relationships between flow fluctuations and redd dewatering and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

BETA %MEAN Calculated vs. Given Disch. (%) Difference (measured vs. pred. WSELs) SITE COEFF. ERROR 943 cfs 2,517 cfs 3,674 cfs 943 cfs 2,517 cfs 3,674 cfs 49A 2.23 2.3 0.8 3.3 2.6 0.01 0.07 0.07 BETA %MEAN Calculated vs. Given Disch. (%) Difference (measured vs. pred. WSELs) SITE COEFF. ERROR 943 cfs 1,740 cfs 2,509 cfs 943 cfs 1,740 cfs 2,509 cfs 50A/B/C 2.27 2.7 1.3 4.0 2.9 0.02 0.08 0.05 BETA %MEAN Calculated vs. Given Disch. (%) Difference (measured vs. pred. WSELs) SITE COEFF. ERROR 1,001 cfs 1,813 cfs 2,517 cfs 3,720 cfs 1,001 cfs 1,813 cfs 2,517 cfs 3,720 cfs 55A/B 1.73 1.6 0.2 2.2 3.1 1.0 0.00 0.03 0.06 0.02 58 1.81 2.7 1.8 5.2 2.9 0.7 0.02 0.10 0.07 0.02 59A/B 3.92 1.4 0.3 1.1 2.8 1.4 0.00 0.02 0.05 0.02 BETA %MEAN Calculated vs. Given Disch. (%) Difference (measured vs. pred. WSELs) SITE COEFF. ERROR 1,001 cfs 1,813 cfs 2,517 cfs 1,001 cfs 1,813 cfs 2,517 cfs 57 3.05 3.7 1.4 5.4 4.2 0.01 0.07 0.05 BETA %MEAN Calculated vs. Given Disch. (%) Difference (measured vs. pred. WSELs) SITE COEFF. ERROR 1,151 cfs 2,517 cfs 3,768 cfs 1,151 cfs 2,517 cfs 3,768 cfs 61 1.38 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 62 2.43 1.2 0.6 1.8 1.1 0.01 0.04 0.03 BETA %MEAN Calculated vs. Given Disch. (%) Difference (measured vs. pred. WSELs) SITE COEFF. ERROR 1,151 cfs 2,823 cfs 1,151 cfs 2,823 cfs 63A/B 2.62 --- --- --- 0.00 0.00 BETA %MEAN Calculated vs. Given Disch. (%) Difference (measured vs. pred. WSELs) SITE COEFF. ERROR 1,151 cfs 2,823 cfs 3,768 cfs 1,151 cfs 2,823 cfs 3,768 cfs 64 2.31 0.9 0.4 1.4 1.0 0.00 0.03 0.01 USFWS, SFWO, Energy Planning and Instream Flow Branch Yuba River Redd Dewatering and Juvenile Stranding Report September 15, 2010 39
BETA %MEAN Calculated vs. Given Disch. (%) Difference (measured vs. pred. WSELs) SITE COEFF. ERROR 1,052 cfs 1,898 cfs 3,768 cfs 1,052 cfs 1,898 cfs 3,768 cfs 66 2.26 2.7 2.0 4.0 2.1 0.03 0.08 0.06 USFWS, SFWO, Energy Planning and Instream Flow Branch Yuba River Redd Dewatering and Juvenile Stranding Report September 15, 2010 40
Page 1 and 2: RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN FLOW FLUCTUAT
Page 3 and 4: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Field work for this
Page 5 and 6: TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) DISCU
Page 7 and 8: LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 Study tasks
Page 9 and 10: Table 1. Study tasks and associated
Page 11 and 12: Figure 1. Yuba River stream segment
Page 13 and 14: Hydraulic and Structural Data Colle
Page 15 and 16: were those which bracketed the stra
Page 17 and 18: Water surface elevations were measu
Page 19 and 20: Table 7. Calibration flows for stra
Page 21 and 22: Figure 2. Tailspill and redd depth
Page 23 and 24: Table 9. Redd dewatering Habitat Su
Page 25 and 26: Figure 6. Stranding areas of juveni
Page 27 and 28: Figure 8. Predicted dewatering of f
Page 29 and 30: Figure 10. Predicted dewatering of
Page 31 and 32: Figure 12. Predicted dewatering of
Page 33 and 34: Habitat Suitability Criteria (HSC)
Page 35 and 36: Figure 13. Yuba River flows below D
Page 37 and 38: APPENDIX A STRANDING SITE LOCATIONS
Page 39 and 40: Stranding Site # MHU # USFWS, SFWO,
Page 41 and 42: USFWS, SFWO, Energy Planning and In
Page 43 and 44: BETA %MEAN Calculated vs. Given Dis
Page 45: BETA %MEAN Calculated vs. Given Dis
Page 49 and 50: Stranding flow (cfs) USFWS, SFWO, E
Page 51 and 52: Stranding flow (cfs) USFWS, SFWO, E
Page 53 and 54: USFWS, SFWO, Energy Planning and In
Page 55 and 56: Dewatering flow (cfs) USFWS, SFWO,
Page 59 and 60: Dewatering flow (cfs) Percentage of
Page 61 and 62: Dewatering flow (cfs) Percentage of
Page 67: LIST OF ACRONYMS 2-D Two dimensiona

relationships between flow fluctuations and redd dewatering and ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?