DOCSLIB.ORG

Leaf Litter Processing in a Regulated Rocky Mountain Stream

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Leaf Litter Processing in a Regulated Rocky Mountain Stream The above data clearly demonstrate selectivity in the Aureliu rmurita L. (Scyphozoa, Semaeostomae). Wiss. diets of the four colnrnon species that show predation Martin Luther Univ. HaBle-i$litter-aberg hfath. Naturwiss on other coelenterates. However. no predator was de- Reihe 33) : 479-482. M. pendent on a single prey species. Tt is difficult to evaluate HYMN, L. 2940. Ob5ervations and experiments on the physiology of medusae. Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 79: the degree of competition involved. Not only do the 282-296. four species vary in period of maximum abundance in LEBOUK,M. V. 1922. The food of plankton organisnas. J. Mar the bay but all four species will accept noncoelenterate Riol. Assoc. U.M. 12: 644-677. prey. This study will be extended to investigate preda- 1923. The food of plankton organisms HI. J. Mar. tion on other possible prey including fish larvae. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 13: 70-92. LC)C;INOVA,N. P., AND N. M. PERZOVA.1967. Some data on Acknowledgnie~zts- We are very grateful for the facil- ecology of feeding of pelagic Coelemterata in the White ities of the Pacific Biological Station, Nanaimo, B.C., where Sea. Issled. Fauny Morei 7415): 21-28. (In Russian) this study was carried out and the cooperation of the staff. ~~CCORMICK,J. M. 1969. Trophic relationships of hydro- Dr Z. Kabata kindly translated several Russian papers. Miss medusae in Yaquina Bay, Oregon. Northwest Sci. 43: Valerie Overend assisted in collection of specimens. The 207-2 14. project was supported by NRC Grant A2007 to M.N.A. PETIPA,T. S.? E. V. PAVLOVA,AND C;. N. MIRONOV.1970. The food web structure utilization and transport of energy by trophic levels in the planktonic communities, p. 142-167. It1 J. H. Steele [ed.] Marine food chains. Oliver and Boyd, AGASSIZ,L. 1862. Contribution to the natural history of the Edinburgh. 552 p. United States of America. Second Monograph. IV. PLOTNIKOVA,E. D. 1961. On the diet of medusae in the littoral MydroBdae 4: 183-372. pl. 16-35. of Eastern Murman, p. 153--156. I/? M. M. Kamshilov FOMBPS.E. 1848. A monograph of the British naked eyed [ed.] Hydrological and biological features of the shore medusae with figures of all the species. The Ray Society waters of Murman. Akad. Nauk USSR Kolsk. Fil. Publication, London. 104 p., pl. 1-13. (In Russian) FRASER,J. H. 1969. Experimental feeding of some medusae SOUTHWARD,A. 3. 1955. Observations on the ciliary currents and Chaetognatha. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 26: 1743- of the jelly-fish AIIT~~~LIrmrifu L. 1. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 1762. 34: 201-216. C~REVE,W. 1970. Cultivation experiments on North Sea SVESPINIKOV,V. A. 1963. The feeding habits of jelly-fish as ctenophores. Helgol. Wiss. Meeresunters. 20: 304-317. possible rivals of the White Sca herring, Mosco\v Univ. 1971. Okologische U~~tersuchungenan Pleurobrtrcllitr Belmorsk. Biologichesk. Tr. 2: 246-249. (In Russian; piieus. 1. Freilanduntersuchurlgen. Helgol. Wiss. Meeie- English abstract) sunters 22: 303-325. ZELICKMAN,E. A. 1076. The biology of a little known neritic 1972. Okologische Untersuchungen an Pl~urobrctclriu hydromedusa Poi~.orchis kurufirroc~nsis (I'olyorchidae: pilrus. 2. Laboratoriumsuntersuchungen. Helgol. Wiss. Coelenterata). Tr. Inst. Okeanol. Altad. Nauk SSSR. 105: Meeresunters. 23 : 141-164. 210-213. (In Russian; English abstract) HUN~LEY,M. C., AND L. A. HOBSON.1978. Medusa predation ZELICKMAN,E. A., V. 1. GELFAND,AND M. A. SHIFKIN.1969. and plankton dynamics in a temperate fjord, British Growth, reproduction and nutrition of some Barents Sea Columbia. J. Fish. Kes. Board Can. 35: 257-261. hydromedusae in natural aggregations. Mar. Biol. (Berl.) HUSING,J. 0. 1956. Zur Frage der Ernahrung der Ohrenclualle 4: 167-173. Leaf Litter Processing in a Regulated Rocky Mountain Stream Depurtnzet~tof Zoology and en tor no log^, Coloru~loState Umivtlrsity, Fort Collins, CCd 80523, USA Snron~,W. A., AND J. V. WARD.1980. Leaf litter processing in a regulated Rocky Mountain stream. