MAY 1 2 W89 Un3426w n- w CALIBRATION AND USE OF AN INTERACTIVE ^COUNTING MODEL TO SIMULATE SSOLVED SOLIDS, STREAMFLOW, AND ATER-SUPPLY OPERATIONS IN THE RKANSAS RIVER BASIN, COLORADO U S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 16 : 58 47 | §1MIJiAtED OBSERVED ilUNO'S Of .«»o Dx.C‘ *• 90 50 10 PERCENTAGE OF MONTHS EXCEEDED Water-Resources Investigations Report 88-4 Prepared in cooperation with the SOUTHEASTERN COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT CALIBRATION AND USE OF AN INTERACTIVE-ACCOUNTING MODEL TO SIMULATE DISSOLVED SOLIDS, STREAMFLOW, AND WATER-SUPPLY OPERATIONS IN THE ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, COLORADO By Alan W. Burns U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 88-4214 Prepared in cooperation with the SOUTHEASTERN COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT Lakewood, Colorado 1989 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL HODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey Box 25046, Mail Stop 415 Federal Center Denver, CO 80225-0046 U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports Section Federal Center, Building 810 Box 25425 Denver, CO 80225-0425 [Telephone: (303) 236-7476] CONTENTS Page Abstract- 1 Introduction- 2 Description of the model- 4 Purpose and criteria of model calibration- 4 Data available for model input and calibration--- 7 Model calibration of simulated dissolved solids- 8 Example use of simulated dissolved solids- 11 Model calibration of simulated streamflow- 12 Model calibration of simulated water-supply operations- 23 Calibration for 1943-74- 26 Calibration for 1975-85- 47 Example use of simulated water-supply operations- 48 Summary- 55 References cited- 56 Supplemental information- 57 Attachment A - Basin-description file for dissolved-solids loads- 58 Attachment B - Basin-description file for streamflow-only calibration- 66 Attachment C - Basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74- 74 Attachment D - Additional basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74- 85 Attachment E - Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1943-74- 87 Attachment F - Basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85- 95 Attachment G - Additional basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85- 106 Attachment H - Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1975-85- 108 FIGURES Page Figure 1. Map showing location of study area- 3 2. Schematic showing streamflow node locations in the Arkansas River basin model- 5 3-27. Graphs showing: 3. Average dissolved-solids load, by decade, along the Arkansas River, 1940-79- 13 4. Average simulated streamflow, dissolved-solids concen¬ tration, and dissolved-solids load along the Arkansas River, 1940-85- 14 5. Streamflow for node 860, ARK GRNT, 1940-85: A, observed streamflow; B , simulated streamflow using zero-slope coefficients; and C, simulated streamflow using stream- flow-only calibrated coefficients- 20 6. Streamflow for node 994, ARK PUBL, 1940-85: A, observed streamflow; B, simulated streamflow using zero-slope coefficients; and C, simulated streamflow using stream- flow-only calibrated coefficients- 21 iii Page Figures 3-27. Graphs showing--Continued 7. Streamflow for node 1375, ARK COOL, 1940-85: A, observed streamflow; B, simulated streamflow using zero-slope coefficients; and C, simulated streamflow using stream- flow-only calibrated coefficients- 22 8. Streamflow for node 915, ARK SLID, 1943-74: A, simulated streamflow; B, difference between observed and simulated streamflow; and C, cumulative frequency curves for the observed and simulated streamflow- 27 9. Streamflow for node 1170, ARK NPST, 1943-74: A, simulated streamflow; B, difference between observed and simulated streamflow; and C, cumulative frequency curves for the observed and simulated streamflow- 28 10. Streamflow for node 1240, ARK ANMS, 1943-74: A, simulated streamflow; B, difference between observed and simulated streamflow; and C, cumulative frequency curves for the observed and simulated streamflow- 30 11. Streamflow for node 1305, ARK JM R, 1943-74: A, simulated streamflow; B, difference between observed and simulated streamflow; and C, cumulative frequency curves for the observed and simulated streamflow- 31 12. Streamflow for node 1375, ARK COOL, 1943-74: A, simulated streamflow; B, difference between observed and simulated streamflow; and C, cumulative frequency curves for the observed and simulated streamflow- 32 13. Basinwide water use, 1943-74: A, simulated direct diver¬ sions; and B, simulated ground-water pumpage- 33 14. Diversions for user 1164, BILL-HAM, 1943-74: A, observed diversions; B, simulated diversions; and C, cumulative frequency curves of observed and simulated diversions- 36 15. Diversions for user 6707, AMITY, 1943-74: A, observed diversions; B, simulated diversions; and C, cumulative frequency curves of observed and simulated diversions- 37 16. Diversions for user 1710, RCKY FRD, 1943-74: A, observed diversions; B, simulated diversions; and C, cumulative frequency curves of observed and simulated diversions- 39 17. Diversions for user 1428, COLORADO, 1943-74: A, observed diversions; B, simulated diversions; and C, cumulative frequency curves of observed and simulated diversions- 40 18. Differences between simulated and observed diversions for user 1216, HYD-FRUT, 1943-74- 41 19. Cumulative frequency curves of observed and simulated diversions for user 1419, BTH-ORCH, 1943-74- 42 20. Simulated ground-water return flows summed for all reaches in the basin, 1943-74- 43 21. Content for reservoir 854, TWIN LKS, 1943-74: A, observed reservoir content; and B, simulated reservoir content- 44 22. Content for reservoir 1107, MEREDITH, 1943-74: A, observed reservoir content; and B, simulated reservoir content- 45 23. Content for reservoir 1300, JM RES, 1943-74: A, observed reservoir content; and B, simulated reservoir content- 46 IV Page Figures 3-27 24 25, 26, 27 Graphs showing--Continued: Content for reservoir 824, TURQUOIS, 1975-85: A, observed reservoir content; and B, simulated reservoir content- 48 Content for reservoir 854, TWIN LKS, 1975-85: A, observed reservoir content; and B, simulated reservoir content- 49 Content for reservoir 993, PUEBLO R, 1975-85: A, observed reservoir content; and B, simulated reservoir content- 50 Simulated reservoir content for six alternatives for reservoir 993, PUEBLO R, 1940-85- 53 Table 1. 2 . 3. 4. 5. 6 . 7. 8 . 9. TABLES Page Node locations in the Arkansas River basin model and corresponding streamflow-gaging stations- 6 Statistical summary of simulated dissolved-solids loads- 10 Summary of multiple-regression analysis of streamflow upstream from Canon City- 15 Sites with time series of data that are used as input to the model- 18 Statistics for node locations used in the streamflow-only simulation- 19 Statistics for node locations used in the 1943-74 model calibration- 29 Statistics of direct diversions for simulated water users, 1943-74- 35 Monthly average transmountain imports for observed and simulated diversions through the Boustead Tunnel- 51 Summary of six alternatives chosen to consider effects of enlarging Pueblo Reservoir, based on hydrologic conditions of 1940-85- 52 CONVERSION FACTORS Inch-pound units in this report may be converted to metric (International System) units by using the following conversion factors: Multiply acre-foot cubic foot per second cubic foot per second per mile ton, short inch By 1,233 0.02817 0.0176 907.2 25.4 To obtain cubic meter cubic meter per second cubic meter per second per kilometer kilogram millimeter Sea level : In this report M sea level” refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD of 1929)--a geodetic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of both the United States and Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of 1929. v Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates https://archive.org/details/calibrationuseof8842burn CALIBRATION AND USE OF AN INTERACTIVE-ACCOUNTING MODEL TO SIMULATE DISSOLVED SOLIDS, STREAMFLOW, AND WATER-SUPPLY OPERATIONS IN THE ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN, COLORADO By Alan W. Burns ABSTRACT An interactive-accounting model was used to simulate the dissolved solids, streamflow, and water-supply operations in the Arkansas River basin, Colorado. The model calculates streamflow for incremental drainage areas by use of regression equations and a time series of independent variables such as snowpack, precipitation, or gaged streamflow. Dissolved-solids concentrations can be calculated at each model node location for the corresponding stream- flow. Streamflow and dissolved-solids loads then can be routed downstream by the model. Use of the model incorporating relations of specific conductance to streamflow enabled the computation of dissolved-solids loads throughout the basin. To simulate streamflow only, all of the water-supply operations were incorporated in the incremental streamflow regression relations and the model was calibrated for 1940-85. Coefficients of determination for streamflow-only simulation for 20 nodes ranged from 0.89 to 0.58. The model input was then revised to incorporate 74 water users and 11 reservoirs to simulate water- supply operations. Two periods were used for this calibration: 1943-74, which included John Martin Reservoir; and 1975-85, which also included the Frying- pan-Arkansas project with Pueblo Reservoir. Calibration of the water-supply operations resulted in coefficients of determination that ranged from 0.87 to negative for 37 selected water users. Even for those users whose simulated irrigation diversions did not relate well statistically to the observed diver¬ sions, plots of data generally indicated reasonable model results. Plots of simulated reservoir contents also indicated reasonable similarity to observed values. Coefficients of determination for 13 selected streamflow nodes ranged from 0.87 to 0.02. To demonstrate the utility of the model, six specific alternatives were simulated to consider the effects of the potential enlarge¬ ment of Pueblo Reservoir. The model was used in this mode to simulate a 46-year period, which represented hydrologic conditions of 1940-85, with three major different alternatives: 1975-85 calibrated model data, calibrated model data with an addition of 30 cubic feet per second to the Fountain Creek flows, and calibrated model data with a municipal water user leaving Fryingpan- Arkansas project water in storage rather than diverting it. These three major alternatives included the option of reservoir enlargement or no enlargement to give the six total alternatives. A 40,000-acre-foot enlargement of Pueblo Reservoir resulted in average annual increases of 2,500 acre-feet in trans¬ mountain imports, of 800 acre-feet in storage diversions, and of 100 acre-feet in winter-water storage. 1 INTRODUCTION The hydrologic system of the Arkansas River basin in Colorado is a set of complex interactions between surface water and ground water and between natural runoff and man’s water use. Most of the streamflow in the river originates as snowmelt in the mountainous upper basin (fig. 1). The river is a conduit that transports the water eastward to the fertile lands of eastern Colorado. Irrigation in the basin began about 1860 with small ditches diverting water to irrigate the nearby flood plain. By the 1880's, large ditches had been constructed to irrigate thousands of acres along the river, and the normal streamflow that occurs during the growing season had been appropriated for use. To enable use of streamflow that occurred at times other than during the growing season, diversion canals leading to off-channel storage reservoirs were constructed during the 1890's. To supplement water supply for irrigation, water was imported from the Rio Grande and Colorado River basins as early as 1900; the water then was stored in high-mountain reservoirs for delivery during the growing season or during periods of lower natural streamflow. Many ground-water wells were drilled in the 1940's, 1950's, and 1960's in the alluvial aquifer adjacent to the river to supply additional water for irrigation. In addition to these privately financed developments, the Federal government built two large on-channel reservoirs for flood protection and supplemental irrigation water. John Martin Reservoir (capacity of 701,775 acre-feet) near Las Animas was completed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in about 1947; Pueblo Reservoir (capacity of 357,000 acre- feet) near Pueblo was completed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in about 1975. In addition, Trinidad Reservoir (capacity of 114,500 acre-feet) was built on the Purgatoire River near Trinidad by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers about 1980. The hydrologic cycle in this complex, conjunctive-use system can be idealized as follows. Good quality water exits the mountainous part of the basin as snowmelt (upstream from Canon City) in the late spring-early summer. This water is diverted for irrigation. Canal leakage and excess irrigation applications recharge the alluvial aquifer adjacent to the river. Because of the concentrating effects of consumptive use of water but not solutes by crops, this recharge is degraded from that of the applied water. Return flows, in the form of both surface water and ground water, replenish some of the flow in the river, which provides water to the next user downstream. This process continues on downstream, and streamflow generally decreases and solute concentrations increase. As the proportion of the river flow that was the original good quality snowmelt decreases downstream, the quality of surface water in the river and ground water in the adjacent aquifer becomes more similar. In areas of ground-water pumpage, return flows are diminished. However, the decrease in return flow because of pumpage is offset by return flows caused by additional excess irrigation applications produced by the added ground-water supply. In a cooperative study between the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District and the U.S. Geological Survey, an interactive accounting model for a digital computer was developed (Burns, 1988) to simulate the hydrologic system of the Arkansas River basin in Colorado. The model has many options capable of simulating varying degrees of complexity. In its simplest form, the model was used to simulate dissolved-solids loads throughout the basin by entering observed streamflow data at the node locations of interest (without using the routing capability of the model). The model then was used 2 DENVER 3 Figure 1.--Location of study area. to simulate the hydrologic system of the basin by using regression equations to calculate incremental streamflow at each point of interest and by routing the streamflow and dissolved-solids loads downstream. For this simulation, the effects of water use were incorporated into the regression equations that normally calculate only incremental streamflow. Finally, the model was used to simulate the water-supply operations of the basin, including reservoirs, ground-water pumpage, and irrigation return flows. This report discusses the calibration and use of the model in the Arkansas River basin and the data necessary to simulate the basin at each level of complexity. The process of adjusting model parameters and factors so that the model will provide a reasonable and useful facsimile to the real system also is discussed. Description of the Model The Arkansas River and tributaries are represented in the model by a net¬ work of nodes (fig. 2). Node ID's (numbers) and names are listed in table 1 with the corresponding gaging-station numbers and names. Gaging stations 07137500 and 07137000 are located in Kansas but are used in the model to represent streamflow leaving the State of Colorado. Regression equations are used to estimate the monthly streamflow of each incremental drainage area, by using a time series of independent variables such as snowpack, precipitation, or gaged streamflow. Concentrations of a conservative constituent (dissolved solids for this study) are calculated by using regression equations; stream- flow is the independent variable. Streamflow and dissolved-solids loads then are routed downstream. When all of the model options are used, the water-use and ground-water systems in the basin also are included. Types of water users that can be simulated include agricultural, municipal, and industrial users, and reservoir operators. Each water user has a list of potential water sources that includes direct diversions, ground-water pumpage, imports, or reservoir releases. Specific data are input to the computer in the order that the water user will use these sources to satisfy individual demands. All direct diversions are simulated to conform to the basinwide priorities, according to the prior-appropriation doctrine (Radosevich and others, 1975). Stream depletion from ground-water pumpage, and return flow from excess irrigation applications and canal leakage are simulated by using ground-water response functions (Jenkins, 1968a, 1968b, 1968c; Burns, 1983). Purpose and Criteria of Model Calibration The model was developed to simulate future or hypothetical changes in hydrologic conditions or water-supply operations in the Arkansas River basin in Colorado. Confidence in simulated results can be enhanced by demonstrating the reasonableness of the results. Hydrologic models, in general, have three typical components: (1) Model input, a time series of natural stresses; (2) model parameters, which enable equations in the model to describe the physical system being simulated; and (3) model output, a time series that results from the physical system acting on the natural stress inputs. A process common to hydrologic modeling is calibration, which is the process of entering an observed time series of input data to a model, and then adjusting the appropriate model parameters so that the time series of simulated output "best" fits, or matches, the corresponding observed sequence. "Best" fit can have many possible definitions that are qualitative and quantitative. 4 IT) co 5 Figure 2.--Streamflow node locations in the Arkansas River basin model. Table l.--7Vode locations in the Arkansas River basin model and corresponding streamflow-gaging stations Node Node Station 1 Station ID name number name 812 ARK LEAD 830 HALFMOON 845 LAKE CK 07081200 Arkansas River near Leadville 07083000 Halfmoon Creek near Malta 07084500 Lake Creek above Twin Lakes Reservoir 860 ARK GRNT 865 CLEAR CK 890 COTTNWD 915 ARK SLID 07086000 Arkansas River at Granite 07086500 Clear Creek above Clear Creek Reservoir 07089000 Cottonwood Creek below Hot Springs 07091500 Arkansas River at Salida 937 ARK WELL 07093700 945 ARK PARK 07094500 950 GRAPE CK 07095000 960 ARK CANC 07096000 970 ARK PORT 07097000 Arkansas River near Wellsville Arkansas River at Parkdale Grape Creek near Westcliffe Arkansas River at Canon City Arkansas River at Portland 991 BEAVER C 07099100 994 ARK PUBL 07099400 07099500 1065 FOUNT PB 07106500 Beaver Creek near Portland Arkansas River above Pueblo Arkansas River near Pueblo Fountain Creek at Pueblo 1090 ST CHARL 1095 ARK AVON 07108500 07108800 07108900 07109000 07109500 St. Charles River near Pueblo St. Charles River near Vineland St. Charles River at Vineland St. Charles River at mouth near Pueblo Arkansas River near Avondale 1160 HUERF R 1170 ARK NPST 1195 APISH R 1197 ARK CAT 1230 ARK LAJU 07116000 07117000 07119500 07119700 07123000 Huerfano River below Huerfano Valley Dam Arkansas River near Nepesta Apishapa River near Fowler Arkansas River at Catlin Dam Arkansas River at La Junta 1240 ARK ANMS 1285 PURG ANS 1305 ARK JM R 1330 ARK LAMR 07124000 Arkansas River at Las Animas 07128500 Purgatoire River near Las Animas 07130500 Arkansas River below John Martin Reservoir 07133000 Arkansas River at Lamar 1341 BIG SAND 1355 ARK HOLY 1375 ARK COOL 07134100 Big Sandy Creek near Lamar 07135500 Arkansas River at Holly 07137500 Arkansas River near Coolidge, Kansas 07137000 Frontier Ditch near Coolidge, Kansas 1 Station locations are identified in Burns, 1985, table 6 and plate 1. 6 For this model of the Arkansas River basin, no single measure of "best" fit is defined because of the multitude of simulated outputs produced. Vari¬ ous plots can be drawn to provide qualitative aids for judging reasonableness. Three statistics (mean of the residuals, standard deviation of the residuals, and coefficient of determination) can be calculated for many simulated results to provide a quantitative aid for judging reasonableness. Residuals are cal¬ culated as the differences between the simulated value for each month from the current simulation and the simulated value for the same month from some other simulation. During the calibration process, this "other" simulation would be observed data. The mean of the residuals (MR) is the arithmetic average, for all months, of the residuals; the standard deviation of the residuals (SDR) is the square root of the population variance of those residuals. Based on linear-regression theory, the best model parameters are those that produce the MR as zero and a minimized SDR. The coefficient of determination (R 2 ) for linear regression is defined as the amount of variation in a dependent vari¬ able that can be explained by relating it to an independent variable. The coefficient of determination adjusted for degrees of freedom may be expressed as: R 2 = 1 - (SE 2 /SDy 2 ) (1) where SE = the standard error of estimate of the regression; and SDy = the standard deviation of the dependent variable. For a simple linear-regression model, the SE would equal the SDR. Because the river-basin model is not a simple linear regression, the "best" fit may not have MR as zero. To account for this, the coefficient of determination, as used in this report, is defined to include the bias term of a possibly nonzero MR, as: R 2 = 1 - (MR 2 + SDR 2 ) SD~2 (2) y For those parameters calibrated by quantitative statistics, the criterion of maximizing R 2 normally was considered most important. DATA AVAILABLE FOR MODEL INPUT AND CALIBRATION Collation and analysis of the considerable data available required much of the effort necessary to develop the model for the Arkansas River basin. Observed streamflow data are essential to the model. During the simplest simulation of dissolved-solids loads, observed streamflow data are used as input at all selected main-stem nodes. During simulations that use more complex capabilities, observed streamflow at many of the tributaries is needed for input. Calibration of the model is evaluated by comparing simulated streamflow to observed streamflow. All the needed streamflow data are enumer¬ ated in the report "Selected hydrographs and statistical analyses character¬ izing the water resources of the Arkansas River basin, Colorado," by Alan W. Burns (1985). Precipitation and snowpack data, used as the time-series input of independent variables to the model, also are enumerated by Burns (1985). 