Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program Administrative History

Between 1999 and 2005, drought in the western United States led to a >44 m fall in the level of Lake Powell (Arizona-Utah), the nation's second-largest reservoir. River discharges to the reservoir were halved, yet the rivers still incised the tops of deltas left exposed along the rim of the reservoir by the lake-level fall. Erosion of the deltas enriched the rivers in sediment such that upon entering the reservoir they discharged plunging subaqueous gravity flows, one of which was imaged acoustically. Repeat bathymetric surveys of the reservoir show that the gravity flows overtopped rockfalls and formed small subaqueous fans, locally raising sediment accumulation rates 10–100-fold. The timing of deep-basin deposition differed regionally across the reservoir with respect to lake-level change. Total mass of sediment transferred from the lake perimeter to its bottom equates to ~22 yr of river input.

It is apparent that before emplacement of the dam gully degradation in terraces was restored by periodic alluvial deposition from river floods, but perhaps even more important is the redistribution of flood sands onto higher terraces by wind. Thus, we propose the term "restorative base-level hypothesis" to emphasize the dynamic equilibrium between gully erosion and renewed deposition, a process that remains active in Cataract Canyon but is disrupted in Grand Canyon by the presence and operation of the dam.

We developed type geomorphic settings to develop a conceptual process model for the diverse small-catchment geomorphic system in Grand Canyon. Research findings explain how streams are able to cross broad, flat terraces given a rainfall event and how they become progressively more integrated with the river. The primary channelization processes are ponding and overflow, alluvial fan progradation, and infiltration and piping, all of which contribute to nickpoint migration. An understanding of these processes was essential to building the geomorphic model.

The predictive mathematical model quantifies erosional vulnerability by applying a hypothetical rainfall event of 25 mm/hour onto a catchment above a "pristine" terrace sequence. The principal driving factor for erosion is basin area. The principal resisting factor for erosion is terrace diffusion capacity, which is a function of terrace sand cross-sectional area and infiltration capacity. Several important modifying factors are applied to the basic model to determine relative vulnerability of each terrace to gully erosion. Vulnerability of the top terrace at each catchment is plotted against the measured amount of gully erosion in that terrace, providing a base line against which progressive changes in gully depth can be easily monitored in the future.

Field studies and research show that: (1) gully erosion of terraces has been severe during the past 20 years in Grand Canyon due to unusually high precipitation; and (2) sediment deprivation coupled with the lack of large annual floods has caused a reduction in restorative (depositional) factors. Continued measurement and documentation of geomorphic processes in catchments, particularly at type geomorphic settings, will further refine and verify the predictability of the model. We conclude that beach-habitat-building flows are essential for initiating natural restorative processes and that one of the most important processes in gully mitigation may be eolian reworking of newly deposited flood sands onto higher terraces. Prior to the construction of Glen Canyon Dam, gully-deepening and river/wind depositional processes were in dynamic equilibrium, allowing the preservation of ancient cultural sites for the past several thousand years.

With a focus on resources of the Colorado River ecosystem below Glen Canyon Dam, the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program has included a variety of experimental policy tests, ranging from manipulation of water releases from the dam to removal of non-native fish within Grand Canyon National Park. None of these field-scale experiments has yet produced unambiguous results in terms of management prescriptions. But there has been adaptive learning, mostly from unanticipated or surprising resource responses relative to predictions from ecosystem modeling. Surprise learning opportunities may often be viewed with dismay by some stakeholders who might not be clear about the purpose of science and modeling in adaptive management. However, the experimental results from the Glen Canyon Dam program actually represent scientific successes in terms of revealing new opportunities for developing better river management policies. A new long-term experimental management planning process for Glen Canyon Dam operations, started in 2011 by the U.S. Department of the Interior, provides an opportunity to refocus management objectives, identify and evaluate key uncertainties about the influence of dam releases, and refine monitoring for learning over the next several decades. Adaptive learning since 1995 is critical input to this long-term planning effort. Embracing uncertainty and surprise outcomes revealed by monitoring and ecosystem modeling will likely continue the advancement of resource objectives below the dam, and may also promote efficient learning in other complex programs.

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.

The year 2005 marked the 10th anniversary of the completion of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Operation of Glen Canyon Dam on the Colorado River, USA. A decade of research and monitoring provides an important milestone to evaluate the effects of dam operations on resources of concern and determine whether or not the desired outcomes are being achieved, or if they are even compatible with one another or not. A comprehensive effort was undertaken to assess the scientific state of knowledge of resources of concern, as identified in the EIS. The result was the first systematic attempt by scientists to conduct an assessment of the changing state of Colorado River ecosystem resources in Grand Canyon over a decadal timeframe. In the EIS, 30 resource attributes are listed along with predictions for how those resources would respond under the Secretary of the Interior’s 1996 Record of Decision, an operating prescription based on the preferred alternative of Modified Low-Fluctuating Flows (MLFF).

Because of a lack of data or subsequent analyses to confirm whether some predictions stated in the EIS were correct, or not, 14 or 47 percent of the outcomes, are essentially unknown. Excluding outcomes that are unclear, then the remaining predictions in the EIS were correct in 7 out of 16 outcomes, or 44 percent of the categories listed. Mixed outcomes occur in 4 out of 16, or 25 percent of the categories, and failed predictions, occur in 5 out of 16, or 31 percent of the categories. As such, less than 50 percent of the outcomes were predicted correctly, underscoring the uncertainties associated with working in a large complex system with few to no long-term data sets. Similar uncertainties are faced by all resource managers charged with ecosystem restoration globally. The acceptability of this kind of uncertainty is influenced by interpretation, societal values, agency missions and mandates, and other factors. However, failure to correctly predict the future, in and of itself, is not deleterious under the paradigm of adaptive management where large uncertainties provide opportunities for learning and adjustment through an iterative process of “learning-by- doing” (Walters and Holling, 1990). Although recent science has documented a continued decline of environmental resources of the Colorado River below Glen Canyon Dam, it has also identified options that might still be implemented by managers to achieved desired future conditions in Grand Canyon.