My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06185
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06185
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:21:38 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:29:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.101.09B
Description
Glen Canyon Dam/Lake Powell
State
AZ
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
1/1/1994
Title
Comments re: Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
EIS
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
98
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 /> <br />spike flow for one week. This estimate does not include cost for <br />proposed steady flow periods before and after the spike. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />CHAPTER III <br /> <br />1 <br />:'1 <br /> <br />Pg. 82, C. 1, P. 1. This section should state why this is important <br />to the river below the dam. Both nitrogen and phosphorus loads are <br />reduced in reservoirs from their inflow values which changes the <br />location primary (algae) production occurs and makes less nutrients <br />available below a dam. <br /> <br />Pg. 83, C. 2, P. 1. A fourth major change related to sediment <br />should be mentioned. Reduced sediment allows greater productivity <br />below dams than occurred at those locations pre-dam due to clearer <br />water and greater light penetration to the bottom. <br /> <br />Pg. 84, C. 1, P. 5. This should be related to dam operations. <br />Floods (flows significantly greater than the maximum during normal <br />operations) have a much greater effect on sand movement in the <br />system than do normal dam operations. <br /> <br />:"1 <br /> <br />~ <br />~; <br />.\ <br />, <br /> <br />Pg. 84, C. 2, P. 1- <br />construction, normal dam <br />losses down the river but <br />into the river. <br /> <br />In contrast to the effects of dam <br />operations have little effect on sand <br />may cause movement of sand from beaches <br /> <br />Pg. 93,' C. 2, P. 2. What information is available on number, <br />location, and size of backwaters at different flows? Also, what is <br />the definition of backwater used by hydrologists and biologists? <br />what are the criteria which define an ideal backwater for native <br />fish? For nonnative fish? Where are these criteria met in Grand <br />Canyon? <br /> <br />Pg. 95, C. 1, P. 1. What is the difference in erosional rates <br />between Lee's Ferry and Phantom Ranch (Grand Canyon)? <br /> <br />Pg. 95, C. 1, P. 5. What are the individual contributions of <br />erosional mechanisms to total erosion from sand deposits (e.g., <br />seepage, wind, waves, recreation, etc.)? What methods were valid <br />for quantifying all sources of erosion and how accurate were the <br />methods used? <br /> <br />:~ <br /><. <br /> <br />.. <br />. ~[ <br /> <br />~: <br />, <br />;:.. <br />" <br />l:l' <br /> <br />.~~ <br /> <br />Pg. ~5, C. 2, P. 1. What is the contribution of up- and down- <br />ramp~ng to erosion in the form of various types of erosion (e.g., <br />longer upramping time may extend exposure time to wave action, <br />etc. )7 <br /> <br />Pg. 96, C. 2, P. 3. What analysis was done of the individual <br />contributions of tractive, wind, human incursion, boat-caused wave <br />action, etc., impacts to erosion? What are the interactive <br /> <br />20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.