7 Simple linear-regression coefficients are input to the model and used to calculate monthly streamflow from selected independent variables and to calculate dissolved-solids concentrations from streamflow. For the upper basin (upstream from Canon City), snowpack was determined to be the best independent variable to relate to May through September streamflow; precipi¬ tation was the best independent variable to relate to October through March streamflow; and air temperature was the best independent variable to relate to April streamflow (P.0. Abbott, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1982). Abbott also determined that the same slope coefficient could be used at various locations, and that different intercept coefficients account for spatial differences in streamflow. All the necessary regression coefficients for the calculation of dissolved-solids are presented in "Relations of specific conductance to streamflow and selected water-quality characteristics of the Arkansas River basin, Colorado," by Doug Cain (1987). Specific conductance is the most commonly available water-quality characteristic that is measured in the basin. The model first computes specific-conductance values with regression equations by using streamflow as the independent variable. Any conservative constituent that can be related to specific conductance then can be simulated with the model; however, the only constituent attempted to date (1989) is dissolved solids. Cain (1987) presents relations of specific conductance to dissolved solids and to six major ionic constituents. Cain (1987) also presents monthly time series of estimated dissolved-solids loads for three streamflow-gaging stations where at least 10 years of daily specific- conductance values are available for calculating those loads. Simulation of the water-supply operations of the basin required quali¬ tative and quantitative information. The general water-supply operations in the basin are described in "Description of water-systems operations in the Arkansas River basin, Colorado," by P.0. Abbott (1986). The water users, descriptions of their water systems, and selected data for their operations are enumerated by Abbott (1986); in addition, a listing of the basinwide water-right priorities as of 1985 is provided. Considerable additional data, such as monthly diversions, transmountain imports, reservoir-storage contents, and air temperatures, that were collated as part of this project from numerous sources, have been stored in a computer data base to enable easy retrieval and analysis (W.B. Blattner, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1985). MODEL CALIBRATION OF SIMULATED DISSOLVED SOLIDS Cain (1987, table 4) presents regression coefficients for the relations of specific conductance to streamflow at 19 main-stem streamflow-gaging stations on the Arkansas River. Several forms of the relation were tested by Cain (1987); a log-log relation was determined to result in the best fit overall. Cain (1987, table 8) also presents the simple linear-regression coefficients that relate dissolved-solids concentration to specific conduc¬ tance. These coefficients were calculated from regressions of instantaneous values. The model, in its simplest form, uses observed monthly mean stream- flow for selected nodes. The dissolved-solids concentrations for each month simulated are calculated by using the given relations of specific conductance to streamflow and dissolved solids to specific conductance. 8 Even this simple use of the model required some parameter adjustment or calibration. Errors are introduced into the model because of the "cascading" regressions; that is, first calculating specific-conductance concentration, then dissolved-solids concentration, and then dissolved-solids load. Also, the calibration criteria of minimum MR and SDR for dissolved-solids loads are linear criteria; however, the use of log-log regressions does not produce minimized coefficients for use with arithmetic averages without certain adjustments (Ferguson, 1986). Because regression coefficients were determined from instantaneous values, errors may occur when monthly mean streamflow is used with those coefficients. To determine what adjustments, if any, would be needed to the regression coefficients, the model was used to simulate dissolved-solids loads for three nodes (994, ARK PUBL; 1305, ARK JM R; and 1375, ARK COOL) for which Cain (1987) calculated monthly dissolved-solids loads from daily specific conductance. Coefficients for relations of specific conductance to streamflow for four simulations are listed in table 2. Separate relations were used for the summer season, May through September, and the winter season, October through April. The calculated MR, SDR, and R 2 for the dissolved-solids loads also are listed in table 2. For simulation 1, the regression coefficients are those calcu¬ lated by Cain (1987) using instantaneous values. The statistics listed in table 2 relate the indicated simulation results to the observed monthly dis¬ solved-solids loads (Cain, 1987, table 8) from calculated daily specific- conductance data. The coefficients of determination for simulation 1 were 0.65 for 994, ARK PUBL, 0.81 for 1305, ARK JM R, and 0.74 for 1375, ARK COOL. The observed values of dissolved-solids loads for streamflow-gaging station 07099400, Arkansas River above Pueblo, indicate a time trend (Cain, 1987, p. 73-75) that is not simulated by the model for node 994, ARK PUBL. Although the exact cause of this trend is not known, the impoundment of water in Pueblo Reservoir that began in 1974 is assumed to be the direct or indirect cause. Comparison of simulation 1 results for node 1305, ARK JM R,to observed values indicates a good seasonal fit with normally distributed random residuals of the peaks. The results of simulation 1 for node 1375, ARK COOL, indicate obvious overestimation of peaks compared with observed values (especially the flood of June 1965). Study of daily specific-conductance and streamflow data, especially for June 1965 at streamflow-gaging station 07137500, Arkansas River near Coolidge, Kansas, indicates that coefficients determined from instantaneous data, but applied to monthly mean streamflow, may have caused much of the error indi¬ cated by these coefficients of determination. Therefore, log-log regressions were calculated by using observed values of monthly dissolved-solids load and monthly mean streamflow. Regression coefficients for the relations of specific conductance to streamflow that are calculated by log-log regression analysis are listed in table 2 (simulation 2). The generally improved coeffi¬ cients of determination for the three nodes were 0.68 for 994, ARK PUBL, 0.80 for 1305, ARK JM R, and 0.83 for 1375, ARK COOL. Ferguson (1986) reports an adjustment that can be made to the intercept coefficient of a log-log regres¬ sion to enable the relation to approximate an arithmetic-minimization crite¬ rion. The effects of adjusting the coefficients of the relations of specific conductance to streamflow (simulation 3) ranged from no change for node 994, ARK PUBL, and node 1305, ARK JM R, to a decrease to 0.79 for node 1375, ARK COOL. 9 Table 2 .--Statistical summary of simulated dissolved-solids loads [All load values are in tons per month] Observed data Simulation number 1 12 3 4 994, ARK PUBL Number of months. 204 Average salt load. 12,700 Standard deviation. 10,500 Winter relation intercept. Winter relation slope. Summer relation intercept. Summer relation slope. Mean of the residual (MR). Standard deviation of the residual (SDR)- Coefficient of determination (R 2 )- 1305, ARK JM R Number of months. 360 Average salt load. 27,300 Standard deviation. 35,300 Winter relation intercept. Winter relation slope. Summer relation intercept. Summer relation slope. Mean of the residual (MR). Standard deviation of the residual (SDR)- Coefficient of determination (R 2 )- 1375, ARK COOL Number of months. 128 Average salt load. 28,700 Standard deviation. 48,800 Winter relation intercept. Winter relation slope. Summer relation intercept. Summer relation slope. Mean of the residual (MR). Standard deviation of the residual (SDR)- Coefficient of determination (R 2 )- 3,000 1,810 1,850 -0.32 -0.21 -0.21 3,000 3,510 3,660 -.32 -.33 -.33 -1,520 -240 273 6,030 5,890 5,860 2,180 -0.24 1,620 -.22 -52 5,770 .65 .68 .68 .70 4,100 3,940 4,100 -.09 -.11 -.11 5,900 4,450 4,630 -.21 -.17 -.17 184 -1,920 -702 15,600 15,900 15,800 3,770 -.08 5,230 -.19 4 15,500 .81 .80 .80 .81 5,100 -.06 6,900 -.20 6,250 23,900 4,990 5,230 10,400 -.11 -.11 -.24 4,570 4,780 10,200 -.16 -.16 -.29 153 1,510 448 19,900 22,400 7,800 .74 .83 .79 .97 Simulation 1 used regression coefficients calculated by Cain (1987) using instantaneous values. Simulation 2 used regression coefficients cal¬ culated using observed monthly dissolved-solids loads. Simulation 3 used regression coefficients calculated using the observed monthly dissolved-solids loads, adjusted to account for the log-log regression. Simulation 4 used the ’’best-fit" calibrated regression coefficients. 10 Finally, a trial-and-error method was attempted to select coefficients of the relation of specific conductance to streamflow. For a given slope coefficient, a near-zero MR could be obtained by adjusting the intercept coefficient. A new slope coefficient then was selected, and its respective intercept coefficient, which would result in a near-zero MR, was determined. By using this stepwise procedure, a function of SDR to slope coefficient was developed, and a ’’best" set of coefficients was determined. The final set of coefficients for the relation of specific conductance to streamflow (simula¬ tion 4) for the three nodes is listed in table 2. The coefficient of deter¬ mination for node 994, ARK PUBL, was 0.70; for node 1305, ARK JM R, was 0.81; and for node 1375, ARK COOL, was 0.97. Comparisons of the dissolved-solids loads simulated by the model using the trial-and-error coefficients (simula¬ tion 4) to those dissolved-solids loads simulated by the model using the coefficients based on instantaneous data (simulation 1) indicated a slightly improved fit for node 994, ARK PUBL; no difference in the fit for node 1305, ARK JM R; and much improved fits for almost every peak for node 1375, ARK COOL. The basin-description file with all of the regression coefficients used in simulation 4 is provided as Attachment A in the "Supplemental Information" section at the back of this report. The time trend in the observed data for node 994, ARK PUBL was an obvious cause of error for dissolved-solids load simulated by the model. This error is symptomatic of calibration difficulties that occurred during the study for the more complex simulations. Although the model uses a time series of independent variables that have changing (and potentially time-trending) values, the description of the basin is assumed static for a given simulation. Thus, although Cain (1987) shows significantly different (from a statistical viewpoint) regression coefficients for two different time periods, coeffi¬ cients cannot be changed with time in the simulation model. The model could simulate one selected time series of independent variables by using one set of coefficients and a second time series of independent variables by using another set of coefficients, but it cannot simulate the integrated effects of that changeover in one simulation. EXAMPLE USE OF SIMULATED DISSOLVED SOLIDS Cain (1987) presented coefficients for the relations of specific conduct¬ ance to streamflow and dissolved solids to specific conductance for most of the main-stem streamflow-gaging stations in the Arkansas River basin. Cain (1987) also presented regionalized equations for the basin to estimate the coefficients for sites where there were insufficient data for regression anal¬ ysis. Although adjustments were made during calibration to the coefficients of the three node locations where observed monthly dissolved-solids loads could be calculated from daily specific-conductance data, the only node where those adjustments made obvious differences was node 1375, ARK COOL. Therefore, the regression coefficients determined by Cain (1987) were used at all model nodes, except node 1375, ARK COOL, where the calibrated values were used, and node 1330, ARK LAMR, midway between node 1305, ARK JM R, and node 1375, ARK COOL. The assigned coefficients for node 1330, ARK LAMR, were based on one-half the adjustments calculated for node 1375, ARK COOL. Dissolved-solids loads throughout the basin then were simulated by using these coefficients. 11 Dissolved-solids loads were simulated by using observed streamflow data only for each decade from 1940-79 (fig. 3). For each decade, dissolved-solids load increases downstream until just downstream from Pueblo. A decline of dissolved-solids load associated with irrigation diversions occurs until downstream from La Junta, where a large increase in dissolved-solids load results from irrigation-return flow and the inflow of the Purgatoire River. The decline in dissolved-solids load through Lamar is the result of irrigation diversions. The increase of dissolved-solids load along the final reach upstream from the State line is most likely the result of irrigation-return flow. Data indicate that dissolved-solids load seems to be decreasing with time (fig. 3). Burns (1985) indicated a statistically significant downward trend existed for most of the streamflow data east of Pueblo, and although these load data were not statistically tested, it was assumed that any trends in dissolved-solids load primarily result from streamflow declines. To alleviate possible interpretation errors because different periods of record exist for observed streamflow, another simulation was made for 1940-85. Missing streamflow data were estimated, and dissolved-solids load was based on complete streamflow records for every main-stem node location. The average simulated streamflow, dissolved-solids concentration, and dissolved-solids load for 1940-85 are shown in figure 4. There is a large increase in the dissolved-solids load between just upstream from Pueblo to just downstream from Pueblo. The total load leaving the basin is only slightly greater than the load near Pueblo, although there are tremendous variations at various node locations along the main-stem reaches. MODEL CALIBRATION OF SIMULATED STREAMFLOW The model can be applied to simulate streamflow throughout the basin by using only regression equations. For this application of the model, the water-supply operations are not included explicitly, but the effects of water use are incorporated into the regression coefficients. The network of node location, where incremental streamflow is calculated, can be divided into three general groups: (1) The upper basin main-stem node locations and tribu¬ tary node locations upstream from Canon City, where streamflow is dominated by snowmelt runoff; (2) the tributary node locations for the remaining basin, where streamflow is affected by thunderstorms and irrigation diversions and return flow; and (3) the main-stem node locations for the remaining basin, where streamflow is dominated by irrigation diversions. Regression equations of monthly streamflow for main-stem and tributary streamflow-gaging stations in the upper basin (upstream from Canon City) were calculated by P.0. Abbott (U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1982) by using multiregression analysis to determine the best independent variables and regression coefficients. For that analysis, monthly streamflow, in cubic feet per second, for 11 streamflow-gaging stations was converted into runoff, in inches, and, where appropriate, adjusted to "native” flow by accounting for transbasin diversions and changes in reservoir storage. Temporal and spatial independent variables were included in the analysis, so the resultant rela¬ tions could be used to calculate monthly runoff for any site in the upper basin. Results of Abbott's analysis determined that log-log regressions were 12 Ld o Q < 00 Ld _I cr Ld > q: H1N0W d3d SN01 Nl ‘QV01 SanOS-QdAIOSSIQ 30Vd3AV o> I"'' I o •H C/3 03 c/3 d 03 X Pi < CD X x oo d o T— I 03 r—I O C/3 C/3 < I I CO CD Sm d 00 Pm 13 40,000 i-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1 1,000 i 2,500 83111 d3d swvaomiw Nl ‘N0LLV81N30N0Q San0S-Q3A10SSia o o o CN o o m o o o o o m QN003S d3d 1333 01900 Nl ‘M013HV3diS o O O o o o O o 00 CD ■'fr CN o m Ld o o o m o o CN £ 00 00 < 00 z < I o o < Cd 3 o o o o N- d o 05 Pi d d O -H w pi I TO W W r—i d O H5 V) dj V J Pi •H <3 d d W 03 O d r-l a> 250 O d w d d 1—1 *H Cd d rH l_L_ S o •H W o 00 Ld W 1 d CO rH Pi O Cd d) w > w Ld < -H > 1 d ■ 350 Cd 1 • d for October through February; (3) March air-temperature data at Buena Vista [T 3 ] and October precipitation data at Salida [Piol> for March; and (4) April air-temperature data at Buena Vista [T 4 ], for April. The snow index [S] that provided the best fit of the data was a parameter that equally weighted the April 1 snowpack with the May 1 snowpack at the Park Cone and Independence Pass snow courses. Although this particular index gave the statistically best fit, other indices that use various combinations of the 2 months and the two sites indicated only minor variations in the goodness of fit, when the seasonal runoff (May through September) was regressed with the indices. The spatial independent variables that provided the best fit of the data were: (1) Percentage of the basin above 11,000 feet in elevation [An]; (2) percentage of the basin above 12,000 feet [A^] > and (3) elevation of the streamflow-gaging station [E] . The regression model and coefficients are listed in table 3. Table 3.--Summary of multiple-regression analysis of streamflow upstream from Canon City ■L J r _ 1 [Model is Q = aS T 3 T 4 P^o An A 12 ^E where: Q is monthly runoff, in inches, for the indicated month; S is Park Cone April 1 and May 1 snow course measurements and Independence Pass April 1 and May 1 snow course measure¬ ments, snowpack water equivalent (inches); T 3 and T 4 are March and April measurements of air temperature at Buena Vista (degrees Fahrenheit); Pjo is October precipitation at Salida (inches + 0.01 inch); An is ratio of drainage area above 11,000 feet to total drainage area; A 12 is ratio of drainage area above 12,000 feet to total drainage area; and E is altitude of site where runoff is to be simulated (thousands of feet)] Month Regression coefficients Coeffieient of determi¬ nation, R 2 a b c d e f g h Season 1.330 X 10" 2 0.905 0.618 1.699 0.92 Oct. 1.888 — — 0.050 0.968 — -.468 .50 Nov. 3.909 X 10 -2 — — .044 .044 — — .27 Dec. 2.810 — — .011 .567 — .968 .13 Jan. 2.196 X 10 -1 — — .019 — — — .01 Feb. 1.833 X 10 _1 — — .012 — — — .00 Mar. 0 CM CM I''- X 10~ 2 — 0.174 -- .009 — — .180 .01 Apr. 5.300 X 10 -6 — -- 2.145 — — — 1.386 .37 May 2.900 X 10' 3 .277 .268 2.538 .64 June 2.300 X 10~ 3 1.051 .648 1.841 .88 July 1.700 X 10~ 3 1.317 .789 1.278 .80 Aug. 1.840 X 10 -2 .683 .728 .937 .70 Sept. 3.190 X 10' 2 .452 .560 .778 .59 15 Several factors were considered to determine how to adapt the results of Abbott's analysis (U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1982) into the simulation model. The coefficients of determination for the snowmelt runoff months (May through September) ranged from fair to good (0.59 to 0.88). For simplicity in the model, only one snow course was used for the index, and, because of findings by Burns (1985) that in some years the May 1 snowpack is zero, the snow index selected was the April 1 snowpack at Independence Pass. For Abbott's analysis, the coefficients of determination for the winter months (October through March) ranged from poor to fair (0.00 to 0.50). Much of the poor fit was the result of rather small standard deviations of the observed data (see eq. 1). Although the regression coefficients result in estimates near the respective monthly means, not enough variation occurs about the mean to cause major error in the simulation. Based on that analysis, the independ¬ ent variables selected for use in the model to simulate monthly incremental streamflow from October through March were monthly precipitation data at Twin Lakes Reservoir. April air-temperature data at Buena Vista was selected as the independent variable to simulate April runoff. Each of the monthly slope-regression coefficients calculated by P.0. Abbott (U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1982) was used directly in the model input. The intercept coefficients to the regression relations were determined by trial and error within the model rather than using Abbott's values because: (1) The period of record used by Abbott generally was differ¬ ent from the period simulated in the model; (2) the model simulates streamflow that is intended to represent gaged streamflow, and not "native" flow; (3) the model nodes are at known gaged sites and, thus, there is no need to estimate data at ungaged sites; and (4) an arithmetic-minimization criterion was selected, whereas Abbott's analysis used a log-log minimization criterion. By adjusting the intercept coefficient at each node for each month, simulated streamflow resulted in an MR that approached zero for each month. Fitting streamflow of tributaries in the lower basin downstream from Canon City by using regression generally was unsuccessful. Burns (1985) indi¬ cated that generally poor correlation occurred between monthly precipitation and streamflow in the basin. Although some relation must exist between rain¬ fall and runoff in the central and eastern parts of the basin, to describe a useful relation most likely would require precipitation records from the indi¬ vidual drainage basins and time periods much shorter than a month. Because of these limitations, observed streamflow at the simulated tributaries is input directly to the model. For sites that did not have sufficient length of record, simple linear regression was used to fill in missing data, by using an upstream or nearby gaged streamflow record as the independent variable. Fitting incremental main-stem streamflow in the lower basin downstream from Canon City was complicated because the typical independent variables gave poor results. Incremental streamflow is defined as the difference between downstream outflow and upstream inflow in a reach. For most of the stream- flow-gaging stations on the Arkansas River downstream from Canon City, that difference usually is negative because of irrigation diversions. Regression analysis to fit the incremental streamflow was attempted by using precipita¬ tion, snowpack, and air-temperature data as independent variables. Streamflow in the river is substantially affected by diversions, which are governed by a fixed set of water rights. Therefore, regression relations that use time- varying independent variables usually resulted in statistically poor results. 