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 />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 />SECTION VIII: CONCLOSIONS AND MANAGEMENT OPTIONS <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Conclusions <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />(1) Flood releases and fluctuating releases from Glen <br />Canyon Dam have a significant effect on many of the <br />downstream environmental and recreational resources. <br /> <br />Adverse downstream consequences are caused primarily by <br />sustained flood releases significantly greater than <br />powerplant capacity and by fluctuating releases. The <br />most critical impacts are the erosive effect of floods <br />on sand deposits and vegetation and the impact of fluc- <br />tuations on white-water recreation. <br /> <br />Continued flood releases will substantially reduce sand <br />deposits in Grand Canyon, which are essential to <br />vegetation and wildlife and are highly valued by <br />white-water boaters. Replenishment of sand in beaches <br />is now dependent on sand delivered by tributaries <br />within Grand Canyon. Because the amount of sand for <br />resupply is much less than before dam construction and <br />is highly variable from year to year, these erosive <br />effects are probably permanent. For white-water recre- <br />ation alone, loss of a substantial number of beaches <br />could reduce recreation benefits by $5.2 million per <br />year. Flood releases also double the risk of <br />white-water boating accidents at major rapids, compared <br />to flows below powerplant capacity. Even infrequent <br />floods cause loss of camping beaches and vegetation <br />substrate, and it appears that this loss is <br />irreversible. Even though infrequent flooding may <br />benefit some resources, the magnitude, duration, and <br />frequency needed to provide those benefits are unknown. <br />Loss of resources could be prevented by avoiding floods <br />until the response of resources to floods is better <br />understood. <br /> <br />spring flood releases have no <br />negative impact on humpback chub, <br />or trout. In fact, these high <br />benefit chub. <br /> <br />apparent long-term <br />common native fish, <br />flows may actually <br /> <br />Daily fluctuations substantially reduce the value of <br />white-water recreation and trout fishing by degrading <br />the natural character of the environment and making the <br />management of white-water and fishing trips more <br /> <br />81 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.