DOCSLIB.ORG

Lake Powell Pipeline Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Lake Powell Pipeline Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement Coconino and Mohave Counties, Arizona Kane and Washington Counties, Utah Estimated Lead Agency Total Costs Associated with Developing this EIS $1,474,000 U.S. Department of the Interior June 2020 Mission Statements Department of the Interior The Department of the Interior conserves and manages the Nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage for the benefit and enjoyment of the American people, provides scientific and other information about natural resources and natural hazards to address societal challenges and create opportunities for the American people, and honors the Nation’s trust responsibilities or special commitments to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated island communities to help them prosper. Bureau of Indian Affairs The Bureau of Indian Affairs’ mission is to enhance the quality of life, to promote economic opportunity, and to carry out the responsibility to protect and improve the trust assets of American Indians, Indian tribes and Alaska Natives. Bureau of Land Management The Bureau of Land Management’s mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. Bureau of Reclamation 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. National Park Service The National Park Service preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. The Park Service cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service The Fish and Wildlife Service’s mission is to work with others to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. U.S. Department of the Interior June 2020 Lake Powell Pipeline Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement Coconino and Mohave Counties, Arizona Kane and Washington Counties, Utah Cover Photo: Reclamation, usbr.gov U.S. Department of the Interior June 2020 Lake Powell Pipeline Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement Dear Reader: Enclosed is the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and Draft Arizona Strip Field Office Resource Management Plan Amendment (RMPA) for the Lake Powell Pipeline Project (LPP, or Proposed Project). Lead and Cooperating Agencies. The DEIS/Draft RMPA was prepared by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) as the Lead Agency, in consultation with the following Cooperating Agencies: Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians (Tribe), National Park Service (NPS), and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Public Scoping and Comment. Reclamation has incorporated input from various government agencies and organizations into this DEIS/Draft RMPA, considering comments received during public scoping conducted by the BLM from June 22 to August 3, 2018, specifically on the RMPA sub-alternatives, and from December 6, 2019 to January 10, 2020, on the entire Proposed Project, including the sub-alternatives. Proposed Project. This DEIS was prepared to evaluate the potential consequences of the Proposed Project on the human and natural environment as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Based on projected population growth in Washington County through the year 2060, water demands will exceed Virgin River Basin surface and groundwater supplies, resulting in shortages. A second, reliable water supply is needed to meet existing and future water demand. Pursuant to the Lake Powell Pipeline Development Act, the Utah Board of Water Resources (UBWR) proposes to build a water conveyance system with inline hydroelectric components spanning from Lake Powell’s Glen Canyon Dam in Page, Arizona, to water storage facilities near St. George, Utah (approximately 141 miles in length). Federal Decisions to be Made. The following table lists the decisions to be made by each cooperating agency in response to the UBWR’s proposal under the different action alternatives. Agency Southern Alternative Highway Alternative BIA No decision Right-of-way (ROW) grant BLM ROW grants and RMPA ROW grants NPS ROW permit ROW permit Reclamation Lake Powell Pipeline Project (LPP) water LPP water exchange contract and exchange contract and easement easement USFWS No decision No decision Structure of the DEIS. This document comprises the main body, which provides the primary presentation of the Proposed Project, the baseline conditions, and the evaluation of the proposed action alternatives on the natural and human environment. It also includes supporting appendices. Additional information has been incorporated into the DEIS by reference. The body of the DEIS is organized as follows: • Chapter 1 addresses the purpose and need for the Proposed Project and the decisions to be made based on the UBWR proposal. • Chapter 2 describes two action alternatives and the No Action Alternative. Other alternatives that were considered but eliminated from detailed analysis are also described in Chapter 2. • Chapter 3 describes the affected environment and the direct and indirect effects on individual resources resulting from each alternative. i • Chapter 4 describes the irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources of the action alternatives and No Action Alternative. • Chapter 5 evaluates cumulative effects of the action alternatives and No Action Alternative. • Chapter 6 lists the references used throughout the document. • Chapter 7 lists acronyms throughout the document. • Chapter 8 contains the list of preparers. • Chapter 9 includes an index of key terms used in this document. The following appendices contain supporting information: • Appendix A details the consultation and coordination for the Proposed Project. • Appendix B provides additional detail on the purpose and need for the Proposed Project. • Appendix C includes the Supplemental Resource Reports for all resources. • Appendix D presents the analysis and perspective of the tribes. • Appendix E includes the Plan of Development for the Proposed Project. Final EIS (FEIS). The FEIS/Proposed RMPA will be prepared following public and agency comment on the DEIS/Draft RMPA. Reclamation will file a Notice of Availability with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announcing availability of the FEIS for interested parties to review. Protest. Pursuant to 43 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §§ 1610.4-8 and 1610.5-1(b), any person who participated in the planning process for this RMPA and has an interest that is or may be adversely affected by the RMPA decision may protest approval of the RMPA decision contained therein. The protest period only applies to the BLM RMPA decision. Governor’s Consistency Review. Pursuant to 43 CFR §§ 1610.3-2(e), prior to the approval of a proposed RMPA, the BLM State Director shall submit to the Governor of the State(s) involved, the RMPA and shall identify any known inconsistencies with State or local plans, policies or programs. Record of Decision. As a “major infrastructure project” under Executive Order 13807, the Proposed Project is subject to the Memorandum of Understanding implementing One Federal Decision. The Secretary of the Interior will issue a Record of Decision outlining the federal agencies’ decision, including the alternative selected and the environmental commitments required of the UBWR. This concludes the NEPA and planning processes. Sincerely, Rick Baxter, Program Manager Interior Region 7 – Upper Colorado Basin Bureau of Reclamation Provo Area Office 302 East Lakeview Parkway Provo, Utah 84606 Phone: (801) 379-1078 Email: [email protected] ii Contents Page Executive Summary ............................................................................................1 ES-1 Project Background ............................................................................................... 1 ES-2 Scoping .................................................................................................................... 2 ES-3 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................. 3 ES-4 Alternatives ............................................................................................................. 4 ES-4.1 Comparison of the Action Alternatives ................................................... 4 ES-5 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ............................ 5 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 6 1.1 Project Background .................................................................................................. 6 1.2 Statement of Purpose and Need ............................................................................. 8 1.2.1 Need for the Project ....................................................................................... 9 1.2.2 Project Proponent’s Objectives .................................................................... 9 1.2.3 Project Purpose ............................................................................................... 9 1.3 Agency Decisions .....................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR

    Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR

    Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR Colorado River at Mile 50. Cover: Salt River. Letter from the President ivers are the great treasury of noted scientists and other experts reviewed the survey design, and biological diversity in the western state-specific experts reviewed the results for each state. RUnited States. As evidence mounts The result is a state-by-state list of more than 250 of the West’s that climate is changing even faster than we outstanding streams, some protected, some still vulnerable. The feared, it becomes essential that we create Great Rivers of the West is a new type of inventory to serve the sanctuaries on our best, most natural rivers modern needs of river conservation—a list that Western Rivers that will harbor viable populations of at-risk Conservancy can use to strategically inform its work. species—not only charismatic species like salmon, but a broad range of aquatic and This is one of 11 state chapters in the report. Also available are a terrestrial species. summary of the entire report, as well as the full report text. That is what we do at Western Rivers Conservancy. We buy land With the right tools in hand, Western Rivers Conservancy is to create sanctuaries along the most outstanding rivers in the West seizing once-in-a-lifetime opportunities to acquire and protect – places where fish, wildlife and people can flourish. precious streamside lands on some of America’s finest rivers. With a talented team in place, combining more than 150 years This is a time when investment in conservation can yield huge of land acquisition experience and offices in Oregon, Colorado, dividends for the future.
  • Scoping Report: Grand Staircase-Escalante National

