Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Research about Grand Canyon

Source-linked reports with geographic coverage including Grand Canyon.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
USGS2016

Using large-scale flow experiments to rehabilitate Colorado River ecosystem function in Grand Canyon: Basis for an adaptive climate-resilient strategy

Adaptive management of Glen Canyon Dam is improving downstream resources of the Colorado River in Glen Canyon National Recreation Area and Grand Canyon National Park. The Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (AMP), a federal advisory committee of 25 members with diverse special interests tasked to advise the U.S. Department of the Interior), was established in 1997 in response to the 1992 Grand Canyon Protection Act. Adaptive management assumes that ecosystem responses to management policies are inherently complex and unpredictable, but that understanding and management can be improved through monitoring. Best known for its high-flow experiments intended to benefit physical and biological resources by simulating one aspect of pre-dam conditions—floods, the AMP promotes collaboration among tribal, recreation, hydropower, environmental, water and other natural resource management interests. Monitoring has shown that high flow experiments move limited new tributary sand inputs below the dam from the bottom of the Colorado River to shorelines; rebuilding eroded sandbars that support camping areas and other natural and cultural resources. Spring-timed high flows have also been shown to stimulate aquatic productivity by disturbing the river bed below the dam in Glen Canyon. Understanding about how nonnative tailwater rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ), and downstream endangered humpback chub ( Gila cypha ) respond to dam operations has also increased, but this learning has mostly posed “surprise” adaptation opportunities to managers. Since reoperation of the dam to Modified Low Fluctuating Flows in 1996, rainbow trout now benefit from more stable daily flows and high spring releases, but possibly at a risk to humpback chub and other native fishes downstream. In contrast, humpback chub have so far proven robust to all flows, and native fish have increased under the combination of warmer river temperatures associated with reduced storage in Lake Powell, and a system-wide reduction in trout from 2000-06, possibly due to several years of natural reproduction under limited food supply. Uncertainties about dam operations and ecosystem responses remain, including how native and nonnative fish will interact and respond to possible increased river temperatures under drier basin conditions. Ongoing assessment of operating policies by the AMP’s diverse stakeholders represents a major commitment to the river’s valued resources, while surprise learning opportunities can also help identify a resilient climate-change strategy for co-managing nonnative and endangered native fish, sandbar habitats and other river resources in a region with already complex and ever-increasing water demands.

Arizona↗
USGS2015

Riparian vegetation, Colorado River, and climate: five decades of spatiotemporal dynamics in the Grand Canyon with river regulation

Documentation of the interacting effects of river regulation and climate on riparian vegetation has typically been limited to small segments of rivers or focused on individual plant species. We examine spatiotemporal variability in riparian vegetation for the Colorado River in Grand Canyon relative to river regulation and climate, over the five decades since completion of the upstream Glen Canyon Dam in 1963. Long-term changes along this highly modified, large segment of the river provide insights for management of similar riparian ecosystems around the world. We analyze vegetation extent based on maps and imagery from eight dates between 1965 and 2009, coupled with the instantaneous hydrograph for the entire period. Analysis confirms a net increase in vegetated area since completion of the dam. Magnitude and timing of such vegetation changes are river stage-dependent. Vegetation expansion is coincident with inundation frequency changes and is unlikely to occur for time periods when inundation frequency exceeds approximately 5%. Vegetation expansion at lower zones of the riparian area is greater during the periods with lower peak and higher base flows, while vegetation at higher zones couples with precipitation patterns and decreases during drought. Short pulses of high flow, such as the controlled floods of the Colorado River in 1996, 2004, and 2008, do not keep vegetation from expanding onto bare sand habitat. Management intended to promote resilience of riparian vegetation must contend with communities that are sensitive to the interacting effects of altered flood regimes and water availability from river and precipitation.