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 37:123-127. Processing of alder (Alrurs tenuijbliu) was investigated during autumn and winter to determine the influence of stream regulation on leaf litter processing. Study sites were the Colorado River below Granby Dam and the Frasei. River, an unregulated tributary. Alder leaves (5-g units) were attached to bricks and placed in riffles. Lcaching controls were re- trieved after 48 h; thereafter five replicates were collected from each site after 17, 38, 52, and 66 d. There were significant differences (P < 0.05) in processing rates B-xtween sites. The loss rate coetiticient (X:) was much higher (X: = 0.0462) for leaves incubated in the regulated section 'Present address: Departmeiat of Biological Sciences, North 'Texas State University, Denton, TX 76203, USA. Printed in Canada (55676) Imprim6 au Canada (55676) CAN. J. FISH. AQUAT. SCI., VOL. 37, 1080 of the Colorado River than for those in the unregulated tributary (k = 0.0235 1. The hypothesis that reductions in macroinvertebrate shredders would decrease processing rates of leaf litter in regulated streams was not supported by the results. The "winter warm" thermal regime below the reservoir seems to compensate for the virtual absence of shredder species apparently by enhanced microbial processing. Kej, words: Colorado River. leaf litter, macroinvertebrates, Rocky Mountains, stream regula- tion, temperature SHORT,R. A., AND J. V. WAI~D.1980. Leaf litter processing in a regulated Rocky Mountain stream. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 37: 123-127 Dans le but de determiner l'influence du contrdle d'un cours d'eau sur la transformation de la litikre de feuilles dans un cours d'eau des montagnes Kocheuses, nous avons 6tudiC la transformation de l'aulne (Alnus terrrl{f'oliu) en automne et en hiver. Les recherches ont Ctl eb'fectuCes sur le fleuve Colorado, en aval du barrage Granby et sur la rivikre Fraser, un tribu- taire non contrale. Bes feuilles d'aulne (unites de 5 g) furent attachees h des briques et plackes dans des .maigres)) le 29 septembre. Des temoins de lessivage furent enleves aprks 48 h; par la suite, 5 reproductions furent recueillies h chaque site aprks 17, 38, 52 et 66 jours. 11 y a des differences signiticatives (P < 0,05) de taux de transformation entre les sites. Le coeficient de taux de perte (k) est beaucoup plus Cleve (k - 0,0462) pour des feuilles incubees dans la section contrdlee du fleuve Colorado que celles placees dans le tributaire non contr816 (k = 0,0235). Les resultats de cette etude n'appuient donc pas l'hypothkse que la diminution des macroinver- tCbrCs dechiqueteurs ralentit la transformation de la litikre vCg6tale dans des cours d'eau con- trdlCs. LC regime thermique de xchaleur hivernale. en aval du reservoir semble compenser l'absence virtuelle d'espkces dechiqueteuses par une transformation microbienne plus active. Received June 15, 1979 Re~ule 15 juin 1979 Accepted October 4, 1979 Accept6 le 4 octobre 1979 DETERMINATIONSof leaf litter processing rates have stream bottom was predominantlgl rubble in both study generated a great deal of information concerning stream sections. During the study period, discharge averaged 0.54 ecosystem strrlcture and function (e.g. Petersen and m"/sin the Colorado River and 0.53 m.'/s in the Fraser River. Total dissolved solids (35.7 mdL: 65.4 mg/L) and Cumnlins 1974; et al. g75; Benfield et 1977) sedell methyl orange a1 kalinity ( I1.0 mg/L; 22.5 mg/L) values and have provided an experimental means to test vari- ,ere somewhat in the River. ous hypotheses (Reice 1974, 1977)- 'The leaf pack (53 .g/L; 43 rg/L) and pH (7.6: 7.4) exhibited similar method has also been used as a bioassay to determine values at both locations. There were, however, collsider- the effects of man's activities on streams (Triska and able differencs in water tenlperature (discused later) be- Sedell 1976; Gelroth and Marzolf 1978). One signifi- tween the regulated and unregulated streams. cant anthropogenic impact has been the construction Experimental procedures - Alder (Alties tenuifolia) leaves of numerous reservoirs on previously free-flowing were collected in September 1978 immediately prior to streams. Large dams may greatly physic'- abscissioll. The leaves were air-dried then oven-dried at chemical conditions of downstream reaches with re- 60°C for 48 h and weighed into 5-g units and strung on sultant changes in the diversity, density, and composi- monofilament line. A single- leaf nack was lashed to each tisn of the nlacrsinvertebrate fauna (Ward 1976a; brick and placed into a rime area of each stream on Sep- Ward and Stanford 1979). Since there is a selective tember 29. After 48 h, three replicate lcaf packs were re- elimination sf certain taxonomic and functional groups trieved from each site to serve as leaching controls. There- (Ward and short 19781, it was hypothesized that leaf after five replicates were collected from each site aAer 17, litter processing would be altered by stream regulation. 38, 52, and 66 d in the stream. At the time of collection the leaf pack was cut free of the brick and placed into a leaf pack The method was to determine the in- plastic bag containing 5% formalin. In the laboratory the fluence of stream regulation by dams on leaf litter pro- leaf Dack was thoroughlv rinsed with ta~water to remove cessing rate. accuiulated sedimen;, dried at 60°C for.48 h, and weighed (k0.1 g). Macroinvertebrates associated with the leaf pack Materials and nlethods - Study area - Study sites were were placed into 80% EtOH until identified and enumerated. on the Colorado River below Lake Granby and on the Dry weight of macroinvertebrates was determined follow- Fraser River, a major tributary unregulated by dams.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Code of Colorado Regulations 1 H
    DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Division of Wildlife CHAPTER W-1 - FISHING 2 CCR 406-1 [Editor’s Notes follow the text of the rules at the end of this CCR Document.] _________________________________________________________________________ ARTICLE I - GENERAL PROVISIONS #100 – DEFINITIONS See also 33-1-102, C.R.S and Chapter 0 of these regulations for other applicable definitions. A. "Artificial flies and lures" means devices made entirely of, or a combination of, natural or synthetic non-edible, non-scented (regardless if the scent is added in the manufacturing process or applied afterward), materials such as wood, plastic, silicone, rubber, epoxy, glass, hair, metal, feathers, or fiber, designed to attract fish. This definition does not include anything defined as bait in #100.B below. B. "Bait" means any hand-moldable material designed to attract fish by the sense of taste or smell; those devices to which scents or smell attractants have been added or externally applied (regardless if the scent is added in the manufacturing process or applied afterward); scented manufactured fish eggs and traditional organic baits, including but not limited to worms, grubs, crickets, leeches, dough baits or stink baits, insects, crayfish, human food, fish, fish parts or fis h eggs. C. "Chumming" means placing fish, parts of fish, or other material upon which fish might feed in the waters of this state for the purpose of attracting fish to a particular area in order that they might be taken, but such term shall not include fishing with baited hooks or live traps. D. “Game fish” means all species of fish except unregulated species, prohibited nongame, endangered and threatened species, which currently exist or may be introduced into the state and which are classified as game fish by the Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • Report No. REC-ERC-90-L, “Compilation Report on the Effects
    REC-ERC-SO-1 January 1990 Denver Office U. S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation 7-2090 (4-81) Bureau of Reclamation TECHNICAL REEPORT STANDARD TITLE PAG 3. RECIPIENT’S CATALOG ~0. 5. REPORT DATE Compilation Report on the Effects January 1990 of Reservoir Releases on 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE Downstream Ecosystems D-3742 7. AUTHOR(S) 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION E. Cheslak REPORT NO. J. Carpenter REC-ERC-90-1 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. WORK UNIT NO. Bureau of Reclamation Denver Office 11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO. Denver CO 80225 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS Same 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE DIBR 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Microfiche and/or hard copy available at the Denver Office, Denver, Colorado. Ed: RDM 16. ABSTRACT Most of the dams built by the Bureau of Reclamation were completed before environmental regulations such as the Clean Water Act, National Environmental Protection Act, or Toxic Substances Control Act existed. The management and operation of dams was instituted under conditions where the ecology of the downstream habitat was unknown and largely ignored. Changing or modifying structures, flow regimes, and land use patterns are some of the efforts being pursued by the Bureau to reconcile or mitigate the effects of impoundment to comply with these environmental policies and to maximize the potential for recreation, fisheries, and water quality in tailwater habitats for the water resource users. The purpose of this report is to provide a reference document intended to aid in the management, compliance, and problem solving processes necessary to accomplish these goals in Bureau tailwater habitats.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado-Big Thompson Project
    75TH CONGRESS} DOCUMENT 1" Session . SENATE { No. 80 COLORADO-BIG THOMPSON PROJECT SYNOPSIS OF REPORT ON COLORADO-BIG THOMPSON PROJECT, PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT AND COST ESTIMATE PRE­ PARED BY THE BUREAU OF RECLAMA­ TION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR PRESENTED BY MR. ADAMS JUNE 15, 1937-0rdered to be printed without illustrations UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON: 1931 Pare Letter of Northern Colorado Water Users' Association ___________ . ____ _ VII Letter of the Western Slope Protective Association ___________________ _ VII Outline of con.struction and operating conditions·___________ ~ ____ .:. _____ _ 1 Manner of operation of,project facilities ,and auxiliary features_, _______ _ 2 Summa.ry-Colorado-Blg Thompson proJect __________ .. ______________ _ 5 Histo~----------_--------------------_----------------- 5 Irrigation use ________________________ ._______ - _ - __ --- __ - __________ _ 6 Need of sopplemental water __________________________ . ________ _ 6: Supplemental 'water supply ________________________________________ _ 8 Land classification-Colorado River areas _______________________ _ 9 Water supply ___________________________________ ~ ____ ._ - ___ - __ . ___ _ 10 Yield of Granby Reservoir __________ ~ __ - _~ _____ --- _---- _ - ______ _ 11 Effect of the diversion on western slope development. _____________ _ 13 Diversion plan and structures ______________________ - _______________ _ Replacement _________________________________________________ _ 14 14 Granby Reservoir storage ______________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix M. Wilding and Sanderson. a Pictorial Guide to Riparian
    Appendix M A Pictorial Guide to Riparian Changes Following Flow Alteration This page left intentionally blank. A pictorial guide to riparian changes following flow alteration Thomas Wilding, Colorado State University John Sanderson, The Nature Conservancy There are many examples in the scientific literature of how stream and river ecosystems respond to flow modification (for a starting point, see Poff et al. 1997). A pilot study for the Roaring Fork basin presented “flow-ecology” relationships that describe the relationship of flow modification with cottonwood, warmwater fish, trout and invertebrates (Watershed Flow Evaluation Tool Pilot; CDM 2009). After receiving feedback on the pilot study from the basin roundtable, improved flow-ecology relationships were then developed for the upper Colorado River. This included further work on cottonwood and willow plant communities (Wilding and Sanderson 2010), warmwater fish (Wilding et al. 2011b), and invertebrates (Wilding et al. 2011a). Predicting how ecosystems and species respond to flow alteration is key to environmental flow assessments. The predictions from scientific models, including flow- ecology relationships, are represented as numbers. If you cannot picture what these numbers translate to in reality then the models are not particularly informative for understanding the consequences of flow alteration. So we were asked to show how the numbers translate to real-life examples, presenting pictures of how plants and animals respond to flow change. Our objective is to present examples that clearly and succinctly illustrate flow-induced changes for riparian vegetation (plants beside streams). For each example, the information presented includes the source, flow alteration and a picture showing the ecological change.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Colorado River Basin Water Resources Planning Model User's
    Upper Colorado River Basin Water Resources Planning Model User’s Manual July 2016 Table of Contents TABLE OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................. IV TABLE OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... VI 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1‐1 1.1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................. 1‐1 1.2 DEVELOPMENT OF THE UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASIN WATER RESOURCES PLANNING MODEL ...................... 1‐1 1.3 RESULTS .......................................................................................................................................... 1‐2 1.4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................................... 1‐3 2. WHAT’S IN THIS DOCUMENT .................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.1 SCOPE OF THIS MANUAL ..................................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.2 MANUAL CONTENTS .......................................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.3 WHAT’S IN OTHER CDSS DOCUMENTATION ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Windy Gap Firming Project Water Resources Technical Report
    Windy Gap Firming Project Water Resources Technical Report U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Great Plains Region December 2007 Water Resources Technical Report Windy Gap Firming Project prepared by ERO Resources Corporation 1842 Clarkson Street Denver, Colorado 80218 and Boyle Engineering Corporation 215 Union Blvd., Suite 500 Lakewood, Colorado 80228 Acronyms and Abbreviations AF acre-feet BESTSM Boyle Engineering Stream Simulation Model C-BT Colorado-Big Thompson Project CDSS Colorado Decision Support System cfs cubic feet per sect CRWCD Colorado River Water Conservation District CWCB Colorado Water Conservation Board DW Denver Water EIS Environmental Impact Statement EOM end-of-month HUP Historic User’s Pool MPWCD Middle Park Water Conservancy District Non-Participants Windy Gap unit holders not participating in the Firming Project NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NCWCD Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District PACSM Platte and Colorado Simulations Model Participants Windy Gap Firming Project Participants Reclamation U.S. Bureau of Reclamation SEO State Engineer’s Office USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey WCFC Willow Creek Feeder Canal WGFP Windy Gap Firming Project WWTP Wastewater treatment plant Alternatives Alternative 1 — No Action, Enlarge Ralph Price Reservoir Alternative 2 — Proposed Action, Chimney Hollow Reservoir with Prepositioning Alternative 3 — Chimney Hollow Reservoir and Jasper East Reservoir Alternative 4 — Chimney Hollow Reservoir and Rockwell/Mueller