    Scoping Report: Grand Staircase-Escalante National

    CONTENTS 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 1 2 Scoping Process ....................................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Purpose of Scoping ........................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Scoping Outreach .............................................................................................................................. 3 2.2.1 Publication of the Notice of Intent ....................................................................................... 3 2.2.2 Other Outreach Methods ....................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Opportunities for Public Comment ................................................................................................ 3 2.4 Public Scoping Meetings .................................................................................................................. 4 2.5 Cooperating Agency Involvement ................................................................................................... 4 2.6 National Historic Preservation Act and Tribal Consultation ....................................................... 5 3 Submission Processing and Comment Coding .................................................................................... 5
  • Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna of the Kaiparowits Basin

    Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna of the Kaiparowits Basin

    Great Basin Naturalist Volume 40 Number 4 Article 2 12-31-1980 Terrestrial vertebrate fauna of the Kaiparowits Basin N. Duane Atwood U.S. Forest Service, Provo, Utah Clyde L. Pritchett Brigham Young University Richard D. Porter U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Provo, Utah Benjamin W. Wood Brigham Young University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Atwood, N. Duane; Pritchett, Clyde L.; Porter, Richard D.; and Wood, Benjamin W. (1980) "Terrestrial vertebrate fauna of the Kaiparowits Basin," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 40 : No. 4 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol40/iss4/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. TERRESTRIAL VERTEBRATE FAUNA OF THE KAIPAROWITS BASIN N. Diiane Atwood', Clyde L. Pritchctt', Richard D. Porter', and Benjamin W. Wood' .\bstr^ct.- This report inehides data collected during an investigation by Brighani Young University personnel to 1976, as well as a literature from 1971 review. The fauna of the Kaiparowits Basin is represented by 7 species of salamander, toads, mnphihians (1 5 and 1 tree frog), 29 species of reptiles (1 turtle, 16 lizards, and 12 snakes), 183 species of birds (plus 2 hypothetical), and 74 species of mammals. Geographic distribution of the various species within the basin are discussed. Birds are categorized according to their population and seasonal status.
  • Grand Canyon National Park U.S

    Grand Canyon National Park U.S

    National Park Service Grand Canyon National Park U.S. Department of the Interior The official newspaper North Rim 2015 Season The Guide North Rim Information and Maps Roosevelt Point, named for President Theodore Roosevelt who in 1908, declared Grand Canyon a national monument. Grand Canyon was later established as a national park in 1919 by President Woodrow Wilson. Welcome to Grand Canyon S ITTING ATOP THE K AIBAB a meadow, a mother turkey leading her thunderstorms, comes and goes all too flies from the South Rim, the North Plateau, 8,000 to 9,000 feet (2,400– young across the road, or a mountain quickly, only to give way to the colors Rim offers a very different visitor 2,750 m) above sea level with lush lion slinking off into the cover of the of fall. With the yellows and oranges of experience. Solitude, awe-inspiring green meadows surrounded by a mixed forest. Visitors in the spring may see quaking aspen and the reds of Rocky views, a slower pace, and the feeling of conifer forest sprinkled with white- remnants of winter in disappearing Mountain maple, the forest seems to going back in time are only a few of the barked aspen, the North Rim is an oasis snowdrifts or temporary mountain glow. Crispness in the air warns of winter many attributes the North Rim has in the desert. Here you may observe lakes of melted snow. The summer, snowstorms soon to come. Although to offer. Discover the uniqueness of deer feeding, a coyote chasing mice in with colorful wildflowers and intense only 10 miles (16 km) as the raven Grand Canyon’s North Rim.
  • STATE of UTAH DEPARTMENT of NATURAL RESOURCES Technical

