DOCSLIB.ORG

Modeling Groundwater Flow to Understand the Water Resources of the Lower Pecos River Watershed

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Modeling Groundwater Flow to Understand the Water Resources of the Lower Pecos River Watershed Modeling Groundwater Flow to Understand the Water Resources of the Lower Pecos River Watershed Final Report June 30, 2016 Ronald T. Green, Ph.D., P.G., Nathaniel Toll, F. Paul Bertetti, P.G., and Nicola Hill Geosciences and Engineering Division Southwest Research Institute® Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 8 Previous Groundwater Flow Models .............................................................................................. 8 River Description ............................................................................................................................ 8 Study Domain ............................................................................................................................... 12 Hydrostratigraphy ......................................................................................................................... 12 Groundwater Elevation Data ..................................................................................................... 15 Streamflow Data ........................................................................................................................ 17 Electrical Resistivity Survey ..................................................................................................... 19 Model Construction ...................................................................................................................... 24 Numerical Model Development ................................................................................................ 29 Recharge .................................................................................................................................... 32 Discharge ................................................................................................................................... 34 Model Calibration ..................................................................................................................... 35 Model Simulation.......................................................................................................................... 35 Groundwater Elevation ............................................................................................................. 36 Model Discharge ....................................................................................................................... 40 Discussion and Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 41 Future Work .................................................................................................................................. 43 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... 43 References ..................................................................................................................................... 43 2 List of Figures Figure 1. Map of the lower Pecos River watershed. ....................................................................... 7 Figure 2. Locations of flow measurements taken on the Pecos River .......................................... 10 Figure 3. Discharge in the Pecos River intermittently measured between 1918 and 1968 ......... 11 Figure 4. Map of the lower Pecos River watershed. Major tributaries are illustrated by color. .. 14 Figure 5. Stratigraphy of the study area ........................................................................................ 15 Figure 6. Location of the lower Pecos River and the selected model domain. ............................. 16 Figure 7. Location of USGS river gauging stations relative to the study domain ........................ 18 Figure 8. Location of the electrical resistivity geophysical survey. ............................................. 20 Figure 9. Location of the electrical resistivity geophysical survey. ............................................. 21 Figure 10. Close in view of the location of the electrical resistivity geophysical survey. ............ 22 Figure 11. Electrical resistivity transect DR-7. ............................................................................. 23 Figure 12. Electrical resistivity transects DR-8 and DR-9. .......................................................... 24 Figure 13. Top slice of the lower Pecos model mesh. .................................................................. 25 Figure 14. Oblique view of the model mesh looking from the south to the north. ....................... 26 Figure 15. Model cross-section along two-dimensional Polyline. ................................................ 27 Figure 16. Model cross-section along two-dimensional Polyline ................................................. 28 Figure 17. Hydraulic Conductivty of Edwards Layer. .................................................................. 30 Figure 18. Hydraulic Conductivty of Trinity Layer...................................................................... 31 Figure 19. Error Plot Steady State Heads ..................................................................................... 32 Figure 20. Steady-state simulation results.. .................................................................................. 36 Figure 21. Groundwater elevation contours at steady state (ft). ................................................... 37 Figure 22. Darcy flux .................................................................................................................... 