My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE103876
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
100000
>
PERMFILE103876
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:57:17 PM
Creation date
11/24/2007 10:33:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981019
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Section_Exhibit Name
EXHIBIT 10 VEGETATION INFORMATION
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
88
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
33 <br />vegetative cover and changes in the soil surface (i.e., surface <br />• drying and the formation of cracks) acted to curb runoff. <br />Factors affecting the amount of runoff and sediment yield for <br />the spring period deal primarily with snow conditions. Rarely did <br />• snow remain on the revegetation test plot for any length of time. <br />Early snowstorms in January and February 1976 were blown from the <br />plot, snowstorms in March and April were wetter and did not blow, <br />howe~~er, they melted rapidly and gave laroe quantities of runoff <br />water. The soil remained frozen during early spring, thus water <br />quality was high (Table 10). <br />Intensity of a summer thunderstorm and the duration of that <br />thunderstorm are the most important factors affecting summer runoff. <br />Amounts of precipitation and intensity of storms are recorded in <br />Appendix Table 1 (more detailed intensity data can be obtained from <br />-~d.A. Berg; Department of Agronomy; Colorado State University). The <br />condition of the soil is also an important factor affecting summer <br />runoff. The storms that contributed to runoff and sediment yield on <br />June 24 were only moderate in intensity and only 17.5 mm of precipi- <br />tation fell in that period. Because of the high runoff values and <br />the relatively small amount of precipitation that fell between June 2 <br />and June 24, we feel that the soil surface must have been saturated <br />and essentially all precipitation that fell ran off. <br />Total precipitation recorded in gages on the revegetation test <br />plot starting October 30, 1975 through November 14, 1976 is 289 mm <br />• or 11.4 inches. There are no long-term records with which to com- <br />pare this value because the closest weather station is at Meeker <br />and this station may have different precipitation patterns. However, <br />it is felt that the 289 mm is lower than normal, thus the total values <br />for sediment loss and runoff could be considerably higher fora normal <br />year. <br />Snowpack measurements were attempted during the winter months; <br />on March 6, a snow depth transect was run across the revegetation <br />test plot and there was an average value of 10 inches of snow, per- <br />cent moisture of the snow was 18. However, for most storms the <br />snow either blew from the revegetation test plot or melted and a <br />Snowpack did not accumulate. <br />Results 1976 <br />Runoff and Sediment Yields <br />Variation in both the amount of runoff and sediment yield is <br />extreme even for plots with similar treatments (Table 10). However, <br />some valuable conclusions can be readily drawn from the data; spring <br />runoff for treatments that were not mulched had much higher sediment <br />yields than treatments that were mulched. The sediment yield per <br />u <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.