Arizona↗
USGS2014

Steady incision of Grand Canyon at the million year timeframe: A case for mantle-driven differential uplift

The Grand Canyon region provides an excellent laboratory to examine the interplay between river incision, magmatism, and the geomorphic and tectonic processes that shape landscapes. Here we apply U-series, Ar–Ar, and cosmogenic burial dating of river terraces to examine spatial variations in incision rates along the 445 km length of the Colorado River through Grand Canyon. We also analyze strath terrace sequences that extend to heights of several hundred meters above the river, and integrate these with speleothem constrained maximum incision rates in several reaches to examine any temporal incision variations at the million-year time frame. This new high-resolution geochronology shows temporally steady long-term incision in any given reach of Grand Canyon but significant variations along its length from 160 m/Ma in the east to 101 m/Ma in the west. Spatial and temporal patterns of incision, and the long timescale of steady incision rule out models where geomorphic controls such as climate oscillations, bedrock strength, sediment load effects, or isostatic response to differential denudation are the first order drivers of canyon incision. The incision pattern is best explained by a model of Neogene and ongoing epeirogenic uplift due to an eastward propagating zone of increased upper mantle buoyancy that we infer from propagation of Neogene basaltic volcanism and a strong lateral gradient in modern upper mantle seismic structure.

Arizona↗
USGS2013

New thermochronometric constraints on the Tertiary landscape evolution of the central and eastern Grand Canyon, Arizona

Thermal histories are modeled from new apatite (U-Th)/He and apatite fission-track data in order to quantitatively constrain the landscape evolution of the Grand Canyon region. Fifty new samples and their associated thermochronometric ages are presented here. Samples span from Lee’s Ferry in the east to Quartermaster Canyon in the west and include four age-elevation transects into Grand Canyon and borehole samples from the Coconino Plateau. Twenty-seven samples are inversely modeled to provide continuous thermal histories. This represents the most extensive and complete dataset on patterns of long-term exhumation in the Grand Canyon region, and it enables us to constrain the timing and magnitude of erosion and also discriminate between canyon incision and broader planation. The new data suggest that the early Cenozoic landscape in eastern Grand Canyon was low in relief and does not indicate the presence of an early Cenozoic precursor to the modern Grand Canyon. However, there is evidence for the incision of a smaller-scale canyon across the Kaibab Uplift at 28–20 Ma. This middle-Cenozoic denudation event was accompanied by the removal of a majority of remaining Mesozoic strata west of the Kaibab Uplift. In contrast, just upstream in the area of Lee’s Ferry, ∼2 km of Mesozoic strata remained over the middle Cenozoic and were removed after 10 Ma.

Arizona↗
USGS2013

Water temperatures in select nearshore environments of the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, Arizona, during the Low Steady Summer Flow experiment of 2000

Water releases from Glen Canyon Dam, Arizona, are the primary determinant of streamflow, sediment transport, water quality, and aquatic and riparian habitat availability in the Colorado River downstream of the dam in Grand Canyon. The presence and operation of the dam have transformed the seasonally warm Colorado River into a consistently cold river because of hypolimnetic, or deep-water, releases from the penstock withdrawal structures on the dam. These releases have substantially altered the thermal regime of the downstream riverine environment. This, in turn, has affected the biota of the river corridor, particularly native and nonnative fish communities and the aquatic food web. In the spring and summer of 2000, a Low Steady Summer Flow experiment was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Bureau of Reclamation to evaluate the effects of the experimental flow on physical and biological resources of the Colorado River ecosystem downstream from Glen Canyon Dam to Lake Mead on the Arizona-Nevada border. This report describes the water temperatures collected during the experimental flow from 14 nearshore sites in the river corridor in Grand Canyon to assess the effects of steady releases on the thermal dynamics of nearshore environments. These nearshore areas are characterized by low-velocity flows with some degree of isolation from the higher velocity flows in the main channel and are hypothesized to be important rearing environments for young native fish. Water-temperature measurements were made at 14 sites, ranging from backwater to open-channel environments. Warming during daylight hours, relative to main-channel temperatures, was measured at all sites in relation to the amount of isolation from the main-channel current. Boat traffic, amount of direct solar radiation, and degree of isolation from the main-channel current appear to be the primary factors affecting the differential warming of the nearshore environment.

