This administrative history of the Grand Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (GCDAMP) includes government reports, oral history interviews and other relevant information about Colorado River law, environmental protection law, hydropower regulation, the Glen Canyon Environmental Studies that served as a precursor to GCDAMP, and the activities of the Adaptive Management Work Group, the Technical Work Group, and the U.S. Geological Survey’s Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center.

Displaying 1 - 2 of 2
Filtering by

Clear all filters

149111-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

ABSTRACT: The Colorado River below Glen Canyon Dam, Arizona, is part of an adaptive management programme which optimizes dam operations to improve various resources in the downstream ecosystem within Grand Canyon. Understanding how populations of federally endangered humpback chub Gila cypha respond to these dam operations is a high priority.

ABSTRACT: The Colorado River below Glen Canyon Dam, Arizona, is part of an adaptive management programme which optimizes dam operations to improve various resources in the downstream ecosystem within Grand Canyon. Understanding how populations of federally endangered humpback chub Gila cypha respond to these dam operations is a high priority. Here, we test hypotheses concerning temporal variation in juvenile humpback chub apparent survival rates and abundance by comparing estimates between hydropeaking and steady discharge regimes over a 3-year period (July 2009–July 2012). The most supported model ignored flow type (steady vs hydropeaking) and estimated a declining trend in daily apparent survival rate across years (99.90%, 99.79% and 99.67% for 2009, 2010 and 2011, respectively). Corresponding abundance of juvenile humpback chub increased temporally; open population model estimates ranged from 615 to 2802 individuals/km, and closed model estimates ranged from 94 to 1515 individuals/km. These changes in apparent survival and abundance may reflect broader trends, or simply represent inter-annual variation. Important findings include (i) juvenile humpback chub are currently surviving and recruiting in the mainstem Colorado River with increasing abundance; (ii) apparent survival does not benefit from steady fall discharges from Glen Canyon Dam; and (iii) direct assessment of demographic parameters for juvenile endangered fish are possible and can rapidly inform management actions in regulated rivers.

ContributorsFinch, Colton G. (Author) / Pine, William E. (Author) / Yackulic, Charles B. (Author) / Dodrill, Michael J. (Author) / Yard, Michael (Author) / Gerig, Brandon (Author) / Coggins, Lewis G. (Author) / Korman, Josh (Author)
Created2015-02-10
149113-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

ABSTRACT: This study assesses the impact of Glen Canyon Dam releases on rafting (white-water boating and day-use rafters) and angling recreationists in Glen Canyon and Grand Canyon National Park using attribute and contingent valuation surveys. Several sources of information were utilized in this study: knowledgeable people (fishing quides, rafting guides,

ABSTRACT: This study assesses the impact of Glen Canyon Dam releases on rafting (white-water boating and day-use rafters) and angling recreationists in Glen Canyon and Grand Canyon National Park using attribute and contingent valuation surveys. Several sources of information were utilized in this study: knowledgeable people (fishing quides, rafting guides, resource managers, and GCES researchers), seven formal surveys (including attribute surveys), and contingent valuation survey to quantify, in dollars, the effects of dam releases on the recreational exoerience. The goal of the study was to assess the impact of alternative annual flow release patterns for Glen Canyon Dam on recreationists in the aggregate. Flow regimes combining high constant flows in the summer months with moderate or low flows during the remainder of the year would be likely to produce the largest recreational benefits. Extreme high or low flows will adversely affect all river recreation, with flows below approximately 5,000 cubic feet per second and above 35,000 cubic feet oer second to both boaters and anglers.

ContributorsBishop, Richard C. (Author) / Boyle, Kevin J. (Author) / Welsh, Michael P. (Author) / Baumgartner, Robert M. (Author) / Rathbun, Pamela R. (Author)
Created1987-01