Recommended Protocols for Core Mo

Sediment within the Colorado River Eco

Glen Canyon Dam: PART I

David J. ToppingScott A. WrightDavid M. RubinTheodore S. Melis
Four tasks identified to address 3 of t

under Goal 7, top 5 plus 3 additional C

Goal 8, top CMIN under Goal 9, and 

supporting data for Goals 1, 2, 6, 

MASS BALANCE PROJE

• Task 1-1: Monitoring of stage, flow, an

of fine sediment in multiple reaches of t

SED TREND PROJECT

• Task 2-1: High-elevation sandbar time 

“effectiveness monitoring”)

• Task 2-2: Analysis of remote-sensing d

years; not in BHBF years)

• Task 2-3: Monitoring of the fine-sedime

account” (annual in different ~30-mile reBHBF years)
Goal 7: Establish water temperature, quality and 

achieve GCDAMP ecosystem goals (downstream 

sediment-flux components only)

• #1 2006 SPG rank - CMIN 7.4.1 – Determine and track rele

Canyon Dam under all operating conditions. -- MASS BAL

• #1 2006 SPG rank - CMIN 7.4.2 – Determine and track flow 

Canyon Dam, particularly related to flow duration, upramp, conditions (same as previous CMIN) -- MASS BALANCE P

• #3 2006 SPG rank - CMIN 7.2.1 – Determine the seasonal 

turbidity, water temperature, conductivity, DO, and pH, (decselenium is important) changes in the mainstem throughou

BALANCE PROJECT

• #4 2006 SPG rank - CMIN 7.1.2 – Determine and track LC

mouth (below springs). -- MASS BALANCE PROJECT
Goal 8: Maintain or attain levels of sediment sto

main channel and along shorelines to achieve GCDA

• #1 2006 SPG rank - CMIN 8.1.3 – Track, as appropriate, th

silt/clay -input volumes and grain-size characteristics, by reestimated at the Paria and Little Colorado River stations, o

like Kanab and Havasu creeks, and “lesser” tributaries. -- M

PROJECT 

• #2 2006 SPG rank - CMIN 8.1.2 – What are the monthly sa

export volumes and grain-size characteristics, by reach, as 

Ferry, Lower Marble Canyon, Grand Canyon, and Diamond MASS BALANCE PROJECT

• #3 2006 SPG rank - CMIN 8.1.1 – Determine and track the 

sediment volume and grain-size changes in the main chann

stage, by reach. -- SED TREND PROJECT TASK 3: FINE

ACCOUNT

• #4 2006 SPG rank - CMIN 8.4.1 – Track, as appropriate, th

sandbar area, volume and grain-size changes within eddie25,000 cfs stage, by reach. -- SED TREND PROJECT TASSEDIMENT BANK ACCOUNT ; SED TREND PROJECT TA

SANDBAR TIME SERIES; SED TREND PROJECT TASK 

REMOTE-SENSING DATA; BHBF SCIENCE PLAN PROJ
• #5 2006 SPG rank - CMIN 8.5.1 –Track, as appropriate, th

area, volume and grain-size changes above 25,000 cfs sta

TREND PROJECT TASK 1: NAU SANDBAR TIME SERIEPROJECT TASK 2: CRE-WIDE REMOTE-SENSING DAT

PLAN PROJECT 1C

• #1 2006 SPG rank for GOAL 9 - CMIN 9.3.1 – Determine a

frequency, and distribution of camping beaches by reach a

and Grand Canyons. -- SED TREND PROJECT TASK 1: N

SERIES; SED TREND PROJECT TASK 2: CRE-WIDE RE

DATA

• CMIN 8.2.1 – Track, as appropriate, the biennial or annual 

volume and grain-size changes outside of eddies between stage, by reach. -- SED TREND PROJECT TASK 3: FINE

ACCOUNT ; SED TREND PROJECT TASK 2: CRE-WIDE DATA

• CMIN 8.3.1 – Track, as appropriate, the biennial or annual 

volume and grain-size changes within eddies below 5,000 SED TREND PROJECT TASK 3: FINE-SEDIMENT BANK 

• CMIN 8.6.1 – Track, as appropriate, changes in coarse sed

abundance and distribution. -- SED TREND PROJECT TAS

SEDIMENT BANK ACCOUNT ; SED TREND PROJECT TA

REMOTE-SENSING DATA
Other GCDAMP goals addressed by the MASS BA

• Goal 1 – Protect or improve the aquatic food base so that it will sup

desired species at higher trophic levels. The mass balance project providing information on flows and turbidity that aids in food base s

assessment of primary productivity and allochthonous inputs.