16 After considering this factor, an additional independent variable was used in the analysis--upstream streamflow. In general, the greater the upstream streamflow is, the greater the diversion is. Thus, this variable often was the best independent variable. Another complicating factor in this regression analysis was that the best type of relation seemed to be a log-log type; however, some of the data often had both positive and negative values, which prohibits the use of log transforms. The final regression relations and corresponding coefficients were selected in a best-fit trial-and-error analysis. For each streamflow-gaging station, for each month, incremental streamflow was regressed with: (1) Precipitation data from the nearest upstream and downstream weather stations; (2) snowpack data from the two nearest snow courses; (3) air-temperature data from the nearest weather station; and (4) upstream streamflow data. For each station, simple linear regressions were calculated by using each of these independent variables; if all except 1 year of the calculated incremental streamflow were the same sign (positive or negative), each of the regressions also was calculated for the log-log transform of the data. The regression analysis that had the greatest coefficient of determination then was selected for that particular gaging station and month. When a log-log relation was selected, the slope coeffi¬ cient was used directly, but the intercept coefficient was adjusted in the model by trial and error to determine the value that resulted in an MR of near zero by using the arithmetic average criterion. To use the model, two data input files are necessary: (1) The basin- description file, which includes the node locations, network configuration, and monthly regression relations and coefficients; and (2) the time series of independent variables. The basin-description file is provided as Attachment B in the ’’Supplemental Information" section at the back of this report. The time series of independent variables included data for 46 years (1940-85) for the 28 variables listed in table 4. Missing data for any of these variables were approximated by filling in with the monthly average value, or by regressing the data using data from a nearby site, as indicated in table 4. The statistical summaries of the simulated results are listed in table 5 for the simulated nodes in the model as mean of residuals (MR), standard deviation of residuals (SDR), and coefficient of determination (R 2 ). The mean and standard deviation of the observed data also are listed for comparative purposes. Based on the coefficients of determination, simulated results are very good (R 2 > 0.80) for 16 of the 20 simulated nodes in table 5. The best fit is 0.89 at node 812, ARK LEAD, and node 970, ARK PORT; the worst fit is 0.58 at node 1305, ARK JM R. Burns (1985) indicated that much of the variation about the annual mean flow could be explained by seasonal patterns, especially in the upper basin upstream from Pueblo. Another simulation was made by using the mean monthly values of incremental streamflow for each node for each month to determine how much improvement had been affected by using regression analysis rather than using only the monthly mean. In effect, this new simulation uses only the intercept coefficient and sets the slope coefficient to zero. The SDR and R 2 values for this zero-slope-coefficient simulation are included in table 5. The inclusion of a slope coefficient indicates a reasonably good fit exists between simulated and observed streamflow throughout the basin; whereas, use of the zero-slope-coefficient simulation generally results in an R 2 decrease downstream. The observed and simulated streamflow from these two simulations 17 Table 4 .--Sites with time series of data that are used as input to the model Percent Sites 1 with of time series 1940-85 Method of estimating any missing data of data record missing Precipitation stations 1071 Buena Vista 11 regressed with 5990 North Lake 1294 Canon City 3 regressed with 8931 Westcliffe 3079 Fowler 11 regressed with 6131 Ordway 4076 Holly 8 regressed with 2446 Eads 4770 Lamar <1 used monthly averages 4834 Las Animas 2 regressed with 4388 John Martin Dam 6740 Pueblo 16 merged 6741 Pueblo <1 then used monthly averages 7167 Rocky Ford 1 regressed with 4720 La Junta 7370 Salida 26 regressed with 8931 Westcliffe 8501 Twin Lakes 26 regressed with 5990 North Lake Reservoir. Snow courses 6K07 Four Mile Park <1 used monthly averages 6L08 Garfield 33 regressed with 6K03S Twin Lakes Tunnel 6K04 Independence Pass 0 5M1M La Veta 0 Streamflow-gaging stations 095000 Grape Creek 2 regressed with 099500 Arkansas River near Pueblo 099100 Beaver Creek 76 regressed with 117000 Arkansas River near Nepesta Streamflow-gaging stations--Continued 106500 Fountain Creek 14 regressed with 105800 Fountain Creek at Security 2 then regressed with 106000 Fountain 108800 St. Charles 86 merged 108500 St. Charles River near Pueblo River. 59 then merged 108900 St. Charles River at Vineland 43 then regressed with 119500 Apishipa River near Fowler. 116000 Huerfano River 40 regressed with 123000 Arkansas River at La Junta 119500 Apishipa River 0 128500 Purgatoire River 19 regressed with 126500 Purgatoire River at Ninemile 134100 Big Sandy Creek 68 regressed with 126500 Purgatoire River at Ninemile Air temperature stations 1071 Buena Vista 12 regressed with 8931 Westcliffe 1294 Canon City 5 regressed with 8931 Westcliffe 4770 Lamar 0 4834 La Animas 4 regressed with 5018 Limon 6740 Pueblo 0 7167 Rocky Ford 0 1 Site locations are identified in Burns (1985, tables 1, 3, and 6 and plate 1). 18 Table 5 .--Statistics for node locations used in the streamflow-only simulation [All flow values are in cubic feet per second] Simulation results using Simulation results calibration coefficients using zero-slope Observed Mean Standard Coeffi- coefficients Node 1 Node 1940- 85 flow 2 of deviation cient Standard Coeffi- ID name Mean Standard the of the of deviation cient of deviation resid- resid- deter- of the deter- uals uals mination residuals mination (MR) (SDR) (R 2 ) (SDR) (R 2 ) 0812 ARK LEAD 72.3 109. 0.4 36.8 0.89 50.7 0.78 0830 HALFM00N 28.8 41.6 .1 14.3 .88 18.9 .79 0845 LAKE CK 166. 272. .4 96.9 .87 109. .84 0860 ARK GRNT 413. 446. -.0 170. .85 211. .78 0865 CLEAR CK 68.3 97.4 . 1 37.7 .85 47.7 .76 0890 COTTNWD 52.4 54.1 . 1 22.1 .83 29.2 .71 0915 ARK SLID 644. 639. .0 245. .85 329. .73 0937 ARK WELL 731. 665. .4 245. .86 360. .71 0945 ARK PARK 806. 742. -.0 300. .84 396. .72 0960 ARK CANC 733. 748. -.2 297. .84 409. .70 0970 ARK PORT 775. 826. . 1 277. .89 442. .71 0994 ARK PUBL 675. 767. .1 316. .83 445. .66 1095 ARK AVON 914. 870. .0 321. .86 432. .75 1170 ARK NPST 699. 763. .0 286. . 86 396. .73 1197 ARK CAT 689. 687. .0 261. .86 348. .74 1230 ARK LAJU 234. 483. .4 253. .73 264. .70 1240 ARK ANMS 212. 462. .3 248. .71 252. .70 1305 ARK JM R 302. 545. -.1 353. .58 448. .32 1330 ARK LAMR 147. 446. .3 240. .71 337. .43 1375 ARK COOL 197. 438. . 1 180. .83 344. .38 1 See table 1 and figure 2 for node descriptions and locations. 2 Not all stations had record for the entire period. are shown in figures 5, 6, and 7; the observed streamflow (A), streamflow simulated using the zero-slope coefficients (B) , and the streamflow simulated using calibration coefficients (C) for three selected nodes along the river are shown for 1940-85 [node 860, ARK GRNT (fig. 5); node 994, ARK PUBL (fig. 6); and node 1375, ARK COOL (fig. 7)]. When the zero-slope-coefficient simulation is used, the calculated incremental streamflow at each node is the same for each respective month, which gives a uniform response such as shown in figure 55. However, the simulated streamflow at all of the nodes does not remain uniform, because the simulation includes the observed tributary inflows for all nodes downstream from Canon City. Therefore, the integrated effect of tributary inflow along the basin is readily seen in figure IB. 19 STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND 2.500 2,000 1.500 1,000 500 0 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 mm umrmm I I II H I II ! i l l I ^11 I I 10 20 30 40 50 YEARS Figure 5.--Streamflow for node 860, ARK GRNT, 1940-85: A, Computed streamflow; B, Simulated streamflow using zero-slope coefficients; and C, Simulated streamflow using streamflow-only calibrated coefficients. 20 AVERAGE STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (PATTERNED) STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND 6,000 5,000 - YEARS Figure 6.--Streamflow for node 994, ARK PUBL, 1940-85: A, observed streamflow; B , simulated streamflow using zero-slope coefficients; and C, simulated streamflow using streamflow-only calibrated coefficients. 21 AVERAGE STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (PATTERNED) 1,200 Q Z o u UJ co oc UJ CL H UJ UJ UL U CQ D U z Si o _1 UL < UJ dc H co 0 10 20 30 40 50 Q Z o o UJ co DC UJ CL f- UJ UJ U. U CQ D U Z Q UJ Z DC LU 0 < ul 2 < UJ DC fr¬ ee UJ O < DC UJ > < YEARS Figure 7.--Streamflow for node 1375, ARK COOL, 1940-85: A, observed streamflow; B, simulated streamflow using zero-slope coefficients; and C, simulated streamflow using stream-flow-only calibrated coefficients. 22 MODEL CALIBRATION OF SIMULATED WATER-SUPPLY OPERATIONS The model, with all its options, simulates most of the hydrologic system in the basin: Natural runoff for all incremental areas; water diverted for irrigation and storage; pumpage of ground water; return flow; and stream depletions or accretions from ground water. The model calculates incremental streamflow at all node locations to produce a "prediversion" streamflow condition--the water that would be in the river if no diversions were made and if no on-channel reservoir storage occurred. To calculate this prediversion streamflow condition, a set of coefficients for each month and node are needed to compute the incremental streamflow. Although the calibrated values for these coefficients can be determined only through trial-and-error adjustments, the initial estimates are physically based. For the main-stem and tributary nodes in the upper basin (upstream from Canon City), the streamflow-only calibrated coefficients are good initial estimates. Those coefficients generally simulated the snowmelt-runoff process. Adjustments to these previous coefficients are required because of possible transbasin imports, reservoir releases, irrigation diversions, and return flows that occur in the upper basin. The slope coefficients used in the streamflow-only calibration were maintained; only the intercept coeffi¬ cients were adjusted during calibration. Initial estimates of coefficients for the main-stem node locations downstream from Canon City were based on two parameters. The intercept coefficient of each monthly relation was calculated from estimates of phreatophyte evapotranspiration in a reach. Use of this parameter enables the model to account for losses from phreatophyte evapotranspiration. Estimates of phreatophyte acreages for reaches along the Arkansas River between Pueblo and the Colorado-Kansas State line and phreatophyte consumptive-use rates (Bittinger and Stringham, 1963) were used to determine the intercept coefficients. Thus, all the intercept coefficients used for the growing season initially were negative to simulate consumptive use by phreatophytes. The slope coefficient of each monthly incremental streamflow relation was calculated by initially setting the slope to zero and operating the model to determine the average error of the streamflow for each particular node for each month. In this manner, simulated diversions and return flows were considered, and the difference between simulated and observed streamflow was assumed to be the incremental inflow. Monthly precipitaton at the nearest weather station then was selected as the independent variable to be used to calculate the incremental streamflow. The MR of the streamflow simulated by using this zero-slope coefficient was divided by the mean precipitation for each respective month to determine the slope coefficient. This procedure was repeated for each node location, moving downstream. Determination of the best calibrated values for these regression coefficients is complicated by the fact that the volume of the diversion (and thus, the volume of return flow) is a function of flow in the river. An additional complication occurred during some months when very large observed streamflow occurred during months with ordinary precipitation. To simulate these peak streamflows, some of the monthly relations had to be changed from linear to log-log. Because the negative intercept coefficients could not be used with the log transform, the intercepts also were changed in those months. The basin-description file for calibration, which was determined as just described, is provided as Attach¬ ment C in the "Supplemental Information" section at the back of this report. 23 Additional information describing the river basin hydrologic system, which is related to the water-supply operations, also is needed. Several water-consumption parameters are needed, including: (1) Monthly crop potential-evapotranspiration rate; (2) monthly lake-evaporation rate; (3) monthly irrigation-diversion demand rate; and (4) a municipal- and industrial-demand rate. Initial estimates for the rate of monthly crop potential evapotranspiration and lake evaporation were obtained from data for a stream-aquifer model of the alluvial Arkansas River valley from Pueblo to the Colorado-Kansas State line (Taylor and Luckey, 1972 and 1974). The monthly crop potential-evapotranspiration rates subsequently were adjusted downward, based on data for crop-consumptive use for the different adminis¬ trative water districts (Don Miles, Colorado State University, written commun., 1968), for observed agricultural-consumptive use (Wheeler and Assoc., 1985), and for phreatophyte-consumptive use estimates (Bittinger and Stringham, 1963). All these sources used an annual value of about 2.5 feet. Monthly irrigation-diversion demand rates were parameters necessary to simulate the direct diversion of water during periods when the monthly crop potential-evapotranspiration rates were zero. These values were calculated from the diversion-record statistics. Monthly average diversions for all canals that had winter direct diversions were calculated on an acre-foot- diverted per acre-irrigated basis. Monthly average values for all those canals were calculated to produce a seasonal distribution. This seasonal distribution was set equal to the potential-evapotranspiration rates for the months during the growing season. The municipal- and industrial-demand factor was determined solely from calibration with the observed diversion data for Pueblo Water Works. The calibrated value of 0.13 provided the appropriate linear combination with the monthly irrigation-diversion demand rates to best fit the seasonal distribution of the average Pueblo Water Works diversions. Another set of general basin information necessary for simulation is a set of factors: (1) Latitude and longitude to mile conversion factors; (2) sinuosity factors for computation of river miles; (3) a prestress factor to adjust initial return-flow values; (4) a canal seepage factor for simu¬ lating leakage from canals; and (5) an effective-precipitation factor. These factors generally are assigned or calibrated values that seem to fit the model best. The latitude and longitude to mile conversion factors are readily available mapping parameters; one value each is assumed acceptable for the entire basin. The sinuosity factors are used to calculate river miles between nodes that are identified by latitude-longitude locations. By using the latitude and longitude to mile conversion factors, a straight-line distance is computed; then these sinuosity factors are used to account for a sinuous stream. These values were adjusted so that calculated river miles along the river reasonably matched planimetered values obtained from maps. The prestress factor is part of a procedure to produce return flow from water-use activities that occurred before the model simulation. The model begins with all return flows set at zero, and if prestress were not included in the model, most of the early time return flows would remain zero until the newly simulated stresses resulted in return flow. So the system may begin in a quasi-equilibrium condition, 10 years of average conditions are simulated simply to build up a reasonable set of return flows. The canal-leakage factor was estimated to be 1 cubic foot per second per mile, based on general know¬ ledge of the basin and selected seepage measurements and estimates (Wheeler and Assoc., 1985; Colorado Water Conservation Board, 1971; P.0. Abbott, U.S. 24 Geological Survey, written commun., 1984). The effective-precipitation factor is a threshold value; monthly precipitation in excess of this value is assumed not to contribute to beneficial crop-consumptive use. Other required data include reservoir data such as: location; storage capacity and maximum surface area; and initial contents and dissolved-solids concentration. The maximum capacity and corresponding surface-area values were obtained from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (1969) and the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (1977). Because the surface area is used only for the calculation of evaporation, it was adjusted for certain reservoirs to facili¬ tate evaporation rates other than the basinwide average. Finally, data are required for the initial volume of ground water in storage and its dissolved'-solids concentration for each reach and side along the river. The estimates for ground-water storage were obtained from the stream-aquifer model of the lower basin (Taylor and Luckey, 1972 and 1974); the estimates of dissolved-solids concentration were obtained from Cain (1987). The additional basin-description file for calibration is provided as Attachment D in the "Supplemental Information" section at the back of this report. The information entered to the model to simulate the water-supply opera¬ tions requires: (1) A code to indicate type of water user; (2) the number of units served by the user--irrigated acres for agricultural users, people served for municipal users, units produced for industrial users, and storage capacity of a reservoir for reservoir operators; (3) the demand factor and code; (4) a return-flow code; (5) a return-flow factor; and (6) the number of sources of supply. In addition, for each source of supply, the following data are required: (1) Type of source; (2) capacity of source; (3) location of source; and (4) distance from stream, used for the stream-depletion factor (SDF) for ground-water pumpage sources, or reservoir-identification number for reservoir releases. Most of these values are documented numbers and need little adjustment during the calibration process. The irrigated acreage for diversion canals was provided by Abbott (1986). The people served and units produced for the municipal and industrial users were adjusted to best match the observed diversion data. The demand factor and code were the primary parameters that were adjusted during calibration by matching simulated diversions to observed diversions. The code was used to determine whether the water demand for a particular water user followed the crop potential- evapotranspiration distribution (diverted only during the irrigation season) or the irrigation-diversion demand distribution (diverted during the winter). This value was determined during calibration based on the best statistical fit of the observed diversions. The demand factor was multiplied by the product of the consumptive rate of the particular distribution chosen and the number of units served by the user. The return-flow factor was initially set at 0.8 for all agricultural users, which means that 80 percent of their applied water, greater than that needed for crop consumptive use, would enter the ground-water system, and 20 percent would return to the river the following month as tailwater. This value was modified during calibration for each user to adjust the timing of return flow to the stream and to adjust ground-water storage. The return-flow code allows for other definitions of the return-flow factor. A few agricultural users (1431, HIGHLINE and 1716, FT LYON) irrigate some areas outside the alluvial aquifer, and excess irrigation applications in those areas cannot contribute return flow to the simulated system. For these 25 users, the return-flow factor represents the percent of the total return flow that remains in the simulated system. The return-flow factor can be coded to represent the percent of total diversion that returns to the system for muni¬ cipal and industrial users. Data for sources of water were obtained from the list of water rights in the prior-appropriation system, enumerated by Abbott (1986). The ground-water pumpage capacity and weighted distance from the stream were determined from information in the stream-aquifer model (Taylor and Luckey, 1972 and 1974). The only parameter that required adjustment dur¬ ing calibration was the quantity of reservoir release. Although this value ought to be limited only by the storage capacity of the reservoir, observed data indicated these values were much smaller. The parameter was adjusted primarily based on the best fit of simulated and observed reservoir contents. All the data used for the 74 users in the basin water-user file are provided as Attachment E in the ’'Supplemental Information" section at the back of this report. Calibration for 1943-74 As was discussed previously, the parameter data that are input to the model to describe the physical system is assumed static in time; that is, operating rules, reservoir sizes, crop demands, and so forth, do not change with time. Because the physical system has been dynamic, two periods were selected for calibration: 1943-74 and 1975-85. The physical system, as it operated in 1965, was selected for the primary calibration to represent 1943-74. The observed (or estimated, if records were missing) rainfall, snow- pack, tributary inflow, and air temperature for 1943-74 were selected as the time series of independent variables to enter in the model. The period was selected to simulate conditions after John Martin Reservoir was constructed and before Pueblo Reservoir was operational. The statistical summaries of the simulated streamflow for the 1943-74 calibration is indicated by the MR, SDR, and R 2 listed in table 6. The coefficients of determination ranged from good (0.86 and 0.87) at several nodes, to poor (0.02 at node 1330, ARK LAMR). The effects of water operations on streamflow are not large in the upper basin; so, for node locations upstream from Canon City, calibrated results with water use and ground water are similar to the results for the streamflow- only simulation. The adjustments that were made were the result of irrigation of hay meadows in the upper basin and the inclusion of the high-mountain reservoirs and corresponding reservoir releases. An example of the calibra¬ tion fit for this reach is shown in figure 8, which presents simulated stream- flow, differences between simulated and observed streamflow, and cumulative frequency curves for observed and simulated streamflow for node 915, ARK SLID. In the river reach between node 960, ARK CANC, and node 1197, ARK CAT, water losses caused by irrigation diversions are offset somewhat by the inflow from several tributaries. The major difficulty in calibrating streamflow along this reach is in accounting for the large incremental inflows that occurred during a few peak months. Some months with peak streamflows correspond to months with substantial precipitation but, during some months, peak streamflow would occur when records indicated below normal precipitation or, during some months, no peak streamflow would occur when records indicated above normal precipitation. Thus, all the peaks could not be explained or properly simu¬ lated. An example of the calibration fit for this reach is shown in figure 9, which presents simulated streamflow, differences between simulated and observed streamflow, and cumulative frequency curves for observed and simulated streamflow for node 1170, ARK NPST. 26 STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 1,000 500 0 -500 - 1,000 - 1,500 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 99 97 90 50 10 PERCENTAGE OF MONTHS EXCEEDED Figure 8.