Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001815 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Ie <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />gation as there is on Muddy and Anthro.cite Creeks above the SOmerset <br /> <br />station has little influence on the runoff of these streams ~hich are <br /> <br />the main sources of supply above that station. <br /> <br />For purposes of comparison the record of runoff of Gunnison <br /> <br />River at Grond Junction has also been used. This automatic recorder <br /> <br />station is located at the mouth of Gunnison River. <br /> <br />The records of the stations used in thiR study are given in the <br /> <br />following: <br /> <br />Table No. 1 - Runoff at Grand Junction, Gunnison River, 1935 - 1940. <br /> <br />Table No.2 - Runoff at SOmersot, North Fork Gunnison River, 1935 - <br />1940. <br />Table No. 3 - Runoff at Horse Ranch, Anthracite Creek, 1939 - 1940. <br /> <br />Compari son of R"cords <br /> <br />The drainage aran above Somerset station is 6.5% of that above <br /> <br />the Grand Junction station. <br /> <br />Compari son of Grand Junction runoff wi th the runoff at SOmerset <br /> <br />indicates that unit runoff at the latter station, 1,100 feet higher in <br /> <br />altitude, is probably three times the unit flow of the Gunnison drninage <br /> <br />area at Grnnd Junction. It appeo.rs also that runoff at Somerset is much <br /> <br />less variable than o.t Grand Junction, and that North Fork of Gunnison <br /> <br />River at Somerset is one cf the steady streams of the Gunnison drainage <br /> <br />area. The comparison indicates that North Fork at SOmerset neither rises <br /> <br />so high in high years nor drops so low in lou yenrs as does Gunnison River <br /> <br />at Grand Junction. The percentage of vo.rio.tion from year to yenr is con- <br /> <br />sistently less at Somerset than at Grand Junction. <br /> <br />Comparison of the records of runoff in 1939 und 1940 for Anthrn- <br /> <br />cite CNek at HarM Ranch VIi th those of North Fork at SOmerset do not <br /> <br />-8- <br />