Arizona↗
USGS2013

Identification and evaluation of scientific uncertainties related to fish and aquatic resources in the Colorado River, Grand Canyon - summary and interpretation of an expert-elicitation questionnaire

Identifying areas of scientific uncertainty is a critical step in the adaptive management process (Walters, 1986; Runge, Converse, and Lyons, 2011). To identify key areas of scientific uncertainty regarding biologic resources of importance to the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program, the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC) convened Knowledge Assessment Workshops in May and July 2005. One of the products of these workshops was a set of strategic science questions that highlighted key areas of scientific uncertainty. These questions were intended to frame and guide the research and monitoring activities conducted by the GCMRC in subsequent years. Questions were developed collaboratively by scientists and managers. The questions were not all of equal importance or merit—some questions were large scale and others were small scale. Nevertheless, these questions were adopted and have guided the research and monitoring efforts conducted by the GCMRC since 2005. A new round of Knowledge Assessment Workshops was convened by the GCMRC in June and October 2011 and January 2012 to determine whether the research and monitoring activities conducted since 2005 had successfully answered some of the strategic science questions. Oral presentations by scientists highlighting research findings were a centerpiece of all three of the 2011–12 workshops. Each presenter was also asked to provide an answer to the strategic science questions that were specific to the presenter’s research area. One limitation of this approach is that these answers represented the views of the handful of scientists who developed the presentations, and, as such, they did not incorporate other perspectives. Thus, the answers provided by presenters at the Knowledge Assessment Workshops may not have accurately captured the sentiments of the broader group of scientists involved in research and monitoring of the Colorado River in Glen and Grand Canyons. Yet a fundamental ingredient of resilient decisionmaking and problem-solving is incorporation of a wide range of perspectives (Carpenter and others, 2009). To ensure that a wide range of scientists had an opportunity to weigh in on the strategic science questions, the GCMRC elicited additional perspectives through written questionnaires. Independently soliciting responses from scientists through questionnaires had the added advantage of allowing all scientists to freely and openly share their views on complex and controversial topics—something which may not have occurred in the group setting of the June 2011 Knowledge Assessment Workshop because of dominance by one or more scientists. The purpose of this report is to document and interpret the questionnaire responses.

Arizona↗
USGS2013

Standardized methods for Grand Canyon fisheries research 2015

This document presents protocols and guidelines to persons sampling fishes in the Grand Canyon, to help ensure consistency in fish handling, fish tagging, and data collection among different projects and organizations. Most such research and monitoring projects are conducted under the general umbrella of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program and include studies by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS), the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD), various universities, and private contractors. This document is intended to provide guidance to fieldworkers regarding protocols that may vary from year to year depending on specific projects and objectives. We also provide herein documentation of standard methods used in the Grand Canyon that can be cited in scientific publications, as well as a summary of changes in protocols since the document was first created in 2002.

Grand Canyon↗
USGS2012

Salinity of the Little Colorado River in Grand Canyon confers anti-parasitic properties on a native fish

Water in the Little Colorado River within Grand Canyon is naturally high in salt (NaCl), which is known to prohibit development of external fish parasites such as Ich ( Ichthyophthirius multifiliis ). The naturally high salinity (>0.3%) of the Little Colorado River at baseflow may be one factor allowing survival and persistence of larval and juvenile humpback chub ( Gila cypha ) and other native fishes in Grand Canyon. We compared salinity readings from the Little Colorado River to those reported in the literature as being effective at removing protozoan parasites from fish. In laboratory tests, 10 juvenile roundtail chub ( Gila robusta ; 61–90 mm TL) were randomly placed into each of 12, 37-L aquaria filled with freshwater, water obtained from the Little Colorado River (0.3% salinity), or freshwater with table salt added until the salinity reached 0.3%. Roundtail chub was used as a surrogate for humpback chub in this study because the species is not listed as endangered but is morphologically and ecologically similar to humpback chub. All roundtail chub infected with Ich recovered and survived when placed in water from the Little Colorado River or water with 0.3% salinity, but all experimental fish placed in freshwater died because of Ich infection. The naturally high salinity of the Little Colorado River at baseflow (0.22%–0.36%), appears sufficiently high to interrupt the life cycle of Ich and may allow increased survival of larval and juvenile humpback chub relative to other areas within Grand Canyon.