--Streamflow for node 915, ARK SLID, 1943-74: A, simulated streamflow; B, difference between observed and simulated streamflow; and C, cumulative frequency curves for the observed and simulated streamflow. 27 AVERAGE STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (PATTERNED) STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND Figure 9.--Streamflow for node 1170, ARK NPST, 1943-74: A, simulated streamflow; B, difference between observed and simulated streamflow; and C, cumulative frequency curves for the observed and simulated streamflow. 28 AVERAGE STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (PATTERNED) Table 6 .--Statistics for node locations used in the 1943-74 model calibration [All flow values are in cubic feet per second] Node ID 1 Node name Observed Mean of the resid¬ uals (MR) Simulated Standard deviation of the residuals (SDR) Coeffi¬ cient of deter¬ mination (R 2 ) Mean Standard deviation 860 ARK GRNT 399 428 8.5 156 0.87 915 ARK SLID 662 642 8.3 227 .87 945 ARK PARK 777 675 2.2 255 .86 960 ARK CANC 715 708 5.9 255 .87 994 ARK PUBL 642 698 4.0 288 .83 1095 ARK AVON 860 715 -4.5 277 .85 1170 ARK NPST 645 679 5.2 301 .80 1197 ARK CAT 603 548 4.7 234 .82 1230 ARK LAJU 194 385 7.9 230 .64 1240 ARK ANMS 166 345 3.2 213 . 62 1305 ARK JM R 264 341 -4.5 300 .23 1330 ARK LAMR 115 217 -9.5 216 .02 1375 ARK COOL 225 513 3.6 189 .86 1 See table 1 and figure 2 for node descriptions and locations. Streamflow for the rest of the river reach downstream as far as John Martin Reservoir generally is quite small and is dominated by diversions and return flow. Thus, simulated streamflow in this reach is most affected by the ability of the model to simulate the water-supply operations. The problems with unaccountable incremental peak streamflow also are seen along this reach. An example of the calibration fit for this reach is shown in figure 10, which presents simulated streamflow, differences between observed and simulated streamflow, and cumulative frequency curves for simulated and observed streamflow for node 1240, ARK ANMS. John Martin Dam was constructed to provide flood control and storage for irrigation in Colorado and Kansas. The ability of the model to simulate the water-supply operations of John Martin Reservoir is best demonstrated by comparing the observed and simulated streamflow for the node locations just downstream from the reservoir, 1305, ARK JM R (fig. 11). The reason for the poor statistical fit at this node (table 5) is that simplified operation rules fail to meet all of the actual release data. 29 STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND Figure 10.--Streamflow for node 1240, ARK ANMS, 1943-74: A , simulated streamflow; B, difference between observed and simulated streamflow; and C, cumulative frequency curves for the observed and simulated streamflow. 30 AVERAGE STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (PATTERNED) STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND i a - 2,000 2,500 i i. .. i 600 500 400 300 200 100 15 20 YEARS 30 35 2,000 - 1,500 - 1,000 - 500 - T SIMULATED OBSERVED L 99 97 90 50 10 PERCENTAGE OF MONTHS EXCEEDED Figure 11.--Streamflow for node 1305, ARK JM R, 1943-74: A, simulated streamflow; B, difference between observed and simulated streamflow; and C, cumulative frequency curves for the observed and simulated streamflow. 31 AVERAGE STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (PATTERNED) The node location that is farthest downstream is 1375, ARK COOL. The flow at this node consists largely of return flow from irrigation and releases from John Martin Reservoir, except for the flood of 1965. In June 1965, local pre¬ cipitation (18 inches) exceeded the average annual precipitation (15 inches), which caused the largest monthly flow during the period of record. An example of the calibration fit for this reach is shown in figure 12, which presents simulated streamflow, differences between observed and simulated streamflow, and cumulative frequency curves for observed and simulated streamflow. The simulated water-supply operations included 74 water users: 57 irriga¬ tion canals, 11 reservoir operators, and 6 industrial or municipal suppliers. The model simulates direct and storage diversions, reservoir releases, ground- water pumpage, and transmountain imports based on demand curves and factors. The sum of all the simulated direct diversions for each month and the sum of all the simulated ground-water pumpage are shown in figure 13. The average annual sum of all simulated direct diversions was 1,039,000 acre-feet. The average annual sum of all simulated ground-water pumpage was 126,000 acre- feet. The statistical summaries of these simulated results are identified for selected users by the MR, SDR, and R 2 in table 7. The coefficients of deter¬ mination that are calculated are not an exact mathematical computation because the standard deviations listed in table 7 indicate the entire period of available data. This error is not considered to introduce any bias into the calculation. The coefficients of determination range from good (0.87 for user 1143, RVRSD-AL) to negative. Selected plots of simulated diversions for various users show that, even though statistically the model may not fit an observed diversion record well, the model still is simulating reasonable conditions. An example of a good fit of direct diversions was for user 1164, BILL-HAM. Observed diversions, simulated diversions, and the cumulative frequency curves for the observed and simulated diversions are shown in figure 14. An example of a statistically negative fit was for user 6707, AMITY. Although it is evident that differences occur between the observed diversions (fig. 15A) and the simulated diversions (fig. 15B) , the cumulative frequency curves of observed and simulated diversions (fig. 15C) match reason¬ ably well and indicate that the model is simulating the purport of the operating rules. The poor statistical fit for users downstream from John Martin Reservoir primarily is caused by a lack of appropriate observed data. Those users have direct diversions and reservoir releases as possible sources of supply and, in fact, to best fit the reservoir contents of John Martin Reservoir, the model simulates the first source of supply as reservoir releases before using direct diversions. Unfortunately, the observed records do not distinguish between direct diversions and reservoir releases; apparently they are recorded together. An example of this shortcoming in the data is shown in figure 15. A flood in 1965 (year 23 on fig. 15) enabled John Martin Reservoir to fill; thus, the model simulated almost no direct diversions in 1966 (year 24 on fig. 15B) as users satisfied their water demands with reservoir releases. However, large observed diversions were recorded for that year (fig. 15A). 32 9,000 Q Z 1,000 o o 0 LU 1,000 CO DC 500 LU Q- f- LU 0 LU LJL u -500 CQ D CJ - 1,000 z £ o u. £ < LU DC H CO 0 - 1,500 - - 2,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 - 4,000 - 3,000 - 2,000 - 1,000 - 0 * 1 i , | J sJI. % i $.fy. x ii 1 i x : x ; x : x y * x: • : ...... ...Js?# 5 I P||l & w " : 'W j m. •. x : x ; x : : : : : : :..• x : : : x- n 1 * * I J... X 10 1— SIMULATED OBSERVED 15 20 YEARS 25 30 35 99 97 90 50 10 PERCENTAGE OF MONTHS EXCEEDED Figure 12.--Streamflow for node 1375, ARK COOL, 1943-74: A, simulated streamflow; B, difference between observed and simulated streamflow; and C, cumulative frequency curves for the observed and simulated streamflow. 33 DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET PER MONTH 250 200 oc / / / / f — 40 / / / < 30 < 100 ^ 20 2 YEARS Figure 13.--Basinwide water use, 1943-74: A, simulated direct diversions; and B, simulated ground-water pumpage. 250 1,400 200 1,200 1,000 800 400 oc < UJ > DC UJ CL H UJ _ UJ Q U- UJ Z CC UJ DC < CL 200 34 Table 7 .--Statistics of direct diversions for simulated water users, 1943-74 [All diversion values are in acre-feet per month] Water- user ID Water- user name 1 Observed Mean of the resid¬ uals (MR) Simulated Standard deviation of the residuals (SDR) Coeffi¬ cient of deter¬ mination (R 2 ) Mean Standard deviation 1143 RVRSD-AL 298 384 9.2 137 0.87 1146 HELENA 366 520 -14.6 290 .69 1161 SUNNY PK 373 434 -29.2 242 .68 1164 BILL-HAM 382 438 -8.1 166 .86 1204 PLEASANT 206 239 -12.7 138 . 66 1210 S CANON 1,270 993 -148 727 .44 1215 S C POWR 3,050 1,060 -281 860 .27 1216 HYD-FRUT 2,230 1,490 43.5 849 .67 1219 OIL CK 989 502 26.3 379 .43 1220 FREMONT 563 458 -46.0 285 . 60 1222 CF&I 5,210 1,630 -73.4 1,520 .13 1228 HNNKRATT 56.5 86.6 -5.3 65.3 .43 1231 L ATTRBY 87.0 99.7 -5.9 65.9 .56 1234 IDEAL CM 147 115 -5.5 130 -.28 1401 BESSEMER 4,960 3,730 520 2,260 .61 1407 W PUEBLO 122 148 -15.4 85.4 .66 1410 PUEBL WW 2,040 811 13.8 334 .83 1419 BTH-0RCH 710 448 -218 340 .19 1422 EXCLSIOR 363 631 186 733 -.44 1425 COLLIER 72.3 200 18.2 157 .38 1428 COLORADO 4,510 7,920 -1,620 5,850 .41 1431 HIGHLINE 6,190 4,360 330 2,900 .55 1434 OXFD-FRM 1,940 1,780 -15.9 1,190 .55 1701 OTERO 629 1,070 -271 808 .37 1704 CATLIN 6,720 4,850 -380 3,180 .56 1707 HOLBROOK 3,110 3,840 202 3,510 . 16 1710 RCKY FRD 3,920 1,880 -195 1,190 .59 1716 FT LYON 18,600 14,400 3,820 10,400 .41 1719 LAS ANMS 2,110 1,640 50.9 1,090 .56 6701 KEESEE 372 334 -81.5 287 .20 6704 FT BENT 1,300 1,300 -709 1,350 -.38 6707 AMITY 6,370 7,280 -1,270 7,530 -.10 6710 LAMAR 2,860 2,350 -99.4 2,440 -.08 6713 HYDE 149 159 -57.9 181 -.43 6716 MANVEL 184 337 -45.3 288 .25 6719 X-Y GRHM 493 637 333 687 -.44 6722 BUFFALO 1,410 1,190 -435 1,040 .10 1 Water-user names and locations are identified in Abbott, 1985, table 4, and plates 2 and 3. 35 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 ’—.—-—»—i—•—*—•—■—i—■—•—>—»—i—•—'—•—»—i—»—»—•—«—i—’—»—*—•—i—*—■—■— r A YEARS 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 99 97 90 50 10 3 1 PERCENTAGE OF MONTHS EXCEEDED Figure 14.--Diversions for user 1164, BILL-HAM, 1943-74: A, observed diversions; B, simulated diversions; and C, cumulative frequency curves of observed and simulated diversions. 36 DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET PER YEAR (PATTERNED) DIRECT DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET PER MONTH DIRECT DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 - 5,000 - 15 YEARS 20 0 SIMULATED OBSERVED 99 97 90 50 10 PERCENTAGE OF MONTHS EXCEEDED Figure 15.--Diversions for user 6707, AMITY, 1943-74: A, observed diversions; B, simulated diversions; and C, cumulative frequency curves of observed and simulated diversions. 37 DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET PER YEAR (PATTERNED) A difficulty that occurred for several users is exemplified by user 1710, RCKY FRD (fig. 16). The demand factor could not be large enough to fit the peak diversions and small enough to fit the diversions during the remaining months. Another cause for a poor fit of observed data is that for some of the lower priority users, the model did not simulate diversions for a sufficient number of months--for example, user 1428, COLORADO (fig. 17). This lack of simulated diversions may be the result of the monthly time step that was not adequate to correctly simulate the shorter periods when the lower priority users would be making diversions. For some users, the observed data seemed very inconsistent. These inconsistencies ranged from gradual trends that probably represent true changes in the observed operation to instances where data seemed to be in error. For example, a plot of the difference between simulated and observed diversions in figure 18 for user 1216, HYD-FRUT, shows a period when the model always over-predicted, a period of relatively even over- and under-prediction, and after a period of missing observed record, a more recent period of general under-prediction. For this user, the observed data had a definite trend that the model could not simulate. A final item that could account for some of the lower statistical fits is that the seasonal average of the observed diversions for some users was between the all-winter diversion and the irrigation-season-only diversion options in the model. An example of this situation is shown by the frequency curves for user 1419, BTH-ORCH (fig. 19). The observed data have zero diversions for about 20 per¬ cent of the months, too often to be classified as all-winter diversion; but the irrigation-season-only simulated diversions show zero diversions about 40 percent of the time. The rest of the physical system simulated by the model includes the ground-water system and the reservoirs. The simulated return flow from the aquifer to the river for its entire simulated length is shown in figure 20. Examples of the observed and simulated reservoir contents are shown for reservoir 854, TWIN LKS (fig. 21) in the upper basin, and reservoir 1107, MEREDITH (fig. 22) and reservoir 1300, JM RES (fig. 23) in the lower basin. Because recorded data generally are insufficient and because storage is a cumulative measure, statistics were not computed for the reservoirs. The plots show the general reasonableness of the simulated results. 38 DIRECT DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET PER MONTH DIRECT DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 8,Oo8 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 50,000 40,000 - 30,000 20,000 - 10,000 15 YEARS 20 SIMULATED OBSERVED 99 97 90 50 10 PERCENTAGE OF MONTHS EXCEEDED Figure 16.--Diversions for user 1710, RCKY FRD, 1943-74: A, observed diversions; £, simulated diversions; and C, cumulative frequency curves of observed and simulated diversions. 39 DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET PER YEAR (PATTERNED) DIRECT DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET PER MONTH DIRECT DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET 90 50 10 PERCENTAGE OF MONTHS EXCEEDED Figure 17.--Diversions for user 1428, COLORADO, 1943-74: A, observed diversions; B, simulated diversions; and C, cumulative frequency curves of observed and simulated diversions. 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 40 DIVERSIONS, IN ACRE-FEET PER YEAR (PATTERNED) 3,000 ID CO «■ «ks xyxx*x*:yxx/xyxyxx<*x*x<*xtt*x-: C»X^'XiX<^^*X%W^gXW:;:;X:X:^^X^;i; ■xsxsx ^^^:^x^x-i i x:-x<<*»iwx^i«wix>> •x-x-5»x-x->x«: , »x-:-X'XW x-x-xx-x-x-x-xx & 8 & M 8 M XvX'X-Xvxyx-xv xxx-x-x-xvx-xx- i-i-x X*X*XvX- irXrXlxXXXXX^X 1 - WXvX'MvMWW'a its xyx-xvxv:xyxv:xx:-xx-:x::::x • • . x-XwXvXvXx. . .£:vx:^:-xllxv ••••• •••■x-x* wssyxssrxxixwxsvxsrxrx'.sy.'.’.v;.;...;. ..•■"• ••' " ' •:»: y^*?:«x:xxx»:-x-xxx<*xyx«xxxxx:: <,: ' x Xw 5 ' .xX ; X : X ; X : X ; : : X:vX v,v ''' , ‘'' , ' w .%-:;X-::-x ; :-:-'-x-x-x- ''::i:^:i::$;wxx-x%x««wxi; XMx,, :;XXXXX:XrX*XXX::r:>X* x:xxxxxxxxwxx':x<x-x.;cc«-x<«-x<*»x«x-x-x-:'X'X<-x-:-x av.v.-,.v.v.,-.v.v.vX : :,, : «>x-:v::-:-x%v;v^xx.vXvx->>>>>Xvx-:-x : xv:;:xX;:s xvx-x-x :-x • • . •x-:;:-:::: xx^XavX-. ... w:;Xv>Xw.%y.v.v.v.v.y/.v//. ; X : X : X ; ••.VAV/.VA.-.-.V.V.V.V.V V.WyAWAV.' , jYXvJ’XvIvX’XvX' ' IvavXv'vav . .ill ^x-tw^x-x-x'.-xx^x'-xxx-x-x.xxx-xx-v-x^xyxv: '.•.•••.•.•.•.v.-■.■■.■■■■■■■XvA'XvXvXvXv' ¥x¥x : A •x-X'X-:x::vX-:-:-XvX-:-:-:::-:-::-:-.-:-::-:-::-:: :•: .x-:-x-x-XvXvX.. >.X-X ••. •.-.'.•.•.vX'.-. lx . . x:<-:<^xxx-x-::x-:-::x:::y:xx:yx-x-; x-x-x xowwcwwwowww ^ llx 5»»»X<« : id ID o o o o CO I 41 Figure 18.--Differences between simulated and observed diversions for user 1216, HYD-FRUT, 1943-74. 1,400 Q UJ Q UJ UJ U X UJ CO X p Z o u- O UJ O < f- z UJ u DC UJ CL T 3 D i—i W rO ~ O W u ^ « o o I w w QJ H > PQ P d ~ u o\ >> •H W +j d d o d w E P d I *H I X 5 QJ P d 00 •H Um 42 1,000 |- 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 — 7 |——t - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 800 (Q3NH311Vd) QN033S H3d 1333 31803 NI ‘M013 NH013H 39VH3AV o o CD o o M- o o «N O ID CO QN033S H3d 1333 31803 MI ‘M013 MM013H 43 Figure 20.--Simulated ground-water return flows summed for all reaches in the basin, 1943-74. STORAGE CONTENTS, IN ACRE-FEET 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 YEARS Figure 21.--Content for reservoir 854, TWIN LKS, 1943-74: A, observed reservoir content; and £, simulated reservoir content. 44 STORAGE CONTENTS, IN ACRE-FEET 30,000 25,000 20,000 - 15,000 - 10,000 5,000 - 0 30,000 25,000 - 20,000 - 15,000 - 10,000 - 5,000 - 15 20 YEARS Figure 22.--Content for reservoir 1107, MEREDITH, 1943-74: A, observed reservoir content; and B, simulated reservoir content. 45 STORAGE CONTENTS, IN ACRE-FEET 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 YEARS Figure 23.--Content for reservoir 1300, JM RES, 1943-74: A, observed reservoir content; and B, simulated reservoir content. 46 Calibration for 1975-85 Upon completion of the model calibration for the 1943-74 period, the model was used to simulate the 1975-85 period. Although this period is rather short to be used to obtain statistical measures for calibration, and even though many changes in water-supply operations were occurring throughout that decade, the model was used to simulate the Fryingpan-Arkansas project. The major changes needed in the model data to simulate this project were: (1) Inclusion of an import streamflow node to generate the transbasin stream- flow of the Boustead Tunnel; (2) enlargement of reservoir 824, TURQUOIS and reservoir 854, TWIN LKS; (3) inclusion of reservoir 993, PUEBLO R; (4) addi¬ tion of Pueblo Reservoir (Fryingpan-Arkansas project water) as a potential source to many of the water users, which permits each user a percentage of water in storage based on the historic allocation; and (5) development of a method for simulating the winter-water storage plan, in which those water users that historically had direct diversions during the winter could store those diversions in Pueblo Reservoir for later use during the irrigation season. The data used for the basin-description file for 1975-85 are provided as Attachment F in the "Supplemental Information" section at the back of this report; the additional basin-description file is included as Attachment G in the "Supplemental Information" section; and the water-user file is included as Attachment H in the "Supplemental Information" section. To demonstrate the applicability of the model to the 1975-85 period and the changes introduced from the 1943-74 period, several components of the Fryingpan-Arkansas project were evaluated. The monthly average simulated transbasin imports through the Boustead Tunnel compare favorably to the observed monthly average diversions (table 8). Pueblo Reservoir is a multiple-use reservoir, but the model can account for separate activities within the reservoir. The average monthly simulated winter storage water entering reservoir 993, PUEBLO R during 1975-85 was 22,300 acre-feet in Decem¬ ber; 18,000 acre-feet in January; 11,400 acre-feet in February; and 5,800 acre-feet in March. The model also simulated an average diversion of 5,500 acre-feet per year from the storage right for native water. The excellent correspondence between observed and simulated reservoir content for 824, TURQUOIS further accredits the simulation process of transmountain imports and releases of those imports. The observed and simulated results for 854, TWIN LKS also match very well until 1984, when either the reservoir was enlarged or the methods of reporting observed contents were changed. As a final demon¬ stration of the simulation capability of the model, the simulated and observed contents of reservoirs 824, TURQUOIS (fig. 24); 854, TWIN LKS (fig. 25); and 993, PUEBLO R (fig. 26) for 1975-85 are shown. Observed and simulated reservoir content for 993, PUEBLO R does not match as well as for the other two reservoirs. An unusually late snowfall in 1983 (year 8) caused higher streamflow than predicted by the model, which uses April 1 snowpack records. However, a more important factor that also causes the disparity is that municipalities allowed approximately 70,000 acre-feet to remain in storage while pipelines were under construction. This long-term storage of transmountain import water was not simulated as part of the 1975-85 reservoir conditions; thus, simulated reservoir content remained lower than observed content near the end of the simulated period. 