WSP03461 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

0024S3 Alternative 11: Similar to Alternative 8, except that the secondary draw on Steamboat Lake would be replaced with a lease of 1,300 AF from the industrial pool of Tri-State Electric Generation & Transmission Cooperative in Stagecoach Reservoir. For modeling purposes, this pool retained its current priority. Altemative 12: Similar to Alternative 8, except that the secondary draw on Steamboat Lake would be replaced with 1,300 AF from a new tributary reservoir. This alternative cannot be modeled until a specific site for the new reservoir is identified and hydrologic data for the site is compiled. Alternative 13: This alternative relies upon leases from existing storage facilities and supply interruption contract(s) to provide water for the fishes. Under this alternative, the primary draw would come from Steamboat Lake (2,000 AF), followed by 1,300 AF from Stagecoach through a lease with Tri-State. Finally, 3,700 AF would be derived from contracts with irrigators who would agree not to divert water from the river they would otherwise be entitled to divert in priority. At this time, no willing irrigators have been identified and no modeling has been done. Alternative 14: Similar to Alternative 8 , except the 2,000-AF lease from Steamboat Lake would be secondary to a 3,700-AF enlargement of Elkhead Reservoir specifically for augmentation, with the remaining 1,300 AF to be supplied by leasing a portion of either a proposed enlargement ofElkhead for human use and/or new tributary reservoir(s). Other alternatives considered Winter/off-peak water storage Winter/off-peak storage options were considered to minimize impacts of storage on spring peak flows while providing all, or a portion of, the 7,000-AF maximum annual augmentation requirement. Principal limitations are inadequate hydrology, high cost and/or potential impacts to winter flows. The winter yield of most tributaries to the Yampa River would not support a volume of this size in most years. However, preliminary modeling has shown that in some years storage could begin as early as November, following the irrigation season. Winter storage was specifically considered as an option with an enlargement of Stagecoach Reservoir. Although Stagecoach is situated on the mainstem of the Yampa River, its headwater location limits its usefulness for this purpose similar to that of a large tributary. It yields roughly half the volume of the Yampa River measured at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) gage at Steamboat Springs. The basins above Steamboat Lake and Elkbead Reservoir cannot provide winter storage without significant impacts to their tailwaters. They also would be less likely to fill during drier winters, and high demand during the following summers would not be met. One potential, though expensive, option would be to divert or pump water from the mainstem of the Yampa River into a tributary or other off-channel reservoir. This option would require construction of either a long gravity-flow canal or a pumping plant and pipeline to deliver water to the reservoir. In addition, it would require construction of a new reservoir or enlargement of an existing reservoir, such as Elkhead. Utility costs for pumping water from the river into the reservoir also could be a prohibitive operational expense. Moreover, it would be difficult to store water in winter while maintaining a winter base-flow target of 124 cfs in the Yampa River. Management Plan for Endangered Fishes in the Yampa River Basin 47