Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Research about Grand Canyon National Park

Source-linked reports with geographic coverage including Grand Canyon National Park.

28 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS2013

Nearshore thermal gradients of the Colorado River near the Little Colorado River confluence, Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, 2010

Construction and operation of Glen Canyon Dam has dramatically impacted the flow of the Colorado River through Glen, Marble, and Grand Canyons. Extremes in both streamflow and water temperature have been suppressed by controlled releases from the dam. Trapping of sediment in Lake Powell, the reservoir formed by Glen Canyon Dam, has also dramatically reduced the supply of suspended sediment entering the system. These changes have altered the riverine ecosystem and the habitat of native species, including fish such as the endangered humpback chub ( Gila cypha ). Most native fish are adapted to seasonally warm water, and the continuous relatively cold water released by the dam is one of the factors that is believed to limit humpback chub growth and survival. While average mainstem temperatures in the Colorado River are well documented, there is limited understanding of temperatures in the nearshore environments that fish typically occupy. Four nearshore geomorphic unit types were studied between the confluence of the Colorado and Little Colorado Rivers and Lava Canyon in the summer and fall of 2010, for study periods of 10 to 27 days. Five to seven sites were studied during each interval. Persistent thermal gradients greater than the 0.2 °C accuracy of the instruments were not observed in any of the sampled shoreline environments. Temperature gradients between the shoreline and mainstem on the order of 4 °C, believed to be important to the habitat-seeking behavior of native or nonnative fishes, were not detected.

Arizona;Nevada;Utah↗
USGS2012

Topographic change detection at select archeological sites in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, 2007-2010

Human occupation in Grand Canyon, Arizona, dates from at least 11,000 years before present to the modern era. For most of this period, the only evidence of human occupation in this iconic landscape is provided by archeological sites. Because of the dynamic nature of this environment, many archeological sites are subject to relatively rapid topographic change. Quantifying the extent, magnitude, and cause of such change is important for monitoring and managing these archeological sites. Such quantification is necessary to help inform the continuing debate on whether and how controlled releases from Glen Canyon Dam, located immediately upstream of Grand Canyon National Park, are affecting site erosion rates, artifact transport, and archeological resource preservation along the Colorado River in Grand Canyon. Although long-term topographic change resulting from a variety of natural processes is inherent in the Grand Canyon region, continued erosion of archeological sites threatens both the archeological resources and our future ability to study evidence of past cultural habitation. Thus, this subject is of considerable interest to National Park Service managers and other stakeholders in the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program. Understanding the causes and effects of archeological site erosion requires a knowledge of several factors, including the location, timing, and magnitude of the changes occurring in relation to archeological resources, the rates of change, and the relative contribution of potential causes. These potential causes include sediment depletion associated with managed flows from Glen Canyon Dam, site-specific weather and overland flow patterns, visitor impacts, and long-term regional climate change. To obtain this information, highly accurate, spatially specific data are needed from sites undergoing change. Using terrestrial lidar techniques, and building upon three previous surveys of archeological sites performed in 2006 and 2007, we collected two new datasets in April and September 2010 and processed and improved upon existing methods to generate high-accuracy (3 to 5 cm vertical change threshold) topographic change-detection maps for 10 survey areas encompassing 9 archeological sites along the Colorado River corridor. We also used terrestrial lidar techniques to investigate several other metrics for studying archeological site stability, including monitoring cultural structures and artifacts and remotely measuring cryptobiotic soil crust areas. Our topographic change results indicate that 9 of 10 survey areas showed signs of either erosion, deposition, or both during the 2007–2010 time interval and that these changes can be linked to a variety of geomorphic processes, primarily overland flow gullying and aeolian sand transport. In several cases, large (>50 cm) vertical change occurred, and in one case, more than 100 m 3 of sediment was eroded. Further, for all sites monitored throughout the river corridor during this time period, the overall signal was related to erosion rather than deposition. These results highlight the potential for rapid archeological site change in Grand Canyon. Whereas the topographic change results presented herein provide the highest level of change detection yet performed on entire archeological sites in Grand Canyon, additional work in combining these results with site-specific weather, hydrology, and geomorphology data is needed to provide a more thorough understanding of the causes of the documented topographic changes. Linking lidar-derived measurements of topographic changes with these other data sources should provide land managers with a scientific basis for making management decisions regarding archeological resources in Grand Canyon National Park and assist in answering open questions regarding the influence that sediment-depleted flows from Glen Canyon Dam have on archeological site stability.