Arizona↗
USGS2011

An experiment to control nonnative fish in the Colorado River, Grand Canyon, Arizona

The humpback chub (Gila cypha) is an endangered native fish found only in the Colorado River Basin. In Grand Canyon, most humpback chub are found in the Little Colorado River and its confluence with the Colorado River. For decades, however, nonnative rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and brown trout (Salmo trutta), which prey on and compete with native fish, have dominated the Grand Canyon fish community. Between 2003 and 2006, scientists with the U.S. Geological Survey and Arizona Game and Fish Department experimentally removed 23,266 nonnative fish from a 9.4-mile-long reach of the Colorado River near where it joins the Little Colorado River. During the experiment, rainbow trout were reduced by as much as 90% and native fish abundance apparently increased in the reach. Concurrent environmental changes and a decrease in rainbow trout throughout the river make it difficult to determine if the apparent increase in native fish was the result of the experiment.

Arizona↗
USGS2010

20,000 grain-size observations from the bed of the Colorado River, and implications for sediment transport through Grand Canyon

In the late 1990s, we developed digital imaging hardware and software for in-situ mapping of sand-sized bed sediment of the Colorado River in Grand Canyon. This new technology enables collection and processing of hundreds of grain-size samples in a day. Bed grain size was mapped using this equipment on 8 surveys of the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, for a total of more than 20,000 observations spanning 8 years. These observations document the fining of the bed when fine sand is introduced from tributaries and document the winnowing of that new sediment in the mainstem during intervening periods. The observations show how grain size varies with depth and geomorphic setting (finer in shallow depths and in lateral separation eddies), and how it varies through time. The results document that mean grain size of sand covering much of the riverbed can change substantially through time (a factor of 3). Such changes in bed sediment can be expected to cause suspended sediment concentration and flux to change by an order of magnitude for a constant water discharge.

Arizona↗
USGS2009

Status and trends of the Grand Canyon population of Humpback Chub

The Colorado River Basin supports one of the most distinctive fish communities in North America, including the federally endangered humpback chub (Gila cypha). One of only six remaining populations of this fish is found in Grand Canyon, Arizona. U.S. Geological Survey scientists and their cooperators are responsible for monitoring the Grand Canyon population. Analysis of recently collected data indicates that the number of Grand Canyon adult humpback chub - fish 4 years old and older and capable of reproduction - increased approximately 50 percent between 2001 and 2008. When possible model error is considered, the estimated number of adult chub in the Grand Canyon population is between 6,000 and 10,000. The most likely number is estimated at 7,650 individuals.

Arizona↗
USGS2008

Is there enough sand? Evaluating the fate of Grand Canyon sandbars

Large dams have the potential to dramatically alter the flow regime, geomorphology, and aquatic ecosystem of downstream river reaches. Development of flow release regimes in order to meet multiple objectives is a challenge facing dam operators, resource managers, and scientists. Herein, we review previous work and present new analyses related to the effects of Glen Canyon Dam on the downstream reach of the Colorado River in Marble and Grand Canyons. The dam traps the entire incoming sediment load in Lake Powell and modulates the hydrologic regime by, for example, eliminating spring snowmelt floods, resulting in changes in the geomorphology of the river downstream. The primary geomorphic impact has been the erosion of sandbars along the banks of the river. Recognition of this impact has led to many scientific studies and a variety of experimental operations of Glen Canyon Dam with the goal of rebuilding the eroding sandbars. These efforts have thus far been generally unsuccessful and the question remains as to whether or not the dam can be operated such that sandbars can be rebuilt and maintained over extended periods with the existing sediment supply. We attempt to answer this question by evaluating a dam operation that may be considered a "best-case scenario" for rebuilding and maintaining eroded sandbars. Our analysis suggests that this best-case scenario may indeed have viability for rebuilding sandbars, and that the initial rate at which sandbars could be rebuilt is comparable to the rate at which sandbars have been eroded since dam construction. The question remains open as to the viability of operations that deviate from the best-case scenario that we have defined.

