Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Research about Colorado River, Grand Canyon

Source-linked reports with geographic coverage including Colorado River, Grand Canyon.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
USGS2005

Changes in the water surface profile of the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, Arizona, between 1923 and 2000

In 1923, a U.S. Geological Survey expedition surveyed the water surface profile of the Colorado River through Grand Canyon with theodolite and stadia rod. In 2000, lidar overflights collected topographic data centered on the river corridor, allowing construction of a new water surface profile and detection of change in the profile since 1923. By registering the surveys with respect to each other on the basis of 11 locations that were independently determined to have been unchanged between 1923 and 2000, 80 rapids were directly compared for change between 1923 and 2000. The average change for all measured rapids was +0.26 m, indicating net aggradation of the coarse‐grained alluvium forming the rapids throughout Grand Canyon. In addition, comparison of the two water surface profiles showed enhanced pool‐and‐rapid morphology. While 50% of the total drop of the river occurred in just 9% of the river distance in 1923, that value increased to 66% by 2000.

Arizona↗
USGS2005

The state of the Colorado River ecosystem in Grand Canyon: A report of the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center 1991-2004

This report is an important milestone in the effort by the Secretary of the Interior to implement the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992 (GCPA; title XVIII, secs. 1801-1809, of Public Law 102-575), the most recent authorizing legislation for Federal efforts to protect resources downstream from Glen Canyon Dam. The chapters that follow are intended to provide decision makers and the American public with relevant scientific information about the status and recent trends of the natural, cultural, and recreational resources of those portions of Grand Canyon National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area affected by Glen Canyon Dam operations. Glen Canyon Dam is one of the last major dams that was built on the Colorado River and is located just south of the Arizona-Utah border in the lower reaches of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, approximately 15 mi (24 km) upriver from Grand Canyon National Park (fig. 1). The information presented here is a product of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (GCDAMP), a federally authorized initiative to ensure that the primary mandate of the GCPA is met through advances in information and resource management. The U.S. Geological Survey`s (USGS) Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC) has responsibility for the scientific monitoring and research efforts for the program, including the preparation of reports such as this one.

Arizona↗
USGS2004

Frequency and initiation of debris flows in Grand Canyon, Arizona

Debris flows from 740 tributaries transport sediment into the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, Arizona, creating rapids that control its longitudinal profile. Debris flows mostly occur when runoff triggers failures in colluvium by a process termed “the fire hose effect.” Debris flows originate from a limited number of geologic strata, almost exclusively shales or other clay‐rich, fine‐grained formations. Observations from 1984 through 2003 provide a 20 year record of all debris flows that reached the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, and repeat photography provides a 100 year record of debris flows from 147 tributaries. Observed frequencies are 5.1 events/year from 1984 to 2003, and historic frequencies are 5.0 events/year from 1890 to 1983. Logistic regression is used to model historic frequencies based on drainage basin parameters observed to control debris flow initiation and transport. From 5 to 7 of the 16 parameters evaluated are statistically significant, including drainage area, basin relief, and the height of and gradient below debris flow source areas, variables which reflect transport distance and potential energy. The aspect of the river channel, which at least partially reflects storm movement within the canyon, is also significant. Model results are used to calculate the probability of debris flow occurrence at the river over a century for all 740 tributaries. Owing to the variability of underlying geomorphic controls, the distribution of this probability is not uniform among tributaries of the Colorado River in Grand Canyon.

Arizona↗
USGS2004

Diets of insectivorous birds along the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, Arizona

We examined diets of six insectivorous bird species ( n = 202 individuals) from two vegetation zones along the Colorado River in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, 1994. All bird species consumed similar quantities of caterpillars and beetles, but use of other prey taxa varied. Non-native leafhoppers ( Opsius stactagolus ) specific to non-native tamarisk ( Tamarix chinensis ) substantially augmented Lucy's Warbler ( Vermivora luciae ) diets (49%), while ants comprised 82% of Yellow-breasted Chat ( Icteria virens ) diets. Yellow Warbler ( Dendroica petechia ) diets were composed of 45% aquatic midges. All bird species consumed the non-native leafhopper specific to tamarisk. Comparison of bird diets with availability of arthropod prey from aquatic and terrestrial origins showed terrestrial insects comprised 91% of all avian diets compared to 9% of prey from aquatic origin. Seasonal shifts in arthropod prey occurred in diets of three bird species, although no seasonal shifts were detected in arthropods sampled in vegetation indicating that at least three bird species were not selecting prey in proportion to its abundance. All bird species had higher prey overlap with arthropods collected in the native, mesquite-acacia vegetation zone which contained higher arthropod diversity and better prey items (i.e., Lepidoptera). Lucy's Warbler and Yellow Warbler consumed high proportions of prey items found in greatest abundance in the tamarisk-dominated vegetation zone that has been established since the construction of Glen Canyon Dam. These species appeared to exhibit ecological plasticity in response to an anthropogenic increase in prey resources.

