Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />., <br />f <br />'. <br /> <br />NAU Sand Bar Studies <br /> <br />Final Report <br /> <br />., <br />~ <br />" <br /> <br />1997 ranked among the top 20% during the 75 years of gage record on the Paria River (Topping et ai" <br />2000b), This new sediment was the first significant input from the Paria River since the winter of <br />1995, and the largest since 1980, It is important to note that Paria River floods generally do not have a <br />significant effect on mainstem river stage because the water volumes are small relative to those in the <br />main stem and the duration of peak discharge is short, on the order of hours, <br /> <br />THE 1997 TEST FLOW <br /> <br />The 1997 Test Flow was the first attempt by the adaptive management program to implement a <br />flow release strategy for sediment redistribution following a tributary flood, The hydrograph of the test <br />flow, beginning on November 3, consisted of a rapid increase in discharge from 479 m3/s (16,909 fe/s) <br />to a steady flow of 878 m3/s (31,000 fels) for 48 hours, followed by a slow decrease to 480 m3/s on <br />November 6 (Fig, 2b), The maximum rate of up ramp was 68 m3/s (2,400 fe/s) per hour and the <br />maximum downramp rate was 39 m3/s (1,377 fe/s) per hour. Similar to the hydrograph for the 1996 <br />Controlled Flood, the slower rate of downramp was designed to reduce erosion caused by dewatering <br />- <br />of bank stored water in sand bars and to avoid stranding of trout in the tailwaters fishery upstream <br />from Lees Ferry, The release was approximately 93% of maximum power plant capacity, <br /> <br />e. <br />.,: <br /> <br />!~ <br />, <br />:;. <br /> <br />'" <br />, <br />~ <br />< <br />~ <br />. <br />~ <br />.~ <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />1"- <br />r-' <br /> <br />,. <br /> <br />STUDY AREAS AND METHODS <br /> <br />Modeling Tributary Sand Inputs <br /> <br />A flow and sediment transport model for the Paria River was previously developed by Topping <br /> <br /> <br />(1997), The outputs from this model are the wetted reach-averaged cross-section geometry, the <br /> <br /> <br />discharge of water, the sand transport rate (in 10 size classes), and the silt and clay transport rate, The <br /> <br /> <br />model provides excellent agreement with the historical record for discharges, suspended-sediment <br /> <br /> <br />concentrations and hydraulic geometries for previous floods, In the future. model estimates may <br /> <br /> <br />provide cost-effective, real-time predictive capabilities for suspended-sediment yields to the Colorado <br /> <br /> <br />River, <br /> <br />To examine the rate at which sand inputs from the Paria River were transported downstream, we <br /> <br /> <br />compared model predicted sand loads (0,0625-2,0 mm) to measured bed changes below the mouth of <br /> <br /> <br />the Paria River (described below), Model loads were compared to deposit volume changes by <br /> <br /> <br />assuming a porosity of 35% for sand-sized sediment on the bed and 20% uncertainties associated with <br /> <br /> <br />the suspended-sand measurements [see Appendix B in Topping et ai, (2000a)], <br /> <br />., <br />...~ <br /> <br />;.l <br />:~ <br />~ <br />'. <br />.~ <br />',: <br />~ <br />~ <br />r:; <br />~ <br />:..1' <br />t <br /> <br />~.., <br />:\. <br /> <br />II <br />