Laserfiche WebLink
W'cwt Elk Nine 2002 Annual liydrologv Report <br />• 2.2 Stream Flow Data <br />fhr \~ath Fork ofthc Gunnison Rrvcr (North Fork) and Minnesota Crcxk arc the mayor drairtages <br />u, the Pro~cct area Thc l' S Geological Survey (USGS) maintains gaging sWGons on both ofthcsc <br />streams. Flow m thtsc watersheds is dominated by sno+cmclt from upland antes Flo+s in WY2002 <br />in twth +tatersheds +cas well below [hc htstoncal a+crage, as the drought from the precious year <br />continual 1 USGS- Z003a, 200?b- 200?c1 <br />:lvcrage daily (lows for the NarUt Fork by month for 1VY20(12 ranged from 21 percent for Junc to <br />68 percent for lanuan• compared to htstoncal data collcctcd from 1934 through 2002. Thc average <br />daily Flew for the year for WYZO(12 ~~ac ?> percent (160 cfs) of the historical daih a+cragc for the <br />}~CarS 1934 through 2002 (456 cfs) l'hc pemk flwc in the North Fork was 680 cfs on April I ). <br />10111. A summary of the strwm flow data is graphically presented m Figure la. <br />Minnesota Cnxk (lows for WY2002 were also be;lo++• the year historical average from 1937 <br />through 1947 and 1985 through 11N12. Average monthh Flows for WY20(12, compared to histoncal <br />data ranged from 17 percent for May to 74 pcrceot for January. Thc average daily flow for the year <br />i,,.• ~1~'Y2(102 w•as 26 percent (5.7 cfs) of the histoncal daih average for the rears 19?7 through <br />• '~I~t' (22 cfs) The peak flow m Minnesota Creek was 25 cfs on May 31, 2(102. A summan ofthc <br />~~ r:am flow data is gstphtcallc proscnted m Frgurc 2b <br />Figure la Strwm Floe+ Data for the North Fork of the Gunnison River <br />2000 <br />_ (500 <br />N <br />V <br />3 <br />1000 <br />E <br />m <br />>n <br />y 500 <br />~-Average Flay <br />W Y s 1934-21102 <br />-~-- Average Flow <br />W Y 2002 <br />U <br />!!1•drn(;eo. lac. <br />04~~0 ~~'~c~~`J9 ~OFr ~c~ ~0A ~~~g ~~~~1 JA~O~~o. <br />F P Q~0 <br />