Arizona↗
USGS2002

Evaluation of airborne thermal-infrared image data for monitoring aquatic habitats and cultural resources within the Grand Canyon

This study examined thermal-infrared (TIR) image data acquired using the airborne Advanced Thematic Mapper (ATM) sensor in the afternoon of July 25th, 2000 over a portion of the Colorado River corridor to determine the capability of these 100-cm resolution data to address some biologic and cultural resource requirements for GCMRC. The requirements investigated included the mapping of warm backwaters that may serve as fish habitats and the detection (and monitoring) of archaeological structures and natural springs that occur on land. This report reviews the procedure for calibration of the airborne TIR data to obtain surface water temperatures and shows the results for various river reaches within the acquired river corridor. With respect to mapping warm backwater areas, our results show that TIR data need to be acquired with a gain setting that optimizes the range of temperatures found within the water to increase sensitivity of the resulting data to a level of 0.1 °C and to reduce scan-line noise. Data acquired within a two-hour window around maximum solar heating (1:30 PM) is recommended to provide maximum solar heating of the water and to minimize cooling effects of late-afternoon shadows. Ground-truth data within the temperature range of the warm backwaters are necessary for calibration of the TIR data. The ground-truth data need to be collected with good locational accuracy. The derived water-temperature data provide the capability for rapid, wide-area mapping of warm-water fish habitats using a threshold temperature for such habitats. The collected daytime TIR data were ineffective in mapping (detecting) both archaeological structures and natural springs (seeps). The inability of the daytime TIR data to detect archaeological structures is attributed to the low thermal sensitivity (0.3 °C) of the collected data. The detection of subtle thermal differences between geologic materials requires sensitivities of at least 0.1 °C, which can be obtained by most TIR sensors using an appropriate gain setting. Simultaneous data collection for both land and water purposes can be achieved using sensors that collect TIR data in two separate channels, each channel using a gain setting most appropriate for land or water. The detection of archaeological structures and natural water seeps would also be improved by collection of data after sunset, which would require a separate data acquisition from that providing surface water temperature data and therefore additional cost. At this point, the cost for acquiring TIR data is quite high ($620/river-km) compared to the potential benefits of the data, unless reflected-wavelength data are also collected that can satisfy other GCMRC protocol requirements (such as mapping riparian vegetation). This is especially true if multiple data acquisitions are required during the year for temporal analyses of backwater areas. The cost for these data cannot be totally mitigated by its ability to partly replace the need for ground surveys of backwaters because calibration of the TIR data will require some ground-truth data from warm backwater areas (in addition to low-temperature main-stem data). However, the airborne data can provide a product that cannot be approached by ground surveys, that being an instantaneous (2 hour) map of surface water temperature over a 160-km stretch of the Grand Canyon.

Arizona↗
USGS2001

Effects of a test flood on fishes of the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, Arizona

