DOCSLIB.ORG

CAPITOL REEF NATIONAL PARK, UTAH by David George Christiana

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CAPITOL REEF NATIONAL PARK, UTAH by David George Christiana Hydrology and water resources of Capitol Reef National Park, Utah : with emphasis on the middle Fremont River area Item Type Thesis-Reproduction (electronic); text Authors Christiana, David. Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 27/09/2021 13:44:08 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/192054 HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES OF CAPITOL REEF NATIONAL PARK, UTAH WITH EMPHASIS ON THE MIDDLE FREMONT RIVER AREA by David George Christiana A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE WITH A MAJOR IN HYDROLOGY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 1991 2 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advance degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained by the author. Signed: APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR This thesis has been approved on the date shown below: ')L1 0 1 ><- 5 k Sta ley N. Davis Date Professor of Hydrology 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was funded by the United States National Park Service, Cooperative Aggreement # 8000-1-0002, Water Resources Assessment of Capitol Reef National Park. I would like express my unbounded gratitude to Dr. Todd C. Rasmussen for his assistance in every aspect of this project and for serving as a member of my graduate thesis committee. He has the patience of Job. My fieldwork was more productive and enjoyable through the efforts and cooperation of the entire Capitol Reef National Park staff, partic- ularly Sandy Borthwick, Sharon Gurr, Gene Blackburn, Lamont Chappell, Leon Chappell, Keith Durfey, and many others. For providing instruction and guidance in the laboratory, I thank Liz Lyons, Chris Peterson, and Dr. Martha Conklin. For the "good grub" I thank Steffney Thompson. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude for the thoughtful comments of the other members of my graduate thesis committee: Dr. Stanley N. Davis, Dr. Randy L. Bassett, and Norman R. Henderson. If I have left anyone out, I am willing to be forgiven. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF FIGURES 7 LIST OF TABLES 10 ABSTRACT 11 1. INTRODUCTION 12 Purpose and Scope of Study 12 Previous Investigations 13 Methods and Data Sources 14 Data-Site Numbering System 14 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA 17 Location, Political Boundaries, Physiography . 17 Location and Political Boundaries 17 Physiographic Region 17 Social Setting 19 Local Economy and Land Uses 19 Park Districts and Management Zones 20 Park Facilities and Cultural Features 20 Legislative History 23 Water Rights 24 Climate 26 Soils and Vegetation 30 Soils 30 Vegetation 30 Geology 33 Stratigraphy 33 Structure 39 3. HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES 41 Ground-Water Resources 41 Occurrence 41 Hydrologic Characteristics of Aquifers 43 Recharge 49 Discharge 50 Movement and Storage 52 Geologic Factors that Affect Hydrology 56 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) PAGE 3. HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES (continued) Surface Water Resources 58 Major Watersheds 58 Fremont River 60 Other Watercourses 71 Floodplains 72 Springs and Seeps 74 Lakes, Reservoirs, and Tinajas 75 Surface Water/Ground-Water Interactions 77 4. WATER QUALITY 82 Introduction 82 Sampling Program 84 Field Program 84 Laboratory Program 86 Accuracy and Sources of Error 90 Water Quality 92 Geochemical Processes 94 Surface Water Quality 98 Ground-Water Quality 115 Evaluation of Potential Water Supplies 128 5. WATER USES AND WATER BUDGET 132 Water Uses, Needs, Impacts 132 Domestic 132 Recreation and Wildlife 135 Agricultural and Riparian 136 Potential Water Uses 140 Water Budget 141 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 144 Status of Water Resources 144 Potential for Development of Water Resources 147 Recommendations 147 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) PAGE APPENDIX A: Monthly discharge of Fremont River at Bicknell and Caineville for the period of record 150 APPENDIX B: Water-quality data from selected water resources collected by the author and from other sources 153 APPENDIX C: State of Utah stream classifications . 