47 STORAGE CONTENTS, IN ACRE-FEET YEARS Figure 24.--Content for reservoir 824, TURQUOIS, 1975-85: A, observed reservoir content; and B, simulated reservoir content. 48 STORAGE CONTENTS, IN ACRE-FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 YEARS Figure 25.--Content for reservoir 854, TWIN LKS, 1975-85: A, observed reservoir content; and B , simulated reservoir content. 49 STORAGE CONTENTS, IN ACRE-FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 YEARS Figure 26.--Content for reservoir 993, PUEBLO R, 1975-85: A, observed reservoir content; and B, simulated reservoir content. 50 Table 8. --Monthly average transmountain imports for observed and simulated diversions through the Boustead Tunnel [All diversion values are in acre-feet] Month Observed Simulated Jan. 0 0 Feb. 0 0 Mar. 0 0 Apr. 100 0 May 8,300 7,900 June 29,400 29,300 July 14,400 13,200 Aug. 3,000 4,000 Sept. 300 200 Oct. 200 100 Nov. 0 0 Dec. 0 0 Total 55,700 54,700 EXAMPLE USE OF SIMULATED WATER-SUPPLY OPERATIONS The Arkansas River basin model is designed to simulate future or hypothetical changes in hydrologic conditions or water-supply operations. Although the model is conceptually simple, the number of computations made and the interrelation among so many of the activities enable a complete analysis of the effects of possible changes. An example management consideration was selected to demonstrate the capabilities of the model and to indicate the total integrated effects of making such changes. To demonstrate the use of the model as a management tool, several simulations were made so that the effects of a possible enlargement of Pueblo Reservoir could be considered. The first alternative selected, which was to be used as a baseline for comparison, used the 1975-85 calibrated basin- description and water-user files with the 1940-85 hydrologic precipitation and tributary streamflow time-series data. For this simulation period, the average annual inflow to Pueblo Reservoir included 53,400 acre-feet of transmountain imports, 7,500 acre-feet of native storage diversions, and 58,200 acre-feet of winter-water program storage, as listed in table 9. Basinwide direct diversions averaged 941,000 acre-feet annually; ground-water pumpage averaged 139,000 acre-feet annually; and reservoir releases averaged 272,000 acre-feet. Average streamflow at node 1375, ARK COOL, was 259 cubic feet per second. The monthly reservoir contents for reservoir 993, PUEBLO R, are shown in figure 21k. The hydrologic conditions of 1942 were very wet, and the simulated reservoir was filled during that year. 51 Table 9 .--Summary of six alternatives chosen to consider effects of enlarging Pueblo Reservoir, based on hydrologic conditions of 1940-85 [All values are annual averages; inflows, reservoir contents, and basinwide usage values in thousands of acre-feet; discharge in cubic feet per second; concentration in milligrams per liter] Inflows to Pueblo Reservoir Average Basinwide usage Alter- Trans- Native Winter- Pueblo Direct Ground- Reservoir releases native 1 mountain storage water Reservoir diver- water imports diversion storage contents sions pumpage 1 53.4 7.5 58.2 101 941 139 272 2 55.9 8.3 58.3 109 941 139 276 3 53.0 7.9 58.5 103 953 135 277 4 55.5 8.8 58.6 111 953 134 281 5 27.6 7.2 57.8 212 938 139 237 6 29.6 8.1 58.0 244 939 139 239 Streamflow information 960, ARK CANC 994, ARK PUBL 1095, ARK AVON 1375, ARK COOL Alter¬ native 1 Dis- Dis- Dis- Dis- Dis¬ charge solved solids concen- . solved Dis- , . , , solids charge concen- Dis¬ charge solved solids concen- ~ . solved Dis- ,. , , solids charge concen- tration tration tration tration 1 801 129 749 196 937 359 259 2,320 2 805 129 752 195 940 358 260 2,320 3 800 129 748 196 966 398 265 2,380 4 804 129 751 195 968 397 265 2,370 5 764 133 714 204 901 373 253 2,380 6 767 132 717 203 904 371 253 2,370 Alternative 1 used the 1975-85 calibrated data Alternative 2 was the same as alternative 1 except it included data for an enlarged Pueblo Reservoir. Alternative 3 used the 1975-85 calibrated data but added 30 cubic feet per second to the monthly flows of Fountain Creek. Alternative 4 was the same as alternative 3 except it included data for an enlarged Pueblo Reservoir. Alter¬ native 5 used the 1975-85 calibrated data but user 999, FONT VLY, stored its Fryingpan-Arkansas project water in Pueblo Reservoir. Alternative 6 was the same as alternative 5 except it included data for an enlarged Pueblo Reservoir. 52 RESERVOIR CONTENTS, IN THOUSANDS OF ACRE FEET 300 200 100 0 300 200 100 0 300 200 100 0 300 200 100 0 300 200 100 0 300 200 100 0 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 Figure 27.--Simulated reservoir content for six alternatives for reservoir 993, PUEBLO R, 1940-85. 53 As a second alternative, the same basin-description and water-user files were used except that the storage capacity of the conservation pool for Pueblo Reservoir was increased 40,000 acre-feet from 264,000 acre-feet to 304,000 acre-feet. The average annual inflows to Pueblo Reservoir for the second alternative indicated a 2,500-acre-foot increase in transmountain imports to 55,900 acre-feet (table 9), an 800-acre-foot increase in native storage diversions to 8,300 acre-feet, and a slight increase in winter-water storage. Basinwide water use remained the same except that reservoir releases increased 4,000 acre-feet. No significant change occurred in streamflow leaving the basin. A noticeable factor that could affect the need for an enlarged reservoir is the recent increase in streamflow in Fountain Creek because of additional return flows of transmountain imports by the city of Colorado Springs. To consider the possible effects of increased return flow in Fountain Creek, two additional simulations were made that were similar to the first two, except that 30 cubic feet per second were added to every monthly flow of Fountain Creek. When the third alternative is compared to the first alternative, the additional flow from Fountain Creek had minimal effect on Pueblo Reservoir. Transmountain imports decreased by 400 acre-feet, while native storage diver¬ sions increased by 400 acre-feet. Winter-water storage increased slightly. The most noticeable change caused by the additional inflow was the flow just downstream from Fountain Creek at node 1095, ARK AVON, where streamflow increased by about 30 cubic feet per second and dissolved-solids concentration increased by 40 milligrams per liter. This additional flow contributed to about 12,000 acre-feet of additional direct diversions and 5,000 acre-feet of additional reservoir releases. The fourth alternative used the same data as did the third alternative except that data for an enlarged Pueblo Reservoir were used. The change in inflow to Pueblo Reservoir was almost the same as the change indicated when the second alternative is compared to the first alternative: Transmountain imports increased by 2,500 acre-feet; native storage diversions increased by 900 acre-feet; and winter-water storage increased by 100 acre-feet. As discussed in the "Model Calibration of Simulated Water-Supply Opera¬ tions" section (page 23), municipal storage can have a large effect on the contents of Pueblo Reservoir. The fifth alternative enabled user 999, FONT VLY to store water in Pueblo Reservoir rather than to export the water from the basin. When the fifth alternative is compared to the first alternative, major effects are evident. Transmountain imports decreased to 27,600 acre- feet, although lesser decreases occurred for native storage diversions (7,200 acre-feet) and for winter-water storage (57,800 acre-feet). Streamflow in the upper basin decreased because smaller transmountain imports were being delivered to Pueblo Reservoir. The sixth alternative used the same data as did the fifth alternative except that data for an enlarged Pueblo Reservoir were used. When the sixth alternative is compared to alternative five, results are very similar to the two previous simulations that increased the capacity of Pueblo Reservoir: Transmountain imports increased by 2,000 acre-feet; native storage diversions increased by 900 acre-feet; winter-water storage increased by 200 acre-feet. 54 SUMMARY An interactive-accounting model was used to simulate dissolved solids, streamflow, and water-supply operations in the Arkansas River basin, Colorado. A description of the generic river basin model and much of the data descrip¬ tion and analysis necessary to apply the model to the Arkansas River basin have been documented in other reports. This report describes the calibration of the model within the Arkansas River basin and provides examples of uses of this calibrated model. The model was first used to calibrate specific conductance to streamflow relations at three sites in the basin where observed monthly dissolved-solids loads were determined by using daily specific-conductance data. Simulated results indicated that existing log-log coefficients calculated by using instantaneous values were acceptable for the monthly time-step simulations at two of the three nodes, which accounted for most of the basin. This cali¬ brated model then was used to compute dissolved-solids loads throughout the basin by using observed streamflow. The model was calibrated for the 1940-85 period simulating streamflow only; all of the water-supply operations in the basin were incorporated in the regression relations for incremental streamflow. Coefficients of determina¬ tion for 20 node locations ranged from 0.89 to 0.58, and values in excess of 0.80 were determined for 16 of the node locations. The model input then was revised to incorporate 74 water users and 11 reservoirs to simulate the water-supply operations in the basin. Two periods were used for calibration: the 1943-74 period, which included John Martin Reservoir, and the 1975-85 period, which also included the Fryingpan- Arkansas project with Pueblo Reservoir. For the 1943-74 calibration, coeffi¬ cients of determination for streamflow at 13 node locations ranged from 0.87 to 0.02. Simulation of the water-supply operations resulted in coefficients of determination that ranged from 0.87 to negative for irrigation diversions of the 37 water users with sufficient observed record for calibration. Even for those users whose simulated diversions did not relate well statistically to observed diversions, plots of data generally indicated reasonable model results. Calibration of reservoir contents did not include statistical measures, but again plots of data indicated reasonable similarity to observed values. Calibration for 1975-85 was not evaluated statistically, but average values and plots of reservoir contents indicated reasonableness of the simulation. To demonstrate the utility of the model, six alternatives were simulated to consider the effects of potential enlargement of Pueblo Reservoir. The model was used to simulate a 46-year period that represented hydrologic conditions of 1940-85, with three major alternatives: the 1975-85 calibrated data; the 1975-85 calibrated data with an increase in Fountain Creek flows of 30 cubic feet per second; and the 1975-85 calibrated data with a municipal water user leaving Fryingpan-Arkansas project water in storage rather than diverting it. These three alternatives included the option of reservoir enlargement or no enlargement to give the six total alternatives. A 40,000- acre-foot enlargement of Pueblo Reservoir resulted in average increases of 2,500 acre-feet in transmountain diversions, of 800 acre-feet in storage diversions, and of 100 acre-feet in winter-water storage for all three of the management settings. 55 REFERENCES CITED Abbott, P.0., 1986, Descriptions of water-systems operations in the Arkansas River basin, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 85-4092, 67 p. Bittinger, M.W. and Stringham, G.E., 1963, A survey of phreatophyte growth in the lower Arkansas River valley of Colorado: Civil Engineering Section, Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado State Univerity, 8 p. Burns, A.W., 1983, Simulated hydrologic effects of possible ground-water and surface-water management alternatives in and near the Platte River, south-central Nebraska, in Hydrologic and geomorphic studies of the Platte River basin: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1277, p. G1-G30. 1985, Selected hydrographs and statistical analyses characterizing the water resources of the Arkansas River basin, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 85-4264, 199 p. _1988, Computer-program documentation of an interactive-accounting model to simulate streamflow, water quality, and water-supply operations in a river basin: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 88-4012, 241 p. Cain, Doug, 1987, Relations of specific conductance to streamflow and selected water-quality characteristics of the Arkansas River basin, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 87-4041, 93 p. Colorado Water Conservation Board, 1971, Progress report--Oxford Farmers Ditch Company system investigation, irrigation seasons 1968-1970: Colorado Water Conservation Board, 26 p. Ferguson, R.I., 1986, River loads underestimated by rating curve: Water Resources Research, v. 22, no. 1, p. 74-77. Jenkins, C.T., 1968a, Computation of rate and volume of stream depletion by wells: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investiga- ions, bk. 4, chap. Dl, 17 p. _1968b, Techniques for computing rate and volume of stream depletion by wells: Ground Water, v. 6, no. 2, p. 37-46. _1968c, Electric-analog and digital-computer model analysis of stream depletion by wells: Ground Water, v. 6, no. 6, p. 27-34. Radosevich, G.E., Hamburg, D.H., and Swick, L.L., compilers and editors, 1975, Colorado water laws--A compilation of statutes regulations, compacts, and selected cases: Fort Collins, Colorado State University, Center for Economic Education and Environmental Resources Center Information Series 17, 3 volumes. Taylor, 0.J., and Luckey, R.R., 1972, A new technique for estimating recharge using a digital model: Ground Water, v. 10, no. 6, 5 p. _1974, Water-management studies of a stream-aquifer system, Arkansas River valley, Colorado: Ground Water, v. 12, no. 1, 15 p. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 1969, Report on the Upper Arkansas River basin, Colorado, Kansas: Region 7, Denver, Colo., 146 p. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1977, Arkansas River basin cooperative study report: State Conservationist, Denver, Colo., 143 p. Wheeler, W.W. and Associates, 1985, Colorado Canal, Lake Meredith, Lake Henry, change of water rights: Englewood, Colo., 42 p. 56 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 57 OBSERVED 29 1000. 812ARK LEAD 830HALFMOON 845LAKE CK Attachment A --Basin-description fil ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN FLOW (with water 250. 1000. 2500. 39.24 106.32 860 -3 1 . 740. -3 1 . 740.- -3 1 . 740. -3 1 . 740. -3 1 . 740. -3 1 . 740. -3 1 . 740. -3 1 . 740. -3 1 . 740. -3 1 . 740. -3 1 . 740. -3 1 . 740. 39.15 106.38 860 -.: -4 1 . 98. -4 1 . 98. -4 1 . 98. -4 1 . 98. -4 1 . 150. -4 1 . 150. -4 1 . 150. -4 1 . 150. -4 1 . 150. -4 1 . 98. -4 1 . 98. -4 1 . 98. 39.05 106.37 860 -.: -5 1 . 88. -5 1 . 88. -5 1 . 88. -5 1 . 88. -5 1 . 76. -5 1 . 76. -5 1 . 76. -5 1 . 76. -5 1 . 76. -5 1 . 88. -5 1 . 88. -5 1 . 88. for dissolved-solids loads quality coefficients from Cain, 1987) .10 0. -6.8 .64 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 .05 0. 7.9 .50 -.04 -.04 -.04 -.04 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.04 -.04 -.04 -.10 0. -6.8 .64 -. 16 -. 16 -. 16 -. 16 -.13 -.13 -.13 -.13 -.13 -. 16 -.16 -. 16 58 Attachment A --Basin-description file for dissolved-solids loads--Continued 860ARK GRNT 865CLEAR CK 890COTTNWD 915ARK SLID 39.02 106.25 915 .15 6 1. 426. 6 1. 426. 6 1. 426. 6 1. 426. 6 1. 426. 6 1. 426. 6 1. 426. 6 1. 426. 6 1. 426. 6 1. 426. 6 1. 426. 6 1. 426. 38.99 106.28 915 -.25 7 1. 87. 7 1. 87. 7 1. 87. 7 1. 87. 7 1. 75. 7 1. 75. 7 1. 75. 7 1. 75. 7 1. 75. 7 1. 87. 7 1. 87. 7 1. 87. 38.78 106.23 915 -.30 8 1. 240. 8 1. 240. 8 1. 240. 8 1. 240. 8 1. 240. 8 1. 240. 8 1. 240. 8 1. 240. 8 1. 240. 8 1. 240. 8 1. 240. 8 1. 240. 38.51 105.98 937 -.05 9 1. 2900. 9 1. 2900. 9 1. 2900. 9 1. 2900. 9 1. 2900. 9 1. 2900. 9 1. 2900. 9 1. 2900. 9 1. 2900. 9 1. 2900. 9 1. 2900. 9 1. 2900. .10 0. .2 .63 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.25 0. 7.9 .50 -.16 -.16 -. 16 -. 16 -.13 -.13 -.13 -.13 -.13 -. 16 -. 16 -. 16 -.20 0. 7.9 .50 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 .20 0. -6.8 .64 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 59 Attachment A --Basin-description file for dissolved-solids loads--Continued 937ARK WELL 945ARK PARK 950GRAPE CK 960ARK CANC 38.48 105.94 945 .20 10 1. 2900. 10 1. 2900. 10 1. 2900. 10 1. 2900. 10 1. 2900. 10 1. 2900. 10 1. 2900. 10 1. 2900. 10 1. 2900. 10 1. 2900. 10 1. 2900. 10 1. 2900. 38.46 105.38 960 -.30 11 1. 1700. 11 1. 1700. 11 1. 1700. 11 1. 1700. 11 1. 1500. 11 1. 1500. 11 1. 1500. 11 1. 1500. 11 1. 1500. 11 1. 1700. 11 1. 1700. 11 1. 1700. 38.16 105.48 960 -.25 12 1 . 1100 . 12 1 . 1100 . 12 1 . 1100 . 12 1 . 1100 . 12 1 . 1200 . 12 1 . 1200 . 12 1 . 1200 . 12 1 . 1200 . 12 1 . 1200 . 12 1 . 1100 . 12 1 . 1100 . 12 1 . 1100 . 38.41 105.25 970 -.40 13 1. 1200. 13 1. 1200. 13 1. 1200. 13 1. 1200. 13 1. 1200. 13 1. 1200. 13 1. 1200. 13 1. 1200. 13 1. 1200. 13 1. 1200. 13 1. 1200. 13 1. 1200. .05 0. -6.8 .64 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 .20 0. -6.8 .64 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 .15 0. -6.8 .64 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 0. -6.8 .64 -.24 -.24 -.24 -.24 -.26 -.26 -.26 -.26 -.26 -.24 -.24 -.24 60 Attachment A --Basin-description file for dissolved-solids loads --Continued 970ARK PORT 38.37 105.02 994 -. -14 1 . 4100. -14 1 . 4100. -14 1 . 4100. -14 1 . 4100. -14 1 . 4100. -14 1 . 4100. -14 1 . 4100. -14 1 . 4100. -14 1 . 4100. -14 1 . 4100. -14 1 . 4100. -14 1 . 4100. 991BEAVER C 38.36 104.95 994 -15 1 . 1400. -15 1 . 1400. -15 1 . 1400. -15 1 . 1400. -15 1 . 1100. -15 1 . 1100. -15 1 . 1100. -15 1 . 1100. -15 1 . 1100. -15 1 . 1400. -15 1 . 1400. -15 1 . 1400. 994ARK PUBL 38.25 104.65 1095 -16 1 . 3000. -16 1 . 3000. -16 1 . 3000. -16 1 . 3000. -16 1 . 3000. -16 1 . 3000. -16 1 . 3000. -16 1 . 3000. -16 1 . 3000. -16 1 . 3000. -16 1 . 3000. -16 1 . 3000. 1065F0UNT PB 38.31 104.61 . 1095 -23 1 . 3200. -23 1 . 3200. -23 1 . 3200. -23 1 . 3200. -23 1 . 2600. -23 1 . 2600. -23 1 . 2600. -23 1 . 2600. -23 1 . 2600. -23 1 . 3200. -23 1 . 3200. -23 1 . 3200. -.30 0. 8.4 .61 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 .00 0. -248.2 .97 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.25 0. -38.4 .75 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 .10 .10 0. -508.8 1.04 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 61 Attachment A --Basin-description file for dissolved-solids loads-- Continued 1090ST CHARL 38.20 104.51 1095 -25 1 . 3900. -25 1 . 3900. -25 1 . 3900. -25 1 . 3900. -25 1 . 3900. -25 1 . 3900. -25 1 . 3900. -25 1 . 3900. -25 1 . 3900. -25 1 . 3900. -25 1 . 3900. -25 1 . 3900. 1095ARK AVON 38.23 104.40 1170 -28 1 . 4700. -28 1 . 4700. -28 1 . 4700. -28 1 . 4700. -28 1 . 4700. -28 1 . 4700. -28 1 . 4700. -28 1 . 4700. -28 1 . 4700. -28 1 . 4700. -28 1 . 4700. -28 1 . 4700. 1160HUERF R 37.97 104.48 1170 -29 1 . 3900. -29 1 . 3900. -29 1 . 3900. -29 1 . 3900. -29 1 . 3900. -29 1 . 3900. -29 1 . 3900. -29 1 . 3900. -29 1 . 3900. -29 1 . 3900. -29 1 . 3900. -29 1 . 3900. 1170ARK NPST 38.19 104.20 1197 -30 1 . 2500. -30 1 . 2500. -30 1 . 2500. -30 1 . 2500. -30 1 . 2500. -30 1 . 2500. -30 1 . 2500. -30 1 . 2500. -30 1 . 2500. -30 1 . 2500. -30 1 . 2500. -30 1 . 2500. -.15 -.30 0. -248.2 .97 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 .05 .15 0. -18.7 .69 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.31 -.31 -.31 -.31 -.31 -.27 -.27 -.27 .05 -.25 0. -458.8 1.16 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 .10 .10 0. -71.0 .80 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.17 -.17 -.17 62 Attachment A --Basin-description file for dissolved-solids loads--Continued 1195APISH R 1197ARK CAT 1230ARK LAJU 1240ARK ANMS 38.07 103.99 1197 -.30 -.15 -31 1 . 3200. -.27 -31 1 . 3200. -.27 -31 1 . 3200. -.27 -31 1 . 3200. -.27 -31 1 . 3200. -.27 -31 1 . 3200. -.27 -31 1 . 3200. -.27 -31 1 . 3200. -.27 -31 1 . 3200. -.27 -31 1 . 3200. -.27 -31 1 . 3200. -.27 -31 1 . 3200. -.27 38.12 103.91 1230 .15 -32 1 . 1200. -.02 -32 1 . 1200. -.02 -32 1 . 1200. -.02 -32 1 . 1200. -.02 -32 1 . 2800. -.23 -32 1 . 2800. -.23 -32 1 . 2800. -.23 -32 1 . 2800. -.23 -32 1 . 2800. -.23 -32 1 . 1200. -.02 -32 1 . 1200. -.02 -32 1 . 1200. -.02 37.98 103.53 1240 - .15 -33 1 . 8300. -.29 -33 1 . 8300. -.29 -33 1 . 8300. -.29 -33 1 . 8300. -.29 -33 1 . 8300. -.31 -33 1 . 8300. -.31 -33 1 . 8300. -.31 -33 1 . 8300. -.31 -33 1 . 8300. -.31 -33 1 . 8300. -.29 -33 1 . 8300. -.29 -33 1 . 8300. -.29 38.08 103.23 1305 .00 -34 1 . 7100. -.24 -34 1 . 7100. -.24 -34 1 . 7100. -.24 -34 1 . 7100. -.24 -34 1 . 7100. -.30 -34 1 . 7100. -.30 -34 1 . 7100. -.30 -34 1 . 7100. -.30 -34 1 . 7100. -.30 -34 1 . 7100. -.24 -34 1 . 7100. -.24 -34 1 . 7100. -.24 0. -438.2 1.14 0. -35.9 .74 0. -189.3 .94 0. -231.8 .94 63 Attachment A --Basin-description file for dissolved-solids loads--Continued 1285PURG ANS 1305ARK JM R 1330ARK LAMR 1341BIG SAND 37.99 103.26 1305 .05 25 -40 1 . 4900. -.12 -40 1 . 4900. -.12 -40 1 . 4900. -.12 -40 1 . 4900. -.12 -40 1 . 4900. -.21 -40 1 . 4900. -.21 -40 1 . 4900. -.21 -40 1 . 4900. -.21 -40 1 . 4900. -.21 -40 1 . 4900. -.12 -40 1 . 4900. -.12 -40 1 . 4900. -.12 38.07 102.93 1330 . 10 -. 25 -41 1 . 4100. -.09 -41 1 . 4100. -.09 -41 1 . 4100. -.09 -41 1 . 4100. -.09 -41 1 . 5900. -.21 -41 1 . 5900. -.21 -41 1 . 5900. -.21 -41 1 . 5900. -.21 -41 1 . 5900. -.21 -41 1 . 4100. -.09 -41 1 . 4100. -.09 -41 1 . 4100. -.09 38.12 102.63 1355 -.40 15 -42 1 . 8800. -. 16 -42 1 . 8800. -. 16 -42 1 . 8800. -.16 -42 1 . 8800. -. 16 -42 1 . 6300. -.24 -42 1 . 6300. -.24 -42 1 . 6300. -.24 -42 1 . 6300. -.24 -42 1 . 6300. -.24 -42 1 . 8800. -. 16 -42 1 . 8800. -.16 -42 1 . 8800. -.16 38.13 102.49 1355 .08 # 08 -43 1 . 5100. -.05 -43 1 . 5100. -.05 -43 1 . 5100. -.05 -43 1 . 5100. -.05 -43 1 . 5100. -.15 -43 1 . 5100. -.15 -43 1 . 5100. -.15 -43 1 . 5100. -.15 -43 1 . 5100. -.15 -43 1 . 5100. -.05 -43 1 . 5100. -.05 -43 1 . 5100. -.05 0. -385.0 0. -243.8 0. -222.3 0. -458. 