DOCSLIB.ORG

Aquatic, Riparian, and Wetland Ecosystem Assessment San Juan National Forest, Colorado USDA Forest Service – Rocky Mountain Region

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Aquatic, Riparian, and Wetland Ecosystem Assessment San Juan National Forest, Colorado USDA Forest Service – Rocky Mountain Region Aquatic, Riparian, and Wetland Ecosystem Assessment San Juan National Forest, Colorado USDA Forest Service – Rocky Mountain Region Report 2 of 3 Part 2 Anthropogenic Influence Results: Management Scale Analysis Technical Coordinator: David S. Winters Aquatic Ecologist Rocky Mountain Region Contributor: Dennis M. Staley Geography Specialist Rocky Mountain Region Jenny Fryxell Hydrologist, T.E.A.M.S Enterprise Team, USFS Jaime Krezelok Hydrologist, San Juan National Forest 1 Chapter 1 Introduction Management Scale This report documents the This chapter contains only the analysis of anthropological influences on final summary table due to electronic aquatic, riparian and wetlands resources volume limitations for this document. in the San Juan National Forest, at the As there is more than one anthropogenic management scale. In this report, the activity under each category, the data for management scale is equivalent to 6th these activities have been placed in level watersheds or “HUB’s”. HUB is an ArcSde is accessible to those on the San acronym for Hydrologic Unit Boundary. Juan National Forest. This data includes On the San Juan National Forest the cumulative percentile rankings for the anthropogenic influences that were each individual anthropogenic activity studied consisted of water uses, found under a given category, such as transportation, recreation, minerals, transportation. vegetation management, and This study also has two additional urbanization. Each of these anthropogenic reports: Report 1 of 1 is “Introduction and influences is discussed in a separate Ecological Driver Analysis” and Report 3 chapter. Each chapter discusses the of 3 is Ecological Driver Analysis and following elements: Anthropogenic Influence Results: Synthesis and Discussion. This chapter is • Key findings from the analysis Report 2 of 2 is “Anthropogenic for each chapter Influences”. • Influence of the anthropogenic The reader is advised to Activity consistently refer to these additional • Management Implications at documents when using this chapter in the 6th Level HUB (watershed) developing watershed analyses, Forest • Direction for Reach/Site Planning activities, or individual project Analysis development. • Information Needs • Cumulative Percentile Rankings A summary chapter was also generated to provide a place for an overall summary table of the analysis. This table lists the designated riparian and wetland clusters for each watershed, the cumulative percentile ranking for each anthropogenic activity by watershed, and the overall category rank. The overall category rank is the total cumulative percentile rank based on all of the ratings for all anthropogenic activities in that watershed. Watersheds highlighted in green are located entirely on-forest, while those that are not highlighted have a portion of their area located within the boundaries of the San Juan National Forest. 2 Chapter 2 Water Use Category Management Scale The purpose of this chapter is to identify water uses that influence aquatic, riparian, and wetland resources within the San Juan ecosystem and especially in lands managed by the San Juan National Forest. In addition, analysis will be performed at the appropriate scales to address the extent of uses across the landscape, improve the design of future site-specific projects and monitoring efforts. Key Findings 1. The diversion ratios (number/ stream mile/ 6th level HUB) ranged from 0 to 0.8, with the highest values in HUBs that are located mostly outside the San Juan National Forest. 2. A total of 41 of the 74 6th level HUBs at the management scale were not influenced by any water diversion structures. 3. There were over 467 miles of water transmission ditches identified at the landscape scale, with only 8 (1.7%) miles located in the San Juan National Forest. 