Project 2:

Streamflow,Water QualitySediment Tranand Sand Budin the ColoradRiver Ecosyste
The USGS team

• David Topping, GCMRC• Ron Griffiths, GCMRC

• Dave Dean, GCMRC

• Nick Voichick, GCMRC• Tom Sabol, GCMRC• Nancy Hornewer, AZ Water Science Center

• Joel Unema, AZ Water Science Center

• Jon Mason, AZ Water Science Center

• Megan Hines, CIDA

• Eric Everman, CIDA• Brad Garner, Office of Water Information
How do operations at Glen Canyon Dam affec

water quality, sediment transport, and sedi

resources in the Colorado River Ecosystem

• Continued development of database and website with us

interactive tools for data visualization and downloading (

THIS YEAR)

• Publication of 3 peer‐reviewed interpretive books/papers 

abstracts presented at AGU

• Real‐time to monthly posting of all discharge, qw, and sed

data on WEBSITE

• Monthly updates of the mass‐balance sand budgets on W
User‐interactive sand budgets in 6 reaches from Lees Ferry to L

Monitoring project with some rese

We collect, post, and analyze the following data 

stations located through the Colorado River Eco

including key tributaries...

• Stage• Discharge• Water temperature• Salinity (specific conductance)

• Turbidity• Dissolved Oxygen

• Suspended‐ and bed‐sediment data

• Sediment loads (silt and clay loads and sand loads)

•• User‐interactive duration‐curve tool for any continuous parame

All other GCDAMP‐funded projects use these d

data from this project inform LTEMP

Citation for data and plots on most slides:

U.S. Geological Survey, 2016, Discharge, sediment, and water quality monito

Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center: accessed on

January 20, 2017, at http://www.gcmrc.gov/discharge_qw_sediment/.
We have continued to add new dataset

make improvements to the new databas

website.

http://www.gcmrc.gov/discharge_qw_sedim

http://cida.usgs.gov/gcmrc/discharge_qw_sed

The user‐interactive tools available at 

website to visualize and operate on the d

unique in the world, with our newest 

(the duration‐curve tool) now onlin
Colorado River at Lees Ferry 2011‐20

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

USGS (2017)

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 

2011 2012 2013 2014 
HFEs increa

November 201caused increas

dissolved oxygLees Ferry durafter event

USGS (2017)
Q

USGS (2017)

Stage, Discharge,

Sediment Transport

Q 

Q 

Q

Q 

Q

Q

QQ

Q

Q

Q

Q 

Q 

Q 
T 

T

T

T 

T T

T 

T

T 

T

T 

T

T T

T

T 

T 

T 

T 

Water Temperature

T(at Lava Cliff) USGS (2017)
S

Specific Conductance,

Dissolved Oxygen,

Turbidity

SC

S

SC, DO, Turb 

SC, DO, Turb 

SC, DO, Turb 

USGS (2017)
Voichick and Topping (2014
Duration‐curve tool

WY 2015 Colorado River near river mile 66

below the mouth of the Little Colorado Rive

After USGS (2017
2016 July-October Paria River sand inputs 

the 9th largest since 1996 

After USGS (2017)
After USGS (2017)

Paria LCR

Temporal pattern of sand supply very different between 
Sand budgets for the last 6‐year peri

Uppe

Marbl

Canyo

E

G

C

East Central

Grand Canyon

West Central

Grand Canyon

Western Grand

Canyon and the

Lake Mead Delta

USGS (2017)
Upper Marble Canyon

1‐1‐2011 through 1‐1‐2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

USGS (2017)
Lower Marble Canyon

1‐1‐2011 through 1‐1‐2017

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

USGS (2017)
Eastern Grand Canyon

1‐1‐2011 through 1‐1‐2017

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

USGS (2017)
East Central Grand Canyon

1‐1‐2011 through 11‐15‐2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

USGS (2017)
West Central Grand Canyon

1‐1‐2011 through 11‐15‐2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

USGS (2017)
Western Grand Canyon and the Lake Me

1‐1‐2011 through 11‐16‐2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

USGS (2017)
Ea

G

Ca

s

b

Lsi

After USGS (2017)
Although sandbars have generally been built in 

reach during the 2004, 2008, 2012, 2013, 2014

2016 HFEs...These controlled floods have had

different systematic effects on the

sand budget in each reach
Over the flood hydrographs of the 2004 and 20

the following occurred...

Erosion

E

Deposition

(no 2004 data)

No change

(no 2004 data)

After USGS (2017
Over the flood hydrographs of each of the 201

and 2014 HFES, the following occurred...

Erosion

E

Deposition

Erosion

After USGS (2017
Over the flood hydrograph of each of the 2016 

following different response occurred...

Erosion

D

Deposition

No change

After USGS (2017
Conclusions

• Duration‐curve tool allows easy comparison of 

water‐quality, and sediment‐transport data bet

years

• Sand resources (amount) appear to be sustaina

the long‐reach scale except in higher release ye

• Eastern Grand Canyon? Dam operations or LC

• Systematic response of reach‐scale sand budge

during HFEs appeared to be emerging under th

Protocol until the 2016 HFE

• Different responses arise from differing longitu

distributions of the antecedent sand supply
Publications in progress

• Measured lesser‐tributary sediment suppl

Griffiths (submitted to journal)

• LCR hydrology article – Dean

• Colorado River sediment transport and sto

during last decade of dam operations – To

• Historical Colorado River flood inundation 

from field surveys ‐ Sabol‐Griffiths

• LCR geomorphic change article – Dean• Sediment storage changes at damsites – T• Turbidity‐measurement bias – Voichick
Proposed interpretive focii of next wor

• Antecedent‐sediment‐condition control o

sediment response during HFEs (with Gramprojects)

• Paria River hydrology, geomorphic change

sediment transport

• Evaluation of sediment transport and stor

during LTEMP releases

• LCR sediment‐transport article

• LCR flood and sediment routing, with imp

for habitat change in lowermost segment 

utilized by Humpback Chub and other nat
Thank you