164 APPENDIX D: Listing of wells and springs in the study area 167 APPENDIX E: Driller's log of deep well drilled in Capitol Reef National Park 169 REFERENCES 174 7 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1 Data site numbering system used in Utah . 15 2 Location map of study area, land ownership, and physiographic region 18 3 Capitol Reef National Park management districts and park facilities 21 4 Mean monthly minimum and maximum temperatures, Capitol Reef National Park 27 5 Mean climate variables and extremes for weather stations in the Capitol Reef area 28 6 Mean monthly precipitation, Capitol Reef National Park 29 7 General geologic map of the Capitol Reef area. 34 8 Hydrographs of selected wells in the Capitol Reef area 51 9 Approximate potentiometric map of the Navajo Sandstone 53 10 Map showing location of piezometers constructed in the Fruita area by the author 55 11 Map of major watersheds in the Capitol Reef area 59 12 Longitudinal profile of Fremont River, from Bicknell gage to Caineville gage 61 13 Fremont River divisions used in study 63 14 Hydrograph of annual discharge of the Fremont River near Bicknell and Caineville 66 15 Hydrograph of monthly Fremont River streamflow near Bicknell and Caineville 67 16 Annual extreme discharges of the Fremont River near Bicknell and Caineville from 1968 to 1989 . 68 8 LIST OF FIGURES (continued) FIGURE PAGE 17 Streamflow duration curve of the Fremont River near Bicknell and Caineville 70 18 Map showing gaging sites used for seepage study along the Fremont River 79 19 Water discharge, TDS, and salt load in the Fremont River on October 1, 1989 81 20 Map showing sites where water quality data was collected by the author 85 21 Relationship between specific conductance and total dissolved solids 89 22 Trilinear Diagram 95 23 Trilinear diagram of mean Fremont River water analyses 102 24 Trilinear diagram of Oak, Pleasant, and Sulphur Creek water analyses 104 25 Trilinear Diagram of tinajas, lakes and reservoir water analyses 105 26 Histogram of fecal coliform frequency: (a) Fremont River; (b) Sulphur Creek 107 27 Quarterly geometric mean of fecal coliforms: (a) Fremont River; (b) Sulphur Creek 108 28 Histogram of fecal coliform frequency: (a) Willow Tinajas; (b) Cottonwood Tinajas 109 29 Quarterly geometric mean of fecal coliforms: (a) Willow Tinajas; (b) Cottonwood Tinajas . 110 30 Percent Exceedance of Fremont River turbidity . 113 31 Monthly geometric mean of turbidity of Fremont River at Gifford House 114 32 Map of TDS of ground water in the Fruita area. 117 33 Trilinear diagram of North District springs water analsyes 120 34 Trilinear diagram of Headquarters District springs water analyses 122 35 Trilinear diagram of South District springs water analyses 123 9 LIST OF FIGURES (continued) FIGURE PAGE 36 Trilinear diagram of ground water in bedrock formations in the study area 125 37 Trilinear diagram of ground water in alluvial aquifers in the study area 127 38 Domestic water production and visitation in Capitol Reef National Park, 1983-1989 134 39 Monthly irrigation usage as a percentage of the total for the irrigation season 137 1 0 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1 Vegetation Zones in the Capitol Reef Area 31 2 Hydrologic Characteristics of Water-Bearing Formations in the Study Area 44 3 Hydraulic Properties of Aquifers in the Study Area 47 4 Ground Water in Storage in the Study Area. 54 5 Depth to Water in Piezometers in Fruita Area . 56 6 Selected Morphometric Relationships of Major Watersheds 60 7 Period of Record of Streamflow Discharge (Water Years) 62 8 Log-Pearson Type III Flood Frequency Analysis, Fremont River 74 9 Classification of Springs By Discharge 75 10 Discharge of Selected Springs in the Study Area 76 11 Seepage Study along the Fremont River 80 12 Classification of Waters Based on Total Dissolved Solids 93 13 Geochemical Processes and Reactions 96 14 TDS of Selected Surface Water Sources in the Study Area 99 15 Classification of Surface Waters in Study Area by Hydrochemical Facies 101 16 TDS of Wells and Springs in the Study Area . 