Arizona↗
USGS2012

Long-term change along the Colorado River in Grand Canyon National Park (1889-2011)

The Colorado River and its riverine resources have undergone profound changes since completion of Glen Canyon Dam in 1963, as every river runner with any history in Grand Canyon will attest. Long-term monitoring data are difficult to obtain for high-value resource areas (Webb et al. 2009), particularly in remote parts of national parks, yet these data are important to determining appropriate actions for restoration of resources and (or) potential modifications of flow releases on regulated rivers. The river corridor through the bottom of Grand Canyon creates a challenging environment for change-detection monitoring techniques (Belnap et al. 2008).

Arizona↗
USGS2006

Applicability of terrestrial LIDAR scanning for scientific studies in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona

In November 2004, an experimental high flow release of water from Glen Canyon Dam into the Colorado River through Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona was conducted. The goal of the experiment was to evaluate the use of high flow events as a management tool for the preservation and restoration of natural resources in the Colorado River below Glen Canyon Dam. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC) located in Flagstaff, Arizona performed oversight of all aspects of scientific data collection including suspended sediment transport studies, biological population variations, effects on archaeological resources, and morphological studies of river sand bars. As part of the experimental high flow studies, the USGS Coastal and Marine Geology (CMG) team was invited to participate to test the effectiveness of utilizing terrestrial LIDAR technology for gathering morphological data on sand bars, biological habitats, and archaeological sites. The CMG is equipped with a terrestrial LIDAR unit and has used the technique in a variety of terrains to gather high-resolution morphological data. A three-member team from CMG participated in the experiment, joining a GCMRC team on a river trip from November 18 to November 21, 2004. This report begins with a brief description of the LIDAR technique and then outlines the data collected, processing required, and results for three study areas located within the Grand Canyon. Specifically, studies were performed at the Mile 30 Sand Bar, at Vaseys Paradise (Mile 32), and at the Mile 66 Palisades Archaeological Site. Conclusions and recommendations for utilizing terrestrial LIDAR for future studies at each of these sites are also included.

Arizona↗
USGS2005

Chemical characteristics of ground-water discharge along the south rim of Grand Canyon in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, 2000-2001

Springs flowing from the south rim of Grand Canyon are an important resource of Grand Canyon National Park, offering refuge to endemic and exotic terrestrial wildlife species and maintaining riparian areas. Population growth on the Coconino Plateau has increased the demand for additional development of ground-water resources, and such development could reduce spring discharge and affect the sustainability of riparian areas within the park. In addition, springs are an important source of drinking water for hikers and are culturally and economically important to Native Americans living in the region. Water samples were collected from May 2000 to September 2001 from 20 spring and creek sites that discharge water from the Redwall-Muav Limestone aquifer along the south rim of Grand Canyon. Sample collection sites were described and samples were analyzed for major ions, nutrients, trace elements, radioactivity, and selected isotopes, and potential sources of ground-water flow to the springs. Rock samples representing the major stratigraphic units of Grand Canyon were collected near the Bright Angel Fault and analyzed for mineralogy, strontium-87/strontium-86, and carbon-13/carbon-12. The chemical composition of water samples collected from a given spring did not vary appreciably over the course of the study. Although water at each spring had a temporally constant composition, the composition was chemically distinct from that of every other spring sampled, indicating spatial variability in the ground-water composition. Most samples had a calcium magnesium bicarbonate composition; a few had a substantial sulfate component. Concentrations of arsenic, nitrate, selenium, uranium, and gross alpha approached or exceeded U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Levels in water discharging from some springs. Oxygen and hydrogen isotopic compositions varied little among samples, and for most sites the isotopic data plot close to the global meteoric water line or below the local meteoric water line. Isotopic enrichment indicates fractionation due to evaporation occurs at some sites. The evaporative process may occur prior to recharge or post-discharge. Flow paths are differentiated between the eastern part of the study area where strontium-87/strontium-86 values for water from springs and creeks are more radiogenic than strontium-87/strontium-86 values for water that discharges from sites farther west. Tritium and carbon isotope analyses indicate that residence time of ground-water discharge from springs and creeks ranges from less than 50 years to about 3,400 years. Water with a residence time of less than 50 years is absent at several sites. Discharge of most springs and creeks is a mixture of younger and older waters.