4. At the landscape scale, an estimated 47 miles of stream have been inundated by reservoirs, and only 0.7 (1.5%) located in the San Juan National Forest. 5. Natural spring density (number/ acre/ 6th level HUB) was low, ranging from .0012 to 0. Most of the springs appear to be associated with calcareous geology in the northern region and around the outside borders of the San Juan National Forest. 6. Nine watersheds are within the 100-80 percentile range for water uses, with four of them located entirely on-Forest. These watersheds are found in the far west and east portions of the Forest and have the highest potential for influencing aquatic health. Out of a possible maximum score of 25, those watersheds within the 100-80 percentile ranged varied from a total of 20 – 15 for the total cumulative water uses score. Influence of Stream Diversions Streams located within the Rocky were primarily used to divert water for mining Mountains are characterized by ephemeral and agricultural related activities. As the natural barriers and an inherent connectivity populations have increased additional uses for of the drainage systems. Stream biota and diversions included transportation of logs to fisheries resources evolved within these timber mills, grain mills, hydroelectric power, natural constraints. As a result, the life fish hatcheries, municipal water supplies, and histories of riparian and aquatic organisms waste water treatment (USFS, 2003). are often closely tied to the natural seasonal Although an individual diversion may be variation in the hydrologic regime of these very small, the cumulative effects due to streams (USFS, 2003). numerous diversion withdrawals can be With the influx of early settlers came the dramatic and very harmful, especially in the construction of the first stream diversions. lower reaches of a river system (USDA, 2003). Stream diversions are physical structures, or modifications to stream channel morphology, whose purpose is to transport water out of a natural stream channel. These first diversions 1 Observed effects include fragmentation of Forest. The ranking of ratio values in this fish populations and impacts to the report are based on the 154 6th level HUBs distribution and abundance of aquatic macro- associated with the San Juan National Forest. invertebrates and fish, that are due to the The ratios, and other associated analyses, are alteration of seasonal hydrologic variations intended to provide a comparative evaluation and dewatering of streams during low flow. of the relative abundance of potential Natural levels of organic debris and fragmentation of stream systems within the sedimentation within channels can be study area. These rankings do not reflect modified when they are either trapped or absolute impacts and may not be comparable diverted by a diversion structure. In addition, with rankings in other geographic areas. diversions can impede nutrient transport to There are a total of 2,221 diversions downstream organisms and energy dynamics distributed across the San Juan National within stream channels (USDA, 2003). Forest boundary (Figure 2.1). The data is from As diversions have become more common the State of Colorado, Department of Water across the Forest, aquatic habitats have Uses. become increasingly fragmented, and The ratio of number of diversion reductions in habitat quantity and quality structures per stream mile for each 6th level have been observed. As a result, populations HUB was calculated in order to delineate of fish and other aquatic organisms have been those watersheds with the largest number of affected. Population trends for the majority of diversion structures. 