Grand Canyon↗
USGS2003

Grand Canyon riverbed sediment changes, experimental release of September 2000 - a sample data set

An experimental water release from the Glen Canyon Dam into the Colorado River above Grand Canyon was conducted in September 2000 by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted sidescan sonar surveys between Glen Canyon Dam (mile -15) and Diamond Creek (mile 220), Arizona (mile designations after Stevens, 1998) to determine the sediment characteristics of the Colorado River bed before and after the release. The first survey (R3-00-GC, 28 Aug to 5 Sep 2000) was conducted before the release when the river was at its Low Summer Steady Flow (LSSF) of 8,000 cfs. The second survey (R4-00-GC, 10 to 18 Sep 2000) was conducted immediately after the September 2000 experimental release when the average daily flow was as high as 30,800 cfs as measured below Glen Canyon Dam (Figure 2). Riverbed sediment properties interpreted from the sidescan sonar images include sediment type and sandwaves; overall changes in these properties between the two surveys were calculated. Sidescan sonar data from the USGS surveys were processed for segments of the Colorado River from Glen Canyon Dam (mile -15) to Phantom Ranch (mile 87.7, Figure 3). The surveys targeted pools between rapids that are part of the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC http://www.gcmrc.gov/ ) physical sciences study. Maps interpreted from the sidescan sonar images show the distribution of sediment types (bedrock, boulders, pebbles or cobbles, and sand) and the extent of sandwaves for each of the pre- and post-flow surveys. The changes between the two surveys were calculated with spatial arithmetric and had properties of fining, coarsening, erosion, deposition, and the appearance or disappearance of sandwaves.

Arizona↗
USGS2001

Displacement rates on the Toroweap and Hurricane faults: Implications for Quaternary downcutting in the Grand Canyon, Arizona

The Toroweap and Hurricane faults, considered to be the most active in Arizona, cross the Uinkaret volcanic field in the western Grand Canyon. These normal faults are downthrown to the west, and the Colorado River crosses these faults as it flows west in the Grand Canyon. Cosmogenic 3 He ( 3 He c ) dates on basalt flows and related landforms are used to calculate vertical displacement rates for these faults. The two faults cross unruptured alluvial fans dated as 3 ka (Toroweap) and 8 ka (Hurricane), and 10 other landforms that range in age from 30 to 400 ka are displaced. Middle and late Quaternary displacement rates of the Toroweap and Hurricane faults are 70–180 and 70–170 m/m.y., respectively. On the basis of these rates, the combined displacement of 580 m on these faults could have occurred in the past 3 to 5 m.y. All 3 He c dates are younger than existing K- Ar dates and are consistent with new 40 Ar/ 39 Ar dates and existing thermoluminescence (TL) dates on basalt flows. These different dating techniques may be combined in an analysis of displacement rates. Downcutting rates for the Colorado River in the eastern Grand Canyon (400 m/m.y.) are at least double the downcutting rates west of the faults (70–160 m/m.y.). Faulting probably increased downcutting in the eastern Grand Canyon relative to downcutting in the western Grand Canyon during the late Quaternary.

Arizona↗
USGS2000

Sediment delivery by ungaged tributaries of the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, Arizona

Sediment input to the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, Arizona, is a valuable resource required to sustain both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. A total of 768 ungaged tributaries deliver sediment to the river between Glen Canyon Dan and the Grand Wash Cliffs (river miles - 15 to 276). The 32 tributaries between the dam and Lee's Ferry produce only streamflow floods, whereas 736 tributaries in Grand Canyon produce streamflow floods and debris flows. We used three techniques to estimate annual streamflow sediment yield from ungaged tributaries to the Colorado River. For the Glen Canyon and Marble Canyon reaches (river miles -15 to 61.5), respectively, these techniques indicate that 0.065 . 10 6 and 0.610 . 10 6 Mg/yr (0.68 . 10 6 Mg/yr of total sediment) enters the river. This amount is 20 percent of the sediment yield of the Paria River, the only gaged tributary in this reach and a major sediment contributor to the Colorado River. The amout of sand delivered ranges from 0.10 . 10 6 to 0.51 . 10 6 Mg/yr, depending on the sand content of streamflow sediment. Sand delivered in Glen Canyon is notably coarser (D 50 = 0.24 mm) than sand in other reaches (D 50 = 0.15 mm). A relation is given for possible variation of this sediment delivery with climate.

Arizona↗