116 17 Classification of Wells and Springs in Study Area by Hydrochemical Facies 119 18 State of Utah Maximum Contaminant Levels and Drinking Water Supplies in the Study Area . 129 19 Consumptive Water Use by Cultivated Crops and Riparian Vegetation Along the Fremont River Corridor 143 1 1 ABSTRACT The water resources of the Capitol Reef National Park area include the middle Fremont River, other perennial and ephemeral watercourses, isolated springs, tinajas, and lakes fed by precipitation on surrounding plateaus, as well as ground water in alluvial, basalt, and sedimentary aquifers fed by recharge from precipitation and stream channel losses. The difference between streamflows at Bicknell (79.2 million m3/yr) and Caineville (67.8 million m 3/yr) can be attributed to evapotranspiration by riparian vegetation and cultivated crops and ground-water recharge, which exceeds 1.5 million m3/yr.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • West Colorado River Plan
    Section 9 - West Colorado River Basin Water Planning and Development 9.1 Introduction 9-1 9.2 Background 9-1 9.3 Water Resources Problems 9-7 9.4 Water Resources Demands and Needs 9-7 9.5 Water Development and Management Alternatives 9-13 9.6 Projected Water Depletions 9-18 9.7 Policy Issues and Recommendations 9-19 Figures 9-1 Price-San Rafael Salinity Control Project Map 9-6 9-2 Wilderness Lands 9-11 9-3 Potential Reservoir Sites 9-16 9-4 Gunnison Butte Mutual Irrigation Project 9-20 9-5 Bryce Valley 9-22 Tables 9-1 Board of Water Resources Development Projects 9-3 9-2 Salinity Control Project Approved Costs 9-7 9-3 Wilderness Lands 9-8 9-4 Current and Projected Culinary Water Use 9-12 9-5 Current and Projected Secondary Water Use 9-12 9-6 Current and Projected Agricultural Water Use 9-13 9-7 Summary of Current and Projected Water Demands 9-14 9-8 Historical Reservoir Site Investigations 9-17 Section 9 West Colorado River Basin - Utah State Water Plan Water Planning and Development 9.1 Introduction The coordination and cooperation of all This section describes the major existing water development projects and proposed water planning water-related government agencies, and development activities in the West Colorado local organizations and individual River Basin. The existing water supplies are vital to water users will be required as the the existence of the local communities while also basin tries to meet its future water providing aesthetic and environmental values.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Stratigraphy Column
    Capitol Reef National Park National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Geology “Geology knows no such word as forever.” —Wallace Stegner Capitol Reef National Park’s geologic story reveals a nearly complete set of Mesozoic-era sedimentary layers. For 200 million years, rock layers formed at or near sea level. About 75-35 million years ago tectonic forces uplifted them, forming the Waterpocket Fold. Forces of erosion have been sculpting this spectacular landscape ever since. Deposition If you could travel in time and visit Capitol Visiting Capitol Reef 180 million years ago, Reef 245 million years ago, you would not when the Navajo Sandstone was deposited, recognize the landscape. Imagine a coastal you would have been surrounded by a giant park, with beaches and tidal flats; the water sand sea, the largest in Earth’s history. In this moves in and out gently, shaping ripple marks hot, dry climate, wind blew over sand dunes, in the wet sand. This is the environment creating large, sweeping crossbeds now in which the sediments of the Moenkopi preserved in the sandstone of Capitol Dome Formation were deposited. and Fern’s Nipple. Now jump ahead 20 million years, to 225 All the sedimentary rock layers were laid million years ago. The tidal flats are gone and down at or near sea level. Younger layers were the climate supports a tropical jungle, filled deposited on top of older layers. The Moenkopi with swamps, primitive trees, and giant ferns. is the oldest layer visible from the visitor center, The water is stagnant and a humid breeze with the younger Chinle Formation above it.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Secret Is Now Yours!