    [Show full text]
  • Il\)S-Fred'y\ -Ptow ~Ystem
    ·"' EFFECTS OF Y'.:..OW PA'rTERNS BELOW LARGE a stronger preference for overhead bank cover than do smaller DAMS ON STRE..bJi BENTHOS: ~ REVIEW though competition and territoriality may explain this James V. Ward ., difference. ,,.· Department of Zoology and Entomology 2) The been d~vei~ped is a habitat Colorado State University .. · Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 ioss of available trout I' ABSTRACT and the I sections investigated, The variously modified flow patterns below dams ~e considered in rela­ ' to exist between le cov;: and. standing tionship to the effects Qn ecological factors of importance to the benthic crop. this area is needed to allow the biologist communities of receiving streams. Species composition and diversity are coo­ the siderably modified by upstream impoundments. Benthic standing crop may be ~0 uantify the biological significance of dewatering enhanced or reduced, largely depending on the flow regime. Daily flow fluctu­ of various stream reaches. ations, if not too severe, may b~ associated with dense benthic populations as long as a relatively constant seasonal flow pattern is maintained. Little is known regarding subtle, sublethal effects of dams on life cycle phenomena and biotic interactions and more data are needed on current preferenda of import­ ant fish food species. Any flow regime which significantly reduces habitat diversity should be avoided. A diverse substrate with silt-free interstices will considerably reduce deleterious effects of periods of reduced flow, I 1: fluctuating flow and high current velocity. In establishing flow criteria for benthos, each dam must be considered individually. INTRODUCTION The productivity, diversity and composition of the stream benthic community is extremely important to the total functioning of the stream eco­ Needs • Soui€e.e.~ Il\)s-fred'Y\ -Ptow ~ystem.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality and Trend Analysis of Colorado-Big Thompson System
    Water Quality and Trend Analysis of Colorado–Big Thompson System Reservoirs and Related Conveyances, 1969 Through 2000 By Michael R. Stevens Prepared in cooperation with the NORTHERN COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, and the CITY OF FORT COLLINS Water-Resources Investigations Report 03–4044 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2003 For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. iii Contents Abstract.......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................. 2 Previous Studies and Acknowledgments........................................................................................ 3 Description of Study Area .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Lake Clarity Stakeholders Memorandum Of
    Memorandum of Understanding No. 16-LM-60-2578 I. WHEREAS, the proposed Windy Gap Firming Project, which will transport water from the Colorado River through the west slope features of the C-BT Project for delivery to the front range of Colorado is subject to a permit from Grand County memorialized in Grand County Resolution No.2021 PA- 1 2-1 ("20 12 Permit"). Condition 7 of the 201 2 Permit provides in pertinent part that "the 201 2 Permit shall not be effective until the Clarity MOU ... [has] been executed;" J. WHEREAS, for the purposes of this MOU, the Three Lakes System includes Grand Lake, Shadow Mountain Reservoir, Granby Reservoir, and the Colorado River between Shadow Mountain Reservoir and Granby Reservoir. K. WHEREAS, the Water Quality Control Commission ("Commission") adopted a narrative clarity standard and numeric clarity standard (with a delayed effective date) for Grand Lake in 2008. The Commission amended both standards in 2014. L. WHEREAS, the Commission's current clarity standard is: "The highest level of clarity attainable, consistent with the exercise of established water rights, the protection of aquatic life, and protection of water quality throughout the Three Lakes system." 5 CCR 1002-33, Numeric Standards Table, at p. 13 (June 30, 2015). M. WHEREAS, the Commission stated in 2014 that: "sufficient effort has not yet been focused on determining an "attainable" level of cia rity that is consistent with the constraints identified in the narrative standard", and that "the Commission expects and anticipates a cooperative effort that will focus on identifying an attainable and protective Grand Lake clarity standard".