37 Figure 23. Locations of calibration target wells ........................................................................... 38 Figure 24. Time histories of calculated and observed hydraulic heads at well 4449301 ............. 39 Figure 25. Time histories of calculated and observed hydraulic heads at well 4555702 ............. 39 Figure 26. Time histories of calculated and observed hydraulic heads at well 5445502 ............. 40 Figure 27. Discharge on the Pecos River ...................................................................................... 41 3 List of Tables Table 1. Hydraulic parameters for the lower Pecos River watershed model ................................ 29 Table 2. Average lake evaporation, Ei, by month for Texas Quadrangle 807 .............................. 33 Table 3. Weighting factors, Φi, to account for antecedent moisture ............................................. 34 4 5 Modeling Groundwater Flow to Understand the Water Resources of the Lower Pecos River Watershed Introduction The groundwater resources of many arid and semi-arid regions of the United States and elsewhere are increasingly stressed due to already limited recharge being further reduced by prolonged and more frequent drought cycles as well as increased pumping to supply growing populations. Climate change that results in altered precipitation patterns can exacerbate these stresses, particularly if changes in precipitation result in reduced recharge. While characterization of water resources is desirable wherever water is used, accurate assessment of water availability is especially critical in areas where resources are limited and stressed. In addition, environments where carbonate aquifers are relied on to provide meaningful water supply warrant special considerations when characterizing and managing the water resources. Effective management of the water resources in such environments requires that the groundwater and surface-water regimes be sufficiently characterized and modeled to provide the proper tools to simulate not only groundwater and surface-water flow, but also the hydraulic interactions between the two regimes. A critical factor for effective management is specification of the sustainability of the water resources. Compounding this challenge is determining what constitutes the sustainable or safe yield of groundwater from a specified domain. This concept has been actively discussed and debated for decades (Lee, 1915; Theis, 1940; Bredehoeft et al. 1982; Sophocleous, 1997; Alley and Leake, 2004; Watson et al., 2014). On one end of the debate, development of groundwater is considered safe if the rate of groundwater extraction does not exceed the rate of recharge. The term “safe yield,” when defined as the attainment and maintenance of a long-term balance between the amount of groundwater withdrawn annually and the annual amount of recharge, reflects this perspective, but has been discredited as an indicator of sustainability (Sophocleous, 1997). Conversely, sustainable yield can be defined as a function of increased recharge and decreased discharge induced by pumping. A critical aspect to sustainable yield is the effect of pumping on surface water flow, which highlights the need to effectively characterize both surface water and groundwater in addition to their hydraulic interaction. A general quantitative method to define “sustainability” has been elusive; thus, sustainable yield is typically formulated with respect to specific water-management objectives and the constraints associated with the targeted resources. The Rio Grande is sourced by water from Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, and Mexico. Approximately 1,600,000 acre-ft/yr flows into the Amistad Reservoir. The
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Native Fish Fauna of Major Drainages East of The
    THE NATIVE FISH FAUNA OF MAJOR DRAINAGES EAST OF THE CONTINENTAL DIVIDE IN NEW MEXICO A Thesis Presented to the Graduate Faculty of Biology Eastern New Mexico University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements fdr -the7Degree: Master of Science in Biology by Michael D. Hatch December 1984 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction Study Area Procedures Results and Discussion Summary Acknowledgements Literature Cited Appendices Abstract INTRODUCTION r (t. The earliest impression of New Mexico's native fish fauna =Ems during the 1850's from naturalists attached to various government survey parties. Without the collections from these and other early surveys, the record of the native fish fauna would be severely deficient because, since that time, some 1 4 native species - or subspecies of fish have become extirpated and the ranges of an additionial 22 native species or subspecies have become severly re- stricted. Since the late Miocene, physiographical changes of drainages have linked New Mexico, to varying degrees, with contemporary ichthyofaunal elements or their progenitors from the Rocky Mountains, the Great Plains, the Chihuahuan Desert, the Mexican Plateau, the Sonoran Desert and the Great Basin. Immigra- tion from these areas contributed to the diversity of the state's native ichthyofauna. Over the millinea, the fate of these fishes waxed and waned in ell 4, response to the changing physical and _chenaca-l-conditions of the surrounding environment. Ultimately, one of the most diverse fish faunas of any of the interior southwestern states developed. Fourteen families comprising 67 species of fish are believed to have occupied New Mexico's waters historically, with strikingly different faunas evolving east and west of the Continental Divide.
