Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · ofr20101031

Short-Term Effects of the 2008 High-Flow Experiment on Macroinvertebrates in Colorado River Below Glen Canyon Dam, Arizona

Abstract

Glen Canyon Dam has dramatically altered the physical environment (especially discharge regime, water temperatures, and sediment inputs) of the Colorado River. High-flow experiments (HFE) that mimic one aspect of the natural hydrograph (floods) were implemented in 1996, 2004, and 2008. The primary goal of these experiments was to increase the size and total area of sandbar habitats that provide both camping sites for recreational users and create backwaters (areas of stagnant flow in the lee of return-current eddies) that may be important as rearing habitat for native fish. Experimental flows might also positively or negatively alter the rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) sport fishery in the clear tailwater reach below Glen Canyon Dam, Ariz., and native fish populations in downstream reaches (for example, endangered humpback chub, Gila cypha) through changes in available food resources. We examined the short-term response of benthic macroinvertebrates to the March 2008 HFE at three sites [river mile 0 (RM 0, 15.7 miles downriver from the dam), RM 62, and RM 225] along the Colorado River downstream from Glen Canyon Dam by sampling immediately before and then 1, 7, 14, and 30 days after the HFE. We selected these sites because of their importance to management; RM 0 has a valuable trout fishery, and RM 62 is the location of the largest population of the endangered humpback chub in the Grand Canyon. In addition to the short-term collection of samples, as part of parallel investigations, we collected 3 years of monthly (quarterly for RM 62) benthic macroinvertebrate samples that included 15 months of post-HFE data for all three sites, but processing of the samples is only complete for one site (RM 0). At RM 0, the HFE caused an immediate 1.75 g AFDM/m2 (expressed as grams ash-free dry mass, or AFDM) reduction of macroinvertebrate biomass that was driven by significant reductions in the biomass of the two dominant taxa in this reach-Potamopyrgus antipodarum (New Zealand mud snails) and Gammarus lacustris (scuds or side-swimmers)-and also biomass reductions of other common taxa (worms in the families Lumbricidae and Tubificidae). Invertebrate drift estimates during the HFE suggest that reductions in biomass of some taxa were because of export from the reach. Reductions in biomass of P. antipodarum and G. lacustris persisted at least 15 months after the HFE, when this study concluded, and coincided with a significant decline in the annual production of these taxa: P. antipodarum production of 11 to 13 g AFDM/m2/yr in two pre-HFE years versus 2 g AFDM/m2/yr in the post-HFE year, and G. lacustris production of 7 to 8 g AFDM/m2/yr in two pre-HFE years versus 3 g AFDM/m2/yr in the post-HFE year. There were not changes in invertebrate feeding habits in response to the HFE, as our 3-year dataset of invertebrate diets indicated no substantial changes. Our long-term analysis of the composition of the drift indicates that because of a reduction in P. antipodarum in the drift relative to digestible taxa, the quality of the drift as a food resource for fishes increased. At downstream sites, total assemblage biomass did not decline, likely because assemblages were dominated by blackflies (Simulium arcticum), which were not affected by the HFE. Similar to RM 0, G. lacustris and Tubificidae had significantly lower biomass after the HFE at RM 62 and RM 225. Chironomids were also significantly lower following the flood at both downstream sites. Our findings demonstrate that the effects of a HFE on invertebrates may persist up to at least 15 months in the clear tailwater below the dam, whereas in downstream reaches impacts were more short lived. If controlling the abundance of P. antipodarum is a goal of managers, our findings indicate that periodic HFEs on the order of every 2 to 3 years may be an effective strategy for meeting that goal. More frequent HFEs may cause a shift in the state of the benthic invertebrate assemblage of the tailwa

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 35° to 37.833333333333336° latitude; -114.83333333333333° to -110.83333333333333° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Emma J. Rosi-Marshall, Theodore A. Kennedy, Dustin W. Kincaid, Wyatt F. Cross, Holly A.W. Kelly, Kathrine A. Behn, Tyler White, Robert O. Hall, Colden V. Baxter. 2010. Short-Term Effects of the 2008 High-Flow Experiment on Macroinvertebrates in Colorado River Below Glen Canyon Dam, Arizona. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20101031

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona