My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06927
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06927
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:24:57 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:59:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.101.09B
Description
Glen Canyon Dam/Lake Powell
State
AZ
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
7/1/1990
Author
BOR
Title
GCD EIS Summary of "Long List" of Alternatives
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.
/
56
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 />- - -~"..., ',- <br /> <br />- "--;.-.~"", --.", ..:-'~tP1="1 <br /> <br />16. The maximum allowable flows of water from the Glen Canyon <br />Dam should be reduced to 18,000 cfs, or 25,000 cfs. <br /> <br />17. Minimum flows for spawning and to eliminate stranding would <br />be required from November through February. These flows <br />would be around 8,000 cfs and would involve minimal <br />fluctuations. There would have to be higher minimum flows <br />in May and June. These flows could be developed by looking <br />at the pre-dam hydrograph. There was some worry about the <br />Little Colorado flows and there may be periods of allowable <br />fluctuations or possible high fluctuations. During the <br />higher minimum flow periods constraints on the allowable <br />fluctuations would have to be developed. <br /> <br />18. The group attempted to scope out flow paramenters by <br />resource to add more insight into this proposal. CUltural <br />resources; it appears likely that fluctuations at the high <br />end are undesirable. Vegetation; timing and duration of <br />floods are important and higher flows are desirable for oar <br />powered craft. Beaches; no conclusions but there are <br />possibly several flow scenarios that will be necessary. <br /> <br />19. Reduced ramping rates on an hour-by-hour basis to prevent <br />stranding of fish and recreationists. <br /> <br />SEDIMENTATION <br /> <br />Sediment Protection <br /> <br />1. Protection of sediment and nutrients within the system. <br />There would be no construction (augmentation through <br />structural means) involved. <br /> <br />Sediment Import <br /> <br />2. Construction of some type of a structural solution to <br />sediment problems in the Grand Canyon. Sediment would be <br />obtained above Glen canyon Dam and delivered to the river <br />at some downstream location slurry pipeline from Lake <br />Powell to the Paria River, trucks, or helicopters. <br /> <br />3. Artificial input of sediment to the system by dredging Lake <br />Powell and supplying sediment to area below trout fishery in <br />Lee's Ferry. <br /> <br />Sediment/Beach <br /> <br />4. Augmentation and maintenance of existing sediment loads and <br />beaches. <br /> <br />5. The sediment resting in the bottom of the Colorado River <br />down stream from the Glen canyon Dam should be placed on <br /> <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.