    EXPLORE... THREE ADVENTUROUS ZONES Travel Guide Travel The Highlands Capitol Reef East Desert Our secret is now yours! Wayne County, - Utah - USA TABLE OF CONTENTS WELCOME Wayne County, Utah - Capitol Reef Country 1- Cover Calendar of Events 2- Table of Contents April to October - Daily Walks / Capitol Reef Welcome to the scenically diverse region encompassing Wayne County YOUR NEXT GREAT 3- Welcome May Utah’s Capitol Reef Country. - Entrada Institute’s Cowboy Poetry and Music DESTINATION 4- Zones Festival This vacation destination includes mountains, forests, pinnacles, arches, 5- Zones July plateaus, and astounding desert - Torrey Apple Days landscapes. The contrast in elevation 6- Attractions - Capitol Reef Classic – Annual High Desert Bike and terrain makes this area a haven Race. for those seeking solitude or - Bicknell International Film Festival (BIFF) 7- Attractions outdoor adventure. August This region is an excellent multi-day 8- Activities - Women’s Redrock Music Festival vacation destination, central to Utah’s - Wayne County Fair scenic attractions, and easily acces- 9- Guides & Outfitters sible from major cities such as Salt September/October Lake City, Denver, and Las Vegas. 10- Maps - Heritage Star Festival - Wayne Wonderland Air show Unpack once and discover a realm 11- Maps that is conveniently situated be- On Going Events: May - September tween Bryce Canyon, the Grand 12- Hotels / Motels Staircase, Goblin Valley State Park, Capitol Reef National Park: Daily walks and nightly Canyonlands National Park, and amphitheatre programs mid May - September. Lake Powell. 13- Cabins / B&B Check at Visitor Center for Ripple Rock Nature Center schedule. Capitol Reef National Park. You’ll want to reserve several days to 14- Campgrounds (435) 425-3791, ext.
    [Show full text]
  • Episodic Sediment Delivery and Landscape Connectivity in the Mancos Shale Badlands and Fremont River System, Utah, USA
    Geomorphology 102 (2008) 242–251 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Geomorphology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/geomorph Episodic sediment delivery and landscape connectivity in the Mancos Shale badlands and Fremont River system, Utah, USA Andrew E. Godfrey 1, Benjamin L. Everitt a, José F. Martín Duque b,⁎ a 170 W. 300 North, Ivins, Utah 84738, USA b Department of Geodynamics, Complutense University, 28040 Madrid, Spain ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article history: The Fremont River drains about 1000 km2 of Mancos Shale badlands, which provide a large percentage of the Accepted 23 May 2007 total sediment load of its middle and lower reaches. Factors controlling sediment movement include: Available online 18 May 2008 weathering that produces thin paralithic soils, mass movement events that move the soil onto locations susceptible to fluvial transport, intense precipitation events that move the sediment along rills and across Keywords: local pediments, and finally Fremont River floods that move the sediment to the main-stem Colorado River. Mancos Shale badlands A forty-year erosion-pin study has shown that down-slope creep moves the weathered shale crust an Erosion Mass movement average of 5.9 cm/yr. Weather records and our monitoring show that wet winters add large slab failures and Connectivity mudflows. Recent sediment-trap studies show that about 95% of sediment movement across pediments is Coupling accomplished by high-intensity summer convective storms. Between 1890 and 1910, a series of large autumn Arroyo cutting floods swept down the Fremont River, eroding its floodplain and transforming it from a narrow and meandering channel to a broad, braided one.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Twin Rocks Quadrangle
    UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY a division of Utah Department of Natural Resources in cooperation with Plate 1 National Park Service Utah Geological Survey Miscellaneous Publication 07-3 and Brigham Young University Department of Geological Sciences Geologic Map of the Twin Rocks Quadrangle Qe JTRw Qal Qmt Jno Jno Qms Jn JTRw Jno Jk Jn Qe Qe Jn Jn Jpc Jk Jpcr Qe Qmt Qe Jno Jno Jno JTRw Jno Jk Qe Qe Jn Qms Jn Jno Jno Jno Jno Ti 4200 JTRw Jno Jno 4600 4000 Jk Jno W A T E R P O C K E T Jn Qmt Qe Jn Ti Jno Qe 5000 Jno Jn Ti Qms Qms Qms Qmt Qmt Qmt 4400 Jk Jn JTRw Jn Qe Jno Qms Jno Jn Qe Qe Jn Qe Jn Jn Ti Jno Jno Jno Jn Jno Jn Jn Jk JTRw Qe Qmt Jk Jno TRco Qmt JTRw Jno TRco Qmt Jn Jno Qe Qmt TRcm TRco Qmt JTRw Jno Jno TRcp TRcp Jno Qmt Qal Jk Ti Qal Qmt JTRw Jk TRcp TRcp Jno Jn Jn TRcm Qmt Jno TRco Jno 4800 Qmt TRcp TRco Qal C A P I T O L R E E F Jno TRco F O L D Qmt JTRw Jno Qe Jno TRcp Qmt Jn JTRw JTRw Spring Jk Jno JTRw Qmt Jno Jk Jk Qmt Qmt TRco 5 Jn TRco Ti Qmt Qmt Jno Jk Qmt JTRw Canyon R TRco Qmt T co Qe JTRw Qmt R Qe TRco TRco TRco Tco Ti Qmt Qal C A P I T O L Qmt TRco TRco Jk TRco 5800 JTRw Qal JTRw Jno Jk Jno Jno Qmt TRco Qe Qe JTRw Jk Qe Jn Jno Jno Ti Jn JTRw Qmt Jk Jk Jno Jno Jno Jn JTRw Jk 5000 Jno JTRw Jno 4 Qe Qe R A' T co Qmt 5400 Jk Jn Jno 5600 Qe Qe Jno TRcp Qe Jn TRcm Qe Qmt Jno Jno JTRw Qe M E E K S Jn Ti Qe 3 4800 Jno Qe R E E F Jno Jno Qe Qal JTRw Qe Qe Jno Jn Qmt Qe Qe Jk Jk R Jk Jno Jno JT w Qmt Jno Jno TRco M E S A Qmt Jno Jno Qmt Qal Jno Qe Qe Qe Qmt Jk Jn Qmt TRco Qe TRco Jno Jk Qmt Qe Qal JTRw JTRw Jk TRco TRcp TRcp 5200
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Resource Evaluation Report, Capitol Reef National Park
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Capitol Reef National Park Geologic Resource Evaluation Report Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/GRD/NRR—2006/005 Capitol Reef National Park Geologic Resource Evaluation Report Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/GRD/NRR—2006/005 Geologic Resources Division Natural Resource Program Center P.O. Box 25287 Denver, Colorado 80225 September 2006 U.S. Department of the Interior Washington, D.C. The Natural Resource Publication series addresses natural resource topics that are of interest and applicability to a broad readership in the National Park Service and to others in the management of natural resources, including the scientific community, the public, and the NPS conservation and environmental constituencies. Manuscripts are peer-reviewed to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and is designed and published in a professional manner. Natural Resource Reports are the designated medium for disseminating high priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. Examples of the diverse array of reports published in this series include vital signs monitoring plans; "how to" resource management papers; proceedings of resource management workshops or conferences; annual reports of resource programs or divisions of the Natural Resource Program Center; resource action plans; fact sheets; and regularly-published newsletters. Views and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect policies of the National Park Service. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the National Park Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Fremont River Watershed Water Quality Management Plan
    FFrreemmoonntt RRiivveerr WWaatteerrsshheedd Water Quality Management Plan September 27, 2002 Includes TMDLs for: Johnson Valley Reservoir Forsyth Reservoir Mill Meadow Reservoir UM Creek Upper Fremont River Lower Fremont River i FREMONT RIVER WATERSHED WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1 1.1 The TMDL Process ........................................................................................ 1 1.2 Utah’s Watershed Approach .......................................................................... 3 2.0 WATERSHED DESCRIPTION ............................................................................... 5 2.1 Historic Perspective ....................................................................................... 5 2.2 Climate........................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Geology / Soils............................................................................................... 8 2.4 Land Use / Land Cover ................................................................................ 11 2.5 Hydrology..................................................................................................... 12 2.5.1 Reservoirs ....................................................................................... 12 2.5.2 Subbasins ....................................................................................... 18 2.5.3 Irrigation