• Goal 2 – Maintain or attain a viable population of existing native fis

humpback chub and razorback sucker, and prevent adverse modifhabitats. The mass balance project supports this goal by providing 

data that is used to adjust for catch efficiency in population models

is important to understanding the effects of nearshore habitat disrufluctuating flows, and information on sandbars which create backw

thought to be important for native fish.

• Goal 6 – Protect or improve the biotic riparian and spring commun

including threatened and endangered species and their critical habproject tracks stage, flow, and the transport and fate of fine sedimesubstrate for riparian vegetation and marsh communities.

• Goal 9 – Maintain or improve the quality of recreational experience

within the framework of AMP ecosystem goals. The mass balance information to understand flow dynamics and the size and abundanare resources that affect the recreational experiences of Colorado 

• Goal 11 – Preserve, protect, manage, and treat cultural resources 

benefit of past, present, and future generations. The mass balance 

sediment-transport information relevant for sandbars that provide a 

through aeolian transport, to high elevation sand deposits that conresources.
Other GCDAMP goals addressed by the SED TR

• Goal 9 – Maintain or improve the quality of recreational experience

within the framework of AMP ecosystem goals. The SED TREND pinformation on the size and abundance of sandbars, which are res

recreational experiences of Colorado River users.

• Goal 11 – Preserve, protect, manage, and treat cultural resources 

benefit of past, present, and future generations. The SED TREND 

information on the sandbars that provide a source of sediment, throa number of high-elevation sand deposits that contain archaeologicanalysis of the canyon-wide remote-sensing data SED TREND pro

on changes in the high-elevation sand deposits that contain archae

• Goal 1 – Protect or improve the aquatic food base so that it will sup

desired species at higher trophic levels. The SED TREND project s

providing information on coarse sediment inputs which provide the aquatic food base.

• Goal 2 – Maintain or attain a viable population of existing native fis

humpback chub and razorback sucker, and prevent adverse modifhabitats. The SED TREND project supports this goal by providing 

which create backwater habitats that are thought to be important fo

• Goal 6 – Protect or improve the biotic riparian and spring commun

including threatened and endangered species and their critical habproject monitors the status of the fine-sediment deposits which pro

riparian vegetation and marsh communities. 
UMC

L

M

C

EGC

CGC

WGC

Mainstem flow

Mainstem flow and sediment

Tributary flow and sediment

Sediment budget reach

UMC – upper Marble CanyonLMC – lower Marble CanyonEGC – eastern Grand CanyonCGC – central Grand CanyonWGC – western Grand Canyon
Science Advisors’ Re

(June 2007)

• “It is our opinion that all four of the 

monitoring components are neededocument and understand trends transport and storage within the Ctheir relationships to other resourc

• “Adjustments in the implementatio

four major monitoring components response to the occurrence of BHimportant component of the propoprotocols for core monitoring.”
Key sediment-reso

strategic science que

“Is there a ‘Flow-Only’ operati

strategy for dam releases, incmanaging tributary inputs with without sediment augmentatiorebuild and maintain sandbar over decadal time scales?”
Corollary

If BHBFs are to be a successf

the rebuilding and maintenancsandbars in the CRE, then the of fine sediment in the long-tesediment “bank account” musdecrease over longer timescaresult of the occurrence of the 
Sediment budgeti

• Over shorter timescales (up to sev

--- mass balance project (uncertaiincrease over time, however)

• Over multiple years to longer than 

--- direct geomorphic monitoring oin the fine-sediment “bank accoun

SED TREND PROJECT TASK 3: FINE

BANK ACCOUNT
• Do future dam releases (including BHBF

to mine the sediment “bank account” (stat elevations less than the stage associadischarge of 8,000 cfs)?

• If the amount of fine sediment in this “b

continues to decrease, then dam operatultimately not be able to sustain the fineresources at higher elevations......HIGH

ELEVATION MONITORING ALONE WIADDRESS THIS ISSUE!!! ....because it necessarily measure signal

Sand budget in at least upper third of CRE wto onset of low-release years in 2000 despite sand inputs (but a period with no BHBFs)
Challenges to sediment-flux mo

mass balance projec

• Requires knowing inputs from major an

tributaries, with uncertainties -- done thLCR, other Glen and Marble Canyon tri

• Sand transport in Colorado River chang

independently of changes in the discha(over timescales less than hours) -- solvthrough addition of acoustic and laser-dtechnologies to conventional methods

• Uncertainties accumulate over time -- s

magnitudes of uncertainties, SED TRENcan help place further constraints on th
1998, 1999, 2006 PEP 

“The panel believes that it is c

have the more robust mass bbecause our understanding osystem is insufficient at this pmake recommendations aboucontrolled floods” (Wohl and oSED-PEP III, 2006)
-1.0