26 out of 154 HUBs, or native fish species are down and long-term 17% of the watersheds found on the Forest population viability for many streams is in were found to be within the 100-80 percentile question. range. These HUB’s are found across the The presence of water diversions and Forest, except for the western-most part, are other man-made structures that can considered to have the highest potential for “fragment” or isolate populations creates a aquatic and hydrologic resources being challenge to the management of existing influenced by the presence of diversion native and desired non-native fish populations structures (Figure 2.1, Figure 2.2). Calculated and other aquatic fauna. Identification of ratios within the 100-80 percentile range from diversion structure density at the 6th level 1.47 for Elbert Creek (HUB 140801040502) to HUB or small watershed scale, would improve 0.4 for Laughlin Park (HUB 140801010303). management by delineating watersheds that However, Table 2.1 shows that three of the 26 lack man-made barriers or identify those with watershed have significantly higher numbers numerous barriers and a high degree of of diversions than the other watersheds fragmentation. This information would be within the 100-80 percentile ranking. particularly useful in managing mobile Elbert Creek (HUB 14080104052) has fisheries populations, as well as any other the highest ratio at 1.5. It is one of the most mobile aquatic organism. highly diverted watersheds on the Forest. To evaluate which watersheds have the Water diverted from this watershed is used highest potential for being influenced by for nearby housing developments, irrigated diversion structures data was analyzed for the agriculture, hydropower generation, and following three metrics: the number of businesses along the Highway 550 corridor. In diversions per stream mile in each 6th level addition, the Elbert Creek watershed receives HUB, the amount of water appropriated per water via inter-basin transfer from Cascade 6th level HUB, and the percentage of stream Creek and the Durango Mountain Resort. length affected between the diversion The Upper Animas Valley-Stevens Creek downstream to the next perennial stream watershed (HUB 140801040503) has a ratio of confluence. 1.3 and the Lower Rio Blanco-San Juan River Data was evaluated and summarized (HUB 140801010406) has a ratio of 1.0. Elbert using GIS data available on the Forest. Due to Creek has a higher ratio than the Upper the amount of data on water uses, and limited Animas Valley-Stevens Creek as it has fewer time and monetary resources, this analysis total stream miles. Not all of the Lower Rio was restricted to information available for the Blanco-San Juan River (HUB 140801010406) 2 is located on the Forest.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geologic Map of the Central San Juan Caldera Cluster, Southwestern Colorado by Peter W
    Geologic Map of the Central San Juan Caldera Cluster, Southwestern Colorado By Peter W. Lipman Pamphlet to accompany Geologic Investigations Series I–2799 dacite Ceobolla Creek Tuff Nelson Mountain Tuff, rhyolite Rat Creek Tuff, dacite Cebolla Creek Tuff Rat Creek Tuff, rhyolite Wheeler Geologic Monument (Half Moon Pass quadrangle) provides exceptional exposures of three outflow tuff sheets erupted from the San Luis caldera complex. Lowest sheet is Rat Creek Tuff, which is nonwelded throughout but grades upward from light-tan rhyolite (~74% SiO2) into pale brown dacite (~66% SiO2) that contains sparse dark-brown andesitic scoria. Distinctive hornblende-rich middle Cebolla Creek Tuff contains basal surge beds, overlain by vitrophyre of uniform mafic dacite that becomes less welded upward. Uppermost Nelson Mountain Tuff consists of nonwelded to weakly welded, crystal-poor rhyolite, which grades upward to a densely welded caprock of crystal-rich dacite (~68% SiO2). White arrows show contacts between outflow units. 2006 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey CONTENTS Geologic setting . 1 Volcanism . 1 Structure . 2 Methods of study . 3 Description of map units . 4 Surficial deposits . 4 Glacial deposits . 4 Postcaldera volcanic rocks . 4 Hinsdale Formation . 4 Los Pinos Formation . 5 Oligocene volcanic rocks . 5 Rocks of the Creede Caldera cycle . 5 Creede Formation . 5 Fisher Dacite . 5 Snowshoe Mountain Tuff . 6 Rocks of the San Luis caldera complex . 7 Rocks of the Nelson Mountain caldera cycle . 7 Rocks of the Cebolla Creek caldera cycle . 9 Rocks of the Rat Creek caldera cycle . 10 Lava flows premonitory(?) to San Luis caldera complex . .11 Rocks of the South River caldera cycle .