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Flora and Vegetation of Capitol Reef National Park, Utah
    Vascular Flora and Vegetation of Capitol Reef National Park, Utah Kenneth D. Heil, J. Mark Porter, Rich Fleming, and William H. Romme Technical Report NPS/NAUCARE/NRTR-93/01 National Park Service Cooperative Park Studies Unit U.S. Department of the Interior at Northern Arizona University National Park Service Cooperative Park Studies Unit Northern Arizona University The National Park Service (NPS) Cooperative Park Studies Unit (CPSU) at Northern Arizona University (NAU) is unique in that it was conceptualized for operation on an ecosystem basis, rather than being restrained by state or NPS boundaries. The CPSU was established to provide research for the 33 NPS units located within the Colorado Plateau, an ecosystem that shares similar resources and their associated management problems. Utilizing the university's physical resources and faculty expertise, the CPSU facilitates multidisciplinary research in NPS units on the Colorado Plateau, which encompasses four states and three NPS regions—Rocky Mountain, Southwest, and Western. The CPSU provides scientific and technical guidance for effective management of natural and cultural resources within those NPS units. The National Park Service disseminates the results of biological, physical, and social science research through the Colorado Plateau Technical Report Series. Natural resources inventories and monitoring activities, scientific literature reviews, bibliographies, and proceedings of techni­ cal workshops and conferences are also disseminated through this series. Unit Staff Charles van Riper, III, Unit Leader Peter G. Rowlands, Research Scientist Henry E. McCutchen, Research Scientist Mark K. Sogge, Ecologist Charles Drost, Zoologist Elena T. Deshler, Biological Technician Paul R. Deshler, Technical Information Specialist Connie C. Cole, Editor Margaret Rasmussen, Administrative Clerk Jennifer Henderson, Secretary National Park Service Review Documents in this series contain information of a preliminary nature and are prepared primarily for internal use within the National Park Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Scenic Byways Guide
    Utah is the place where prehistory intersects with the enduring spirit of the Old West. Wild, adventure-rich places cradle vibrant urban centers. With interstates and airplanes, the world can feel pretty small. On Utah’s designated scenic byways, the world feels grand; its horizons seem infinite. As you drive through Utah, you’ll inevitably encounter many of the state’s scenic byways. In total, Utah’s distinct topography provides the surface for 27 scenic byways, which add up to hundreds of miles of vivid travel experiences wherein the road trip is as memorable as the destination. Utah’s All-American Road: Scenic Byway 12 headlines the network of top roads thanks to landscapes and heritage unlike anywhere else in the nation. All of Utah’s scenic byways are explorative journeys filled with trailheads, scenic overlooks, museums, local flavors and vibrant communities where you can stop for the night or hook up your RV. Not sure where to start? In the following pages, you’ll discover monumental upheavals of exposed rock strata among multiple national and state parks along the All-American Road (pg. 4); dense concentrations of fossils along Dinosaur Diamond (pg. 8); and the blazing red cliffs and deep blue waters of Flaming Gorge–Uintas (pg. 12) — and that’s just in the first three highlighted byways. Your journey continues down two dozen additional byways, arranged north to south. Best of all, these byways access an outdoor adventureland you can hike, fish, bike, raft, climb and explore from sunup to sundown — then stay up to welcome the return of the Milky Way.