    STATE of UTAH DEPARTMENT of NATURAL RESOURCES Technical

    STATE OF UTAH DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Technical Publication No. 70 GROUND-WATER CONDITIONS IN THE UPPER VIRGIN RIVER AND KANAB CREEK BASINS AREA, UTAH, WITH EMPHASIS ON THE NAVAJO SANDSTONE by R. M. Cordova Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey Prepared by the United States Geological Survey in cooperation with The Utah Department of Natural Resources Division of Water Rights 1981 CONTENTS Page Conversion factors VI Abstract 1 Introduction 2 Purpose and scope of the study.................................... 2 Previous studies and acknowledgments 2 Data-site-numbering system........................................ 3 Location and general features of the study area 3 Physiography and drainage 3 Climate 6 CuI ture and economy 9 Geologic setting 9 General characteristics of the rocks 9 General geologic structure 11 Water resources 11 Precipitation 11 Surface water 13 Runoff 13 Chemical quality 13 Ground water 16 General conditions of occurrence 16 Unconsolidated-rock aquifers 17 Consolidated-rock aquifers 19 Hydrologic properties of aquifers 20 Recharge 27 Movement 28 Discharge 30 Seepage to streams 31 Evapotranspiration 31 Springs 33 Wells 35 Subsurface outflow 36 Storage 37 Chemical quality 41 General characteristics 41 Relation to use 47 Public supply 47 Irrigation supply 47 Temperature 49 Possible hydrologic effects of increased ground-water development 50 Interference with existing wells .......................•.......... 50 Shift of the ground-water divide 55 Reduction of streamflow 56 Effects on chemical quality of water 56 Summary and conclusions 57 References cited 59 Publications of the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights 78 III ILLUSTRATIONS [Plates are in pocket] Plate 1. Map showing selected geohydrologic information in the upper Virgin River basin.
  • Halls Crossing

    Halls Crossing

    National Park Service Glen Canyon National Recreation Area U.S. Department of the Interior Rainbow Bridge National Monument Vol. 10, No. 1, 2014 The official newspaper PHOTO: Bob Moffitt Discover Glen Canyon Welcome! only 13% of Glen Canyon National Recreation overlooks. For spectacular views of the canyon Area. The impounded waters offer unparalleled country, those with 4-wheel drive vehicles Glen Canyon National Recreation Area’s varied water-based recreational opportunities where can visit less accessible areas of the park like expanses of land and water offer more than you can boat, swim, fish, water ski, camp or Alstrom Point or the Burr Trail, which begins you may think. As a unit of the National Park take a boat tour to Rainbow Bridge or Antelope in Glen Canyon and continues into Capitol Reef Service, Glen Canyon preserves and protects Canyon. National Park. over 1.2 million acres for scenic, scientific, and recreational values. Glen Canyon’s vast acreage You may be surprised to know that almost half With such recreational diversity and so many can be divided into three prominent land and of the park is managed as a proposed wilderness places to discover, visitors are often inspired to water areas, each of which offers distinct types area, meaning there is minimal development and return for further exploration. Whether it’s by of experiences for visitors from around the visitors can enjoy a more remote experience. boat, car, or foot, we invite you to experience all globe. that Glen Canyon National Recreation Area has The remainder of the park offers areas that to offer.
  • CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, and RELATED AGENCIES (Dollar Amounts in Thousands)

    CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, and RELATED AGENCIES (Dollar Amounts in Thousands)

    Appendix C CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES (dollar amounts in thousands) 2022 State Project Request U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE AK Office of Law Enforcement, Resident Agent in Charge Rehabilitate office and replace fuel storage tank .................................................................................. 350 AZ Alchesay National Fish Hatchery Replace effluent treatment system .......................................................................................................... 1,012 Replace tank house .................................................................................................................................... 1,400 CA Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge Rehabilitate South Bay flood protection levee, phase 4 ....................................................................... 1,200 MT Northwest Montana National Wildlife Refuge Complex Replace infrastructure to support field stations currently supported at the National Bison Range ..................................................................................................................... 11,533 NY Montezuma National Wildlife Refuge Replace headquarters and visitor center; co-locate with Ecological Services office ........................ 3,160 WA Makah National Fish Hatchery Replace diversion dam and fish barrier, phase 2 .................................................................................. 2,521 WI Iron River National Fish Hatchery Demolish dilapidated milking barn .......................................................................................................
  • Quantifying the Base Flow of the Colorado River: Its Importance in Sustaining Perennial Flow in Northern Arizona And