1.06 .97 .98 1.16 64 Attachment A --Basin-description file for dissolved-solids loads --Continued 1355ARK HOLY 38.07 102.12 1375 - -44 1 . 13000. -44 1 . 13000. -44 1 . 13000. -44 1 . 13000. -44 1 . 10000. -44 1 . 10000. -44 1 . 10000. -44 1 . 10000. -44 1 . 10000. -44 1 . 13000. -44 1 . 13000. -44 1 . 13000. 1375ARK COOL 38.05 102.02 -999 -45 1 . 13000. -45 1 . 13000. -45 1 . 13000. -45 1 . 13000. -45 1 . 10000. -45 1 . 10000. -45 1 . 10000. -45 1 . 10000. -45 1 . 10000. -45 1 . 13000. -45 1 . 13000. -45 1 . 13000. .55 -.25 0. -6.5 .92 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.27 -.27 -.27 .10 .10 0. -6.5 .92 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.27 -.27 -.27 65 Attachment B --Basin-description file for streamflow-only calibration CALIBRATION DATA USING STREAMFLOW, SNOWPACK, AND PRECIPITATION TO ESTIMATE FLOW 28 1000 . : 812ARK LEAD 830HALFMOON 845LAKE CK 39.24 106.32 860 . 10 • 110 14.4 .019 725. -.35 110 14.2 .012 725. -.35 110 14.7 .009 725. -.35 123 .00947 2.15 725. -.35 113 69.8 .277 725. -.35 113 17.7 1.05 725. -.35 113 3.25 1.32 725. -.35 113 8.85 .683 725. -.35 113 9.66 .452 725. -.35 110 27.4 .050 725. -.35 110 21.2 .044 725. -.35 110 16.8 .011 725. -.35 39.15 106.38 860 -.30 # 110 4.07 .019 98. -.04 110 3.73 .012 98. -.04 110 3.62 .009 98. -.04 123 .00217 2.15 98. -.04 113 19.9 .277 133. -.22 113 6.25 1.05 133. -.22 113 1.88 1.32 133. -.22 113 5.06 .683 133. -.22 113 4.90 .452 133. -.22 110 11.4 .050 98. -.04 110 7.73 .044 98. -.04 110 5.32 .011 98. -.04 39.05 106.37 860 -.55 110 19.3 .019 85. -. 16 110 15.0 .012 85. -.16 110 14.7 .009 85. -.16 123 .0105 2.15 85. -. 16 113 142. .277 76. -.13 113 42.3 1.05 76. -.13 113 9.31 1.32 76. -.13 113 19.2 .683 76. -.13 113 19.0 .452 76. -.13 110 47.2 .050 85. -.16 110 29.4 .044 85. -.16 110 20.6 .011 85. -. 16 10 05 -.10 0. -6.8 .64 0. 7.9 .50 0. -6.8 .64 66 Attachment B --Basin-description file for streamflow-only calibration --Continued 860 ARK GRNT 39.02 106.25 915 .15 no 110 75.7 .0836 421 . -.23 110 67.3 -.139 421 . -.23 23 - 21.6 3.33 421 . -.23 23 - 689 . 21.4 421 . -.23 23 - 1724 . 38.1 2780 . -.48 13 446 . - 26.1 2780 . -.48 13 64.0 16.9 2780 . -.48 13 137 . 13.9 2780 . -.48 23 1457 . - 23.2 2780 . -.48 23 371 . - 6.13 421 . -.23 110 92.2 .117 421 . -.23 110 75.1 . 141 421 . -.23 865 CLEAR CK 38.99 106.28 915 -.25 -.25 110 12.4 .019 87 . -.16 110 11.4 .012 87 . -.16 110 11.2 .009 87 . -. 16 123 .00601 2.15 87 . -. 16 113 49.3 .277 74 . -.13 113 14.5 1.05 74 . -.13 113 3.81 1.32 74 . -.13 113 10.2 .683 74 . -.13 113 11.7 .452 74 . -.13 110 31.1 .050 87 . -. 16 110 20.6 .044 87 . -. 16 110 15.1 .011 87 . -.16 890 COTTNWD 38.78 106.23 915 -.30 -.20 110 23.1 .019 240 . -.20 110 20.7 .012 240 . -.20 110 19.1 .009 240 . -.20 123 .00732 2.15 240 . -.20 113 31.0 .277 238 . -.20 113 8.71 1.05 238 . -.20 113 2.42 1.32 238 . -.20 113 8.51 .683 238 . -.20 113 12.0 .452 238 . -.20 110 36.5 .050 240 . -.20 no 30.5 .044 240 . -.20 no 25.5 .011 240 . -.20 915 ARK SLID 38.51 105.98 937 .10 .15 109 82.9 -.0923 1115 . -.20 109 91.7 .0488 1115 . -.20 23 191 . - 3.63 1115 . -.20 13 - 181 . 13.6 1115 . -.20 11 - 109 . 36.6 9800 . -.64 11 48.0 26.0 9800 . -.64 11 - 242 . 82.7 9800 . -. 64 11 - 12.2 30.7 9800 . -.64 11 22.2 15.3 9800 . -.64 23 403 . - 6.40 1115 . -.20 109 115 . -.0813 1115 . -.20 109 119 . .0278 1115 . -.20 .2 7.9 7.9 - 6.8 . 63 .50 .50 .64 67 Attachment B --Basin-description file for streamflow-only calibration- -Continued 937 ARK WELL 38.48 105.94 23 91.6 23 30.0 23 - 17.6 13 - 21.3 23 - 4103 . 23 - 2353 . 9 - 59.9 9 19.3 9 - 61.7 9 28.0 23 322 . 23 - 31.4 945 ARK PARK 38.46 105.38 9 44.1 9 34.6 9 40.1 201 288 . 13 - 288 . 13 - 375 . 24 - 2729 . 24 - 912 . 13 - 35.8 9 58.8 9 59.3 24 - 64.2 950 GRAPE CK 38.16 105.48 -15 0 . -15 0 . -15 0 . -15 0 . -15 0 . -15 0 . -15 0 . -15 0 . -15 0 . -15 0 . -15 0 . -15 0 . 960 ARK CANC 38.41 105.25 201 277 . 201 - 455 . 2 - 97.0 24 - 1174 . 201 137 . 2 - 379 . 2 - 552 . 2 - 334 . 2 - 51.7 9 - 161 . 9 - 128 . 201 222 . 945 .15 .05 .397 300 . -.18 2.14 300 . -.18 2.68 300 . -.18 3.41 300 . -.18 83.6 135 . -.13 42.6 135 . -.13 113 . 135 . -.13 39.0 135 . -.13 136 . 135 . -.13 44.5 300 . -.18 6.74 300 . -.18 4.88 300 . -.18 960 -.40 . 10 29.6 87 . -. 16 14.7 87 . -. 16 12.2 87 . -. 16 .584 87 . -.16 23.6 75 . -.13 35.5 75 . -.13 38.3 75 . -.13 13.7 75 . -.13 5.62 75 . -.13 24.1 87 . -.16 39.4 87 . -. 16 2.90 87 . -.16 960 -.20 .15 1 . 1700 . -.30 1 . 1700 . -.30 1 . 1700 . -.30 1 . 1700 . -.30 1 . 1500 . -.30 1 . 1500 . -.30 1 . 1500 . -.30 1 . 1500 . -.30 1 . 1500 . -.30 1 . 1700 . -.30 1 . 1700 . -.30 1 . 1700 . -.30 970 -.10 -.30 .893 1400 . -.30 1.11 1400 . -.30 33.7 1400 . -.30 20.9 1400 . -.30 .267 1100 . -.30 146 . 1100 . -.30 208 . 1100 . -.30 120 . 1100 . -.30 78.8 1100 . -.30 45.8 1400 . -.30 56.6 1400 . -.30 .704 1400 . -.30 1 . - 6.8 .64 0 . - 6.8 .64 0 . - 6.8 .64 0 . - 6.2 .64 68 Attachment B 970ARK PORT 991BEAVER C 994ARK PUBL 1065FOUNT PB -Basin-description file for streamflow-only calibration --Continued 38.37 105.02 994 - . 201 -4891. 14.7 1400. 201 -298. .833 1400. 2 -54.5 38.4 1400. 7 -191. 178. 1400. 14 -42.9 32.9 1100. 14 -267. 80.7 1100. 2 376. -179. 1100. 24 -3250. 45.1 1100. 24 -2138. 32.6 1100. 7 -45.3 92.2 1400. 201 -258. .707 1400. 7 -57.0 106. 1400. 38.36 104.95 994 -16 0. 1. 1400. -16 0. 1. 1400. -16 0. 1. 1400. -16 0. 1. 1400. -16 0. 1. 1100. -16 0. 1. 1100. -16 0. 1. 1100. -16 0. 1. 1100. -16 0. 1. 1100. -16 0. 1. 1400. -16 0. 1. 1400. -16 0. 1. 1400. 38.25 104,65 1095 201 180. -.733 1400. 7 -92.6 121. 1400. 27 133. r-~ CM m i 1400. 201 -107. .205 1400. 2 -168. 54.7 1100. 12 586. -61.3 1100. 2 -507. 182. 1100. 27 4213. -57.3 1100. 27 1124. -17.9 1100. 7 -42.3 -43.6 1100. 27 -474. 10.1 1400. 7 -28.6 -116. 1400. 38.26 104.61 1095 -17 1. 3200. -17 1. 3200. -17 1. 3200. -17 1. 3200. -17 1. 2600. -17 1. 2600. -17 1. 2600. -17 1. 2600. -17 1. 2600. -17 1. 3200. -17 1. 3200. -17 1. 3200. 20 -.30 0. 8.4 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 10 .05 0. -248.2 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 25 -.30 0. -38.4 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 10 .10 0. -508.8 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 .61 .97 .75 1.04 69 Attachment B --Basin-description file for streamflow-only calibration- -Continued 1090ST CHARL 1095ARK AVON 1160HUERF R 1170ARK NPST 38. 20 104.51 1095 - . 10 - -18 1. 3900. -.29 -18 1. 3900. -.29 -18 1. 3900. -.29 -18 1. 3900. -.29 -18 1. 3900. -.29 -18 1. 3900. -.29 -18 1. 3900. -.29 -18 1. 3900. -.29 -18 1. 3900. -.29 -18 1. 3900. -.29 -18 1. 3900. -.29 -18 1. 3900. -.29 38. 23 104.40 1170 . 10 201 -945. 3.95 3200. -.17 7 130. -79.4 3200. -.17 7 171. -43.9 3200. -.17 201 -21.6 .334 3200. -.17 3 226. -83.3 2600. -.17 7 -243. 220. 2600. -.17 201 413. -.174 2600. -.17 201 -433. .593 2600. -.17 27 -1027. 17.8 2600. -.17 7 96.7 44.1 3200. -.17 201 -308. 1.40 3200. -.17 201 -1431. 5.67 3200. -.17 37. 97 104.48 1170 .10 - -19 1. 3900. -.23 -19 1. 3900. -.23 -19 1. 3900. -.23 -19 1. 3900. -.23 -19 1. 3900. -.23 -19 1. 3900. -.23 -19 1. 3900. -.23 -19 1. 3900. -.23 -19 1. 3900. -.23 -19 1. 3900. -.23 -19 1. 3900. -.23 -19 1. 3900. -.23 38. 19 104.20 1197 . 10 3 2.55 -95.1 3200. -.27 13 -123. 6.08 3200. -.27 201 -247. .418 3200. -.27 7 -50.4 -106. 3200. -.27 201 -834. .372 3200. -.27 12 26.0 -34.2 3200. -.27 201 -1108. .375 3200. -.27 13 205. -37.3 3200. -.27 28 1873. -31.7 3200. r-'- CN • i 3 -66.3 -103. 3200. -.27 201 95.0 -.357 3200. -.27 201 -69.1 .0311 3200. -.27 -.25 0 -248.2 97 10 -.15 15 0 . -18.7 69 0 . -458.8 1.16 0 -71.0 .80 70 Attachment B --Basin-description file for streamflow-only calibration --Continued 1195APISH R 1197ARK CAT 1230ARK LAJU 1240ARK ARMS 38. 07 103.99 1197 - .30 - -20 1. 3200. -.27 -20 1. 3200. -.27 -20 1. 3200. -.27 -20 1. 3200. -.27 -20 1. 3200. -.27 -20 1. 3200. -.27 -20 1. 3200. -.27 -20 1. 3200. -.27 -20 1. 3200. -.27 -20 1. 3200. -.27 -20 1. 3200. -.27 -20 1. 3200. -.27 38. 12 103.91 1230 .15 201 131. -.356 3200. -.27 13 73.0 -6.63 3200. -.27 201 76.0 -.283 3200. -.27 28 2289. -43.8 3200. -.27 201 -63.4 -.150 3200. -.27 8 -61.0 -50.0 3200. -.27 201 335. -.319 3200. -.27 8 -115. 123. 3200. -.27 8 -26.7 69.0 3200. -.27 8 -63.9 107. 3200. -.27 201 -198. .364 3200. -.27 28 153. -5.53 3200. -.27 37. 98 103.53 1240 - .15 128 -135. .239 3200. -.27 201 -44.4 -.685 3200. -.27 128 -7450. -.893 3200. -.27 28 -2755. 43.4 3200. -.27 14 -386. -53.3 3200. -.27 14 -987. -50.0 3200. -.27 106 -666. .350 3200. -.27 201 -280. -.421 3200. -.27 201 0.61 -.750 3200. -.27 201 55.3 -.773 3200. -.27 201 10.1 -.786 3200. -.27 201 -98.4 -.523 3200. -.27 38. 08 103.23 1305 .00 201 9.40 .242 3200. -.27 26 233. -5.79 3200. -.27 26 251. -5.79 3200. -.27 201 -129. .131 3200. -.27 201 -875. .724 3200. -.27 6 -364. 142. 3200. -.27 201 66.4 -.260 3200. -.27 13 -272. 11.7 3200. -.27 13 78.3 -6.06 3200. -.27 201 -84.3 .313 3200. r-"- CM i 201 -78.4 .823 3200. -.27 8 -5.87 67.7 3200. -.27 -.15 10 20 15 0. -438.2 1.14 0. -35.9 .74 0. -189.3 .94 0. -231.8 .94 71 Attachment B — Basin-description file for streamflow-only calibration --Continued 1285PURG ANS 1305ARK JM R 1330ARK LAMR 1341BIG SAND 38. 03 103.21 1305 .05 -21 1 . 4900. -.12 -21 1 . 4900. -.12 -21 1 . 4900. -.12 -21 1 . 4900. -.12 -21 1 . 4900. -.21 -21 1 . 4900. -.21 -21 1 . 4900. -.21 -21 1 . 4900. -.21 -21 1 . 4900. -.21 -21 1 . 4900. -.12 -21 1 . 4900. -.12 -21 1 . 4900. -.12 38. 07 102.93 1330 .00 201 -90.0 -.389 4900. -.12 8 -69.9 -116. 4900. -.12 201 13.0 -1.30 4900. -.12 201 202. .534 4900. -.12 6 1524. -900. 4900. -.21 8 779. -925. 4900. -.21 201 213. -.450 4900. -.21 8 326. -115. 4900. -.21 6 274. -61.3 4900. -.21 6 109. -54.0 4900. -.12 8 -26.3 -54.4 4900. -.12 6 -82.4 -36.3 4900. -.12 38. 12 102.63 1375 - .05 201 3.94 .318 4900. -.12 25 161. -4.57 4900. -.12 201 20.2 -.773 4900. -.12 14 87.0 -40.0 4900. -.12 201 -235. -.257 4900. -.21 201 151. -.700 4900. -.21 201 29.0 -.625 4900. -.21 201 -119. -.389 4900. -.21 14 -329. 9.66 4900. -.21 5 -174. 25.3 4900. -.12 5 -45.0 17.6 4900. -.12 25 60.6 -1.99 4900. -.12 38. 13 102.49 1375 .08 -22 1 . 5100. -.05 -22 1 . 5100. -.05 -22 1 . 5100. -.05 -22 1 . 5100. -.05 -22 1 . 5100. -.15 -22 1 . 5100. -.15 -22 1 . 5100. -.15 -22 1 . 5100. -.15 -22 1 . 5100. -.15 -22 1 . 5100. -.05 -22 1 . 5100. -.05 -22 1 . 5100. -.05 -.25 15 15 .08 0. -385.0 1.06 0. -243.8 .97 0. -222.3 .98 0. -6.8 1.16 72 Attachment B --Basin-description file for streamflow-only calibration --Continued 1375ARK COOL 38.05 102.02 -999 4 10.4 127. 5100. A 41.3 90.5 5100. 201 -39.6 4.06 5100. 201 141. -.641 5100. 201 267. -1.00 5100. 4 -1298. 475. 5100. 4 -101. 50.0 5100. 201 -33.3 .316 5100. 25 1780. -25.4 5100. 5 98.7 -34.6 5100. 201 78.9 -.692 5100. 201 59.1 .207 5100. .10 .10 0. -6.5 .92 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.15 -.15 -.15 -.15 -.15 -.05 -.05 -.05 73 CALIBRATION DATA 40 Attachment C --Basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74 USING STREAMFLOW, SNOWPACK, AND PRECIPITATION TO ESTIMATE FLOW 1000. 250. 1000. 2500. 90615C0LUMBIN 39 .2500 106.6000 - •999 - .50 110 0.0 .019 200. -.05 110 0.0 .012 200. -.05 110 0.0 .009 200. -.05 123 0.0 2.15 200. -.05 113 1.7 .277 800. -.20 113 0.65 1.05 800. -.20 113 0.08 1.32 800. -.20 113 0.12 .683 800. -.20 113 0.0 .452 800. -.20 110 0.0 .050 200. -.05 110 0.0 .044 200. -.05 110 0.0 .011 200. -.05 90620EWING 39 .2600 106.6100 - 999 - .55 110 0.25 .019 200. -.05 110 0.22 .012 200. -.05 110 0.26 .009 200. -.05 123 .0001 2.15 200. -.05 113 1.9 .277 800. -.20 113 0.41 1.05 800. -.20 113 0.07 1.32 800. -.20 113 0.18 .683 800. -.20 113 0.20 .452 800. -.20 110 0.54 .050 200. -.05 110 0.33 .044 200. -.05 110 0.26 .011 200. -.05 90625WURTZ 39.2400 106.5900 -999 -.45 110 0.0 .019 200. -.05 110 0.0 .012 200. -.05 110 0.0 .009 200. -.05 123 0.0 2.15 200. -.05 113 5.4 .277 800. -.20 113 1.0 1.05 800. -.20 113 0.11 1.32 800. -.20 113 0.24 .683 800. -.20 113 0.03 .452 800. -.20 110 0.0 .050 200. -.05 110 0.0 .044 200. -.05 110 0.0 .011 200. -.05 .32 0 0 .44 0 0 20 0 0 .65 . 65 . 65 74 Attachment C--Basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74--C ontinued 90775BUSK-IVH 39.2000 106.8000 -999 - 110 0.0 .019 200. 110 0.0 .012 200. 110 0.03 .009 200. 123 .0006 2.15 200. 113 6.6 .277 400. 113 2.1 1.05 400. 113 0.36 1.32 400. 113 0.66 .683 400. 113 0.43 .452 400. 110 1.8 .050 200. 110 0.42 .044 200. 110 0.0 .011 200. 90730TW LK TN 39.1500 106.9000 -999 - 110 2.9 .019 200. 110 2.5 .012 200. 110 2.3 .009 200. 123 .0020 2.15 200. 113 58. .277 400. 113 15. 1.05 400. 113 3.1 1.32 400. 113 5.5 .683 400. 113 4.3 .452 400. 110 9.5 .050 200. 110 9.5 .044 200. 110 3.5 .011 200. 91150LARKSPUR 39.1000 107.0000 -999 - 110 0.0 .019 200. 110 0.0 .012 200. 110 0.0 .009 200. 123 0.0 2.15 200. 113 0.24 .277 800. 113 0.080 1.05 800. 113 0.013 1.32 800. 113 0.053 .683 800. 113 0.10 .452 800. 110 0.0 .050 200. 110 0.0 .044 200. 110 812ARK LEAD 0.0 39.26 .011 106.34 860 200. 110 13.8 .019 740. no 13.8 .012 740. no 14.6 .009 740. 123 .00967 2.15 740. 113 76.7 .277 740. 113 16.6 1.05 740. 113 3.13 1.32 740. 113 7.18 .683 740. 113 8.27 .452 740. no 25.7 .050 740. no 19.7 .044 740. no 14.9 .011 740. .70 .10 0. 0. .65 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.05 -.05 -.05 .70 .05 0. 0. .65 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.05 -.05 -.05 .70 0.0 0. 0. .65 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.05 -.05 -.05 .10 -.05 0. -6.8 .64 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 75 Attachment C--Basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74--C ontinued 820LAKE FK 825LAKE FK 830HALFHOON 845LAKE CK 39.26 106 .45 825 -.13 110 2.35 .019 100. -.05 no 2.07 .012 100. -.05 no 1.95 .009 100. -.05 123 .00109 2.15 100. -.05 113 12.3 .277 250. -.20 113 5.79 1.05 250. -.20 113 1.74 1.32 250. -.20 113 3.03 .683 250. -.20 113 2.85 .452 250. -.20 110 6.23 .050 100. -.05 no 4.07 .044 100. -.05 no 3.10 .011 100. -.05 39 .2528 106.3739 860 .15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 39 .15 106.38 860 -.42 no 4.01 .019 98. -.04 no 3.66 .012 98. -.04 no 3.52 .009 98. -.04 123 .00211 2.15 98. -.04 113 19.9 .277 150. -.22 113 5.99 1.05 150. -.22 113 1.77 1.32 150. -.22 113 4.68 .683 150. -.22 113 4.63 .452 150. -.22 no 10.9 .050 98. -.04 no 7.48 .044 98. -.04 no 5.12 .011 98. .-.04 39 .05 106.37 855 -.50 no 11.3 .019 88. -. 16 no 10.2 .012 88. -.16 no 10.0 .009 88. -. 16 123 .0071 2.15 88. -. 16 113 100. .277 100. -.13 113 29.5 1.05 100. -.13 113 6.36 1.32 100. -.13 113 12.6 .683 100. -.13 113 12.7 .452 100. -.13 no 31.4 .050 88. -.16 no 19.9 .044 88. -. 16 no 14.0 .011 88. -.16 0. 0. .65 0. 0. .65 0. 7.9 .50 0. -6.8 .64 76 Attachment C--Basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74--C ontinued 855LAKE CK 860ARK GRNT 865CLEAR CK 870CLEAR CK 39.0807 106.3125 860 .15 .18 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 39.04 106.24 915 .13 110 66.0 .019 426. -.22 110 67.5 .012 426. -.22 110 74.9 .009 426. -.22 123 .079 2.15 426. -.22 113 87.4 .277 426. -.22 113 6.70 1.05 426. -.22 113 4.50 1.32 426. -.22 113 31.9 .683 426. -.22 113 31.0 .452 426. -.22 110 96.1 .050 426. -.22 110 84.3 .044 426. -.22 110 64.1 .011 426. -.22 38.99 106.28 870 -.30 110 13.2 .019 87. -. 16 110 12.4 .012 87. -. 16 110 12.2 .009 87. -.16 123 00661 2.15 87. -. 16 113 54.9 .277 250. -.13 113 15.7 1.05 250. -.13 113 4.16 1.32 250. -.13 113 10.6 .683 250. -.13 113 12.1 .452 250. -.13 110 32.9 .050 87. -. 16 110 21.9 .044 87. -.16 110 16.1 .011 87. -. 16 38.99 106.2444 915 . 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 . 0 . 00.0 0. .2 .63 0. 7.9 .50 0 . 0 . 00.0 77 Attachment C--Basin-description file for model calibration, I943-74--Continued 890COTTNWD 915ARK SLID 937ARK WELL 945ARK PARK 38.78 106.23 915 -.30 110 22.8 .019 240. - .20 110 20.6 .012 240. - .20 110 19.1 .009 240. - .20 123 00732 2.15 240. - .20 113 31.6 .277 240. - .20 113 8.60 1.05 240. - .20 113 2.39 1.32 240. - .20 113 8.32 .683 240. - .20 113 11.6 .452 240. - .20 110 36.5 .050 240. - .20 110 30.5 .044 240. - .20 110 25.4 .011 240. - .20 38.51 105.98 937 0. • 110 127. .019 2900. - .43 110 118. .012 2900. - .43 no 96.1 .009 2900. - .43 123 .026 2.15 2900. - .43 113 58.4 .277 2900. - .43 113 9.25 1.05 2900. - .43 112 00027 5.00 2900. - .43 113 24.9 .683 2900. - .43 113 27.2 .452 2900. - .43 no 118. .050 2900. - .43 no 154. .044 2900. - .43 no 135. .011 2900. - .43 38.48 105.94 945 .15 no 57.6 .019 2900. - .43 no 54.5 .012 2900. - .43 no 43.3 .009 2900. - .43 123 .0055 2.15 2900. - .43 113 33.0 .277 2900. - .43 113 0.17 1.05 2900. - .43 113 .378 1.32 2900. - .43 113 5.28 .683 2900. - .43 113 14.6 .452 2900. - .43 no 47.2 .050 2900. - .43 no 87.6 .044 2900. - .43 no 71.1 .011 2900. - .43 38.46 105.38 960 -.40 # 2 0.00 128. 1600. - .30 2 0.00 119. 1600. - .30 2 0.00 65.5 1600. - .30 2 0.00 44.4 1600. - .30 2 7.0 21.1 1600. - .30 114 10.0 1.9 1600. - .30 2 220. 10.0 1600. - .30 2 0.00 47.2 1600. - .30 2 0.00 7.33 1600. - .30 2 0.00 30.0 1600. - .30 2 0.00 48.6 1600. - .30 2 0.00 103. 1600. - .30 0. 7.9 .50 0. -6.8 .64 0. -6.8 .64 0. -6.8 .64 78 Attachment C --Basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74--Continued 950GRAPE CK 960ARK CANC 970ARK PORT 991BEAVER C 38.16 105.48 960 15 0 . 1 . 1100. 15 0 . 1 . 1100. 15 0 . 1 . 1100. 15 0 . 1 . 1100. 15 0 . 1 . 1200. 15 0 . 1 . 1200. 15 0 . 1 . 1200. 15 0 . 1 . 1200. 15 0 . 1 . 1200. 15 0 . 1 . 1100. 15 0 . 1 . 1100. 15 0 . 1 . 1100. 38.41 105.25 970 2 -43. 8. 1100. 2 -42. 18. 1100. 2 -48. 11. 1100. 2 -90. 23.6 1100. 2 -70.0 3.48 1300. 2 -200. 143. 1300. 2 -100. 11.5 1300. 102 .056 5.78 1300. 2 -70. 24. 1300. 2 -73. 13.9 1100. 2 -79. 11. 1100. 2 -47. 18. 1100. 38.37 105.02 994 2 -43. 8. 4400. 2 -42. 18. 4400. 2 -48. 11. 4400. 2 -62. 5. 4400. 2 -36. 13. 4400. 2 -200. 90.0 4400. 2 -43. 8. 4400. 2 -21. 12. 4400. 2 -70. 24. 4400. 2 -73. 13. 4400. 2 -79. 11. 4400. 2 -47. 18. 4400. 38.36 104.95 994 0 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 16 0 . 1 . 2000. 16 0 . 1 . 2000. 16 0 . 1 . 2000. 16 0 . 1 . 2000. 16 0 . 1 . 2000. 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 16 0 . 1 . 3000. .15 0. -6.8 .64 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 0. -6.2 .64 -.24 -.24 -.24 -.24 -. 26 -. 26 -. 26 -. 26 -. 26 -.24 -.24 -.24 -.30 -1. 8.4 .61 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 -.37 .15 0. -248.2 .97 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 79 Attachment C --Basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74 --Continued 994ARK PUBL 1065F0UNT PB 1090ST CHARL 1095ARK AVON 38.25 104.65 1095 -.30 7 17.0 288. 3000. 7 24.0 210. 3000. 7 -20.0 125. 3000. 7 -47.0 200. 3000. 7 159. 0 . 3000. 7 -100. 250. 3000. 7 -82.0 75.5 3000. 7 -36.0 91.0 3000. 7 50. 50.0 3000. 7 -5. 130. 3000. 7 38.0 220. 3000. 7 42.0 220. 3000. 38.26 104 .61 1095 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 17 0 . 1 . 4000. 17 0 . 1 . 4000. 17 0 . 1 . 4000. 17 0 . 1 . 4000. 17 0 . 1 . 4000. 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 38.20 104 .51 1095 - 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 38.23 104 .40 1170 3 -2. 0 . 4700. 3 0 . 15. 4700. 3 0 . 25. 4700. 3 -5.0 25. 4700. 3 -80.0 20. 4700. 3 -200. 50. 4700. 3 100. 20. 4700. 3 70.0 13.2 4700. 3 -14.2 45. 4700. 3 -1.7 40. 4700. 3 0 . 30. 4700. 3 0 . 7. 4700. -.30 -1. -38.4 .75 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 .15 0. -508.8 1.04 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.25 0. -248.2 .97 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 .15 -1. -18.7 .69 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.31 -.31 -.31 -.31 -.31 -.27 -.27 -.27 80 Attachment C --Basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74-- Continued 1160HUERF R 1170ARK NPST 1195APISH R 1197ARK CAT 37.97 104.48 1170 .10 -.15 19 0 . 1 . 3900. -.23 19 0 . 1 . 3900. -.23 19 0 . 1 . 3900. -.23 19 0 . 1 . 3900. -.23 19 0 . 1 . 3900. -.23 19 0 . 1 . 3900. -.23 19 0 . 1 . 3900. -.23 19 0 . 1 . 3900. -.23 19 0 . 1 . 3900. -.23 19 0 . 1 . 3900. -.23 19 0 . 1 . 3900. -.23 19 0 . 1 . 3900. -.23 38.19 104.20 1197 .15 3 23. 0 . 2500. -.17 3 15. 60. 2500. -.17 3 -31. 100. 2500. -.17 3 -94.0 75. 2500. -.17 3 -32.0 40. 2500. -.22 3 -30.0 140. 2500. -.22 3 -150. 50. 2500. -.22 3 -80. 13.8 2500. -.22 3 -60.0 120. 2500. -.22 3 -55.0 150. 2500. -.17 3 -47. 110. 2500. -.17 3 0 . 30. 2500. -.17 38.07 103.99 1197 - .50 - 20 0 . 1 . 3200. -.27 20 0 . 1 . 3200. -.27 20 0 . 1 . 3200. -.27 20 0 . 1 . 3200. -.27 20 0 . 1 . 3200. -.27 20 0 . 1 . 3200. -.27 20 0 . 1 . 3200. -.27 20 0 . 1 . 3200. -.27 20 0 . 1 . 3200. -.27 20 0 . 1 . 3200. -.27 20 0 . 1 . 3200. -.27 20 0 . 1 . 3200. -.27 38.12 103.91 1230 . 10 3 -30. 0 . 1200. -.02 3 -16 . 0 . 1200. -.02 3 31. 0 . 1200. -.02 3 25.0 4.8 1200. -.02 103 2.0 1 . 6 2800. -.23 3 -100. 16.2 2800. -.23 3 120. 14.2 2800. -.23 3 200. 13.8 2800. -.23 3 30.0 18.6 2800. -.23 3 50.0 3.3 1200. -.02 3 65. 0 . 1200. -.02 3 -30.0 0 . 1200. -.02 0. -458.8 1.16 -1. -71.0 .80 0. -438.2 1.14 0. -35.9 .74 81 Attachment C --Basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74-- Continued 1230ARK LAJU 1240ARK ANMS 1285PURG ANS 1289ARK A JM 37.98 103.53 1240 -.25 .20 8 0 . 0 . 8300. -.29 8 0 . 0 . 8300. -.29 8 0 . 0 . 8300. -.29 8 -7.3 6 . 1 8300. -.29 108 18. 3.2 8300. -.31 108 250. 1.3 8300. -.31 8 -34.6 18.1 8300. -.31 8 31.6 20.0 8300. -.31 8 -20.6 22.4 8300. -.31 8 -2.4 3.8 8300. -.29 8 0 . 0 . 8300. -.29 8 0 . 0 . 8300. -.29 38.08 103. 23 1289 - .40 6 0 . 0 . 7100. -.24 6 0 . 0 . 7100. -.24 6 0 . 0 . 7100. -.24 6 -7.3 6.4 7100. -.24 6 -150. 11.9 7100. -.30 6 -350. 20.3 7100. -.30 6 -80.0 16.2 7100. -.30 6 -31.6 20.3 7100. -.30 6 -20.6 22.6 7100. -.30 6 -2.4 3.4 7100. -.24 6 0 . 0 . 7100. -.24 6 0 . 0 . 7100. -.24 38.03 103. 21 1289 - .10 - 21 0 . 1 . 6000. -.12 21 0 . 1 . 6000. -.12 21 0 . 1 . 6000. -.12 21 0 . 1 . 6000. -.12 21 0 . 1 . 6000. -.21 21 0 . 1 . 6000. -.21 21 0 . 1 . 6000. -.21 21 0 . 1 . 6000. -.21 21 0 . 1 . 6000. -.21 21 0 . 1 . 6000. -.12 21 0 . 1 . 6000. -.12 21 0 . 1 . 6000. -.12 38.07 103. 15 1305 - .05 5 0 . 0 . 4100. -.09 5 0 . 0 . 4100. -.09 5 0 . 0 . 4100. -.09 5 -2.8 2.2 4100. -.09 5 -9.3 3.8 5900. -.21 5 -12.1 5.4 5900. -.21 5 -13.3 5.9 5900. -.21 5 -12.1 6.1 5900. -.21 5 -7.9 7.1 5900. -.21 5 -0.9 1.0 4100. -.09 5 0 . 0 . 4100. -.09 5 0 . 0 . 4100. -.09 -1. -189.3 .94 -1. -231.8 .94 0. -385.0 1.06 0. -243.8 .97 82 Attachment C--Basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74 --Continued 1305ARK JM R 1330ARK LAMR 1341BIG SAND 1355ARK HOLY 38.07 102.92 1330 .00 -.20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 0. 0. 8800. -. 16 5 0. 0. 8800. -. 16 5 0. 0. 8800. -. 16 5 -50. 6.6 8800. -.16 5 -200. 11.3 6300. -.24 104 1.00 2.5 6300. -.24 5 -130. 17.7 6300. -.24 5 -25.0 18.5 6300. -.24 5 -23.9 21.3 6300. -.24 5 -2.8 3.2 8800. -. 