    [Show full text]
  • Capitol Reef National Monument
    THIS WATER-CARVED LAND Thereafter, the area was covered by a series of calm, land-locked basins in which were deposited Water has been responsible, in one form or an- the soft, reddish-brown Entrada and the hard. other, for the spectacular scenery you see before gray Curtis Sandstones. Also deposited in these you. Water, in the form of rivers carrying tremen- shallow lakes was the Summerville Formation. dous loads of stones, pebbles, and grit, ground with its thin even bedding. much like the earlier away at rocks and cliffs to carve the valleys. Moenkopi. The most accessible view of these Water, as glaciers, helped grind the rocks and formations is on the eastern edge of the monu- boulders into soil. Water, as ice, also created the ment near the turnoff to Notom. pressures which split rocks to start the processes that made the soil beneath your feet. Water, as Once again the land uplifted and created a wide rain, softened and eroded the hard materials and flood plain. then settled and became a swampy transported them to other areas. lake. During this time. the colorful Morrison Formation. with its reds. purples. green3, yellows, The geologic story goes back millions of years. and grays, was deposited. It can be seen best as Two deposits are of the Permian Period, when a you approach the monument from the east, where shallow sea covered the area before the begin- it forms badlands. nings of life, but these are not easily seen. How- ever, standing by the visitor center, you can see This tranquil setting of swamp deposition was several formations which lie above the Kaibab changed by the slow encroachment of the Cre- Formation of the Permian.
    [Show full text]
  • A Hydrometeorological Look at a Utah Flash Flood
    Western Region Technical Attachment No. 93-22 August 3, 1993 A HYDROMETEOROLOGICAL LOOK AT A UTAH FLASH FLOOD Brian Mcinerney · WSFO Salt Lake City Craig C. Schmidt · WSFO Portland Introduction On Friday, July 24, 1992, a flash flood occurred on the Grand Wash in south central Utah and continued into Capitol Reef National Park on the Fremont River (Map 1). July 24th is a state holiday, with peak visitor attendance in the state's national parks. During this period, the Grand Wash is normally dry and only experiences flows during very heavy runoff. On the morning of the flash flood, the wash was dry, but quickly rose and became a flash flood by early afternoon. Many visitors were swimming in the Fremont River at the park during the early afternoon hours, and left just minutes before the flooding would have reached them. Other recreationalists were stranded in and near the area due to the rising water in both the Grand Wash and the Fremont River. Meteorological Discussion The flash flood was caused by a single thunderstorm cell that developed in a typical synoptic weather pattern for July in Utah. A number of meteorological factors considered favorable for thunderstorm development existed, but flash flood potential was minimal. At 1200 UTC 24 July, a positive-tilt trough was present over the western United States, with the axis extending from the Washington/ Idaho border, across Oregon, and over the Pacific Ocean. At 250 mb (Fig. 1), the Great Basin was under a strong southwesterly jet ahead of the trough, with southern Utah positioned under the favorable right-rear quadrant of the jet maximum.
    [Show full text]
  • Andrew E. Godfrey" Benjamin L. Everitt A, Jose F. Martin Duque B.*
    Episodic sediment delivery and landscape connectivity in the Mancos Shale badlands and Fremont River system, Utah, USA Andrew E. Godfrey" Benjamin L. Everitt a, Jose F. Martin Duque b.* ·170 W 300 North, Ivins, Utah 84738, USA b Department of Geodynamics, Complutense UnivelSity, 28040 Madrid, Spain ABSTRACT The FremontRiver drains about 1000 km2 of Mancos Shale badlands, which provide a large percentage of the total sediment load of its middle and lower reaches. Factors controlling sediment movement include: weathering that produces thin paralithic soils, mass movement events that move the soil onto locations susceptible to fluvial transport, intense precipitation events that move the sediment along rills and across Keywords: local pediments, and finally FremontRiver floods that move the sediment to the main-stem ColoradoRiver. Mancos Shale badlands Erosion A forty-year erosion-pin study has shown that down-slope creep moves the weathered shale crust an Mass movement average of 5.9 cm/yr. Weather records and our monitoring show that wet winters add large slab failures and Connectivity mudflows.Recent sediment-trap studies show that about 95% of sediment movement across pediments is Coupling accomplished by high-intensity summer convective storms.Between 1890 and 1910, a series of large autumn Arroyo cutting floods swept down the Fremont River, eroding its floodplain and transforming it from a narrow and meandering channel to a broad, braided one.Beginning about 1940, the Fremont's channel began to narrow. Sequential aerial photos and cross-sections suggest that floodplain construction since about 1966 has stored about 4000 to 8000 m3 of sediment per kilometer per year.
    [Show full text]