Laserfiche WebLink
^ It is our understanding that because of limitations with the hydro-generating <br />equipment, the UYWCD generally operates at a minimum release of 40 cfs during the <br />winter months. <br />^ Because of a recent court decision, the 3,300 acre-feet of storage in the surcharge <br />capacity of Steamboat Lake cannot be specifically released for instream flow uses, as <br />described in the YRBAS documentation. <br />^ The city of Craig now owns the water storage formerly owned by the CDOW in <br />Elkhead Reservoir. Based on recent capacity information, it is believed that the <br />Yampa Participants (Craig Station) may now own approximately 8,754 acre-feet in <br />Elkhead rather than the 8,310 acre-feet referenced in the YRBAS documentation. <br />^ The YRBAS documentation refers to 50 percent of the Stagecoach water exchanged <br />to Yamcolo Reservoir as being delivered out-of--basin to the Colorado River drainage. <br />According to ownership information, about 90 percent of this Stagecoach Contract <br />water is used in the Yampa drainage, with only 10 percent being used in the Colorado <br />basin. <br />^ The YRBAS assumes a reservoir administration date of April 1, the point of lowest <br />storage during the year. Currently the Yampa Model assumes a November 1 <br />administration date. This should be further investigated. <br />^ It is our opinion that the potential yield of the Four Counties water rights at <br />Stagecoach Reservoir could be greater than 4,595 acre-feet per year, as indicated in <br />the YRBAS documentation. Even though the potential yield is greater, this will not <br />make a significant difference in the operation of the reservoir. <br />The objective of the YRBAS operation model is essentially to develop a tool to <br />evaluate reservoir storage options and means to enhance the availability of water for <br />downstream instream flows on the Yampa River without causing injury to existing <br />and projected future uses. The assumptions and data requirements for this objective <br />are somewhat more generalized that the assumptions required for development of the <br />Yampa Model. <br />We are unable to identify any specific data or administrative policy procedures that have <br />been developed for the YRBAS that could be directly ported to the Yampa Model, given the <br />different objectives and focus of the two models. However, we found the YRBAS <br />documentation and discussion to be very helpful in developing an understanding of many of <br />the existing water rights operations and administrative practices (although we have taken <br />exception to some of the assumptions). The documentation was also helpful in understanding <br />some of the policy decisions that are facing the Yampa River basin in the near future. <br />Yampa River Basin Information 5-5 <br />