Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001785 <br /> <br />42 <br /> <br />One previous study assessed recreational preferences relative to dam-controlled flows <br />and quality of camping opportunities (Stewart et aI., 20100). The study concluded that users of <br />the Colorado River were relatively unconcerned about impacts of fluctuating flows, had strong <br />concerns (generally positive) about impacts of spike flows, and strongly preferred sandy beaches <br />with shade (especially from trees) for camping. <br />Recent and Ongoing Recreation Investigations: Recent GCMRC studies have assessed <br />camping beaches, trout fishing activities, and recreational river running in terms of visitor <br />experience issues and safety concerns associated with varying flow levels. Low Steady Summer <br />Flows in summer 2000, provided data on impacts to rel:reational experiences (Jonas and Stewart, <br />2002), travel rates and safety (Jalbert, 2001) and economic impacts to concessionaires (Hjerpe <br />and Kim, 2001). Final reports have been received for all projects except the safety study. <br />Annual monitoring of 31 campsite areas is on-going as part of the FIST. Interim results <br />from this monitoring effort indicate that camping areas continue to erode steadily. However, <br />research results also suggest that erosion can be offset lby flows greater than power plant capacity <br />combined with adequate sediment supply (Hazel et aI., 2001). A more complete discussion of <br />sediment monitoring is found in the previous sediment resources section for fine-sediment <br />storage and sand bar monitoring. <br />In addition to the quantitative evaluation of beach size, camping beaches are also being <br />monitored by repeat photography carried out by volunteers working for the Grand Canyon River <br />Guides through the Adopt-A-Beach (AAB) program. Initiated in 1996, the Adopt-A-Beach <br />effort relies largely on volunteer contributions of commercial guides to provide qualitative and <br />anecdotal information on changing beach conditions. The program relies on repeat photography <br />taken from established photo points, supplemented by 1the guide's observations. The results of <br />the AAB monitoring effort supplements the quantitatively derived information derived from the <br />campsite surveys. The FY04 AAB report generally supports findings of the most recent beach <br />surveys (Kaplinski et aI., 2004) that campsite areas are generally declining due to both loss of <br />sediment from the beaches and encroachment of vegetation. <br />An analysis of past campsite assessment and monitoring protocols used to qualitatively <br />and quantitatively assess changes in beaches (sand bars) and detect area and volume changes <br />was finalized in December 2003 (Kaplinski et aI., 2003) One recommendation of this <br />assessment effort is that GCMRC should convene a palllel of recreational experts to assess the <br /> <br />GCMRC FY2006 Annual Work Plan (Draft February 15,2005) <br />