My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7423
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
7423
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:30 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 10:44:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
7423
Author
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
Title
Glen Canyon Environmental Studies Draft Report, September 1987.
USFW Year
1987.
USFW - Doc Type
Washington, D.C.
Copyright Material
NO
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
357
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />78 <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Possible adverse consequences of such a modification <br />would have to be evaluated prior to implementation. <br />These include the cost of dam modification, the effect <br />of temperature increase on the trout fishery, the <br />change in water quality of both Lake Powell and Lake <br />Mead, and the potential for increase in warm-water <br />exotic species that could prey on or compete with hump- <br />back chub or other native fishes. <br /> <br />Loss of marshes. The flood flows of 1983 eliminated <br />most well-established marshes in the Grand Canyon. <br />These highly productive areas provide habitat for a <br />variety of native fishes, aquatic mammals, and <br />terrestrial birds and mammals. Marshes might be <br />recreated by diverting flow into low-lying or protected <br />terrestrial habitats adjacent to the river. However, <br />objections might well be raised if such a diversion re- <br />quired the building of structures or water control <br />facilities that would detract from the naturalness of <br />the canyon. Not much is known regarding the marsh <br />ecology in Grand Canyon. Research would need to be <br />completed prior to considering any structural fea- <br />tures. <br /> <br />White-water boatina. Fluctuating releases have many <br />negative effects on white-water boating, such as the <br />need for moving boats at night, waiting for better <br />flows, the unnaturalness of fluctuations, and the <br />difficulty of selecting campsites and mooring <br />locations. Mitigating these impacts of fluctuations <br />through non-operational means would be very difficult. <br />The only non-operational method we are aware of is <br />construction of a re-regulating dam downstream of Glen <br />Canyon Dam to catch and dampen the fluctuating <br />releases. Such structures have been proposed in the <br />past and rejected because of their unacceptable impact <br />on Grand Canyon National Park. <br /> <br />The difficulty of rapids at high flows could be <br />mitigated by using larger boats, but this would <br />exacerbate problems with rapids at low flows. Also, it <br />is unlikely that river runners would willingly change <br />the type of boat they use. For example, it would be <br />difficult for private boaters to obtain and use larger <br />rigs (motor or oar-powered), and the use of motors <br />would be resisted by most private boaters. <br /> <br />The primary hazard associated with white-water boating <br />is drowning after falling into the river. The water <br />released from the dam is extremely cold, quickly ren- <br />dering persons helpless. Since 1980, five individuals <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.