    [Show full text]
  • Index of Surface-Water Records to December 31, 1963 Part 8.-Western Gulf of Mexico Basins
    Index of Surface-Water Records to December 31, 1963 Part 8.-Western Gulf of Mexico Basins GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 508 ,. Index of Surface-Water Records to December 31, 1 963 Part B.-Western Gulf of Mexico Basins By H. P. Eisenhuth Geological Survey Circular 508 Washington 1965 United States Department of the Interior STEW ART L. UDALL, SBCRETARY Geological Survey THOMAS B. NOLAN, DIRECTOR Free on application to the U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D. C. 20242 Index of Surface-Water Records to December 31, 1963 Part 8.-Western Gulf of Mexico Basins By H. P. Eisenhuth INTRODUCTION This report lists the streamflow and reservoir stations in the Western Gulf of Mexico basins for which records have'been or are to be published in reports of the Geological Survey for periods through December 31, 1963. It supersedes Geological Survey Circular 388. Basic data on surface-water_ supply have been published in an annual series of water-supply papers consisting of several volumes, including one each for the States of Alaska and Hawaii. The area of the other 48 States is divided into 14 parts whose boundaries coincide with certain natural drainage lines. Prior to 1951, the records for the 48 States were published in 14 volumes, one for each of the parts. From 1951 to 1960, the records for the 48 States were published annually in 18 volumes, there being 2 volumes each for Parts 1, 2, 3, and 6. The boundaries of the various parts are shown on the map in figure 1. Beginning in 1961, the annual series of water-supply papers on surface-water supply was changed to a 5-year series.
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Management Program 2013-2018 Appendix A
    Appendix A 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) As required under Sections 303(d) and 304(a) of the federal Clean Water Act, this list identifies the water bodies in or bordering Texas for which effluent limitations are not stringent enough to implement water quality standards, and for which the associated pollutants are suitable for measurement by maximum daily load. In addition, the TCEQ also develops a schedule identifying Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) that will be initiated in the next two years for priority impaired waters. Issuance of permits to discharge into 303(d)-listed water bodies is described in the TCEQ regulatory guidance document Procedures to Implement the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (January 2003, RG-194). Impairments are limited to the geographic area described by the Assessment Unit and identified with a six or seven-digit AU_ID. A TMDL for each impaired parameter will be developed to allocate pollutant loads from contributing sources that affect the parameter of concern in each Assessment Unit. The TMDL will be identified and counted using a six or seven-digit AU_ID. Water Quality permits that are issued before a TMDL is approved will not increase pollutant loading that would contribute to the impairment identified for the Assessment Unit. Explanation of Column Headings SegID and Name: The unique identifier (SegID), segment name, and location of the water body. The SegID may be one of two types of numbers. The first type is a classified segment number (4 digits, e.g., 0218), as defined in Appendix A of the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (TSWQS).
    [Show full text]
  • MEXICO Las Moras Seco Creek K Er LAVACA MEDINA US HWY 77 Springs Uvalde LEGEND Medina River
    Cedar Creek Reservoir NAVARRO HENDERSON HILL BOSQUE BROWN ERATH 281 RUNNELS COLEMAN Y ANDERSON S HW COMANCHE U MIDLAND GLASSCOCK STERLING COKE Colorado River 3 7 7 HAMILTON LIMESTONE 2 Y 16 Y W FREESTONE US HW W THE HIDDEN HEART OF TEXAS H H S S U Y 87 U Waco Lake Waco McLENNAN San Angelo San Angelo Lake Concho River MILLS O.H. Ivie Reservoir UPTON Colorado River Horseshoe Park at San Felipe Springs. Popular swimming hole providing relief from hot Texas summers. REAGAN CONCHO U S HW Photo courtesy of Gregg Eckhardt. Y 183 Twin Buttes McCULLOCH CORYELL L IRION Reservoir 190 am US HWY LAMPASAS US HWY 87 pasas R FALLS US HWY 377 Belton U S HW TOM GREEN Lake B Y 67 Brady iver razos R iver LEON Temple ROBERTSON Lampasas Stillhouse BELL SAN SABA Hollow Lake