    [Show full text]
  • Summer 2012 Magazine
    Summer 2012 RECLAMATIONManaging Water in the West Plains Talk NEWS FROM THE GREAT PLAINS REGION CAN HYDROPOWER HELP MEET GROWING ENERGY DEMANDS? “THE 97 PERCENT OF EXISTING DAMS ... REPRESENT HUGE POTENTIAL.” THE FUTURE OF WATER: SHIFTING POPULATION, CLIMATE STRESS AND OTHER CHALLENGES FACE RECLAMATION IN THE 21st CENTURY Plains Talk Issue 01-2012: contents PUBLISHER Tyler Johnson 1 Hydropower - The Search for Untapped Energy “The 97 percent of existing dams in the U.S. that are not currently producing power represent EDITOR-IN-CHIEF huge potential.” Buck Feist ASSISTANT EDITOR 4 Always On Sterling Rech Reclamation harnesses the power of the Internet to advance its mission and highlight its objec- GRAPHICS tives to internal and external audiences. Jerry Leggate Tobias Taylor 6 Hall Recognized for Advancing Rural Water “It has been extremely gratifying to work with rural water systems ... to be a small part in the NEWSPAPER TEAM delivery of high quality water to rural areas.” Paula Holwegner, Montana Patience Hurley, Dakotas Jay Dallman, Wyoming 7 Plant Operators Get “SCADA-fied!” Kara Lamb, Colorado Kimberley Parish, Oklahoma & Texas The SCADA system monitors and controls water treatment plant operations by gathering data Lois Conway, Nebraska & Kansas from sensors at the facility and then sending the information to a central computer system. Plains Talk is an employee publication devoted to the in- 8 Anniversary Year Spectacular: terests of Reclamation’s Great Plains Region. Fry-Ark and C-BT Hit Milestones Plains Talk is published from Reclamation celebrates the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project and Colorado Big-Thompson Project the Great Plains Office of Pub- after 75 years of serving the public.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Flow and Salt Computation Methods, Calendar Years 1971-1995
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository) Depository) 12-2005 Natural Flow and Salt Computation Methods, Calendar Years 1971-1995 James Prairie Russell Callejo Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/govdocs Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Prairie, James and Callejo, Russell, "Natural Flow and Salt Computation Methods, Calendar Years 1971-1995" (2005). All U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository). Paper 135. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/govdocs/135 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository) at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository) by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Natural Flow And Salt Computation Methods Calendar Years 1971-1995 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation Upper Colorado Regional Office Lower Colorado Regional Office Technical Services and Dams Division Boulder Canyon Operations Office Water Quality Group River Operations Group Salt Lake City, Utah Boulder City, Nevada December 2005 Natural Flow And Salt Computation Methods Calendar Years 1971-1995 by James Prairie Russell Callejo U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment-2011-088 Granby Hydropower Project Eastern Colorado Area Office Great Plains Region
    Environmental Assessment-2011-088 Granby Hydropower Project Eastern Colorado Area Office Great Plains Region Photo courtesy of Northern; © 2012 Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. All rights reserved. March 2015 MISSION STATEMENTS The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. ii Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1 PROPOSED ACTION ................................................................................................................ 1 NEED FOR AND PURPOSE OF ACTION ............................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ........................................................................................... 3 Colorado Big-Thompson Project ............................................................................................ 3 Lease of Power Privilege ........................................................................................................ 3 SCOPING ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]