OCR Text |
Show Table C- 19 Stream Fish Habitat Affected by the Bonneville Unit Approximate Type of effect and miles 1/ affected by Project Miles inundated and hav ing reduced flows Total Length ( Miles) ( with fishery classifications in jarenthesis) 2/ ( by fishery classification) 2/ Basin and Stream Inundated Reduced Flows Excessive Improved Total for ... Total for Flows 3/ Flovs 4/ I- VI I II Ill I- III Uinta Basin: Rock Creek 37 1.5 ( II); 2.0 ( III) 6.5 ( II); 16.5 ( III) 0 0 26.5 0 8.0 18.5 26.5 South Fork of Rock CreeV 6 0 1.3 ( III) 0 0 1.3 0 0 1.3 1.3 Hades Creek 5 0 0.6 ( III) 0 0 0.6 0 0 0.6 0.6 North Fork of Duchesne R 15 0 5.0 ( III) 0 0 5.0 0 0 5.0 5.0 Wolf Creek 7 0 3.0 ( III) 0 0 3.0 0 0 3.0 3.0 Twin Creek 2 0 0.2 5/ 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 0 West Fork of Duchesne R. 18 0 10.0 ( III) 0 0 10.0 0 0 10.0 10.0 Currant Creek 28 1.5 ( II) 8.0 ( II); 14.0 ( IV) 0 5.0 23.5 0 9.5 0 9.5 Layout Creek 5 0 2.0 5/ 0 0 2.0 0 0 0 0 Water Hollow Creek 11 0 4.5 TlV) 0 0 4.5 0 0 0 0 Strawberry River 56 1.5 ( III); 2.9 ( V); 10.6 ( IV) 20.0 ( II); 14.0 ( IV) 0 0 49.0 0 20.0 1.5 21.5 Duchesne River 100 0 10.4 ( II); 1.1 ( IV); 0 0 37.0 0 10.4 25.5 35.9 300 20.0 25.5 ( III) 8/ 142.6 ~ 0~ 53 0 47.9 65.4 Uinta Basin Totals 162.6 113.3 Bonneville Basin: Sixth Water Creek 9 0.7 ( III) 0 0 8.0 0.7 0 0 0.7 0.7 Diamond Fork Creek 21 4.0 ( III) 0 5.0 ( III) 0 4.0 0 0 4.0 4.0 Spanish Fork River 44 0 0 0 3.0 0 0 0 0 0 Currant Creek 10 2.0 5/ 0 0 0 2.0 0 0 0 0 Hobble Creek 22 0 2.5 ( III); 2.5 ( VI) 0 0 5.0 0 0 2.5 2.5 Beer Creek 20 0 7.0 5/ 0 0 7.0 0 0 0 0 Provo River 69 4.0 ( II); 0.8 ( III) 5.0 Tl); 2.7 ( II); 4.0 ( III); 1.0 ( IV); 2.1 ( VI) 0 14.0 5/ 19.6 5.0 6.7 4.8 16.5 Jordan River 7/ Bonneville Basin Totals 54 249 7.7 ( III) 19.2 6.6 ( III); 29.0 ( V) 62.4 0 5.0 ib 43.3 81.6 0 5.0 0 6.7 14.3 26.3 14.3 38.0 TOTAL FOR BOTH BASINS 549 39.2 205.0 5.0 30.0 244.2 5.0 54.6 91.7 151.3 1/ Mileages were obtained from Bureau of Reclamation calculations, the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, and the Utah State Division of Wildlife Resources . There were some differences in length of stream mileage detercinations. 2/ Fishery classifications were determined by the Utah State Division of Wildlife Resources , Class I waters are the best fisheries in the State, Classes II and III are of significant importance, and Classes IV through VI are of minor or negligible fishery importance. 3/ Peak discharges are too great for the natural capacity of the stream channel resulting in scouring and erosion damage to the fishery. 4/ Present flows are altered ( increased or decreased) in such a manner that the fishery capability of the stream is improved. 5/ These streams were not classified and are considered to have insignificant value as sport fisheries. 6/ Of this 14 miles, 10 miles would be above Deer Creek Reservoir and 4 miles would be below. 7/ The effects of the proposed Lampton Reservoir have not yet been evaluated by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife and the Utah State Division of Wildlife Resources. 8/ This table does not include the Duchesne River below the town of Duchesne. All of this portion of stream is classified as Class IV. Its existing condition would not be significantly altered by the Unit. About 8 miles of stream ( Class III and IV) are affected by Knight Diversion Dam. 9/ Inundation calculated on basis of a capacity of 320,000 acre- feet and an area of 3,068 acres for Jordanelle Reservoir. |