    [Show full text]
  • DWR Surface Water Stations Map (Statewide) Based on DWR Surface Water Stations
    DWR Surface Water Stations Map (Statewide) Based on DWR Surface Water Stations DIV WD County State 2 12 CO 5 36 SUMMIT CO 3 99 NM 3 20 CO 2 16 HUERFANO CO 2 79 CO 6 56 MOFFAT CO 3 22 CONEJOS CO 5 36 SUMMIT CO 2 10 CO 1 3 WELD CO 5 36 SUMMIT CO 6 43 RIO BLANCO CO 99 KS 5 51 GRAND CO 5 38 EAGLE CO Page 1 of 700 10/02/2021 DWR Surface Water Stations Map (Statewide) Based on DWR Surface Water Stations DWR USGS Station Station Name Abbrev ID OIL CREEK NEAR CANON CITY, CO OILCANCO BLUE RIVER AT FARMERS CORNER BELOW SWAN RIVER BLUSWACO LOWER WILLOW CREEK ABOVE HERON, NM. WILHERNM KIRKPATRICK (SLV CANAL) RECHARGE PIT 2002056A GOMEZ DITCH GOMDITCO SPANISH PEAKS JV RETURN FLOW SPJVRFCO VERMILLION CREEK AT INK SPRINGS RANCH, CO. VERINKCO 09235450 CONEJOS RIVER BELOW PLATORO RESERVOIR, CO. CONPLACO 08245000 BLUE RIVER NEAR DILLON, CO BLUNDICO 09046600 COTTONWOOD CK AT UNION BLVD, AT COLO SPRINGS, CO 07103987 CANAL # 3 NEAR GREELEY CANAL3CO BLUE RIVER ABV PENNSYLVANIA CR NR BLUE RIVER, CO BLUPENCO 392547106023400 DRY FORK NEAR RANGELY, CO. DRYFRACO 09306237 ARKANSAS RIVER AT DODGE CITY, KS 07139500 MEADOW CREEK AT MOUTH NR TABERNASH, CO 400016105490800 CATTLE CREEK NEAR CARBONDALE, CO. CATCARCO 09084000 Page 2 of 700 10/02/2021 DWR Surface Water Stations Map (Statewide) Based on DWR Surface Water Stations Data POR POR Status UTM X UTM Y Source Start End DWR Historic 1949 1953 USGS Historic 1995 1999 409852 4380126.2 NMEX Historic 2001 2002 DWR Historic 2011 2013 DWR Active 2016 2021 518442 4163340 DWR Active 2018 2021 502864 4177096 USGS Historic 1977
    [Show full text]
  • Campground, Mesa Verde National Park Chief Ranger Office, Mesa Verde Wilderness, a 8500 Acre Wilderness Area Located Within Mesa Verde National Park in Colorado
    MileByMile.com Personal Road Trip Guide Colorado United States Highway #160 "Cortez to Walsenburg" Miles ITEM SUMMARY 0.0 Cortez, CO The city of Cortez, Colorado, a city in Montezuma County, CO. Cortez is a popular stop for tourists for its close proximity to surrounding attractions such as Mesa Verde National Park, Monument Valley, and the Four Corners. Also here is Parque De Vida, Centennial Park, Southwest Memorial Hospital and the Conquistador Golf Course. Altitude: 6191 feet 2.2 Junction State Route #145 Junction State Route #145 / County Road 27, Conquistador Golf Course, Lakeside Drive to, Denny Lake Park, Denny Lake. Altitude: 6168 feet 3.7 County Road 29 : Totten County Road 29, Totten Lake, a lake located north off United States Lake Route #160. Altitude: 6165 feet 10.3 Entrance : Mesa Verde State Highway #10, Entrance to Mesa Verde National Park, Spruce National Park Canyon Trail, Mesa Verde National Park Headquarters, Ara Morafield Campground, Mesa Verde National Park Chief Ranger Office, Mesa Verde Wilderness, a 8500 acre wilderness area located within Mesa Verde National Park in Colorado. These three small and separate sections of the National Park are located on the steep north and east boundaries and serve as buffers to further protect the significant Native American sites. Unlike most wilderness areas, visitor access to Mesa Verde Wilderness is prohibited. Altitude: 6886 feet 11.3 Access : Mesa Verde RV Access to, Mesa Verde RV Resort, located just off United States Resort Highway #160. Altitude: 6844 feet 18.0 Junction State Route #184 Junction State Route #184, N Main Street.
    [Show full text]
  • Rico-West Dolores Roads and Trails (Travel Management) Project Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Rico-West Dolores Roads and Trails (Travel Management) Project Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement Dolores District, San Juan National Forest, Dolores and Montezuma Counties, Colorado November, 2017 For More Information Contact: Derek Padilla, Dolores District Ranger Dolores District 29211 Hwy. 184 Dolores, CO 81323 970-882-7296 [email protected] FAX: 970-882-6841 1 RWD FEIS In accordance with federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, office, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form.
