My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC01380
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
13000-13999
>
WSPC01380
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 11:11:28 AM
Creation date
10/9/2006 2:45:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.700
Description
Colorado River Basin General Publications - Augmentation-Weather Modification
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
4/18/1986
Author
WBLA Inc
Title
Uses of Increased Flows Originating on the Arapaho National Forest - Final Report
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />o 0 314 2 Page 41 <br />IV. SCENARIOS - DESCRIPTIONS AND RESULTS <br /> <br />A. Interstate Water Use Changes <br /> <br />1. Effects of runoff increases given current institutions and demands <br /> <br />The MODSIM network optimization model was specified for the Colorado River <br /> <br />system, as described previously, and then a series of computer runs was <br /> <br />performed in which the parameters of inflow, demand, and water-use priorities <br /> <br />were varied systematically. The first of those runs represented the baseline <br /> <br />case, i.e., a situation characterized by no vegetation manipulation, climatic <br /> <br />conditions equal to a repeat of the 1906-1977 period of record, water demands <br /> <br />and storage facilities representative of 1980, and current interstate and <br /> <br />intrastate water allocation institutions remaining unmodified. Then, a second <br /> <br />run was performed in which the only change from the baseline assumptions was <br /> <br />that of vegetation manipulation on the Arapahoe National ~orest, and consequent <br /> <br />increased flows into the Colorado River. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />As shown in the first two columns of Table IV-l, the streamflow <br /> <br />augmentation from vegetation manipulation produced almost no change in water <br /> <br />consumption anywhere in the Colorado River system under the assumptions of the <br /> <br />baseline scenario. In other words, the increased flows went largely unused, in <br /> <br />the sense of the uses which were modeled (instream uses such as hydroelectric <br /> <br />power generation, salinity control, fishery habitat maintenance, and water-based <br /> <br />recreation would have been affected). This result is due to the fact that there <br /> <br />Were no physically satisfiable yet unsatisfied demands in the Upper Basin, and <br /> <br />the flows were stored in Lake Powell and not released for Lower Basin use except <br /> <br />in years of high run-off, at which times Lower Basin demands were already fully <br /> <br />met. In such years, if storage space existed in Lake Mead, increased flows <br /> <br />would be stored therein, subject to downstream demands, but usually would be <br /> <br />~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.