    Quantifying the Base Flow of the Colorado River: Its Importance in Sustaining Perennial Flow in Northern Arizona And

    1 * This paper is under review for publication in Hydrogeology Journal as well as a chapter in my soon to be published 2 master’s thesis. 3 4 Quantifying the base flow of the Colorado River: its importance in sustaining perennial flow in northern Arizona and 5 southern Utah 6 7 Riley K. Swanson1* 8 Abraham E. Springer1 9 David K. Kreamer2 10 Benjamin W. Tobin3 11 Denielle M. Perry1 12 13 1. School of Earth and Sustainability, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, US 14 email: [email protected] 15 2. Department of Geoscience, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, US 16 3. Kentucky Geological Survey, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, US 17 *corresponding author 18 19 Abstract 20 Water in the Colorado River is known to be a highly over-allocated resource, yet decision makers fail to consider, in 21 their management efforts, one of the most important contributions to the existing water in the river, groundwater. This 22 failure may result from the contrasting results of base flow studies conducted on the amount of streamflow into the 23 Colorado River sourced from groundwater. Some studies rule out the significance of groundwater contribution, while 24 other studies show groundwater contributing the majority flow to the river. This study uses new and extant 1 25 instrumented data (not indirect methods) to quantify the base flow contribution to surface flow and highlight the 26 overlooked, substantial portion of groundwater. Ten remote sub-basins of the Colorado Plateau in southern Utah and 27 northern Arizona were examined in detail.
  • Paria Canyon Vermilion Cliffs Wilderness Management Plan

    Paria Canyon Vermilion Cliffs Wilderness Management Plan

    01\16• ,.J ~ UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR -- BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT ~Lf 1.,.J/ t'CI/C w~P 0 ARIZONA STRIP FIELD OFFICE/KANAB RESOURCE AREA PARIA CANYONNERMILION CLIFFS WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA-AZ-01 0-97-16 I. INTRODUCTION The Paria Canyon - Vermilion Cliffs Wilderness Area contains 112,500 acres (92,500 acres in Coconino County, Arizona and 20,000 acres in Kane County, Utah) of public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management. The area is approximately 10 to 30 miles west of Page, Arizona. Included are 35 miles of the Paria river Canyon, 15 miles of the Buckskin Gulch, Coyote Buttes, and the Vermilion Cliffs from Lee's Ferry to House Rock Valley (Map 1). The Paria Canyon, Buckskin Gulch, Wire Pass, and the Coyote Buttes Special Management Area are part of the larger Paria Canyon-Vermilion Cliffs Wilderness, designated in August 1984 (Map 2). Existing management plan guidance is to protect primitive, natural conditions and the many outstanding opportunities for hiking, backpacking, photographing, or viewing in the seven different highly scenic geologic formations from which the canyons and buttes are carved. Visitor use in Paria Canyon, Buckskin Gulch, and Coyote Buttes has increased from 2,400 visits in Fiscal Year (FY) 1986 to nearly 10,000 visits in FY96-a 375% increase in use over 10 years. This increased use, combined with the narrow nature of the canyons, small camping terraces, and changing visitor use patterns, is impacting the wilderness character of these areas. Human waste, overcrowding, and public safety have become important issues.
  • Energy and Mineral Resources, Grand Staircase