16 5 0. 0. 8800. -.16 5 0. 38.13 102. 0. 49 1355 8800. .08 -. 16 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 22 0. 1. 5100. -.15 22 0. 1. 5100. -.15 22 0. 1. 5100. -.15 22 0. 1. 5100. -.15 22 0. 1. 5100. -.15 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 22 0. 38.0436 102. 1. 1192 1375 5100. .30 -.05 15 08 -.25 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0. -243.8 .97 0. -222.3 .98 0 . - 6.8 1.16 0 . 0 . 00.0 83 Attachment C --Basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74--Continued 1375ARK COOL 38.05 102 .02 -999 -.05 4 0 . 0 . 13000. -.27 4 0 . 0 . 13000. -.27 4 0 . 0 . 13000. -.27 4 70.0 7.0 13000. -.27 104 23.0 2.10 10000. -.29 104 30.0 1.85 10000. -.29 4 30.0 20.0 10000. -.29 4 80.0 18.5 10000. -.29 4 35.0 19.4 10000. -.29 4 -2.9 2.7 13000. -.27 4 0 . 0 . 13000. -.27 4 0 . 0 . 13000. -.27 .92 84 Attachment D --Additional basin-description file for model calibration, 1943-74 MAIN STEM RESERVOIRS (pre 1965) PLUS OTHER INITIAL DATA PET 0 . 0 . 0 . 0.12 0.40 0.52 0.57 0.52 0.34 0.04 0 . 0 . EVAP 0 . 0 . 0 . 0.75 0.95 1.00 1.10 0.85 0.60 0.50 0.10 0 . AGDMND 0.09 0.11 0.18 0.27 0.40 0.52 0.57 0.52 0.34 0.27 0.22 0.14 SESNAL 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AQUIFER .2 10000. DRINK .13 CONV FAC69.04853.310 1.38 1.55 1.25 104.0 104.7 .80 60.3 1. 11 824TURQUOIS 17731. 3000. 245. 106.3739 39.2528 13000. 100. .10 .05 854TWIN LKS 54453. 8000. 1100. 106.3125 39.0807 44000. 75. -.05 .05 869CLR CK R 11440. 382. 106.2444 38.99 9000. 100. -.05 0.0 1106LK HENRY 10300. 1120. 103.684 38.224 3500. 1000. .20 .05 1107MEREDITH 28000. 3220. 103.658 38.172 -.05 .03 1202DYE RES 4000. 800. 103.661 38.045 .26 -.07 1203HLBR0K R 7000. 673. 103.580 38.029 CM O • 1 .02 1221GR PLAIN 130000. 12653. 102.707 38.308 .10 .05 1236HRS CK R 28000. 2603. 103.372 38.144 -.05 -.03 1238ADB CK R 65000. 5147. 103.231 38.236 -.05 .05 1300JM RES 412000. 17500. 102.92 38.07 ' 25000. 1000. -.08 -.05 85 Attachment D --Additional basin-description file for model calibration, 2943-74--Continued GW01 GW02 GW03 GW04 GW05 GW06 GW07 5000. 200. GW08 GW08a GW09 GW10 GW11 GW12 10000. 100. 25000. 100. GW13 GW14 GW15 GW16 20000. 100. 25000. 100. GW17 GW18 20000. 125. 10000. 125. GW19 GW20 GW21 60000. 200. GW22 GW23 10000. 300. 10000. 400. GW24 GW25 GW26 40000. 350. 15000. 500. GW27 GW28 30000. 700. 80000. 700. GW29 GW30 40000. 800. 7000001500. GW31 100000 900. GW32 50000.1000. 3000001500. GW33 GW34 30000.1500. 1000001500. GW35 GW36 60000.2000. 2000001500. GW37 GW38 2000003000. 3000004000. GW39 4000003500. 3000004000. 86 Attachment E --Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1943-74 BASIN USERS IN 1965 74 1101MARTIN 1 240. 1 1 0.20 1 3.43 106.338 39.2563 1104BERRY 1 200. 1 1 0.20 1 4.00 106.335 39.2539 1108WELL-STR 1 99. 1 1 0.20 1 8.00 106.332 39.252 1110BEAVER D 1 320. 2 1 0.20 1 5.71 106.329 39.2505 1 1.43 106.329 39.2505 1116YOUNGR 2 1 340. 1 1 0.20 1 6.29 106.326 39.2384 1122DERRY 1 1 400. 1 1 0.20 1 4.00 106.3258 39.1841 1125UPPR RIV 1 600. 1 1 0.20 1 14.00 106.3404 39.2008 1128PIONEER 1 320. 1 1 0.20 1 7.00 106.3156 39.1439 1130WHEEL 1 200. 1 1 0.20 1 16.00 106.3124 39.1379 1131CHAMP 1 320. 1 1 0.20 1 5.00 106.3157 39.1500 1137LANGHOFF 1 80. 1 1 0.20 1 4.80 106.2130 38.9869 1140DRYFIELD 1 40. 1 1 0.20 1 6.20 106.2049 38.9678 1143RVRSD-AL 1 300. 4 1 0.20 1 8.00 106.1896 38.9463 1 1.00 106.1896 38.9463 1 9.00 106.1896 38.9463 1 16.00 106.1896 38.9463 1146HELENA 1 320. 3 1 0.20 1 1.00 106.1142 38.8331 1 19.00 106.1142 38.8331 1 16.00 106.1142 38.8331 1147BV SMELT 4 0 . 1 2 1.00 1 115.00 106.1216 38.8474 2. 106.3474 39.2422 0.16 0.08 10 106.3474 39.2422 800. 2. 106.3604 39.2407 0.35-0.01 10 106.345 39.2407 800. 2. 106.3566 39.2571-0.05-0.03 10 106.343 39.240 800. 2. 106.3497 39.2420 0.30-0.07 10 106.341 39 .239 800. 2. 106.3601 39.2261-0.05 0.06 10 106.340 39.2261 800. 2. 106.3285 39.1446 0.30-0.04 10 106.3285 39.1446 800. 2. 106.3289 39.1822-0.05-0.02 10 106.3289 39.1822 800. 2. 106.3202 39.1365-0.15-0.10 10 106.3202 39.1365 800. 2. 106.3152 39.1338 0.25-0.14 10 106.3152 39.1338 800. 2. 106.3208 39.1429-0.08-0.05 10 106.3208 39.1429 800. 2. 106.2051 38.9731-0.05 0.0 10 106.2051 38.9731 800. 2. 106.2036 38.9614 0.25-0.05 10 106.2036 38.9614 800. 5.0 106.1804 38.9098-0.05-0.05 10 106.1804 38.9098 800. 6.0 106.1228 38.8094 0.28 0.03 1 106.1228 38.8094 800. 2. 106.4435 38.6588-0.05 0.05 0 106.4435 38.6588 87 Attachment E--Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1943-74--Continued 1149BRY-ALEN 1 100. 2 1 0.20 1 5.00 106.1033 38.8131 1 6.00 106.1033 38.8131 1155SALIDA 1 900. 1 1 0.20 1 20.00 106.0569 38.6153 1158KRAFT 1 240. 1 1 0.20 1 5.00 106.0558 38.6197 1161SUNNY PK 1 700. 2 1 0.20 1 14.17 106.0670 38.6043 1 25.00 106.0670 38.6043 1164BILL-HAM 1 534. 2 1 0.20 1 16.00 106.0787 38.5794 1 1.00 106.0787 38.5794 1201PICKETT 1 90. 1 1 0.20 1 3.80 105.9150 38.4968 1204PLEASANT 1 250. 2 1 0.20 1 2.00 105.8413 38.4592 1 8.00 105.8413 38.4592 1210S CANON 1 1280. 8 1 0.20 1 2.00 105.2689 38.4319 1 2.00 105.2689 38.4319 1 3.00 105.2689 38.4319 1 7.91 105.2689 38.4319 1 1.00 105.2689 38.4319 1 3.40 105.2689 38.4319 1 3.00 105.2689 38.4319 1 23.20 105.2689 38.4319 1213CAN0N WW 2 500. 2 2 0.50 1 19.00 105.2408 38.4376 1 3.50 105.2408 38.4376 1215S C POWR 4 3300. 3 2 1.00 1 37.00 105.2287 38.4403 1 15.00 105.2287 38.4403 1 9.00 105.2287 38.4403 1216HYD-FRUT 1 4180. 1 1 0.20 1 77.00 105.2521 38.4348 12190IL CK 1 1250. 2 1 0.20 1 10.46 105.2327 38.4403 1 14.27 105.2327 38.4403 2. 106.0750 38.7681-0.02 0.02 1 106.0750 38.7681 800. 2. 106.0000 38.5597 0.23-0.09 9 106.0000 38.5597 800. 2. 106.0794 38.6000-0.03 0.04 9 106.0794 38.6000 800. 2.5 106.0393 38.5761 0.30 0.04 9 106.0393 38.5761 800. 3.6 106.0038 38.5524-0.05 0.03 9 106.0038 38.5524 800. 2. 105.8934 38.4826-0.03 0.02 2 105.8934 38.4826 800. 3.9 105.8132 38.4381-0.05-0.01 2 105.8132 38.4381 800. 4.8 105.2009 38.4306-0.05 0.12 2 105.2009 38.4306 800. 2. 105.2253 38.4439-0.06 0.05 2 105.2253 38.4439 1.0 105.2230 38.4345 .30 0.07 0 105.2230 38.4345 -1.8 105.1968 38.4592 0.10 0.15 2 105.1968 38.4592 800. -2.9 105.1885 38.4461 0.32 0.00 2 105.1885 38.4461 800. 88 Attachment E--£asin water-user file for model calibration, 1943-74 --Continued 1220FREMONT 1 425. 4 1 0.20 1 17.00 105.1867 38.4272 1 0.24 105.1867 38.4272 1 0.28 105.1867 38.4272 1 0.41 105.1867 38.4272 1222CF&I 3 41000. 8 2 0.83 1 2.00 105.1581 38.4145 1 48.00 105.1581 38.4145 1 20.00 105.1581 38.4145 1 5.70 105.1581 38.4145 1 1.64 105.1581 38.4145 1 150.00 105.1581 38.4145 1 0 . 104.678 38.241 3 150. 104.678 38.241 1225UNI0N 1 1250. 1 1 0.50 1 48.00 105.1583 38.4144 1228HNNKRATT 1 125. 5 1 0.50 1 1.60 105.1480 38.4140 1 1.00 105.1480 38.4140 1 0.56 105.1480 38.4140 1 1.00 105.1480 38.4140 1 1.00 105.1480 38.4140 1231L ATTRBY 1 180. 3 1 0.50 1 3.50 105.0719 38.3921 1 2.00 105.0719 38.3921 1 3.60 105.0719 38.3921 1234IDEAL CM 3 1600. 7 2 1.00 1 1.05 105.0147 38.3877 1 0.50 105.0147 38.3877 1 1.50 105.0147 38.3877 1 1.00 105.0147 38.3877 1 2.00 105.0147 38.3877 1 11.50 105.0147 38.3877 1 3.50 105.0147 38.3877 1240 HOBSON 1 2 1 0.50 1 1.60 104.9455 38.3421 1 4.40 104.9455 38.3421 16. 105.1341 38.3967 0.25-0.07 2 105.1341 38.3967 800. 1. 104.6250 38.2333 0.40-0.12 0 104.6250 38.2333 824 2. 105.1092 38.3934 0.15-0.13 2 105.1092 38.3934 800. 2.0 105.1238 38.4111 0.0 0.02 2 105.1238 38.4111 800. 2.2 105.0580 38.4029-0.05-0.03 2 105.0580 38.4029 800. 1. 105.0078 38.3778-0.10 0.07 0 105.0078 38.3778 2. 104.9255 38.3404 -.05 .05 7 104.9255 38.3404 89 Attachment E --Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1943-74-- Continued 1401BESSEMER 1 20000. 15 1 0.20 1 2.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 20.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 3.74 104.7263 38.2606 1 3.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 2.50 104.7263 38.2606 1 5.13 104.7263 38.2606 1 1.47 104.7263 38.2606 1 3.40 104.7263 38.2606 1 2.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 3.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 0.41 104.7263 38.2606 1 14.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 2.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 8.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 322.00 104.7263 38.2606 1402ST CHRLS 2 0 . 2 2 0.50 1 1.20 104.6025 38.2534 1 2.60 104.6025 38.2534 1404HAMP-BEL 1 40. 3 1 0.50 1 1.03 104.7184 38.2705 1 0.29 104.7184 38.2705 1 1.60 104.7184 38.2705 1407W PUEBLO 1 500. 5 1 0.50 1 1.20 104.7116 38.2716 1 1.00 104.7116 38.2716 1 0.60 104.7116 38.2716 1 15.00 104.7116 38.2716 2 16. 104.6519 38.2759 1410PUEBL WW 2 4700. 4 2 0.50 1 2.50 104.6701 38.2706 1 1.20 104.6701 38.2706 1 4.60 104.6701 38.2706 1 45.00 104.6701 38.2706 1416RVRSD DY 1 55. 1 1 0.50 1 1.00 104.6552 38.2686 1419BTH -ORCH 1 1451. 6 1 0.50 1 7.00 104.5857 38.2538 1 8.00 104.5857 38.2538 1 1.00 104.5857 38.2538 1 2.00 104.5857 38.2538 1 0.00 104.5857 38.2538 2 5. 104.5 38.2691 1.0 104.5985 38.2296 .05 -0.16 7 104.5985 38.2296 1900. 2. 104.5250 38.2118 0.21-0.12 0 104.5250 38.2118 2. 104.6954 38.2548 0.05 0.13 7 104.6954 38.2548 1.7 104.6519 38.2759 .05 0.04 7 104.6519 38.2759 1002. 467. 1. 104.6544 38.2740 0.27 0.03 7 104.6544 38.2740 2. 104.6407 38.2660-0.10-0.09 7 104.6407 38.2660 3.4 104.5000 38.2691 -.05 .05 7 104.5000 38.2691 1260. 1548. 90 Attachment E --Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1943-74--Continued 1422EXCLSI0R 1 1583. 3 1 0.80 1 20.00 104.4988 38.2601 1 40.00 104.4988 38.2601 2 52. 104.3916 38.2683 1425COLLIER 1 1000. 3 1 0.80 1 4.00 104.3458 38.2426 1 22.00 104.3458 38.2426 2 3. 104.2895 38.2338 1428COLORADO 1 50800. 5 1 0.70 1 756.28 104.3106 38.2453 2 40. 104.1283 38.2128 3 15000.00 104.3106 38.2453 -3 600. 103.658 38.172 -3 2000. 103.684 38.224 2 45. 104.1283 38.2128 1431HIGHLINE 1 24100. 9 4 0.25 1 40.00 104.2392 38.2269 1 0.60 104.2392 38.2269 1 16.00 104.2392 38.2269 1 32.50 104.2392 38.2269 1 30.00 104.2392 38.2269 1 2.00 104.2392 38.2269 1 380.50 104.2392 38.2269 3 3200. 104.2392 38.2269 2 100. 103.7651 37.9855 14340XFD-FRM 1 6000. 3 1 0.60 1 13.40 104.1573 38.1819 1 116.00 104.1573 38.1819 2 50. 103.9857 38.1127 1701OTERO 1 10000. 4 1 0.80 1 123.00 104.00 38.1416 1 334.92 104.00 38.1416 3 850. 104.00 38.1416 2 34. 103.5119 37.9684 1703BLDWN-ST 1 650. 1 1 0.80 1 22.00 103.9738 38.1387 1704CATLIN 1 18800. 4 1 0.30 1 22.00 103.9460 38.1273 1 226.00 103.9460 38.1273 1 97.00 103.9460 38.1273 2 63. 103.6294 37.9623 3.3 104.3916 38.2683-0.02 0.11 104.3916 38.2683 2726. 3173. 0.8 104.2895 38.2338 .20 -.12 104.2895 38.2338 1086. 1253. -0.9 104.10 38.24 .05 .07 104.1283 38.2128 4800. 1800. 854 1107 1106 1800 -1.0 104.05 37.9855 0.27-0.05 103.99 38.08 4500. 824 4700. -1.2 103.9857 38.1127 0.27-0.06 103.9857 38.1127 1800. 3179. 0.5 103.5119 37.9684 0.01-0.08 103.5119 37.9684 1608. 869 1234. 2. 103.9140 38.1575-0.03 -.05 103.9140 38.1575 -1.2 103.6294 37.9623 0.16-0.14 103.6294 37.9623 4800. 5300. 7 3 3 3 3 8 8 8 91 Attachment E --Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1943-74--Continued 1707HOLBROOK 1 19550. 1 155.00 5 1 103.8444 0.50 38.1212 1 445.00 103.8444 38.1212 -3 20000. 103.661 38.045 -3 20000. 103.580 38.029 2 50. 103.3980 38.0939 1710RCKY FRD 1 1 3200. 1 111.76 3 1 103.8264 0.30 38.1124 1 96.54 103.8264 38.1124 2 60. 103.6746 38.0033 1716FT LYON 1 91300. 1 164.64 6 5 103.5878 0.30 38.0110 1 597.16 103.5878 38.0110 1 171.20 103.5878 38.0110 -3 20000. 103.372 38.144 -3 20000. 103.231 38.236 2 350. 102.6500 38.2450 1719LAS 1 ANMS 1 ^650. 1 22.00 6 1 103.3546 0.40 38.0566 1 5.50 103.3546 38.0566 1 22.00 103.3546 38.0566 1 80.00 103.3546 38.0566 1 44.80 103.3546 38.0566 2 60. 103.20 38.04 6701KEESEE 1 1900. 3 -.01 5 1 102.8396 0.50 38.0761 1 9.00 102.8396 38.0761 1 4.50 102.8396 38.0761 1 15.00 102.8396 38.0761 2 15. 102.7470 38.0864 6704FT BENT 1 6840. 3 -.08 7 1 102.8394 0.50 38.0761 1 27.77 102.8394 38.0761 1 32.77 102.8394 38.0761 1 26.77 102.8394 38.0761 1 50.00 102.8394 38.0761 1 80.00 102.8394 38.0761 2 41. 102.5591 38.0550 6707AMITY 1 37800. 3 -.29 5 1 102.7588 0.35 38.0908 1 283.50 102.7588 38.0908 1 500.00 102.7588 38.0908 -3 20000. 102.707 38.308 2 200. 102.0445 38.1303 -1.4 103.3980 38.0939-0.05 -.02 8 103.3980 38.0939 1122. 1202 1203 1032. -1.5 103.6746 38.0033 0.21-0.13 8 103.6746 38.0033 1900. 2200 . -1.1 102.6500 38.2450-0.06 0.06 6 102.6500 38.2450 4500. 1236 1238 4500. -1.7 103.2336 38.0288 0.01-0.10 6 103.20 38.04 4800. 5200. 0.9 102.7470 38.0864 0.22-0.09 6 102.6 38.0864 840. 1300 1342. 1.1 102.71 38.0550 0.15-0.12 6 102.60 38.0550 2776. 1300 2250. 1.2 102.0445 38.1303 .15 0.08 5 102.0445 38.1303 5500. 1300 1221 7498. 92 Attachment E --Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1943-74--Continued 6710LAMAR 1 8700. -1.5 102.3545 38.0427 0.15-0.18 7 1 0.50 102. 3545 38.0427 1937. 3 -.11 102.6430 38.1049 1300 1 15.75 102.6430 38.1049 1 72.09 102.6430 38.1049 1 13.64 102.6430 38.1049 1 11.70 102.6430 38.1049 1 184.27 102.6430 38.1049 2 27. 102.3545 38.0427 1728. 6713HYDE 1 970. 1.0 102.5600 38.1138 0.07 0.04 3 1 0.50 102. 5600 38.1138 1620. 3 -.01 102.6115 38:1055 1300 1 23.44 102.6115 38.1055 2 50. 102.5600 38.1138 1039. 6716MANVEL 1 750. 2.1 102.3431 38.0573 0.15-0.12 3 1 0.50 102. 3431 38.0573 3125. 3 -.02 102.4942 38.0948 1300 1 54.00 102.4942 38.0948 2 145. 102.3431 38.0573 2412. 6719X- -Y GRHM 1 6000. 0.5 102.2436 38.0397 0.0 -0.15 4 1 0.50 102. 2436 38.0397 2782. 3 -.05 102.4252 38.1005 1300 1 69.00 102.4252 38.1005 1 61.00 102.4252 38.1005 2 80. 102.2436 38.0397 3054. 6722BUFFALO 1 5000. 1.1 102.1372 38.0646 0.25 0.05 3 1 0.50 102. 1372 38.0646 1759. 112 3 -.02 102.3284 38.1005 1300 1 67.50 102.3284 38.1005 2 25. 102.1372 38.0646 864. 6725SSN-STUB 1 300. 2. 102.1670 38.0302-0.10-0.08 5 1 0.80 102. 1670 38.0302 442. 3 -.01 102.2181 38.0468 1300 1 7.54 102.2181 38.0468 1 18.00 102.2181 38.0468 1 7.20 102.2181 38.0468 2 57. 102.1670 38.0302 860. 99KANSAS 1 30000. 3. 102.01 38.05-0.10 0.05 1 3 0.00 3 -.50 102.01 38.05 1300 824TURQU0IS 5 17371. 1. 106.3739 39.2528 .30 .05 2 3 5 1000. 106.3739 39.2528 4 17500. 106.80 39.20 854TWIN LKS 5 55000. 1. 106.3125 39.0807 .45 -.10 3 3 5 1000. 106.3125 39.0807 5 1000. 106.3125 39.0807 4 55000. 106.90 39.15 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 93 Attachment E--Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1943-74--Continued 869CLR CK R 5 11440. 5 3 1 . 106.2444 38.99 .45 -.10 5 45. 106.27 38.99 5 25. 106.27 38.99 4 9402. 106.6 39.25 4 9402. 106.61 39.26 4 9402. 106.59 39.24 1106LK HENRY 5 10300. 2 3 1 . 103.684 38.224 .20 . 06 5 20. 104.3106 38.2453 5 10. 104.3106 38.2453 1107MEREDITH 5 26028. 1 . 103.658 38.172 -. 06 .04 1 3 5 250. 104.3106 38.2453 1202DYE RES 5 7986. 2 3 1 . 103.661 38.045 . 26 -.30 5 100. 103.8444 38.1212 5 100. 103.8444 38.1212 1203HLBR0K R 5 7472. 1 . 103.580 38.029 -.02 -.25 2 3 5 100. 103.8444 38.1212 1221GR PLAIN 5 125000. 1 . 102.707 38.308 .20 .04 5 100. 103.8444 38.1212 1 3 5 400. 103.5878 38.0110 1236HRS CK R 5 28000. 2 3 1 . 103.372 38.144 0.0 .20 5 250. 103.8444 38.1212 5 125. 103.8444 38.1212 1238ADB CK R 5 85000. 2 3 1 . 103.231 38.236 -.06 .07 5 500. 103.8444 38.1212 5 250. 103.8444 38.1212 1300JM RES 5 701775. 1 3 1 . 102.92 38.07 .17 .05 5 20000.00 102.9369 38.0681 94 Attachment F --Basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85 CALIBRATION DATA USING STREAMFLOW. SNOWPACK. AND PRECIPITATION TO ESTIMATE FLOW 42 1000. 250. 1000. 2500. 90615COLUMBIN 39.2500 106.6000 - ■999 110 0.0 .019 200 110 0.0 .012 200 110 0.0 .009 200 123 0.0 2.15 200 113 1.7 .277 800 113 0.65 1.05 800 113 0.08 1.32 800 113 0.12 .683 800 113 0.0 .452 800 110 0.0 .050 200 no 0.0 .044 200 no 0.0 .011 200 90620EWING 39.2600 106.6100 - •999 no 0.25 .019 200 no 0.22 .012 200 no 0.26 .009 200 123 .0001 2.15 200 113 1.9 .277 800 113 0.41 1.05 800 113 0.07 1.32 800 113 0.18 .683 800 113 0.20 .452 800 no 0.54 .050 200 no 0.33 .044 200 no 0.26 .011 200 90625WURTZ 39.2400 106.5900 - ■999 no 0.0 .019 200 no 0.0 .012 200 no 0.0 .009 200 123 0.0 2.15 200 113 5.4 .277 800 113 1.0 1.05 800 113 0.11 1.32 800 113 0.24 .683 800 113 0.03 .452 800 no 0.0 .050 200 no 0.0 .044 200 no 0.0 .011 200 -.50 .32 0. 0. .65 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.55 .44 0. 0. .65 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.45 .20 0. 0. .65 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.05 -.05 -.05 95 Attachment F --Basin-description file for model calibration, I975-85--Continued 90775 BUSK-IVH 39 .2000 106.8000 - 999 - .70 110 0.0 .019 200 . -.05 110 0.0 .012 200 . -.05 110 0.03 .009 200 . -.05 123 .0006 2.15 200 . -.05 113 6 . 6 .277 400 . -.20 113 2.1 1.05 400 . -.20 113 0.36 1.32 400 . -.20 113 0.66 .683 400 . -.20 113 0.43 .452 400 . -.20 110 1.8 .050 200 . -.05 110 0.42 .044 200 . -.05 110 0.0 .011 200 . -.05 90730 TW LK TN 39 . 1500 106.9000 - 999 - .70 110 2.9 .019 200 . -.05 110 2.5 .012 200 . -.05 110 2.3 .009 200 . -.05 123 .0020 2.15 200 . -.05 113 58 . .277 400 . -.20 113 15 . 1.05 400 . -.20 113 3.1 1.32 400 . -.20 113 5.5 .683 400 . -.20 113 4.3 .452 400 . -.20 110 9.5 .050 200 . -.05 110 9.5 .044 200 . -.05 no 3.5 .011 200 . -.05 91150 LARKSPUR 39 . 1000 107.0000 - •999 - .70 no 0.0 .019 200 . -.05 no 0.0 .012 200 . -.05 no 0.0 .009 200 . -.05 123 0.0 2.15 200 . -.05 113 0.24 .277 800 . -.20 113 0.080 1.05 800 . -.20 113 0.013 1.32 800 . -.20 113 0.053 .683 800 . -.20 113 0.10 .452 800 . -.20 no 0.0 .050 200 . -.05 no 0.0 .044 200 . -.05 no 0.0 .011 200 . -.05 90772 B 0 USTEAD 39.1000 106.8000 -999 -.40 no 5.8 .019 200 . -.05 no 5.0 .012 200 . -.05 no 4.6 .009 200 . -.05 123 .0040 2.15 200 . -.05 113 116 . .277 200 . -.20 113 30 . 1.05 200 . -.20 113 6.2 1.32 200 . -.20 113 11 . .683 200 . -.20 113 8.6 .452 200 . -.20 no 19 . .050 200 . -.05 no 19 . .044 200 . -.05 no 7.0 .011 200 . -.05 . 10 .05 0.0 -.30 0 . 0 . .65 0 . 0 . .65 0 . 0 . .65 0 . 0 . .65 96 Attachment F --Basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85--Continued 812ARK LEAD 39.26 106.34 860 110 13.8 .019 740. 110 13.8 .012 740. 110 14.6 .009 740. 123 .00967 2.15 740. 113 76.7 .277 740. 113 16.6 1.05 740. 113 3.13 1.32 740. 113 7.18 .683 740. 113 8.27 .452 740. 110 25.7 .050 740. 110 19.7 .044 740. 110 14.9 .011 740. 820LAKE FK 39.26 106.45 825 - 110 2.35 .019 100. 110 2.07 .012 100. 110 1.95 .009 100. 123 .00109 2.15 100. 113 12.3 .277 250. 113 5.79 1.05 250. 113 1.74 1.32 250. 113 3.03 .683 250. 113 2.85 .452 250. 110 6.23 .050 100. 110 4.07 .044 100. 110 3.10 .011 100. 825LAKE FK 39.2528 106.3739 860 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 830HALFMOON 39.15 106.38 860 110 4.01 .019 98. 110 3.66 .012 98. 110 3.52 .009 98. 123 .00211 2.15 98. 113 19.9 .277 150. 113 5.99 1.05 150. 113 1.77 1.32 150. 113 4.68 .683 150. 113 4.63 .452 150. 110 10.9 .050 98. 110 7.48 .044 98. 110 5.12 .011 98. .10 -.05 0. -6.8 .64 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 -.35 .13 .18 0. 0. .65 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.05 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.05 -.05 -.05 .15 .16 0. 0. .65 .42 -.10 0. 7.9 .50 -.04 -.04 -.04 -.04 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.04 -.04 -.04 97 Attachment Y--Basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85--C ontinued 845LAKE CK 110 110 110 123 113 113 113 113 113 110 110 110 855LAKE CK 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 860ARK GRNT 110 110 110 123 113 113 113 113 113 110 110 110 865CLEAR CK 110 110 110 123 113 113 113 113 113 110 110 110 39.05 106 11.3 10.2 10.0 .0071 100 . 29.5 6.36 12.6 12.7 31.4 19.9 14.0 39.0807 106 39.04 106 66.0 67.5 74.9 .079 87.4 6.70 4.50 31.9 31.0 96.1 84.3 64.1 38.99 106 13.2 12.4 12.2 .00661 54.9 15.7 4.16 10.6 12.1 32.9 21.9 16.1 37 855 .019 88. .012 88. .009 88. 2.15 88. .277 100. 1.05 100. 1.32 100. .683 100. .452 100. .050 88. .044 88. .011 88. 3125 860 24 915 .019 426. .012 426. .009 426. 2.15 426. .277 426. 1.05 426. 1.32 426. .683 426. .452 426. .050 426. .044 426. .011 426. 28 870 .019 87. .012 87. .009 87. 2.15 87. .277 250. 1.05 250. 1.32 250. .683 250. .452 250. .050 87. .044 87. .011 87. .50 -.10 -.16 -. 16 -.16 -. 16 -.13 -.13 -.13 -.13 -.13 -. 16 -.16 -. 16 .15 .18 .13 0. -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 .30 -.27 -.16 -. 16 -. 16 -.16 -.13 -.13 -.13 -.13 -.13 -. 16 -.16 -.16 0. -6.8 .64 0 . 0 . 00.0 0. .2 .63 0. 7.9 .50 98 Attachment F --Basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85--Continued 870CLEAR CK 1 1 1 1 1 1 38.99 106.2444 915 1 1 1 1 1 1 890COTTNWD 38.78 106.23 915 110 22.8 .019 240. 110 20.6 .012 240. 110 19.1 .009 240. 123 .00732 2.15 240. 113 31.6 .277 240. 113 8.60 1.05 240. 113 2.39 1.32 240. 113 8.32 .683 240. 113 11.6 .452 240. 110 36.5 .050 240. 110 30.5 .044 240. 110 25.4 .011 240. 915ARK SLID 38.51 105.98 937 110 127. .019 2900. 110 118. .012 2900. 110 96.1 .009 2900. 123 .026 2.15 2900. 113 58.4 .277 2900. 113 9.25 1.05 2900. 112 .00027 5.00 2900. 113 24.9 .683 2900. 113 27.2 .452 2900. 110 118. .050 2900. no 154. .044 2900. no 135. .011 2900. 937ARK WELL 38.48 105.94 945 no 57.6 .019 2900. no 54.5 .012 2900. no 43.3 .009 2900. 123 .0055 2.15 2900. 113 33.0 .277 2900. 113 0.17 1.05 2900. 113 .378 1.32 2900. 113 5.28 .683 2900. 113 14.6 .452 2900. no 47.2 .050 2900. no 87.6 .044 2900. no 71.1 .011 2900. .10 -.20 0 . 0 . 00.0 -.30 -.30 0. 7.9 .50 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 -.20 .18 0. -6.8 .64 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 0. 0. -6.8 .64 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 -.43 99 Attachment F --Basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85--Continued 945ARK PARK 38.46 105.38 960 - .40 .15 2 0.00 128. 1600. -.30 2 0.00 119. 1600. -.30 2 0.00 65.5 1600. -.30 2 0.00 44.4 1600. -.30 2 7.0 21.1 1600. -.30 114 10.0 1.9 1600. -.30 2 220. 10.0 1600. -.30 2 0.00 47.2 1600. -.30 2 0.00 7.33 1600. -.30 2 0.00 30.0 1600. -.30 2 0.00 48.6 1600. -.30 2 0.00 103. 1600. -.30 950GRAPE CK 38.16 105.48 960 - .20 .15 15 0 . 1 . 1100. -.30 15 0 . 1 . 1100. -.30 15 0 . 1 . 1100. -.30 15 0 . 1 . 1100. -.30 15 0 . 1 . 1200. -.32 15 0 . 1 . 1200. -.32 15 0 . 1 . 1200. -.32 15 0 . 1 . 1200. -.32 15 0 . 1 . 1200. -.32 15 0 . 1 . 1100. -.30 15 0 . 1 . 1100. -.30 15 0 . 1 . 1100. -.30 960ARK CANC 38.41 105.25 970 - .20 - .30 2 -43. 8. 1100. -.24 2 -42. 18. 1100. -.24 2 -48. 11. 1100. -.24 2 -90. 23.6 1100. -.24 2 -70.0 3.48 1300. -.26 2 -200. 143. 1300. -.26 2 -100. 11.5 1300. -. 26 102 .056 5.78 1300. -. 26 2 -70. 24. 1300. -.26 2 -73. 13.9 1100. -.24 2 -79. 11. 1100. -.24 2 -47. 18. 1100. -.24 970ARK PORT 38.37 105.02 992 - .25 - .30 2 -43. 8. 4400. -.37 2 -42. 18. 4400. -.37 2 -48. 11. 4400. -.37 2 -62. 5. 4400. -.37 2 -36. 13. 4400. -.37 2 -200. 90.0 4400. -.37 2 -43. 8. 4400. -.37 2 -21. 12. 4400. -.37 2 -70. 24. 4400. -.37 2 -73. 13. 