Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br />w <br />(Xl <br />co <br /> <br />amounts of runoff, response to various amounts and intensities of <br />precipitation, and, where required, the characteristics ot seasonal <br />variation in runoff. This item occasioned some controversy during the <br />AWR st~. Federal and State agencies and local interests concerned <br />with such IIJI,tters should promote freer exchange of intorDJl.tion and <br />encourage more inquiry concerning availability of inforDJl.tion as well <br />as encourage the adoption of results coming from individual studies <br />previously conducted. <br /> <br />c.; <br />,. . <br /> <br />c. Establish a critical dry period or periods for all sections of <br />a watershed. <br /> <br />Various Federal and State agencies and local interests have respon- <br />sibilities which require that they analyze very carefully the minimum <br />flow of streams for certain periods in order to determine probable <br />future dependable flows. These items enter into power studies, water <br />supply studies, irrisation studies, fish and wildlife studies, pollu- <br />tion studies, water rights administration and various other water use <br />investiijBtions. The record of flow together with judgment in select- <br />ing the period, as well as the length of period used, are all important <br />factors in the design of certain types of projects and in the planning <br />of certain programs. It is probably not feasible to use the same <br />cri tical low flow periods for all purposes; however, it seems highly <br />desirable that where interrelated projects or programs are designed or <br />planned for several purposes, that uniform criteria concerning critical <br />low flows should be used by the various interests. Also, it behooves <br />all interests involved in such planning and design to utilize the <br />latest basic data such as streamflow and weather records. So far as <br />is known, this item caused no IIJI,jor controversy in the preparation of <br />the AWR report. However, it is an item of Jl!l,jor importance in <br />hydrologic coordination. <br /> <br />d. Establish the flood history of the watershed, inCluding magnitude <br />and frequency of floods throughout the watershed, and the origin and <br />characteristics of the floods. <br /> <br />Since various Federal and State agencies and local interests are <br />concerned with certain aspects of floods, their effects, and their <br />control, and since such interests are enijBged in planning and design- <br />ing projects and programs in which floods must be taken into account, <br />and since such projects and programs frequently constitute alternatives, <br />partial alternatives, or at least are quite closely related hydrologi- <br />cally, it is important that all agencies and interests use the same <br />flood history, IIJI,gnitudes and frequencies as nearly as possible. Where <br />these factors are based on historical records, there seldom is ~ch <br />controversy or difference on this item. However, unfortunately, <br />historical records are not available at many places where these factors <br />are required by the planning or designing parties. This fact must be <br />recognized and although full support should be given to improving the <br /> <br />C/l-3 <br />