Salado MILAM MADISON San Saba River Nava BURNET US HWY 183 US HWY 190 Salado sota River Lake TX HWY 71 TX HWY 29 MASON Buchanan N. San G Springs abriel Couple enjoying the historic mill at Barton Springs in 1902. R Mason Burnet iver Photo courtesy of Center for American History, University of Texas. SCHLEICHER MENARD Y 29 TX HW WILLIAMSON BRAZOS US HWY 83 377 Llano S. S an PECOS Gabriel R US HWY iver Georgetown US HWY 163 Llano River Longhorn Cavern Y 79 Sonora LLANO Inner Space Caverns US HW Eckert James River Bat Cave US HWY 95 Lake Lyndon Lake Caverns B. Johnson Junction Travis CROCKETT of Sonora BURLESON 281 GILLESPIE BLANCO Y KIMBLE W TRAVIS SUTTON H GRIMES TERRELL S U US HWY 290 US HWY 16 US HWY P Austin edernales R Fredericksburg Barton Springs 21 LEE Somerville Lake AUSTIN Pecos
    [Show full text]
  • Prize Bridge 1960 •
    PRIZE BRIDGE 1960 • Prize Bridges 1960 Steel b1'idges selected tn the annual national competition conducted by the Ame1'ican Insti­ tute of Steel Const1'uction as the most beautiful b~'idges opened to traffic in 1960. • AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION, INC. 101 Park Avenue, New York 17, N. Y. • • ~ury of Award A. L. AYDELOTT, AlA A. L. Aydelott and Associates, Architects Memphis, Tennessee THOMAS S. BUECHNER Director The Brooklyn Museum Brooklyn, New YOl'k GLENN W. HOLCOMB President American Society of Civil Engineers Professor, Civil Engineering Oregon State University • Corvallis, Oregon GEORGE LINDSTROM Lundstrom & Skubic, Architects Chicago, Illinois GEOFFREY PLATT, FAIA Architect New York City, New York 'J ; • Beauty in Steel Bridges The enduring beauty of steel bridges is eloquent tribute to the vision and skill of the men who plan, design and build them. The bridge de igner of today is both artist and engineer. He understands the potential for strength and beauty which is inherent in steel structures, and he knows that aesthetic appearance can be achieved at no sacrifice of efficiency or economy. The simple grace of a highway overpass, no less than the majestic sweep of a river crossing reflects a creative integration of structure, func­ tion and form, skillfully executed in beautiful bridges of steel. To promote a more widespread appreciation of the aesthetics of steel bridges and to honor the architectural excellence of modern bridge design, the American Institute of Steel Construction sponsors an annual Prize Brid'ge Competition. Each year a distinguished Jury of Award, composed of leading art directors, architects and engineers, selects the steel bridges which it judges to be the most beautiful of those opened to traffic in the • United States during the previous year.
    [Show full text]
  • Salt Sources, Loading and Salinity of the Pecos River
    INFLUENCE OF TRIBUTARIES ON SALINITY OF AMISTAD INTERNATIONAL RESERVOIR S. Miyamoto, Fasong Yuan and Shilpa Anand Texas A&M University Agricultural Research Center at El Paso Texas Agricultural Experiment Station An Investigatory Report Submitted to Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency In a partial fulfillment of A contract TSSWCB, No. 04-11 and US EPA, No. 4280001 Technical Report TR – 292 April 2006 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The study reported here was performed under a contract with the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB Project No. 04-11) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA Project No. 4280001). The overall project is entitled “Basin-wide Management Plan for the Pecos River in Texas”. The materials presented here apply to Subtask 1.6; “River Salinity Modeling”. The cost of exploratory soil sample analyses was defrayed in part by the funds from the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture under Agreement No. 2005-34461-15661. The main data set used for this study came from an open file available from the U.S. Section of the International Boundary and Water Commission (US- IBWC), and some from the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). Administrative support to this project was provided by the Texas Water Resource Institute (TWRI). Logistic support to this project was provided by Jessica N. White and Olivia Navarrete, Student Assistants. This document was reviewed by Nancy Hanks of the Texas Clean Rivers Program (TCRP), Gilbert Anaya of the US-IBWC, and Kevin Wagner of the Texas Water Resource Institute (TWRI).
