Laserfiche WebLink
<br />5 <br /> <br />> Ruedi Reservoir releases from storage accounts of2I,650 acre-feet (available <br />every year), 5,000 acre-feet annually and 5,000 acre-feet (available 4 out of 5 <br />years) to the 15-Mile Reach <br /> <br />Priority of use of various reservoir storage accounts iu deliveries to the 15-Mile Reach: <br />1. Ruedi 5,000 acre-feet pool (available 4 out of5 years) <br />2. Ruedi 26,650 acre-feet pool <br />3. Wolford Mountain 6,000 acre-feet pool <br />4, Green Mountain HUP Surplus pool <br /> <br />Following the release of the preliminary draft biological opinion and comments by water users the <br />following changes were made in model runs. <br /> <br />I. Reassignment of Service flow recommendations to individual water years, based <br />on the Service's wet-dry-average ranking. <br />2. Initial storage (in October 1974) offish pools in Ruedi and Wolford set to zero. <br />3. Demands for Ruedi Round I and II contracts set to full amount of 24,850 <br />acre- feet. <br />4. Demands for Green Mountain Reservoir contracts set to full amount of 20,000 <br />acre-feet. <br /> <br />Explanation of Tables and Figures in the Biological Opinion <br /> <br />All the tables and figures presented in the biological opinion were based upon information <br />provided by the CRDSS as described in the C, scenarios above and the data presented in tables 2 _ <br />7 of this Appendix. The modeling of the scenarios was completed by CWCB staff and results <br />passed to the Service in Excel worksheets for analysis, Because it is difficult to look at the data <br />on a year by year basis, a representative wet, average, and dry year was selected for analysis. <br />The representative years were identified by using CRDSS base case data, summing the data for <br />the runoff months (April, May, June and July), sorting the years by volume and then ranking the <br />years in the 1975 to 1991 period (Table 1). Using this methodology, 1996, 1982, and 1989 were <br />selected as representative wet, average and dry year respectively. These years were then used to <br />develop the data for the tables and figures in the biological opinion. Because of the short period <br />of record, it was difficult to find years where all months within a representative year provided <br />appropriate conditions, for example, April of 1982 (representative wet year) is dryer than April of <br />1989 (representative dry year). <br /> <br />After examining the data, and the way the Recovery Action items were modeled, the analysis was <br />shifted from a water year basis to a November to October analysis year so that the augmentation <br />provided by the Recovery Action items could be displayed as a continuum for August, September, <br />and October. The model results are presented on a November to October year in the tables and <br />figures used in the biological opinion. <br />