    Energy and Mineral Resources, Grand Staircase

    Circular 93 Utah Geological Survey Illustration Captions View figure: Circular 93 1., 2., 3., 4., 5., 6., 7., 8., 9., 10., 11., 12., 13., 14., 15. A Preliminary Assessment of Energy and Table of Contents 1.Preface Mineral Resources within the Grand 2.Summary 3.Introduction Staircase - Escalante National Monument 4.Geology 5.Kaiparowits Plateau coal Compiled by M. Lee Allison, State Geologist field 6.Oil and Gas Potential Contributors: 7.Tar-sand Resources Robert E. Blackett, Editor 8.Non-fuel Minerals and Thomas C. Chidsey Jr., Oil and Gas Mining David E. Tabet, Coal and Coal-Bed Gas 9.Acknowledgments Robert W. Gloyn, Minerals 10.References Charles E. Bishop, Tar-Sands January 1997 UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY a division of UTAH DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CONTENTS PREFACE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION Background Purpose and Scope GEOLOGY Regional Structure Permian through Jurassic Stratigraphy Cretaceous and Tertiary Stratigraphy THE KAIPAROWITS PLATEAU COAL FIELD History of Mining and Exploration Coal Resources Coal Resources on School and Institutional Trust Lands Sulfur Content of Kaiparowits Coal Coal-bed Gas Resources Further Coal Resource Assessments Needed OIL AND GAS POTENTIAL Source Rocks Potential Reservoirs Trapping Mechanisms Exploration and Development Carbon Dioxide Further Oil and Gas Resource Assessments Needed TAR-SAND RESOURCES OF THE CIRCLE CLIFFS AREA NON-FUEL MINERALS AND MINING Manganese Uranium-Vanadium Zirconium-Titanium Gold Copper, Lead and Zinc Industrial and Construction Materials Mining Activity Further Non-Fuel Mineral Resource Assessments Needed ACKNOWLEDGMENTS REFERENCES APPENDIX A: Presidential proclamation APPENDIX B: Summary of the coal resource of Kaiparowits Plateau and its value APPENDIX C: Summary of coal resources on School and Institutional Trust Lands APPENDIX D: Authorized Federal Oil and Gas Leases in the monument ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1.
  • Glen Canyon Unit, CRSP, Arizona and Utah

    Glen Canyon Unit, CRSP, Arizona and Utah

    Contents Glen Canyon Unit ............................................................................................................................2 Project Location...................................................................................................................3 Historic Setting ....................................................................................................................4 Project Authorization .........................................................................................................8 Pre-Construction ................................................................................................................14 Construction.......................................................................................................................21 Project Benefits and Uses of Project Water.......................................................................31 Conclusion .........................................................................................................................36 Notes ..................................................................................................................................39 Bibliography ......................................................................................................................46 Index ..................................................................................................................................52 Glen Canyon Unit The Glen Canyon Unit, located along the Colorado River in north central
  • FISH of the COLORADO RIVER Colorado River and Tributaries Between Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Mead

    FISH of the COLORADO RIVER Colorado River and Tributaries Between Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Mead

    FISH OF THE COLORADO RIVER Colorado River and tributaries between Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Mead ON-LINE TRAINING: DRAFT Outline: • Colorado River • Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (GCDAMP) • Native Fishes • Common Non-Native Fishes • Rare Non-Native Fishes • Standardized Sampling Protocol Colorado River: • The Colorado River through Grand Canyon historically hosted one of the most distinct fish assemblages in North America (lowest diversity, highest endemism) • Aquatic habitat was variable ▫ Large spring floods ▫ Cold winter temperatures ▫ Warm summer temperatures ▫ Heavy silt load • Today ▫ Stable flow releases ▫ Cooler temperatures ▫ Predation Overview: • The Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program was established in 1997 to address downstream ecosystem impacts from operation of Glen Canyon Dam and to provide research and monitoring of downstream resources. Area of Interest: from Glen Canyon Dam to Lake Mead Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (Fish) Goals: • Maintain or attain viable populations of existing native fish, eliminate risk of extinction from humpback chub and razorback sucker, and prevent adverse modification to their critical habitat. • Maintain a naturally reproducing population of rainbow trout above the Paria River, to the extent practicable and consistent with the maintenance of viable populations of native fish. Course Purpose: • The purpose of this training course “Fish of the Colorado River” is to provide a general overview of fish located within the Colorado River below Glen Canyon Dam downstream to Lake Mead and linked directly to the GCDAMP. • Also included are brief explanations of management concerns related to the native fish species, as well as species locations. Native Fishes: Colorado River and tributaries between Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Mead Bluehead Sucker • Scientific name: Catostomus discobolus • Status: Species of Special Concern (conservation status may be at risk) • Description: Streamlined with small scales.