    [Show full text]
  • San Juan-Chama Project History
    San Juan-Chama Project Leah S. Glaser Bureau of Reclamation Table of Contents The San Juan-Chama Project.....................................................2 Project Location.........................................................2 Pre-historic Setting ......................................................2 Historic Setting .........................................................4 Project Authorization....................................................10 Construction History ....................................................14 Uses of Project Water ...................................................20 Conclusion............................................................20 About the Author .............................................................21 Bibliography ................................................................22 Archival Collections ....................................................22 Government Documents .................................................22 Journal Articles and Essays...............................................22 Books ................................................................23 Newspapers ...........................................................23 Unpublished Reports and Dissertations ......................................23 Index ......................................................................24 1 The San Juan-Chama Project A participating project in the Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP), the San Juan- Chama Project diverts water from the upper tributaries of the San Juan
    [Show full text]
  • Floods of September 1970 in Arizona, Utah and Colorado
    WATER-RESOURCES REPORT NUMBER FORTY - FOUR ARIZONA STATE LAND DEPARTMENT ANDREW L. BETTWY. COMMISSIONER FLOODS OF SEPTE1VIBER 1970 IN ARIZONA, UTAH, AND COLORADO BY R. H. ROESKE PREPARED BY THE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PHOENIX. ARIZONA UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR APRIL 1971 'Water Rights Adjudication Team Civil Division Attorney Generars Office: CONTENTS Page Introduction - - ----------------------------------------------- 1 Acknowledgments -------------------------------------------- 1 The storm ---------------------------- - - --------------------- 3 Descri¢ionof floods ----------------------------------------- 4 Southern Arizona----------------------------------------- 4 Centrru Arizona------------------------------------------ 4 Northeastern Arizona------------------------------------- 13 Southeastern Utah and southwestern Colorado --------------- 14 ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURE 1-5. Maps showing: 1. Area of report ----------------------------- 2 2. Rainfrul, September 4- 6, 1970, in southern and central Arizona -------------------------- 5 3. Rainfall, September 5- 6, 1970, in northeastern Arizona, southeastern Utah, and southwestern Colorado -------------------------------- 7 4. Location of sites where flood data were collected for floods of September 4-7, 1970, in Ariz ona ------------------------ - - - - - - - - - 9 5. Location of sites where flood data were collected for floods of September 5- 6, 12-14, 1970, in northeastern Arizona, southeastern Utah, and southwestern Colorado-------------------- 15 ITI IV TABLES Page TABLE 1.
    [Show full text]
  • San Juan / Dolores River Basin Water Resources Planning Model
    San Juan / Dolores River Basin Water Resources Planning Model User’s Manual October 2009 Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................. i 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.2 Development of the San Juan / Dolores River Basin Water Resources Planning Model 1‐1 1.3 Future Enhancements ...................................................................................................... 1‐3 1.4 Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... 1‐3 2. What’s in This Document ...................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.1 Scope of this Manual ....................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.2 Manual Contents .............................................................................................................. 2‐1 2.3 What’s in other CDSS documentation ............................................................................. 2‐2 3. The San Juan / Dolores River Basin ....................................................................................... 3‐1 3.1 Physical Geography
    [Show full text]
  • 2.2 Mile, 1372' Lizard Head Wilderness
    June 2 - 4, 2007 Lizard Head 11583’, north 37° 49’ 17”, west 107° 57’ 11” 2.2 mile, 1372’ Lizard Head Wilderness, San Juan National Forest, Dolores County, Colorado The Lizard Head looks to the sky from it’s 12000’ perch twelve miles almost due south of Sawpit, Colorado. You can’t drive there, but if you drive on CO-145 south for 21.6 miles from Sawpit, you can park at the trailhead for Lizard Head Pass Trail, and can see the 13113’ spire. But you still need to walk about four miles in the San Miguel Mountains to touch the old rocky spire. Getting to the top, however, is for experts. One internet climbing site says it’s not safe to climb anymore because it’s rock is rotting and unstable. Another site calls the volcanic pinnacle the state's most dangerous climb. Another calls Lizard Head peak a recommended conditioning or training climb in preparation for other climbs in the area, such as the Mt. Wilson – El Diente Traverse, only three miles west. At a little after 10 am on Saturday morning Kent and I met at the Cross Mountain Trail Head parking lot, about two miles south of Lizard Head Pass on CO-145. One empty vehicle was parked at the trailhead. Another, occupied by a couple of trail runners who had jogged down the trail almost as soon as I arrived, had left a bit before Kent arrived. A cowboy and his horse and dog pulled in while we were getting ready, saddled up and was off on a day ride to Navajo Lake, a popular destination at 11154’ in the valley west of Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • December 2, 2020 Ms. Susan Bachini Nall Chief, Colorado West Section
    December 2, 2020 Ms. Susan Bachini Nall Chief, Colorado West Section U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District 400 Rood Ave # 224 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 Delivered via email – [email protected] and [email protected] Mr. Colin Larrick Water Quality Program Manager Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, Environmental Programs Department 520 Sunset Blvd. or P.O. Box 448 Towaoc, Colorado 81334 Delivered via email - [email protected] RE: Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) for Nationwide Permits 3 and 43, and Request for Individual Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification Running Horse Pipeline MP 29 Mancos Wash Montezuma County, Colorado; Ute Mountain Ute Tribe Lands SME #200037; DA# SPK-2020-00866 Dear Ms. Nall and Mr. Larrick: SME Environmental, Inc. (SME) was retained by Navajo Nation Oil and Gas (NNOGC) to procure Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 and Section 401 authorizations for the above- referenced project. The purpose of the NNOGC Mancos Wash project is to address the potential hazard along the Running Horse Pipeline (RHP) where the existing pipeline crosses the Mancos River at MP 29. The existing RHP has approximately 10-15 feet (ft) of pipeline exposure in the Mancos River at this location. We request CWA Section 404 authorization for this crossing pursuant to Nationwide Permit (NWP) 3 for Maintenance and NWP 43 for Stormwater Management Facilities. Pre- Construction Notification (PCN) to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is required. On March 3, 2017, the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe denied CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) for their Tribal lands in Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah.