A beach/habitat-building flow (i.e., test flood) of 1274 m 3 /s, released from Glen Canyon Dam down the Colorado River through Grand Canyon, had little effect on distribution, abundance, or movement of native fishes, and only short-term effects on densities of some nonnative species. Shoreline and backwater catch rates of native fishes, including juvenile humpback chub ( Gila cypha ), flannelmouth suckers ( Catostomus latipinnis ), and bluehead suckers ( C. discobolus ), and all ages of speckled dace ( Rhinichthys osculus ), were not significantly different before and after the flood. Annual spring spawning migrations of flannelmouth suckers into the Paria River and endangered humpback chub into the Little Colorado River (LCR) took place during and after the flood, indicating no impediment to fish migrations. Pre-spawning adults staged in large slack water pools formed at the mouths of these tributaries during the flood. Net movement and habitat used by nine radio-tagged adult humpback chub during the flood were not significantly different from prior observations. Diet composition of adult humpback chub varied, but total biomass did not differ significantly before, during, and after the flood, indicating opportunistic feeding for a larger array of available food items displaced by the flood. Numbers of nonnative rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) <152 mm total length decreased by ∼8% in electrofishing samples from the dam tailwaters (0–25 km downstream of the dam) during the flood. Increased catch rates in the vicinity of the LCR (125 km downstream of the dam) and Hell's Hollow (314 km downstream of the dam) suggest that these young trout were displaced downstream by the flood, although displacement distance was unknown since some fish could have originated from local populations associated with intervening tributaries. Abundance, catch rate, body condition, and diet of adult rainbow trout in the dam tailwaters were not significantly affected by the flood, and the flood did not detrimentally affect spawning success; catch of young-of-year increased by 20% in summer following the flood. Post-flood catch rates of nonnative fathead minnows ( Pimephales promelas ) in shorelines and backwaters, and plains killifish ( Fundulus zebrinus ) in backwaters decreased in the vicinity of the LCR, and fathead minnows increased near Hell's Hollow, suggesting that the flood displaced this nonnative species. Densities of rainbow trout and fathead minnows recovered to pre-flood levels eight months after the flood by reinvasion from tributaries and reproduction in backwaters. We concluded that the flood was of insufficient magnitude to substantially reduce populations of nonnative fishes, but that similar managed floods can disadvantage alien predators and competitors and enhance survival of native fishes.

Arizona↗
USGS2001

The internal structure of sand bars on the Colorado River, Grand Canyon, as determined by ground-penetrating radar

High-resolution, subsurface imagery from ground-penetrating radar (GPR) has revealed the internal structure of sand bars at seven sites on the Colorado River, Grand Canyon. Based on reconnaissance-level surveys, we recognized three stratigraphic units and several intervening unconformities. Unit A, which exhibits hyperbolic reflections and always occurs at the base of the section, is interpreted as bedrock and/or talus. Unit B is a commonly observed sand deposit that overlies unit A and is characterized by reflections that gently dip down toward the river axis. Unit C is a sand deposit up to 2 m thick that always occurs at the top of the section and may represent a flood deposit from 1983. This study demonstrates the utility of GPR for non-destructive investigation of sand-bar thickness and the stratigraphic record of flood events in the Grand Canyon.

Arizona↗
USGS2001

Techniques for estimating sediment yield of ungaged tributaries on the southern Colorado Plateau

Numerous regional sediment transport data are used to evaluate three techniques for estimating streamflow sediment yield from ungaged tributaries of the Colorado River in Grand Canyon. These techniques include: (1) a regression equation relating drainage area to sediment yield for all relevant sediment-yield data from northern Arizona, (2) an empirical relation developed by Renard (1972) selected from 8 potentially relevant methods, and (3) a new procedure that combines regional flood-frequency analysis with sediment-rating curves. Results based on techniques (1) and (2) are not significantly different. The third technique requires numerous assumptions, most notably that sediment yield on a decadal average can be described by several floods of recurrence intervals of 2 yr, 5 yr, and 10 yr described by regional flood-frequency relations. Using data collected at gaging stations, we develop a relation between peak discharge and total-event sediment yield derived from hydrographs and sediment-rating curves. This third technique produces sediment yield estimates comparable to those of the regional data regression and Renard (1972) relations and may be a more robust technique for estimating sediment yield when streamflow data are available.

Arizona↗
USGS2000

Colorado River sediment transport: 2. Systematic bed‐elevation and grain‐size effects of sand supply limitation

