<br />TOPPING ET AL: COLORADO RIVER SEDIMENT TRANSPORT, I
<br />
<br />527
<br />
<br />10
<br />9 FlOOD ",0", WATER-SURFACE STAGE
<br />PEAK ___ MEAN BED STAGE
<br />· I .--...--- MINIMUM BED STAGE
<br />~ ....0-.- 1948-1a58 MEAN BED STAGE
<br />~ ~ . A x... n CN.S.& MEAN BED STAGE)
<br />: . .~.~(:{ ,.X"~. :"+,,nIMINIMUMBEDSTAGE)
<br />
<br />
<br />5 O-O-{}..Q.-Q..o- q MIN. BED ~ 2.2'); .^-.Q'Q-2'i2-{}.-o--o
<br />" ELEVATION Y ~
<br />
<br />3 t
<br />
<br />2 i. -l '.I..I..I..
<br />1 !.! '.
<br />
<br />o
<br />.,
<br />-2 .,x",x",x"X")("M...X" . oX
<br />x..~___~..X-'M.-M"K ~ Xi ." Ii()( ~ ~ .)Ii
<br />-3 -+- -+- +..+ . .-....:.+.:...:..".0.......+...+.000.+..0..+
<br />+-. ...+-........+._+.. .+' "+-.+--.......,+.
<br />..
<br />
<br />I
<br />w
<br />'"
<br />-=
<br />'"
<br />~
<br />-'
<br />lC
<br />-=
<br />o
<br />....
<br />-=
<br />w
<br />'"
<br />~
<br />'"
<br />
<br />..
<br />
<br />..
<br />
<br />
<br />..
<br />
<br />75
<br />50
<br />,
<br />25
<br />o
<br />
<br />~ ~ ~ ~ _ Jun ~ ~g Ssp ~ b ~
<br />
<br /> 200
<br />w
<br />" 180
<br />z
<br />w
<br />a: 160
<br />a:
<br />::>
<br />8 140
<br />c 120
<br />~
<br />" 100
<br />! 80
<br />-=
<br />9 60
<br />c
<br />i!l 40
<br />~ 20
<br />a:
<br />0
<br />z 0
<br />
<br />~ SAND-OEPLET1QN EVENTS
<br />---0... DECAEASING-CQNCENTRATION INCONCLUSIVE EVENTS
<br />----.- SAND-ENHANCEMENT EVENTS
<br />_.. -.6,... INCAEASING-CONCENTRATlON INCONCLUSIVE EVENTS
<br />... -x-.. - n (total number 01 the 4 rypes of sand-8l4lPIY events)
<br />
<br />
<br />X-"X-
<br />._~...x..-x"-
<br />
<br />J8I1
<br />
<br />Fob
<br />
<br />... Ap' May
<br />
<br />b)
<br />
<br />;,..
<br />.Jo4=..M..M...X'"..x...~..X:..)(..)(_.~ '->;:'''X''':lo'.. .
<br />Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Noy D8C
<br />
<br />50
<br />
<br />,
<br />
<br />o
<br />
<br />Figure 6, (oontinued)
<br />
<br />Lees Ferry gage annual technical file, 1945) and caused ap-
<br />proximately 10 m of channel narrowing (Figure 7c). Because of
<br />these externally foreed changes in geometry, the bed-stage
<br />data from the upper cableway were analyred in four segments:
<br />(1) from August 3,1921, through April 8, 1923, (2) from April
<br />10, 1923, through July 31, 1929, (3) from August 2, 1929,
<br />through December 7, 1944, and (4) from January 10, 1945,
<br />through February 7, 1959. To ensure that only natural long-
<br />term trends were detected in this analysis, the period after
<br />completion of the cofferdam at the Glen Canyon Dam site on
<br />February 11, 1959 [Maron, 1989], was not included. Though
<br />the effect of the oofferdam was probably smaU at the upper
<br />cableway during 1959-1962, by trapping some of the upstream
<br />supply of sediment, the oofferdam may have slightly enhanced
<br />the soour at the upper cableway (Figure 6b) [see Pembenon,
<br />1976].
<br />From August 2, 1929, through February 7, 1959, and as
<br />observed at the Orand Canyon cableway, the trend in bed stage
<br />at the upper Lees Ferry cableway was slightly, but significantly,
<br />negative (Figure 7b). Trends in mean bed stage from August 3,
<br />1921, through April 8, 1923, and from April 10, 1923, through
<br />July 31, 1929, are not significant at either the 5% or 10% level,
<br />however. From August 2. 1929. through December 7, 19.\.\. the
<br />
<br />bed at the upper cableway sooured at a rate of 2.5 cm/yr; this
<br />trend is significant at the 1.6 X 10-' level. From January 10,
<br />1945, through February 7,1959, the bed sooured at a rate of3.0
<br />cm/yr; this trend is significant at the 3.9 X 10-4 level. Thus,
<br />given the approximate 120-m width of the channel at the upper
<br />cableway, about 3.0 m' more sediment was eroded from this
<br />cross section than was supplied to it each year during 1929-
<br />1944, and about 3.6 m2 more sediment was eroded from this
<br />cross section than was supplied to it each year during 1945-
<br />1958. From August 2, 1929, through February 7, 1959, the
<br />I5-min discharge of water at tbe Lees Ferry gage increased by
<br />only 10%, and the 15-min water-surface stage increased by
<br />only 3% (L. E. Vierra and D. J. Topping, unpublished data,
<br />1999). Thus long.term changes in either discharge or stage can
<br />be ruled out as the cause of the 1929-1958 erosion. Further-
<br />more. because the August 2, 1929, to February 7, 1959, stage.
<br />discharge relationship was effectively oonstant (Figure 7d), the
<br />1929-1958 decrease in the amount of sediment at the upper
<br />cableway suggests that Glen Canyon, like Grand Canyon, was
<br />supply-limited with respect to fine sediment. However, the
<br />previous analyses (shown in Figures 4, 5, and 6) suggest that
<br />the degree of sediment supply limitation in Glen Canyon was
<br />much less than in Grand Canyon.
<br />
|