Arizona↗
USGS2004

Geochemical discrimination of five pleistocene lava-dam outburst-flood deposits, western Grand Canyon, Arizona

Pleistocene basaltic lava dams and outburst‐flood deposits in the western Grand Canyon, Arizona, have been correlated by means of cosmogenic 3 He ( 3 He c ) ages and concentrations of SiO 2 , Na 2 O, K 2 O, and rare earth elements. These data indicate that basalt clasts and vitroclasts in a given outburst‐flood deposit came from a common source, a lava dam. With these data, it is possible to distinguish individual dam‐flood events and improve our understanding of the interrelations of volcanism and river processes. At least five lava dams on the Colorado River failed catastrophically between 100 and 525 ka; subsequent outburst floods emplaced basalt‐rich deposits preserved on benches as high as 200 m above the current river and up to 53 km downstream of dam sites. Chemical data also distinguishes individual lava flows that were collectively mapped in the past as large long‐lasting dam complexes. These chemical data, in combination with age constraints, increase our ability to correlate lava dams and outburst‐flood deposits and increase our understanding of the longevity of lava dams. Bases of correlated lava dams and flood deposits approximate the elevation of the ancestral river during each flood event. Water surface profiles are reconstructed and can be used in future hydraulic models to estimate the magnitude of these large‐scale floods.

Arizona↗
USGS1987

Debris flows from tributaries of the Colorado River, Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona

A reconnaissance of 36 tributaries of the Colorado River indicates that debris flows are a major process by which sediment is transported to the Colorado River in Grand Canyon National Park. Debris flows are slurries of sediment and water that have a water content < 40% by volume. Debris flows occur frequently in arid and semiarid regions. Slope failures commonly trigger debris flows, which can originate from any rock formation in the Grand Canyon. The largest and most frequent flows originate from the Permian Hermit Shale, the underlying Esplanade Sandstone of the Supai Group, and other formations of the Permian and Pennsylvanian Supai Group. Debris flows have reached the Colorado River on an average of once every 20 to 30 yr in the Lava-Chuar Creek drainage since about 1916. Two debris flows have reached the Colorado River in the last 25 yr in Monument Creek. The Crystal Creek drainage has had an average of one debris flow reaching the Colorado River every 50 yr, although the debris flow of 1966 has been the only flow that reached the Colorado River since 1900. Debris flows may actually reach the Colorado River more frequently in these drainages because evidence for all debris flows may not have been preserved in the channel-margin stratigraphy. Discharges were estimated for the peak flow of three debris flows that reached the Colorado River. The debris flow of 1966 in the Lava-Chuar Creek drainage had an estimated discharge of 4,000 cu ft/sec. The debris flow of 1984 in the Monument Creek drainage had a discharge estimated between 3,600 and 4,200 cu ft/sec. The debris flow of 1966 in the Crystal Creek drainage had a discharge estimated between 9,200 and 14,000 cu ft/sec. Debris flows in the Grand Canyon generally are composed of 10 to 40% sand by weight and may represent a significant source of beach-building sand along the Colorado River. The particle size distributions are very poorly sorted and the largest transported boulders were in the Crystal Creek drainage. Reworking of debris fans by the Colorado River creates debris bars that constrain the size of eddy systems and forms secondary rapids and riffles below tributary mouths. (See also W89-09239) (Lantz-PTT)

Arizona↗