Klamath Watershed in Perspective A Review of Historical Hydrology of Major Features of the Klamath...
-
Upload
lee-patterson -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
3
Transcript of Klamath Watershed in Perspective A Review of Historical Hydrology of Major Features of the Klamath...
Klamath Watershed in PerspectiveKlamath Watershed in Perspective
A Review of Historical Hydrology of Major Features of the Klamath River Watershed and
Evaluation of Hardy Iron Gate Flow Requirements
A Review of Historical Hydrology of Major Features of the Klamath River Watershed and
Evaluation of Hardy Iron Gate Flow Requirements
K.A. Rykbost R. Todd
Superintendent Klamath County Extension Service
Klamath Experiment Station Oregon State University Oregon State University
K.A. Rykbost R. Todd
Superintendent Klamath County Extension Service
Klamath Experiment Station Oregon State University Oregon State University
Objectives of the Study
• Gain a better understanding of the total Klamath watershed and its hydrologic history
• Develop multi-year hydrographs at key locations in the watershed to look for long-term trends in flows of major tributaries and the Upper Basin
• Examine Klamath Project long-term operations to determine the probability of achieving flow requirements recommended in Hardy Reports
Data Sources and Limitations
• Streamflow data are from Bureau of Reclamation and U.S. Geological Survey records available on the Internet
• Years of record vary for various subbasins in the watershed
• Minimum Instream Flows from Hardy studies are taken directly from Hardy Phase I Final Report and Hardy Phase II Draft Report
Data Sources and Limitations
• Klamath Project water diversions reported include agricultural and refuge use as calculated by Jim Bryant at the Bureau of Reclamation
• Data are summarized over years to mask the inherent and large variability between water year types due to precipitation fluctuations
Major studies and reports shaping public policy have used a non-typical hydrologic period as the basis for historical flows
Reports by Balance Hydrologics, Inc. and Hardy Phase I use flows at Keno, OR from 1905-1912 as a partial basis for estimating pre-Klamath Project Upper Basin flows
Selective Use of Data
Balance Hydrologics, Inc. used a 4% correction to account for 1905-1912 being an above average precipitation period
Compared with long term records, 1905-1912 experienced 21% above normal precipitation in Yreka, CA and 4% above normal in Klamath Falls
The Bureau of Reclamation estimated inflow to UKL at 34% above normal in 1905-1912
Selective Use of Data
• The Lost River Slough was dammed in 1890 to stop drainage of excess flows from Klamath River to Tulelake
• Construction of a railroad through Lower Klamath Lake between 1907-1911 reduced overflows from Klamath River to Lower Klamath Lake, reducing large evaporation losses
• Both changes resulted in increased flows at Keno compared with pre-settlement hydrology
Changes in Upper Basin Hydrology
Pre-development, the Lost River system was a closed basin with no access to Klamath River
Project features now allow diversion from the Gerber, Clear Lake, Lost River system to Klamath River through the Diversion Channel
Direct access to Klamath River is available from Tulelake through Lower Klamath Refuge and the Straits Drain
Changes in Upper Basin Hydrology
Annual Precipitation in the Klamath Basin
• Long-term NOAA precipitation records are available for Klamath Falls, Crater Lake, and Keno, OR, and Yreka and Klamath, CA
• Total Annual precipitation is charted for each location for 1951-2000
• Average precipitation for multi-year periods that will be used for streamflow data presentation are quite similar at each location
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Mean Annual Precipitation in the Klamath Watershed
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Klamath Falls Crater Lake Keno Yreka Klamath CA
Location
Me
an
An
nu
al P
rec
ipit
ati
on
(in
ch
es
)
1951-1963
1963-1976
1977-1989
1990-2000
Streamflows for Klamath River Tributaries
Iron Gate Dam records begin in 1960 Data for the Klamath Mouth is not available for
1994-1997 The major tributaries contribute about 54% of flow
at the mouth for the period of record Remaining flows are from smaller tributaries and
include 360 TAF (thousand acre-feet) of accretions from Keno to Iron Gate Dam
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Mea
n A
nnua
l Str
eam
flow
(1,0
00 c
fs)
1961-1970 1971-1980 1981-1990 1991-1993 and 1998-2000
Period
Klamath River and Tributaries Streamflow
Iron GateDam
ShastaRiver
Scott River
SalmonRiver
TrinityRiver
KlamathMouth
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Annual Klamath Water Volumes
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
1961-1970 1971-1980 1981-1990 1991-1993 and 1998-2000
Period
Th
ou
san
d A
cre-
Fee
t (T
AF
)
Klamath Project
Iron Gate
4 Tribs
Sub Total
Klamath Mouth
Klamath Mouth Annual Hydrograph
• Limited Klamath Project diversions in 1911-1925
• Klamath Project fully developed by 1960
• Trinity River Diversion started about 1964
• Consistent low flows in August and September
• Wide range of flows in December through March
K. Rykbost and R. Todd OSU 2003