    [Show full text]
  • Consultation and Coordination
    Brantley and Avalon Reservoirs RMPA Final Environmental Assessment February 2011 CHAPTER 5: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION The preparation of the Brantley and Avalon Reservoirs Resource Management Plan Amendment (RMPA) Environmental Assessment (EA) required a comprehensive consultation and coordination effort throughout the RMPA planning process. The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) initiated the RMPA planning process in July 2006 by requesting comments to determine the scope of issues and concerns that needed to be addressed in this Final EA document. As part of the resource inventory phase of the planning process, members of the interdisciplinary team formally and informally contacted various relevant agencies to request data to supplement Reclamation’s existing resource database. This chapter describes the coordination with agencies that either have jurisdiction by law or interest in the development of the RMPA for the Project Area. In addition, this chapter describes the public involvement process that was undertaken for the Brantley and Avalon Reservoirs RMPA project and provides a distribution list of agencies and organizations receiving a copy of this Final EA. Written comments received on the Draft EA document, along with Reclamation responses, are provided in Appendix D. 5.1 CONSULTATION A number of Federal and State government agencies, as well as local governments, were consulted during the RMPA planning process through communications, meetings, and other cooperative efforts. Cooperating agencies for this EA are the U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Carlsbad Irrigation District (CID). Additional government agencies consulted included the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office (NMSHPO), the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF), and 19 Native American Tribes.
    [Show full text]
  • CID Main Canal Lining Project for Water Saving & Efficiency
    CID Main Canal Lining Project for Water Saving & Efficiency Carlsbad Irrigation District, New Mexico WaterSMART Grants: Small-Scale Water Efficiency Projects FY2018 Funding Number: BOR-DO-18-F009 CFDA Number: 15.507 Submitted July 2018 to Bureau of Reclamation Financial Assistance Support Section by Carlsbad Irrigation District Dale Ballard, CID Manager Mary Barnhart, CID Board Member 5117 Grandi Road Carlsbad, NM 88220 575-236-6390 Fax: 575-236-6396 [email protected] Table of Contents 1. Technical Proposal: ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.1. Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Background Data.............................................................................................................. 1 1.2.1. Source of Water Supply & Uses .................................................................................... 2 1.2.2. Water Rights .................................................................................................................. 2 1.2.3. Geographic Location Vicinity Map............................................................................... 3 1.2.4. Current Water Demand ................................................................................................. 3 1.2.5. Major Crops and Total Acres Served ............................................................................ 3 1.2.6. Water Delivery
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Hydrologic Alteration and Opportunities for Environmental Flow Management in New Mexico
    Evaluation of Hydrologic Alteration and Opportunities for Environmental Flow Management in New Mexico October 2011 Photo: Elephant Butte Dam, Rio Grande, New Mexico; Prepared by The Cadmus Group, Inc. Courtesy U.S. Bureau of Reclamation U.S. EPA Contract Number EP-C-08-002 i Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 3 2. Hydrologic Alteration Analysis Study Design ....................................................................................................... 5 What Sites Are Assessed? ............................................................................................................................. 5 What Drives Hydrologic Alteration? ........................................................................................................ 11 How Is Hydrologic Alteration Assessed?................................................................................................. 16 3. Results of Hydrologic Alteration Analysis ........................................................................................................... 19 Alteration of High Flow Events ................................................................................................................ 19 Alteration of Low Flow
    [Show full text]
  • Rio Grande Silvery Minnow Recovery Plan
    RIO GRANDE SILVERY MINNOW RECOVERY PLAN DRAFT DR AFT RIO GRANDE SILVERY MINNOW (Hybognathus amarus) RECOVERY PLAN Region 2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico Approved: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Regional Director, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date: DR AFT Disclaimer/Literature Citation Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans published by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service or National Marine Fisheries Service, are sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and other affected and interested parties. Recovery teams serve as independent advisors to the Services. Plans are reviewed by the public and submitted to additional peer review before they are adopted by the Services. Objectives of the plan will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not obligate other parties to undertake specific tasks and may not represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service/National Marine Fisheries Service. They represent the official position of the-National Marine Fisheries Service/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Assistant Administrator/ Regional Director or Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. By approving this document, the Director/Regional Director/Assistant Administrator certifies that the data used in its development represents the best scientific and commercial data available at the time it was written.