-0.5

0.00.51.01.52.0

SEDIMENT-YEAR 2004 MASS-BALANCE SAND 

JUL 2003

SEP 2003

NOV 2003

JAN 2004

MAR 2004

MAY 2004

0-30 MILE MASS-BALANCE UNCERTAINTY ENV30-60 MILE MASS-BALANCE UNCERTAINTY EN60-87 MILE MASS-BALANCE UNCERTAINTY ENWATER DISCHARGE

SAND MASS IN REACH RELATIVE TO 

THAT ON AUG 11, 2002 (million metric tons)

ACCUMULATION

EROSION
Data 48

UPPER MARBL(river-miles 1-30LOWER MARBL(river-miles 30-6GRAND CANYO(> river-mile 61)

> 680,000 metric tons

above river-mile 30

Where was the sand from the October 200floods as of March 1, 2007?
Mass balance project link

• Provides the sediment data required for triggering fu

and management actions

• Provides data that is essential to the development a

numerical predictive models of discharge, stage, sesandbar morphology, and other water-quality paramtemperature

• Supports new research focused on the food web of 

by providing continuous data on surface flow in the major tributaries, as well as suspended-sediment cograin size for suspended particles in transport

• Supports science activities in the fisheries program 

and quality-of-water data that may be used by the fievaluating their fish catch data, as well as growth, mhabitat use information 
Mass balance project products

• Streamflow (discharge and stage), and suspen

concentration and grain-size time series at musites and at the mouths of major tributaries

• Sediment budgets for five reaches of the CRE

Canyon, lower Marble Canyon, eastern Grand Grand Canyon, and western Grand Canyon

• Annual peer-reviewed USGS report document

monitoring project

• Contribution to other research-related peer-rev

publications (such as models)

• Biannual presentations at GCDAMP meetings
Challenges to geomorphic m

(i.e., key FIST result

• More than 90% of the fine sediment in t

stored at elevations lower than the stagwith a discharge of 8,000 cfs --- this is rthe fine-sediment “bank account”

• Extrapolation of FIST reach-based data 

river segments is impossible. Thus, mostatus of this bank account is best done river segments that equate to mass-baland are therefore constrained by mass-sediment budgeting.

Sediment budgets cann

extrapolated from FIST-rea

• Approxima

change in slower Marboccurred in this river seby FIST

• Sand budg

lower Marbhave had Oand LARGEof change 600,000

700,000800,000900,000

1,000,0001,100,000

-1,000,000 0

LOWER MARBLE CANYON

REACH 4 + 5 + 6

y = 9.0594e+5 + 1.2167x R2= 0.96547 

CHANNEL + LOW-ELEVATION EDDY SAND (metric tons)

SAND MASS BALANCE (metric tons)
UMC

L

M

C

EGC

CGC

WGC

Mainstem flow

Mainstem flow and sediment

Tributary flow and sediment

Sediment budget reach

UMC – upper Marble CanyonLMC – lower Marble CanyonEGC – eastern Grand CanyonCGC – central Grand CanyonWGC – western Grand Canyon
• The main channel below 8,000 cf

important fine-sediment storage bdownstream from tributaries, edd8,000 cfs are the most important storage bin farther downstream. and eddy environments must themonitored.

• Data collection on the geometries 

backwaters (i.e., eddy return-currrequires topographic data collecti8,000 cfs.

Digitizing Geomorphic Classes in GIS: B
• No relation between the sedimen

the amount of sand above 8,000 exists because less than 10% of sediment in the CRE occurs at thelevations. 

WARNING: Only monitoring high

sand will not provide information overall sediment budget and will prediction of the long-term fate of related resources. YOU CAN’T P

THE FUTURE BASED ON NOIS
70,000

80,00090,000

100,000110,000120,000130,000

-400,000 -200,000 0 

LOWER MARBLE CANYON

HIGH-ELEVATION SAND (metric tons)

SAND MASS BALANCE (metric tons)
• The sandbars monitored as part of the NAU ti

sufficient to detect trends in the area of sand a(Schmidt and others, 2004). This is because sediment is least sensitive to dam operations. provide information on the effectiveness of pamaintaining fine sediment at high elevations.

• There is not a unique relation between fine-se

area (owing to changes in deposit convexity/csection). This observation requires that both afine sediment be monitored.