The Colorado River in Marble and Grand Canyons displays evidence of annual supply limitation with respect to sand both prior to [ Topping et al , this issue] and after the closure of Glen Canyon Dam in 1963. Systematic changes in bed elevation and systematic coupled changes in suspended‐sand concentration and grain size result from this supply limitation. During floods, sand supply limitation either causes or modifies a lag between the time of maximum discharge and the time of either maximum or minimum (depending on reach geometry) bed elevation. If, at a cross section where the bed aggrades with increasing flow, the maximum bed elevation is observed to lead the peak or the receding limb of a flood, then this observed response of the bed is due to sand supply limitation. Sand supply limitation also leads to the systematic evolution of sand grain size (both on the bed and in suspension) in the Colorado River. Sand input during a tributary flood travels down the Colorado River as an elongating sediment wave, with the finest sizes (because of their lower settling velocities) traveling the fastest. As the fine front of a sediment wave arrives at a given location, the bed fines and suspended‐sand concentrations increase in response to the enhanced upstream supply of finer sand. Then, as the front of the sediment wave passes that location, the bed is winnowed and suspended‐sand concentrations decrease in response to the depletion of the upstream supply of finer sand. The grain‐size effects of depletion of the upstream sand supply are most obvious during periods of higher dam releases (e.g., the 1996 flood experiment and the 1997 test flow). Because of substantial changes in the grain‐size distribution of the bed, stable relationships between the discharge of water and sand‐transport rates (i.e., stable sand rating curves) are precluded. Sand budgets in a supply‐limited river like the Colorado River can only be constructed through inclusion of the physical processes that couple changes in bed‐sediment grain size to changes in sand‐transport rates.

Colorado River, Grand Canyon↗
USGS1997

Reworking of aggraded debris fans by the 1996 controlled flood on the Colorado River in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona

Debris flows from 600 tributaries in Grand Canyon periodically deposit poorly sorted sediment on debris fans along the Colorado River between Lakes Powell and Mead. Before regulation, stable fans and rapids along the river resulted from the interaction of tributary debris flows and large, mainstem floods. Floods in the Colorado River maintained fans and rapids as highly-reworked deposits of boulders and cobbles. After the closure of Glen Canyon Dam in 1963, decreases in stage and stream power associated with reduced annual peak flows drastically reduced the amount of debris-fan reworking. Previous research has shown that modest powerplant releases from Glen Canyon Dam, particularly in combination with tributary floods, can significantly rework aggraded debris fans. These limited flows have entrained boulders up to 1 mo in diameter, although discharges greatly exceeding the maximum powerplant release (946 m 3 /s) would be required to completely remove most aggraded fans. From 1987 through 1995, debris flows constricted the Colorado River at the mouths of at least 25 tributary canyons in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, creating 2 new rapids and narrowing at least 9 existing riffles or rapids. The highest peak discharge on the Colorado River in Grand Canyon between 1986 and 1996 was 960 m 3 /s in January 1993. In March-April 1996, we studied the effects of a 7-day flood release that peaked at 1,370 m 3 /s on 18 recently aggraded debris fans downstream from Glen Canyon Dam. The largest changes occurred at Badger and Lava Falls rapids, 38 and 312 km downstream from the dam, respectively; several other aggraded debris fans were only slightly changed. Areas of aggraded debris fans decreased by 2 to 42 percent; only the debris fan at Bedrock Rapid, which is controlled by a large bedrock outcrop, increased in area owing to deposition of reworked sediment on the downstream margin. Volumes decreased on 7 of 9 debris fans by 3 to 34 percent. The distal margins of most recently aggraded debris fans became armored with a lag of cobbles and boulders, and the width of the reworked zone on most debris fans increased by 4 to 30 m. Constriction of the river decreased at 11 of 18 debris fans, although some rapids, such as Tanner Rapid, became slightly more constricted at low discharges owing to changes in stage-discharge relations. Velocities on the left and right sides of Lava Falls Rapid decreased by about half, but velocities increased in three other rapids (e.g., Badger Creek Rapid). Stream power per unit width decreased in 9 of 10 rapids because of decreases in water-surface fall and widening of the rapids. Changes in the sizes of upper pool sand bars were inconsistent, although separation bars downstream from the reworked debris fan generally increased in size. The amount of stream power generated by the controlled flood greatly affected the variability of reworking among the 18 debris fans. For a given discharge, mainstem reworking is expected to vary with channel and debris-fan geometry, the initial particle-size distribution of the deposit, and distance from the dam. The elapsed time between debris flow and the controlled flood also was important because larger particles at older deposits became interlocked, imbricated, and (or) sutured together during smaller dam releases combined with tributary floods in January 1993 and August 1994. The effectiveness of future floods of similar magnitude in reworking debris fans will depend in part on the release history and extent of armoring in the period between the debris flow and the flood. If reworking of debris fans is a criterion for design of future controlled floods, our data support release of a higher peak discharge of shorter duration shortly after constricting debris flows occur.

Arizona↗