4400. -.37 2 -79. 11. 4400. -.37 2 -47. 18. 4400. -.37 0 . - 6.8 0 . - 6.8 0 . - 6.2 -1. 8.4 Attachment F --Basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85 --Continued 991BEAVER C 992ARK A PB 994ARK PUBL 38.36 104.95 992 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 16 0 . 1 . 2000. 16 0 . 1 . 2000. 16 0 . 1 . 2000. 16 0 . 1 . 2000. 16 0 . 1 . 2000. 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 16 0 . 1 . 3000. 38.29 104.80 994 7 17.0 288. 3000. 7 24.0 210. 3000. 7 -20.0 125. 3000. 7 -47.0 200. 3000. 7 159. 0 . 3000. 7 -100. 250. 3000. 7 -82.0 75.5 3000. 7 -36.0 91.0 3000. 7 50. 50.0 3000. 7 -5. 130. 3000. 7 38.0 220. 3000. 7 42.0 220. 3000. 38.25 104.65 1095 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 38.26 104.61 1095 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 17 0 . 1 . 4000. 17 0 . 1 . 4000. 17 0 . 1 . 4000. 17 0 . 1 . 4000. 17 0 . 1 . 4000. 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 17 0 . 1 . 5000. 0.0 .15 0. -248.2 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 .20 -1. -38.4 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.32 -.30 0. -38.4 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 1065F0UNT PB 0 . .15 0 . -508.8 Attachment F --Basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85--Continued 1090ST CHARL 38.20 104.51 1095 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 18 0 . 1 . 5000. 1095ARK AVON 38.23 104.40 1170 3 -2. 0 . 4700. 3 0 . 15. 4700. 3 0 . 25. 4700. 3 -5.0 25. 4700. 3 -80.0 20. 4700. 3 -200. 50. 4700. 3 100. 20. 4700. 3 70.0 13.2 4700. 3 -14.2 45. 4700. 3 -1.7 40. 4700. 3 0 . 30. 4700. 3 0 . 7. 4700. 1160HUERF R 37.97 104.48 1170 19 0 . 1 . 3900. 19 0 . 1 . 3900. 19 0 . 1 . 3900. 19 0 . 1 . 3900. 19 0 . 1 . 3900. 19 0 . 1 . 3900. 19 0 . 1 . 3900. 19 0 . 1 . 3900. 19 0 . 1 . 3900. 19 0 . 1 . 3900. 19 0 . 1 . 3900. 19 0 . 1 . 3900. 1170ARK NPST 38.19 104.20 1197 3 23. 0 . 2500. 3 15. 60. 2500. 3 -31. 100. 2500. 3 -94.0 75. 2500. 3 -32.0 40. 2500. 3 -30.0 140. 2500. 3 -150. 50. 2500. 3 -80. 13.8 2500. 3 -60.0 120. 2500. 3 -55.0 150. 2500. 3 -47. 110. 2500. 3 0 . 30. 2500. .20 -.25 0. -248.2 .97 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 .10 .15 -1. -18.7 .69 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.31 -.31 -.31 -.31 -.31 -.27 -.27 -.27 .10 -.15 0. -458.8 1.16 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 .15 .10 -1. -71.0 .80 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.17 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.22 -.17 -.17 -.17 102 Attachment Y--Basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85--Continued 1195APISH R 38.07 103.99 1197 20 0 . 1 . 3200. 20 0 . 1 . 3200. 20 0 . 1 . 3200. 20 0 . 1 . 3200. 20 0 . 1 . 3200. 20 0 . 1 . 3200. 20 0 . 1 . 3200. 20 0 . 1 . 3200. 20 0 . 1 . 3200. 20 0 . 1 . 3200. 20 0 . 1 . 3200. 20 0 . 1 . 3200. 1197ARK CAT 38.12 103.91 1230 3 -30. 0 . 1200. 3 -16. 0 . 1200. 3 31. 0 . 1200. 3 25.0 4.8 1200. 103 2.0 1 . 6 2800. 3 -100. 16.2 2800. 3 120. 14.2 2800. 3 200. 13.8 2800. 3 30.0 18.6 2800. 3 50.0 3.3 1200. 3 65. 0 . 1200. 3 -30.0 0 . 1200. 1230ARK LAJTJ 37.98 103.53 1240 8 0 . 0 . 8300. 8 0 . 0 . 8300. 8 0 . 0 . 8300. 8 -7.3 6 . 1 8300. 108 18. 3.2 8300. 108 250. 1.3 8300. 8 -34.6 18.1 8300. 8 31.6 20.0 8300. 8 -20.6 22.4 8300. 8 -2.4 3.8 8300. 8 0 . 0 . 8300. 8 0 . 0 . 8300. 1240ARK ANMS 38.08 103.23 1289 6 0 . 0 . 7100. 6 0 . 0 . 7100. 6 0 . 0 . 7100. 6 -7.3 6.4 7100. 6 -150. 11.9 7100. 6 -350. 20.3 7100. 6 -80.0 16.2 7100. 6 -31.6 20.3 7100. 6 -20.6 22.6 7100. 6 -2.4 3.4 7100. 6 0 . 0 . 7100. 6 0 . 0 . 7100. -.50 -.25 0. -438.2 1.14 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 -.27 .10 .10 0. -35.9 .74 -.02 -.02 -.02 -.02 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.23 -.02 -.02 -.02 -.25 .20 -1. -189.3 .94 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.31 -.31 -.31 -.31 -.31 -.29 -.29 -.29 -.40 .15 -1. -231.8 .94 -.24 -.24 -.24 -.24 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.30 -.24 -.24 -.24 103 Attachment Y--Basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85-- Continued 1285PURG ANS 1289ARK A JM 1305ARK JM R 38.03 103.21 1289 -.10 21 0. 1. 6000. -.12 21 0. 1. 6000. -.12 21 0. 1. 6000. -.12 21 0. 1. 6000. -.12 21 0. 1. 6000. -.21 21 0. 1. 6000. -.21 21 0. 1. 6000. -.21 21 0. 1. 6000. -.21 21 0. 1. 6000. -.21 21 0. 1. 6000. -.12 21 0. 1. 6000. -.12 21 0. 1. 6000. -.12 38.07 103.15 1305 -.05 5 0. 0. 4100. -.09 5 0. 0. 4100. -.09 5 0. 0. 4100. -.09 5 -2.8 2.2 4100. -.09 5 -9.3 3.8 5900. -.21 5 -12.1 5.4 5900. -.21 5 -13.3 5.9 5900. -.21 5 -12.1 6.1 5900. -.21 5 -7.9 7.1 5900. -.21 5 -0.9 1.0 4100. -.09 5 0. 0. 4100. -.09 5 0. 0. 4100. -.09 38.07 102.92 1330 .00 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -.25 .15 -.20 1330ARK LAMR 38.12 102.63 1355 -.35 5 0. 0. 8800. -. 16 5 0. 0. 8800. -. 16 5 0. 0. 8800. -. 16 5 -50. 6.6 8800. -. 16 5 -200. 11.3 6300. -.24 104 1.00 2.5 6300. -.24 5 -130. 17.7 6300. -.24 5 -25.0 18.5 6300. -.24 5 -23.9 21.3 6300. -.24 5 -2.8 3.2 8800. -.16 5 0. 0. 8800. -.16 5 0. 0. 8800. -.16 .15 0. -385.0 1.06 0. -243.8 .97 0. -243.8 .97 0. -222.3 .98 104 Attachment F--Basin- description file for model calibration, 1975-85- -Continued 1341BIG SAND 38.13 102.49 1355 OO o .08 0. -6.8 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 22 0. 1. 5100. -.15 22 0. 1. 5100. -.15 22 0. 1. 5100. -.15 22 0. 1. 5100. -.15 22 0. 1. 5100. -.15 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 22 0. 1. 5100. -.05 1355ARK HOLY 38.0436 102.1192 1375 -.30 -.25 0. 0. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1375ARK COOL 38.05 102.02 -999 -.05 .15 0. -6.5 4 0. 0. 13000. -.27 4 0. 0. 13000. -.27 4 0. 0. 13000. -.27 4 70.0 7.0 13000. -.27 104 23.0 2.10 10000. -.29 104 30.0 1.85 10000. -.29 4 30.0 20.0 10000. -.29 4 80.0 18.5 10000. -.29 4 35.0 19.4 10000. -.29 4 -2.9 2.7 13000. -.27 4 0. 0. 13000. -.27 4 0. 0. 13000. -.27 1.16 00.0 .92 105 Attachment G --Additional basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85 MAIN STEM RESERVOIRS PLUS OTHER INITIAL DATA PET 0 . 0 . 0 . 0.12 0.40 0.52 0.57 0.52 0.34 0.04 0 . 0 . EVAP 0 . 0 . 0 . 0.75 0.95 1.00 1.10 0.85 0.60 0.50 0.10 0 . AGDMND 0.09 0.11 0.18 0.27 0.40 0.52 0.57 0.52 0.34 0.27 0.22 0.14 SESNAL 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AQUIFER .2 10000. DRINK .13 CONV FAC69.04853.310 i 1 . 38 1.55 1.25 104. 0 104. 7 .80 60.3 1 . 12 824TURQUOIS 120490. 40000. 1665. 106.3739 39.2528 45000. 100. . 10 .05 854TWIN LKS 67833. 5000. 1370. 106.3125 39.0807 15000. 75. -.05 .05 869CLR CK R 11440. 1500. 382. 106.2444 38.99 2000. 100. -.05 0.0 1106LK HENRY 10300. 1120. 103.684 38.224 .20 .05 1107MEREDITH 28000. 3220. 103.658 38.172 -.05 .03 1202DYE RES 4000. 800. 103.661 38.045 .26 -.07 1203HLBROK R 7000. 673. 103.580 38.029 -.02 .02 1221GR PLAIN 130000. 12653. 102.707 38.308 .10 .05 1236HRS CK R 28000. 2603. 103.372 38.144 -.05 -.03 1238ADB CK R 65000. 5147. 103.231 38.236 -.05 .05 1300JM RES 400000. 17500. 102.92 38.07 10000. 1000. -.08 -.05 993PUEBLO R 264000. 30000. 5350. 104.65 38.25 10000. 125. .25 -.10 106 Attachment G--Additional basin-description file for model calibration, 1975-85--Continued GW01 GW02 GW03 GW04 GW05 GW06 GW06a GW07 5000. 200. GW08 GW08a GW09 GW10 GW11 GW12 10000. 100. 25000. 100. GW13 GW14 GW15 GW16 20000. 100. 25000. 100. GW17 GW18 20000. 125. 10000. 125. GW19 GW20 GW21 60000. 200. GW22 GW23 10000. 300. 10000. 400. GW23a GW24 GW25 GW26 40000. 350. 15000. 500. GW27 GW28 30000. 700. 80000. 700. GW29 GW30 40000. 800. 7000001500. GW31 100000 900. GW32 50000.1000. 3000001500. GW33 GW34 30000.1500. 1000001500. GW35 GW36 60000.2000. 2000001500. GW37 GW38 2000003000. 3000004000. GW39 4000003500. 3000004000. 107 Attachment H --Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1975-85 BASIN USERS IN 1980 83 1101MARTIN 1 240. 1 1 0.20 1 3.43 106.338 39.2563 1104BERRY 1 200. 1 1 0.20 1 4.00 106.335 39.2539 1108WELL-STR 1 99. 1 1 0.20 1 8.00 106.332 39.252 1110BEAVER D 1 320. 2 1 0.20 1 5.71 106.329 39.2505 1 1.43 106.329 39.2505 1116YOUNGR 2 1 340. 1 1 0.20 1 6.29 106.326 39.2384 1122DERRY 1 1 400. 1 1 0.20 1 4.00 106.3258 39.1841 1125UPPR RIV 1 600. 1 1 0.20 1 14.00 106.3404 39.2008 1128PIONEER 1 320. 1 1 0.20 1 7.00 106.3156 39.1439 1130WHEEL 1 200. 1 1 0.20 1 16.00 106.3124 39.1379 1131CHAMP 1 320. 1 1 0.20 1 5.00 106.3157 39.1500 1137LANGHOFF 1 80. 1 1 0.20 1 4.80 106.2130 38.9869 1140DRYFIELD 1 40. 1 1 0.20 1 6.20 106.2049 38.9678 1143RVRSD-AL 1 300. 3 1 0.20 1 1.00 106.1896 38.9463 1 9.00 106.1896 38.9463 1 16.00 106.1896 38.9463 1146HELENA 1 320. 3 1 0.20 1 1.00 106.1142 38.8331 1 19.00 106.1142 38.8331 1 16.00 106.1142 38.8331 1147BV SMELT 4 0 . 1 2 1.00 1 115.00 106.1216 38.8474 2. 106.3474 39.2422 0.16 0.08 10 106.3474 39.2422 800. 2. 106.3604 39.2407 0.35-0.01 10 106.345 39.2407 800. 2. 106.3566 39.2571-0.05-0.03 10 106.343 39.240 800. 2. 106.3497 39.2420 0.30-0.07 10 106.341 39.239 800. 2. 106.3601 39.2261-0.05 0.06 10 106.340 39.2261 800. 2. 106.3285 39.1446 0.30-0.04 10 106.3285 39.1446 800. 2. 106.3289 39.1822-0.05-0.02 10 106.3289 39.1822 800. 2. 106.3202 39.1365-0.15-0.10 10 106.3202 39.1365 800. 2. 106.3152 39.1338 0.25-0.14 10 106.3152 39.1338 800. 2. 106.3208 39.1429-0.08-0.05 10 106.3208 39.1429 800. 2. 106.2051 38.9731-0.05 0.0 10 106.2051 38.9731 800. 2. 106.2036 38.9614 0.25-0.05 10 106.2036 38.9614 800. 5.0 106.1804 38.9098-0.05-0.05 10 106.1804 38.9098 800. 6.0 106.1228 38.8094 0.28 0.03 1 106.1228 38.8094 800. 2. 106.4435 38.6588-0.05 0.05 0 106.4435 38.6588 108 Attachment H--Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1975-85--Continued 1149BRY-ALEN 1 100. 2 1 0.20 1 5.00 106.1033 38.8131 1 6.00 106.1033 38.8131 1155SALIDA 1 900. 1 1 0.20 1 20.00 106.0569 38.6153 1158KRAFT 1 240. 1 1 0.20 1 5.00 106.0558 38.6197 1161SUNNY PK 1 700. 2 1 ,0.20 1 14.17 106.0670 38.6043 1 25.00 106.0670 38.6043 1164BILL-HAM 1 534. 2 1 0.20 1 16.00 106.0787 38.5794 1 1.00 106.0787 38.5794 1201PICKETT 1 90. 1 1 0.20 1 3.80 105.9150 38.4968 1204PLEASANT 1 250. 2 1 0.20 1 2.00 105.8413 38.4592 1 8.00 105.8413 38.4592 1210S CANON 1 1280. 8 1 0.20 1 2.00 105.2689 38.4319 1 2.00 105.2689 38.4319 1 3.00 105.2689 38.4319 1 7.91 105.2689 38.4319 1 1.00 105.2689 38.4319 1 3.40 105.2689 38.4319 1 3.00 105.2689 38.4319 1 23.20 105.2689 38.4319 1213CAN0N WW 2 500. 3 2 0.50 1 19.00 105.2408 38.4376 1 3.50 105.2408 38.4376 1 4.68 105.2408 38.4376 1215S C POWR 4 3300. 3 2 1.00 1 37.00 105.2287 38.4403 1 15.00 105.2287 38.4403 1 9.00 105.2287 38.4403 1216HYD-FRUT 1 4180. 1 1 0.20 1 77.00 105.2521 38.4348 12190IL CK 1 1250. 2 1 0.20 1 10.46 105.2327 38.4403 1 14.27 105.2327 38.4403 2. 106.0750 38.7681-0.02 0.02 1 106.0750 38.7681 800. 2. 106.0000 38.5597 0.23-0.09 9 106.0000 38.5597 800. 2. 106.0794 38.6000-0.03 0.04 9 106.0794 38.6000 800. 2.5 106.0393 38.5761 0.30 0.04 9 106.0393 38.5761 800. 3.6 106.0038 38.5524-0.05 0.03 9 106.0038 38.5524 800. 2. 105.8934 38.4826-0.03 0.02 2 105.8934 38.4826 800. 3.9 105.8132 38.4381-0.05-0.01 2 105.8132 38.4381 800. 4.8 105.2009 38.4306-0.05 0.12 2 105.2009 38.4306 800. 2. 105.2253 38.4439-0.06 0.05 2 105.2253 38.4439 1.0 105.2230 38.4345 .30 0.07 0 105.2230 38.4345 -1.8 105.1968 38.4592 0.10 0.15 2 105.1968 38.4592 800. -2.9 105.1885 38.4461 0.32 0.00 2 105.1885 38.4461 800. 109 Attachment H --Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1975-85--C ontinued 1220FREMONT 1 425. 4 1 0.20 1 17.00 105.1867 38.4272 1 0.24 105.1867 38.4272 1 0.28 105.1867 38.4272 1 0.41 105.1867 38.4272 1222CF&I 3 41000. 9 2 0.83 1 2.00 105.1581 38.4145 1 48.00 105.1581 38.4145 1 20.00 105.1581 38.4145 1 5.70 105.1581 38.4145 1 1.64 105.1581 38.4145 1 150.00 105.1581 38.4145 1 0 . 104.678 38.241 3 150. 104.678 38.241 3 -.01 105.1581 38.4145 1225UNI0N 1 1250. 1 1 0.50 1 48.00 105.1583 38.4144 1228HNNKRATT 1 125. 5 1 0.50 1 1.60 105.1480 38.4140 1 1.00 105.1480 38.4140 1 0.56 105.1480 38.4140 1 1.00 105.1480 38.4140 1 1.00 105.1480 38.4140 1231L ATTRBY 1 180. 3 1 0.50 1 3.50 105.0719 38.3921 1 2.00 105.0719 38.3921 1 3.60 105.0719 38.3921 1234IDEAL CM 3 1600. 7 2 1.00 1 1.05 105.0147 38.3877 1 0.50 105.0147 38.3877 1 1.50 105.0147 38.3877 1 1.00 105.0147 38.3877 1 2.00 105.0147 38.3877 1 11.50 105.0147 38.3877 1 3.50 105.0147 38.3877 105.1341 38.3967 0.25-0.07 2 .1341 38.3967 800. 104.6250 38.2333 0.40-0.12 0 .6250 38.2333 824 993 105.1092 38.3934 0.15-0.13 2 .1092 38.3934 800. 105.1238 38.4111 0.0 0.02 2 .1238 38.4111 800. 105.0580 38.4029-0.05-0.03 2 .0580 38.4029 800. 105.0078 38.3778-0.10 0.07 0 .0078 38.3778 16. 105 1 . 104 2 . 105 2.0 105 2.2 105 1 . 105 110 Attachment H --Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1975-85--Continued 1401BESSEMER 1 20000. 1.1 104.5985 38.2296 .05 -0.16 15 1 0.20 104.5985 38.2296 1900. 1 2.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 20.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 3.74 104.7263 38.2606 1 3.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 2.50 104.7263 38.2606 1 5.13 104.7263 38.2606 1 4.87 104.7263 38.2606 1 2.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 3.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 14.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 2.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 8.00 104.7263 38.2606 1 322.00 104.7263 38.2606 3 -.210 104.7263 38.2606 993 2 3 -.07 104.7263 38.2606 993 1402ST CHRLS 2 50. 2. 104.5250 38.2118 0.21-0.12 3 2 0.50 104.5250 38.2118 1 1.01 104.6025 38.2534 1. 1. 1. 1. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1. 1. 1 0. 104.6025 38.2534 3 -.01 104.6025 38.2534 993 1404HAMP-BEL 1 40. 2. 104.6954 38.2548 0.05 0.13 3 1 0.50 104.6954 38.2548 1 1.03 104.7184 38.2705 1 0.29 104.7184 38.2705 1 1.60 104.7184 38.2705 1407W PUEBLO 1 500. 1.7 104.6519 38.2759 .05 0.04 5 1 0.50 104.6519 38.2759 1002. 1 1.20 104.7116 38.2716 1 1.00 104.7116 38.2716 1 0.60 104.7116 38.2716 1 15.00 104.7116 38.2716 3 -.014 104.7116 38.2716 993 2 1410PUEBL WW 2 4700. 1. 104.6544 38.2740 0.27 0.03 11 2 0.50 104.6544 38.2740 1 7.00 104.6701 38.2706 1 8.00 104.6701 38.2706 1 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1. 1. 1. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1 2.50 104.6701 38.2706 1 2.20 104.6701 38.2706 1 1.60 104.6701 38.2706 1 0. 0. 0. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 0. 0. 1 4.60 104.6701 38.2706 1 45.00 104.6701 38.2706 1 2.00 104.6701 38.2706 1 2.46 104.6701 38.2706 1 0. 0. 0. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 0. 0. 1 7.00 104.6701 38.2706 3 850. 104.6701 38.2706 869 111 Attachment H--Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1975-85--Continued 1416RVRSD DY 1 55. 2. 104.6407 38.2660-0.10-0.09 1 1 0.50 104.6407 38. 2660 1 1.00 104.6552 38.2686 1419BTH-0RCH 1 1451. 3.4 104.5000 38.2691 -.05 .05 1 1 0.50 104.5000 38. 2691 1260. 2 5. 104.5 38.2691 1548. 1422EXCLSI0R 1 1583. 3.3 104.3916 38.2683-0.02 0.11 3 1 0.80 104.3916 38. 2683 2726. 1 20.00 104.4988 38.2601 1 40.00 104.4988 38.2601 2 52. 104.3916 38.2683 3173. 1425C0LLIER 1 1000. 0.8 104.2895 38.2338 .20 -.12 3 1 0.80 104.2895 38. 2338 1086. 1 4.00 104.3458 38.2426 1 22.00 104.3458 38.2426 2 3. 104.2895 38.2338 1253. 1428C0L0RAD0 1 50800. -1.1 104.1283 38.2128 .05 .07 6 1 0.70 104.1283 38. 2128 4800. 6 756.28 104.3106 38.2453 1107 1 1 0 . 0 . 0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 0 . 2 40. 104.1283 38.2128 1800. 3 15000. 104.3106 38.2453 854 -3 600. 103.658 38.172 1107 -3 2000. 103.684 38.224 1106 2 45 104.1283 38.2128 1800 3 -.15 104.3106 38.2453 993 1431HIGHLINE 1 24100. 1.3 104.05 37.9855 0.27-0.05 10 4 0.25 103.99 38. 08 4500. 1 40.00 104.2392 38.2269 1 0.60 104.2392 38.2269 1 16.00 104.2392 38.2269 1 32.50 104.2392 38.2269 1 32.00 104.2392 38.2269 1 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 0 . 0 . 1 380.50 104.2392 38.2269 3 -.282 104.2392 38.2269 993 2 3 3200. 104.2392 38.2269 824 2 100. 103.7651 37.9855 5644. 3 -.07 104.2392 38.2269 993 14340XFD-FRM 1 i 5000. 1.4 103.9857 38.1127 0.27-0.06 5 1 0.60 103.9857 38. 1127 1800. 1 13.40 104.1573 38.1819 1 116.00 104.1573 38.1819 2 50. 103.9857 38.1127 3179. 3 -.068 104.1573 38.1819 993 2 3 -.02 104.1573 38.1819 993 17010TERO 1 10000. 0.7 103.5119 37.9684 0.01-0.08 5 1 0.80 103.5119 37. 9684 1608. 1 123.00 104.00 38.1416 1 334.92 104.00 38.1416 2 34. 103.5119 37.9684 1234. 3 -.023 104.00 38.1416 993 2 3 -.01 104.00 38.1416 993 112 Attachment H --Basin water-user file for model calibration, I975-85--Continued 1703BLDWN-ST 1 650. 2. 103.9140 38.1575-0.03 -.05 8 1 1 0.80 103.9140 38.1575 1 22.00 103.9738 38.1387 1704CATLIN 1 18800. 1.5 103.6294 37.9623 0.16-0.14 8 6 1 0.30 103.6294 37.9623 4800. 1 22.00 103.9460 38.1273 1 226.00 103.9460 38.1273 1 97.00 103.9460 38.1273 3 -.310 103.9460 38.1273 993 2 2 63. 103.6294 37.9623 5300. 3 -.08 103.9460 38.1273 993 1707HOLBROOK 1 19550. -1.5 103.3980 38.0939-0.05 -.02 8 6 1 0.50 103.3980 38.0939 1122. 6 155.00 103.8444 38.1212 1202 1 1 0 . 0 . 0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 0 . 6 445.00 103.8444 38.1212 1202 1 1 0 . 0 . 0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 0 . -3 20000. 103.661 38.045 1202 -3 20000. 103.580 38.029 1203 2 50. 103.3980 38.0939 1032. 3 -.13 103.8444 38.1212 993 1710RCKY FRD 1 8200. -1.5 103.6746 38.0033 0.21-0.13 8 3 1 0.30 103.6746 38.0033 1900. 1 111.76 103.8264 38.1124 1 96.54 103.8264 38.1124 2 60. 103.6746 38.0033 2200. 1716F1 ’ LYON 1 91300. -1.3 102.6500 38.2450-0.06 0.06 6 7 5 0.30 102.6500 38.2450 4500. 6 164.64 103.5878 38.0110 1238 1 1 0 . 0 . 0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 0 . 6 597.16 103.5878 38.0110 1238 1 1 0 . 0 . 0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 0 . 6 171.20 103.5878 38.0110 1238 1 1 0 . 0 . 0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 0 . -3 20000. 103.372 38.144 1236 -3 20000. 103.231 38.236 1238 2 350. 102.6500 38.2450 4500. 3 -.22 103.5878 38.0110 993 1719LAS ANMS 1 4650. 1.8 103.2336 38.0288 0.01-0.10 6 7 1 0.40 103.20 38.04 4800. 1 22.00 103.3546 38.0566 1 5.50 103.3546 38.0566 1 22.00 103.3546 38.0566 1 80.00 103.3546 38.0566 1 44.80 103.3546 38.0566 2 60. 103.20 38.04 5200. 3 -.093 103.3546 38.0566 993 2 113 Attachment H--Basin water-user file for model calibration, 2975-85--Continued 6701KEESEE 1 1900. 5 1 0.50 3 -.01 102.8396 38.0761 1 9.00 102.8396 38.0761 1 4.50 102.8396 38.0761 1 15.00 102.8396 38.0761 2 15. 102.7470 38.0864 6704FT BENT 1 6840. 7 1 0.50 3 -.08 102.8394 38.0761 1 27.77 102.8394 38.0761 1 32.77 102.8394 38.0761 1 26.77 102.8394 38.0761 1 50.00 102.8394 38.0761 1 80.00 102.8394 38.0761 2 41. 102.5591 38.0550 6707AMITY 1 37800. 5 1 0.35 3 -.35 102.7588 38.0908 1 283.50 102.7588 38.0908 1 500.00 102.7588 38.0908 -3 20000. 102.707 38.308 2 200. 102.0445 38.1303 6710LAMAR 1 8700. 8 1 0.50 3 -.11 102.6430 38.1049 1 15.75 102.6430 38.1049 1 72.09 102.6430 38.1049 1 13.64 102.6430 38.1049 1 11.70 102.6430 38.1049 1 184.27 102.6430 38.1049 2 27. 102.3545 38.0427 3 -.02 102.6430 38.1049 6713HYDE 1 970. 3 1 0.50 3 -.01 102.6115 38.1055 1 23.44 102.6115 38.1055 2 50. 102.5600 38.1138 6716MANVEL 1 750. 3 1 0.50 3 -.02 102.4942 38.0948 1 54.00 102.4942 38.0948 2 145. 102.3431 38.0573 6719X-Y GRHM 1 6000. 3 1 0.50 1 0 . 102.4252 38.1005 1 0 . 102.4252 38.1005 2 80. 102.2436 38.0397 0.9 102.7470 38.0864 0.22-0.09 102.6 38.0864 840. 1300 1342. 1.1 102.71 38.0550 0.15-0.12 102.6 38.0550 2776. 1300 2250. 1.2 102.0445 38.1303 .15 0.08 102.0445 38.1303 5500. 1300 1221 7498. -1.5 102.3545 38.0427 0.15-0.18 102.3545 38.0427 1937. 1300 1728. 993 1.0 102.5600 38.1138 0.07 0.04 102.5600 38.1138 1620. 1300 1039. 2.1 102.3431 38.0573 0.15-0.12 102.3431 38.0573 3125. 1300 2412. 0.5 102.2436 38.0397 0.0 -0.15 102.2436 38.0397 2782. 3054. 6 6 5 5 5 4 4 114 Attachment H --Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1975-85--C ontinued 6722BUFFALO 1 5000. 1.1 102 3 1 0.50 102.1372 3 -.02 102.3284 38.1005 1 67.50 102.3284 38.1005 2 25. 102.1372 38.0646 864. 6725SSN- STUB 1 300. 2. 102 4 1 0.80 102.1670 1 0 . 102.2181 38.0468 1 0 . 102.2181 38.0468 1 0 . 102.2181 38.0468 2 57. 102.1670 38.0302 860. 1759. 1300 442 99KANSAS -.50 1 30000. 1 3 0.00 102.01 38.05 102.01 1300 38.05-0.10 0.05 824TURQU0IS 5 27400. 2 3 5 5000. 106.3739 39.2528 4 17500. 106.80 39.20 825FRY-ARK1 5 129000. 1 3 4 57000. 106.8000 39.1000 854TWIN LKS 5 55000. 3 3 5 1000. 106.3125 39.0807 5 1000. 106.3125 39.0807 4 55000. 106.90 39.15 855FRY-ARK2 5 12833. 1 3 3 12833. 106.3739 39.2528 .05 .05 869CLR CK R .05 5 5 05 .05 11440. 3 .05 1 . 106.3739 39.2528 .30 .05 2 1 . 106.3739 39.2528 .30 .11 1 . 106.3125 39.0807 .45 -.10 1 . 106.3125 39.0807 .45 -.04 2 .05 1 . 824 .05 .05 106.2444 1 1 .05 .05 38.99 .05 .45 -.10 5 45. 106.27 38.99 5 25. 106.27 38.99 4 9402. 106.6 39.25 4 9402. 106.61 39.26 4 9402. 106.59 39.24 1106LK HENRY 5 10300. 1 . 103.684 38.224 .20 .06 2 3 5 20. 104.3106 38.2453 5 10. 104.3106 38.2453 1107MEREDITH 5 26028. 1 . 103.658 38.172 -. 06 .04 1 3 5 250. 104.3106 38.2453 1202DYE : RES 5 2 3 7986. 1 . 103.661 38.045 .26 -.30 5 100. 103.8444 38.1212 5 100. 103.8444 38.1212 1203HLBROK R 5 7472. 1 . 103.580 38.029 -.02 -.25 2 3 5 100. 103.8444 38.1212 5 100. 103.8444 38.1212 0 0 115 Attachment H--Basin water-user file for model calibration, 1975-85--Continued 1221GR PLAIN 5 125000. 1 3 1. 102.707 38.308 .20 .04 5 400. 103.5878 38.0110 1236HRS CK R 5 28000. 2 3 1. 103.372 38.144 0.0 .20 5 250. 103.8444 38.1212 5 125. 103.8444 38.1212 1238ADB CK R 5 85000. 2 3 1. 103.231 38.236 -. 06 .07 5 500. 103.8444 38.1212 5 250. 103.8444 38.1212 1300JM RES 5 600000. 1 3 1 . 102.92 38.07 .17 .05 5 20000. 102.9369 38.0681 993FRY-ARK3 5 264000. 3 3 1 . 104.65 38.25 .30 -.20 5 20000. 104.725 38.2708 3 264000. 104.725 38.2708 854 2 1 .03 .04 .06 .08 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .02 .02 .03 3 264000. 104.725 38.2708 824 1 1 .03 .04 .06 .08 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .02 .02 .03 9993WINTER W 5 85000. 1 3 1. 104.65 38.25 .30 -.30 5 250. 104.65 38.25 1 1. 1. 1. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1. 9994DUMP WW 2 85000. 1. 104.65 38.25 .30 -.40 1 2 1.00 104. 725 38.27 -3 85000. 104.7263 38.2606 993 2 1 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0. .3 .5 1. 0 . 9107WINTER M 5 5400. 0 3 1. 103.658 38.172 -.06 . 10 9202WINTER D 5 13000. 0 3 1. 103.661 38.045 . 26 -.36 9238WINTER A 5 10000. 0 3 1 . 103.231 38.236 -.06 .13 999FONT VLY 2 3000. 1 3 0.00 2. 104.65 38.25- •0.10 0.0 3 -.22 104.725 38.2708 993 998ARK VALY 2 3000. 2. 102.35 38.01- •0.10 0.0 1 3 0.00 3 -.02 102.643 38.1049 993 116 »U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1 9 8 9-0- 67 3- 1 9 6/0 0 0 1 4 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA 551 49UN3426W C001 WATER-RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS MENLO PAR 88-4214 1989