• Although remote-sensing data are least neede

only high-elevation sand, they do provide CREand are required to address multiple resource interfaces between goals 8, 9, 11, 1, 2, and 6
Surface Change

Dry, Fine Sediment: 5/02 & 5/05 Blowup May

Blowup May, 2005
SED TREND project linka

• Provides the data showing whether dam operations 

the long-term fine sediment “bank account” stored a8,000 cfs

TASK 3: FINE-SEDIMENT BANK ACCOUNT

• Provides data (i.e, the maps showing the topograph

sediment types over ~30-mile reaches of the river) tthe development and testing of numerical predictive 

discharge, stage, sediment transport, and sandbar m

TASK 3: FINE-SEDIMENT BANK ACCOUNT

• Supports science activities in the fisheries program 

data (as part of the long ~30-mile data collection effTask 3) to characterize the locations and geometriethought to be important habitat for native fish. 

TASK 3: FINE-SEDIMENT BANK ACCOUNT

• Provides the data used to evaluate the effectivenes

(including BHBFs) on rebuilding and maintaining sa

TASK 1: NAU SANDBAR TIME SERIES ; TASK 2: 

REMOTE-SENSING DATA; BHBF SCIENCE PLAN 
• Supports the campsite inventories conducted under G

characterizing the status and trends of a sample of thas campsites. 

TASK 1: NAU SANDBAR TIME SERIES ; TASK 2: 

REMOTE-SENSING DATA; BHBF SCIENCE PLAN P

• Supports Goal 11 by characterizing the status of fine-

higher elevations in and around cultural sites, and by amount of open dry sand available to be transported some of these cultural sites. 

TASK 2: CRE-WIDE REMOTE-SENSING DATA; BH

PLAN PROJECT 1C

• Supports new research focused on the food web of th

providing data on the input of new gravel from tributaaccumulation and redistribution of gravel used as a saquatic food web. 

TASK 2: CRE-WIDE REMOTE-SENSING DATA; TA

SEDIMENT BANK ACCOUNT

• Provides information on the distribution of the fine-se

that form the substrate for the riparian ecology.

TASK 2: CRE-WIDE REMOTE-SENSING DATA; TA

SEDIMENT BANK ACCOUNT
SED TREND project products/

• Topographic maps of the CRE in five long reaches: upper M

Marble Canyon, eastern Grand Canyon, central Grand CanGrand Canyon. These maps will be produced 1-2 times pe

reach on average. These maps will characterize the geomebackwaters in each ~30-mile reach.

• Decadal-timescale sediment budgets for these five reaches 

data will provide managers information on the long-term stasediment “bank account.”

• These sediment budgets will be compared to the sediment 

for these reaches under the complimentary mass balance pcomparison will help evaluate the uncertainties associated monitoring and mass-balance approaches.

• Where possible, data collected in upper Marble Canyon in 

compared with earlier multibeam-sonar data collected in 20of the 2002–04 FIST project to evaluate volume changes in bank account (2000 vs. 2008). 

• Annual updates of the NAU sandbar time series showing tr

volume of the high-elevation parts of sandbars 

• Maps and analyses of the systemwide area and volume of 

elevations as determined by digital aerial photography and 

• Annual peer-reviewed USGS data reports documenting res

project 

• Contribution to other research-related peer-reviewed publi

models)

• Biannual presentations at GCDAMP meetings
Annual costs

• MASS BALANCE PROJECT 

$700,000 to $1,045,000 depending on number of m

tributary gaging stations; FY 2008 cost for stage, dissediment components of this project is $700,000 (a$183,000 in FY 2008 is for other water-quality paramtemperature, conductivity)

• SED TREND TASK 3: FINE-SEDIMENT BANK AC

$200,000 but deferred during years with BHBF test

SAVINGS that could be rolled into experimental fun

$200,000

• SED TREND TASK 1: NAU SANDBAR TIME SERI

$95,000 (see FY 2008 draft work plan description fo

9.R1.07/PHYS 8.M2/07)

• SED TREND TASK 2: CRE-WIDE REMOTE-SENS

Scope of analyses and cost are yet to be fully deter

during years with BHBF tests; refer to FY 2008 and descriptions for Goal #12, Remote Sensing and Ana
Risks to knowledge and resou

implemented

• MASS-BALANCE PROJECT 

No information on stage, flow, sediment flux in CRE; No in

sediment budgets; No information for BHBF triggers

• SED TREND TASK 3: FINE-SEDIMENT BANK ACCOUN

No ability to predict future condition of fine-sediment resou

locations and geometries (areas plus depths) of backwate

$200,000 is minimum required to survey sufficiently long r

reaches are not worth surveying

• SED TREND TASK 1: NAU SANDBAR TIME SERIES 

No information on effectiveness of past dam operations on 

elevation fine sediment; No information on annual status o

• SED TREND TASK 2: CRE-WIDE REMOTE-SENSING D

No information on CRE-wide distribution of high-elevation 

ability to interface with other GCDAMP goals, especially g