Mountain Buzz banner

1 - 20 of 46 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
Hi Ron, thanks for all of your great work on this!
I'm in the San Miguel/Dolores watershed area. In your graphs we are something like "Dolores, Placerville, Stateline". Kinda backwards. If we could get a separate San Miguel @ Placerville graph, that would be great!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,533 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thanks rtsideup,

The forecast hydrograph array is somewhat arranged geographically. Blue arrows attempt to impart flow direction. Width of the blue line implies relative volume. Black line suggest basin dividers with the spill direction of the basin indicated by arrow heads. As you can see, considering the available space(23"x33") the attempt at a geographic arrangement is vague at best. An early conception of the graph was to have an underlying shaded relief map with arrows pointing from each hydrograph to gauge location on that map. That idea crashed like a lead balloon early on.

The Dolores flows south to north and that is the arrangement of the hydrographs on the graph(bottom to top, south to north). Little blue arrows try to show that flow direction with another blue arrow indicating that . Now here I'm confused since you say "Kinda backwards." Please explain what is backwards?

Going forward I have removed "State-line and Placerville" from the description of the north-most gauge so as not to confuse. Perhaps that will clear up what you might be referring to. That gauge is at Cisco. Those references were relics of a time when one gauge was to be representative of the entire Dolores-San Miguel basin on what I call the "Down River Report" that I post at a different website.

I do have a gauge for the San Miguel at Nucla. Is the Placerville gauge preferred? Is the Uranvan gauge preferred? At this time I'm limited by space to one of the three. Please let me know
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
What I meant by backwards was that Placerville is the upper most gauge of the San Miguel watershed while Stateline is near the bottom of the Dolores (same water, yes). IMO the most pertinent gauges on the Miguel are Placerville and Uravan. The Nucla section isn't boatable do to diversion dams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,533 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I chose Nucla to split the difference, some idea of what's above and a very good idea of what is below in terms of runnability.

I will switch to Placerville since that is the most commonly run and populated/utilized section of the San Miguel.

If at some future date I split the graph into regions then more gauges might be possible in each region. For now, the single page graph is meant to be one stop shopping for understanding the status of most western rivers of interest to Rocky Mtn boaters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Does anyone have a sense of why a lot of the Utah rivers are dropping (Deso, for example)? I understand that it's cold and freezing at high elevations, but it's also been absolutely dumping rain all over these basins/drainages. Thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,533 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
My best guess is as you say, colder than average temps are causing the precip that is falling to fall as snow and the snow is not melting because it is still snowing. The White and the Yampa at Steamboat forecasts another peak coming soon when the weather warms up. That next peak is out at the right edge of some of the most upstream gauges on the 5/23/2019 Hydrograph Forecasts. Besides, most of the desert rivers haven't yet gotten to the date of their average peaks, well which is about now.
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
Top