    [Show full text]
  • Rico-West Dolores Roads and Trails (Travel Management) Project Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Rico-West Dolores Roads and Trails (Travel Management) Project Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement Dolores District, San Juan National Forest, Dolores and Montezuma Counties, Colorado November, 2017 For More Information Contact: Derek Padilla, Dolores District Ranger Dolores District 29211 Hwy. 184 Dolores, CO 81323 970-882-7296 [email protected] FAX: 970-882-6841 1 RWD FEIS In accordance with federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, office, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Resources Data Colorado Water Year 1985
    Water Resources Data Colorado Water Year 1985 Volume 3. Dolores River Basin, Green River Basin, and San Juan River Basin Volume 1. Missouri River Basin, Volume 2. Arkansas River Basin, Colorado River Basin and Rio Grande Basin above Dolores River U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-DATA REPORT CO-85-3 Prepared in cooperation with the State of Colorado and with other agencies CALENDAR FOR WATER YEAR 1985 1984 OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 123456 123 1 789 10 11 12 13 456789 10 2345678 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 28 29 30 31 25 26 27 28 29 30 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1985 J A N U A R Y F E B R U A R Y M A R C H S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 APRIL MAY JUNE SMTWTFS SMTWTFS SMTWTFS 123456 1234 1 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2345678 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 28 29 30 26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER SMTWTFS SMTWTFS SMTWTFS 123456 123 1234567 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 28 29 30 31 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30 Water Resources Data Colorado Water Year 1985 Volume 3.
    [Show full text]
  • USGS-Streamgage-Data-Final.Pdf
    Paleoflood Investigations to Improve Peak-Streamflow Regional-Regression Equations for Natural Streamflow in Eastern Colorado, 2015 By Michael S. Kohn, Michael R. Stevens, Tessa M. Harden, Jeanne E. Godaire, Ralph E. Klinger, and Amanullah Mommandi Prepared in cooperation with the Colorado Department of Transportation Scientific Investigations Report 2016–5099 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey 6 Table 1. Summary of the streamgages used in the regression analysis of natural streams in eastern Colorado, 2015. Paleoflood InvestigationstoImprovePeak-StreamflowRegional-RegressionEquations,EasternColorado,2015 [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; CDWR, Colorado Division of Water Resources; NDNR, Nebraska Department of Natural Resources; A, drainage area; mi2, square miles; C, amount of soil consisting of clay in basin; %, percent; Eout, elevation of basin outlet; ft, feet; 6P100, mean basin 6-hour, 100-year precipitation; in., inches; S, mean basin slope; Wyo., Wyoming; Nebr., Nebraska; Colo., Colorado; Kans., Kansas; Okla., Oklahoma; N. Mex., New Mexico; Tex., Texas; NA, not applicable] USGS Latitude Longitude Paleo- USGS CDWR NDNR A C E P S streamgage Streamgage name (decimal (decimal flood out 6 100 peaks peaks peaks (mi2) (%) (ft) (in.) (%) number degrees) degrees) data 06655000 Cottonwood Creek at Wendover, Wyo. 42.3258 –104.8764 24 NA NA No 1,960 17.3 4,450 2.59 13.6 06668040 Rabbit Creek near Wheatland, Wyo. 42.2158 –105.2291 20 NA NA No 1.30 20.6 5,650 2.45 14.9 06675300 Horse Creek Tributary near Little Bear, Wyo. 41.4558 –104.8839 21 NA NA No 8.16 12.2 6,240 2.81 7.78 06687000 Blue Creek near Lewellen, Nebr.
    [Show full text]