    [Show full text]
  • 20.6.4 Nmac 1 Title 20 Environmental Protection
    TITLE 20 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CHAPTER 6 WATER QUALITY PART 4 STANDARDS FOR INTERSTATE AND INTRASTATE SURFACE WATERS 20.6.4.1 ISSUING AGENCY: Water Quality Control commission. [20.6.4.1 NMAC - Rp 20 NMAC 6.1.1001, 10-12-00] 20.6.4.2 SCOPE: Except as otherwise provided by statute or regulation of the water quality control commission, this part governs all surface waters of the state of New Mexico, which are subject to the New Mexico Water Quality Act, Sections 74-6-1 through 74-6-17 NMSA 1978. [20.6.4.2 NMAC - Rp 20 NMAC 6.1.1002, 10-12-00; A, 05-23-05] 20.6.4.3 STATUTORY AUTHORITY: This part is adopted by the water quality control commission pursuant to Subsection C of Section 74-6-4 NMSA 1978. [20.6.4.3 NMAC - Rp 20 NMAC 6.1.1003, 10-12-00] 20.6.4.4 DURATION: Permanent. [20.6.4.4 NMAC - Rp 20 NMAC 6.1.1004, 10-12-00] 20.6.4.5 EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2000, unless a later date is indicated in the history note at the end of a section. [20.6.4.5 NMAC - Rp 20 NMAC 6.1.1005, 10-12-00] 20.6.4.6 OBJECTIVE: A. The purpose of this part is to establish water quality standards that consist of the designated use or uses of surface waters of the state, the water quality criteria necessary to protect the use or uses and an antidegradation policy. B. The state of New Mexico is required under the New Mexico Water Quality Act (Subsection C of Section 74-6-4 NMSA 1978) and the federal Clean Water Act, as amended (33 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • 143 Rio Grande Basin 08328500 Jemez Canyon Reservoir
    RIO GRANDE BASIN 143 08328500 JEMEZ CANYON RESERVOIR NEAR BERNALILLO, NM ° ° 1 1 LOCATION.--Lat 35 23'40", long 106 32'50", in SW ⁄4 SW ⁄4 sec.32, T.14 N., R.4 E., Sandoval County, Hydrologic Unit 13020202, at corner of outlet works control tower of Jemez Canyon Dam on Jemez River, 2.8 mi upstream from mouth, and 6.0 mi north of Bernalillo. DRAINAGE AREA.--l,034 mi2. PERIOD OF RECORD.--October 1953 to September 1965 (monthend contents only), October 1965 to current year. GAGE.--Water-stage recorder. Datum of gage is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (levels by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). REMARKS.--Reservoir is formed by earthfill dam, completed Oct. 19, 1953. Capacity, 172,800 acre-ft, from capacity table adapted Jan. 1, 1999, between elevations 5,125.0 ft, sill of outlet gates, and 5,252.3 ft, operating deck of spillway. Maximum controlled capacity, 102,700 acre-ft at elevation 5,232.0 ft (floor of spillway, which is located about 0.8 mi south of dam). Capacity by original survey was 189,100 acre-ft. Original plan for reservoir operation was to desilt all flow above 30 ft3/s by storage for one day before releasing to Rio Grande, and for possible detention during flood stage on Rio Grande. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers satellite telemetry at station. COOPERATION.--Records provided by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. EXTREMES FOR PERIOD OF RECORD.--Maximum contents, 72,110 acre-ft, June 1, 1987, elevation, 5,220.24 ft; no storage most of time prior to Mar.
    [Show full text]