|
<br />~
<br />....) ..
<br />
<br />Of.l2523
<br />
<br />Draft: Test Flood Effects on Lake Powell
<br />
<br />7
<br />
<br />Powerplant, Technical Record of Design and
<br />Construction. A Water Resources Technical
<br />Publication. United States Bureau of Reclamation.
<br />Washington, D.C.
<br />1995. Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Final
<br />Environmental Impact Statement. Department of
<br />Interior. Department ofInterior. Salt Lake City.
<br />--. 1996. Record of Decision for Operation of Glen Canyon
<br />Dam Final Environmental Impact Statement.
<br />Department of Interior. Department of Interior.
<br />Washington, D,C.
<br />U.S. Geological Survey, 1996. Water Resource Data for
<br />Arizona. Water Year 1996. Water Data Report.
<br />AZ-96-1. U.S. Geological Survey, Department of
<br />Interior. Washington, D.C.
<br />Ward, J. V. and J. A. Stanford. 1983. The intermediate
<br />disturbance hypothesis: an explanation for biotic
<br />diversity patterns in lotic ecosystems. Pages 347-
<br />356, in T. D. Fontaine & S. M. Bartell (eds),
<br />Dynamics of Lotie Ecosystems. Ann Arbor
<br />Science, Ann Arbor.
<br />Valdez, R. A., T. L. Hoffnagle, W. C. Leibfried, C. C.
<br />McIvor, T. McKinney, R. S. Rogers. 1998. Effects
<br />of an Experimental Flood on Fishes of the
<br />Colorado River in Grand Canyon. Ecological
<br />Applications. (In press).
<br />Wetzel, R.G. 1975. Limnology. W.B. Saunders Co.,
<br />Philadelphia, P A.
<br />
<br />FIGURE CAPTIONS
<br />Fig. 1: Structure of Glen Canyon Dam with
<br />location and discharge capacity of outlet
<br />structures. Fig. 2: Map of Lake
<br />Powell with sampling station locations.
<br />Utah and Arizona, USA.
<br />Fig. 3: Discharge (m'/s), temperature (oC),
<br />conductivity (flS/cm), dissolved oxygen
<br />(mgIL), and wind speed (krn/hr) for 22
<br />
<br />March to 23 April 1996 at the penstock
<br />draft tubes in Glen Canyon Dam, AZ.
<br />Fig. 4: Synoptic channel profiles of Lake Powell,
<br />AZ and UT, for conductivity (flS/cm, plots
<br />A-F) and dissolved oxygen (mgIL, plots G-
<br />L) in winter and spring of 1994 to 1996,
<br />comparing seasonal shifts in chemoclines
<br />for the test flood and 2 previous years.
<br />Contour interval ~ 25 flS/cm for SC,
<br />0.5 mgIL for DO. Penstock, ROWand
<br />sampling stations elevations indicated on
<br />plotA.
<br />Fig. 5: Temporal isopleths of conductivity
<br />(flS/cm), dissolved oxygen (mgIL) at the
<br />Wahweap fore bay station demonstrating
<br />upwelling and chemocline migration, 1994
<br />to 1997.
<br />Fig. 6; Detailed synoptic channel profiles to river
<br />Ian 90 of Lake Powell, AZ and UT,
<br />showing shifts in conductivity (flS/cm,
<br />plots A to D), dissolved oxygen (mgIL,
<br />plots E to H), gradients from 28 February
<br />to 21 April 1996. Penstock and ROW
<br />elevations indicated on plot A. Sampling
<br />stations indicated on plot B.
<br />Fig. 7; Discharge (m'/s), temperature ("C),
<br />conductivity (flS/cm), dissolved oxygen
<br />(mgIL), and pH for 24 March to 5 April
<br />1996 at Lees Ferry, AZ.
<br />Fig. 8: Rate of change (unit/day) for temperature
<br />(oC), dissolved oxygen (mgIL), and
<br />conductivity (flS/cm), before, during, and
<br />after the test flow from Wahweap to Oak
<br />Canyon, Lake Powell, AZ and UT.
<br />
<br />"
<br />
|