My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP00547
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
WSP00547
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:26:30 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 9:49:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.760
Description
Yampa River General
State
CO
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Date
12/1/1992
Author
Resource Consultants
Title
Mineral Bottom Geomorphic Investigation Trip Report - December 1992
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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 />001032 <br /> <br />", <br /> <br />Grat's Intffil retation of the effects of tamarisk colonization on the frequency of overbank flooding <br />does not take into account the substantial modification of cross section geometry that occurs in sand <br />bed streams und r high flow conditions. When the channel banks are relatively erosion resistant <br />(Anthony and Ha ey, 1991). Evidence of cross section adjustments occurring on the Green River with <br />changes in discha~e is provided by the repeat cross section surveys at the Cottonwood Bottom IFIM <br />site. I' <br /> <br />If Grafs d978) interpretation of the effects of tamarisk colonization are correct then it appears <br />that under natUral~re-dam and pre-tamarisk conditions there was very little overbank larval stage <br />habitat along the I er Green River. This suggests that Razorback sucker laMle that were hatched just <br />before or near the peak of the annual hydrograph (Tyus and Karp, 1989) and drifted downstream to this <br />reach of the river ould have been flushed on downstream. It should be recllgnized that this reach of <br />the Green River is bedrock-constrained reach and that there was never a wide alluvial floodplain &Ven <br />prior to the I uction of tamarisk. From the point of view of the Colorado Squawflsh larvae the <br />frequency of ave nk .floodlng Is moot beeause the squawfish spawn on the recessional limb of the <br />hydrllgraph (Tyus and Karp, 1989), and therefore, under natural conditions they could not have utilized <br />out-of-bank hab' . The reduced channel Width may have an effect on the squawflsh larvae if thli low <br />flow habitat has b en significantly affected. ' <br /> <br />Our obse ions of the distribution of riparian vegetation along the Green River from RM 120 <br />to RM 28 (conflu nce with the Colorado River Is RM 0) are somewhat at variance with those of Graf <br />(1978). There ap rs to be a-range of conditions along the reach. In some,locatlons dense stands <br />of willows of su ntlal age and size comprise the riparian vegetation. At other locations the riparian <br />vegetation Is co prlsed of both tamarisk and willows, and at yet other locations the vegetation Is <br />comprised exclus e1y of tamarisk. Given the amount of time available to observe these variations In <br />species comrosit on, we were unable to determine any associations between specific geomorphic <br />factors al'ld speci s distribution. <br /> <br />Given the~extensive presence of willows and to a lesser extent cottonwoods, in a wide range <br />of geomorphic s ttlngs along the Green River, it Is not Immediately obvious why the common <br />explanation' for th persistence of tamarisk, over willows was generated. It has been suggested that <br />tamarisk persists ~Urlng floods because flows are Incapable of eroding the root-reinforced banks. Since <br />willows are also ri arian species whose roots reinforce banks (Gra, y and Ohashi, 1983; Smith, 197,6), and <br />willows have obvl usly reinforced banks al'ld persisted along the Green River, it is not clear why Graf <br />(1978) and others (Hadley, 1961) have suggested that before the advent of tamarisk the native riparian. <br />vegetation was removed by floods and therefore had little lasting geomorphic effect on the channels. <br />Perhaps the dept~ of rooting or root density Is greater for tamarisk than willow. <br /> <br />During th course of the field inspection of the Green River, it was observed that tamarisk was <br />being remaved b 2 different mechanisms. At Unknown Bottom a large area of tamarisk had died as <br />a result of pondln of flows In the overbank area, probably In 1986. The depression on the left averbank <br />area was the Infll ed remains of a cutoff channel segment. The cuioff at Bonita Bend (AM 31) had <br />already occurred when Powell traversed this reach of the Green River In 1869. Flows entered the <br />depression throu h a crevasse In the natural levee at about RM 30.6L and were prevented from spilling <br />back to the river by the well developed and tamarisk 'vegetated natural levee. Given the relatively <br />Infrequent occurr nce of overbank flows (see next section for a fuller discussion), it is unlikely that this <br />mechanism for removing tamarisk Is very effective. <br /> <br />~~". <br /> <br />Tamarisk was also being removed by lateral erosion of banks upon which it had become <br />established. Sta s of very large tamarisks on the outsides of bends. or where the channel was very <br />deep, were bein undercut by flows even though their roots extended to the water line. Vertical <br />accretion as a re ultof vegetation-induced overbank sedimentation leads to increased bank height. In <br />moderately cohe ive upper bank sediments, bank stability is related to both bank angle and bank height, <br />and therefore wh n bank angle Is increased by fluvial erosion of the less cohesive bank toe sediments, <br />the increased ba k height caused by the vegetation-Induced sedimentation leads to mass failure of the <br /> <br />2 Resource Consultants & Engineers, Inc. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.