Mean Monthly Outflow at Klamath River Mouth
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Out
flow
in 1
,000
cfs
1911-1921
1922-1925
1951-1963
1964-1976
1977-1989
1990-1993
1998-2000
Trinity River Annual Hydrograph
• Shape of hydrograph is very similar to Klamath mouth hydrograph
• Significant change in April through June for periods before and after Trinity Diversion
• Diversion was about 1.1 MAF (million acre-feet) in 1964-1986 and 0.73 MAF from 1987-2000 (CDWR)
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Trinity River Flows at Hoopa, CA
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Mea
n M
onth
ly F
low
s (1
,000
cfs
)
1932-1937
1938-1950
1951-1963
1964-1976
1977-1989
1990-2000
Trinity Hydrograph Pre- and Post- Diversion
• Important to note that diversion only diverts flows from the upper 20% of the total Trinity system measured at Hoopa, CA
• Hydrograph suggests diversion occurs between March and July
• February dip in post-diversion hydrograph is related to filling of Trinity reservoirs
• August through December graphs are identical
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Trinity River Outflow at Hoopa, CA
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Mea
n M
onth
ly F
low
s (1
,000
cfs
)
1932-1963Pre-Dam
1964-2000Post-Dam
Klamath Mouth Hydrograph pre- and post-Trinity River Dams
• Main difference coincides with reduced post-dam spring Trinity River hydrograph
• August and September flows nearly identical pre- and post-Trinity dam
• Period of apparent shortage coincides with request for increased flows for smolt out-migration
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Outflow at Mouth of Klamath RiverPre- and Post- Trinity Dam Periods
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Mea
n M
onth
ly F
low
(1,0
00 c
fs)
Pre 1964 (28 YearsEnding in 1963)
Post 1964 (33 YearsFrom 1964 to 2000)
Salmon River Hydrographs
• No out of stream diversions from Salmon River, but seasonal hydrograph coincides with Trinity’s
• Hydrographs show similar trends for varied flows from December through April, but consistent low flows in August and September
• Pre- and post- Trinity Diversion periods have nearly identical hydrographs from June through October
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Salmon River Flows at Somes Bar
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Mea
n M
onth
ly F
low
s (1
,000
cfs
)
1928-1937
1938-1950
1951-1963
1964-1976
1977-1989
1990-2000
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Mean Monthly Outflow at Salmon RiverPre- and Post-Trinity Dam Periods
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Mea
n M
onth
ly F
low
s (1
,000
cfs
)
1928-1963
1964-2000
Scott River Hydrographs
• Same seasonal hydrograph trends as observed for Trinity and Salmon Rivers
• Diversions for agriculture are estimated at 70 TAF or about 15 % of Scott River watershed yield (CDWR)
• Study by Drake, Tate, and Carlson reported precipitation accounted for 75-80 % of fall flow variability
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Streamflows in Scott River at Fort Jones
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Mea
n M
on
thly
Flo
w (
cfs)
1942-1950
1951-1963
1964-1976
1977-1989
1990-2000
Shasta River Hydrographs
• More uniform hydrographs across years than other tributaries
• CDWR estimates agricultural diversion is about 100 TAF annually
• Diversion represents about 40 % of Shasta yield and 25 % of Klamath Project diversion from UKL and Klamath River
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Shasta River Flows near Yreka, CA
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Mea
n M
on
thly
Flo
w (c
fs)
1934-1941
1945-1950
1951-1963
1964-1976
1977-1989
1990-2000
Iron Gate Dam Hydrographs
• Annual discharge declined from 1.75 MAF in 1964-76 to 1.38 MAF in 1990-2000
• No significant increase in Klamath Project agriculture diversions from 1960s to present
• Mean flows from May through August were similar in all periods
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Iron Gate Flows 1961-2000
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Mo
nth
ly F
low
(cf
s)
1961-1996Average
1964-1976
1977-1989
1990-2000
Meeting Hardy Minimum Instream Flows at Iron Gate Dam
• Hardy Phase I recommended an “average” year flow regime requiring annual discharge at Iron Gate Dam of 1.62 MAF
• Average 1961-1997 Iron Gate flow is 1.53 MAF
• Total annual flows at Iron Gate were less than Hardy Phase I “average year” flows in 25 of the 42 years from 1961-2002
Meeting Hardy Minimum Instream Flows at Iron Gate Dam
Revised Hardy Phase II flow regimes set 5 hydrologic year-types based on projected April-September inflow to UKL:
• Critical: Inflow < 286.8 TAF
• Dry: Inflow 286.8 – 458.3 TAF
• Average: Inflow 458.4 – 568.5 TAF
• Above Avg: Inflow 568.6 – 785.2 TAF
• Wet: Inflow >785.2 TAF
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Monthly Hardy Stream Flows at Iron Gate Dam
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Mea
n M
onth
ly F
low
s (1
,000
cfs
)
Actual Mean1961-1996
Hardy Phase I
Hardy Phase II(Average Year)
Hardy Phase II(Dry Year)
Hardy Phase II(Critical Year)
Can Hardy Phase II Targets for Iron Gate Dam be Met?
• No consideration for minimum lake elevations, overflows in spill mode, or timing of flows to meet summer targets in the analysis
• Evaluation only considers total annual Iron Gate flows and whether individual years achieved those flows based on year type targets
• Results are charted by year type for 1961-2002
• Charts show surplus or deficit (-) by year type
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Mo
nth
ly F
low
TA
F
1961-1997 Hardy Dry Hardy Below Hardy Avg Hardy Above Hardy Wet
Year Type
Hardy Summer Flow Targets
June
July
Aug
Sept
Total
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Hardy Compliance "Wet Years"
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
1971 1983 1984
Year
Acre
Fee
t Sur
plus
or
Def
icit
(-)
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Hardy Compliance "Above Average Years"
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
63 67 69 72 74 75 82 89 93 96 98 99
Year
Acre
-Fee
t Sur
plus
or
Defic
it (-)
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Hardy Flow Compliance "Average Years"
-500
0
500
1000
1500
64 65 76 78 85 86 95 97 2000
Year
Acre
-Fee
t Sur
plus
or
Defic
it (-)
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Hardy Compliance "Below Average" Years
-400
-200
0
200
400
60061 62 66 68 70 73 77 79 80 87 88 90
2002
Year
Acr
e-Fe
et S
urpl
us o
r De
ficit
(-)
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Hardy Compliance "Dry" Years
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
81 91 92 94 2001
Year
Acre
-Fee
t Sur
plus
or
Defic
it (-)
Hydrographs for Klamath River below
Keno• No data are available for 1913-1930
• Historical flow models in Balance Hydrologic Inc., Trihey, and Hardy Phase I Reports are partially based on 1905-1912 Keno flows
• Trends are same as Iron Gate for 1964-2000
• Annual accretions between Keno and Iron Gate Dam are about 360 TAF or about 500 cfs
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Klamath River Flows at Keno, OR
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Month
Mean
Mo
nth
ly F
low
s (
cfs
)
1905-1912
1938-1950
1951-1963
1964-1976
1977-1989
1990-2000
Williamson River Flows at Modoc Point Road
• Williamson River accounts for about 46 % of inflow to UKL according to several studies
• Williamson River watershed yield per inch of precipitation at Klamath Falls or Crater Lake has declined significantly over the past 50 years
• Changes in the upper Williamson, Sycan, and Sprague Rivers seem apparent
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
Williamson River Flows at Modoc Point Road
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Month
Mean
Mo
nth
ly F
low
s (
cfs
)
1938-1950
1951-1963
1964-1976
1977-1989
1990-2000
OSU 2003K. Rykbost and R. Todd
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
TA
F/I
nch
of
An
nu
al P
reci
pit
atio
n
1951-1963 1964-1976 1977-1989 1990-2000
Period
Williamson River Yield Per Inch of Precipitation
KlamathFalls
CraterLake
Klamath Watershed in Perspective Summary
• The Upper Basin above Iron Gate Dam, including Klamath Project diversions, accounts for about 15 % of annual flow at the mouth of Klamath River over past 40 years
• Klamath Project agricultural water use has not changed significantly in the past half century
• High summer flows requested for environmental use are only potentially available because of storage designated for agricultural irrigation
Klamath Watershed in Perspective Summary
• All tributaries in the Klamath system produce hydrographs with widely varying winter and spring flows but consistently low summer flows
• Trinity diversions represent about 20 % of river yield and appear to mainly affect the spring hydrograph for Trinity and mouth of Klamath
• Watershed yield above UKL appears to have declined in recent decades
Klamath Watershed in Perspective Summary
• Hardy flow regimes requested for summer months could not be met in a significant number of years even if the Klamath Project received no diversions from UKL or Klamath River
• Basing historical flows on 1905-1912 Keno flows results in unachievable expectations
Klamath Watershed in Perspective Summary
• The 1905-1912 period used to model flows is the only period since 1905 when streamflow records are unavailable in all other reaches of the watershed
• This fact precludes the ability to compare the yield at Keno, OR with flows in the Lower Klamath River Basin or other tributaries