Advertisement

Modeling Temperature Regime and Physical Habitat Impacts from Restored Streamflow

  • Russell T. Bair
  • Benjamin W. TobinEmail author
  • Brian D. Healy
  • Claire E. Spangenberg
  • Hampton K. Childres
  • Edward R. Schenk
Article
  • 24 Downloads

Abstract

Water infrastructure updates at Grand Canyon National Park (GRCA) provide an opportunity to restore natural flow to Bright Angel Creek, adding an additional ~20% to baseflow. This creek provides habitat for endangered humpback chub (Gila cypha) and invasive brown trout (Salmo trutta). We assess how increased flow may alter habitat and how that change may impact native and nonnative species using physical habitat modeling and statistical analysis of stream temperature data. We used System for Environmental Flow Analysis to calculate the change in habitat area for both species in the lower 2.1 km of the creek before and after the increased flow. Results indicate a slight increase in available habitat for juveniles of both species and a slight decrease for spawning brown trout. We used regression modeling to relate daily average air temperature to stream temperature and periods of increased discharge during water system maintenance were used to model the temperatures during likely future conditions. Both high and low stream temperature were dampened due to the added water resulting in fewer days with suitable spawning temperature and more days with suitable growth temperature for humpback chub. Fewer suitable days for growth upstream but more suitable days downstream, were predicted for brown trout. Compared to other streams that sustain populations of humpback chub, flow conditions for Bright Angel Creek provide fewer days throughout the year with suitable temperatures, particularly during the winter months. Juvenile humpback chub rearing may improve through the restoration of flow however the presence of predatory brown trout complicates the net beneficial impact.

Keywords

Grand Canyon National Park Stream restoration Physical habitat modeling Endangered species 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Geoscientists-in-the-Parks, Environmental Stewards, the Grand Canyon Association, Bureau of Reclamation, and Grand Canyon National Park for their finanicial support of this project. We thank Robyn Henderek, Allison Roush, Krista Keski-Hynnila, Natalie Jones, Saj Zappitello, Tori Williams, Michele Gandee, Cynthia Valle, and Carolyn Box for assistance in the collection of hydrologic data. We would also like to thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their comments that helped improve this manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Autom Control 19(6):716–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arismendi I, Safeeq M, Johnson SL, Dunham JB, Haggerty R (2013) Increasing synchrony of high temperature and low flow in western North American streams: double trouble for coldwater biota? Hydrobiologia 712(1):61–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benjankar R, Tonina D, McKean J (2015) One‐dimensional and two‐dimensional hydrodynamic modeling derived flow properties: impacts on aquatic habitat quality predictions. Earth Surf Process Landf 40(3):340–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernhardt ES, Palmer MA, Allan JD, Alexander G, Barnas K, Brooks S, Carr J, Clayton S, Dahm C, Follstad-Shah J, Galat D (2005) Synthesizing US river restoration efforts. Science 308(5722):636–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bovee KD (1978) Probability-of-use criteria for the family Salmonidae (No. 4). Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Western Energy and Land Use Team, Cooperative Instream Flow Service Group, Fort Collins, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown GW, Krygier JT (1970) Effects of clear‐cutting on stream temperature. Water Resour Res 6(4):1133–1139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Budy P, Conner MM, Salant NL, Macfarlane WW (2015) An occupancy-based quantification of the highly imperiled status of desert fishes of the southwestern United States. Conserv Biol 29(4):1142–1152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bunn SE, Arthington AH (2002) Basic principles and ecological consequences of altered flow regimes for aquatic biodiversity. Environ Manag 30(4):492–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clarkson RW, Childs MR, Schaefer SA (2000) Temperature effects of hypolimnial-release dams on early life stages of Colorado River Basin big-river fishes. Copeia 2000(2):402–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coggins LG, Yard MD, Pine WE (2011) Nonnative fish control in the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, Arizona: an effective program or serendipitous timing? Trans Am Fish Soc 140(2):456–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dextrase AJ, Mandrak NE (2006) Impacts of alien invasive species on freshwater fauna at risk in Canada. Biol Invasions 8(1):13–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elliott JM, Elliott JA (2010) Temperature requirements of Atlantic salmon Salmo salar, Brown Trout Salmo trutta and Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus: predicting the effects of climate change. J Fish Biol 77(8):1793–1817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Elliott JM, Hurley MA (2000) Optimum energy intake and gross efficiency of energy conversion for brown trout, Salmo trutta, feeding on invertebrates or fish. Freshw Biol 44(4):605–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fausch KD, Taniguchi Y, Nakano S, Grossman GD, Townsend CR (2001) Flood disturbance regimes influence rainbow trout invasion success among five holarctic regions. Ecol Appl 11(5):1438–1455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gibson SA, Pasternack GB (2016) Selecting between one‐dimensional and two‐dimensional hydrodynamic models for ecohydraulic analysis. River Res Appl 32(6):1365–1381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gloss SP, Coggins LG (2005) Fishes of Grand Canyon, In Gloss SP, Lovich JE, Melis TS (eds). The state of the Colorado River ecosystem in the Grand Canyon. US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey Circular 1282, Reston, VirginiaGoogle Scholar
  17. Gorman OT, Stone DM (1999) Ecology of spawning humpback chub, Gila cypha, in the Little Colorado River near Grand Canyon, Arizona. Environ Biol Fishes 55(1–2):115–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hamman RL (1982) Spawning and culture of humpback chub. Progress Fish-Cult 44(4):213–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Healy B, Schelly R, Nelson C, Omana SE, Trammell M, Koller R (2018) Review of effective suppression of nonnative fishes in bright angel creek, 2012–2017, with recommendations for humpback chub translocations. report prepared for the bureau of reclamation, Upper Colorado River Region, Flagstaff, ArizonaGoogle Scholar
  20. Hobbs RJ, Norton DA (1996) Towards a conceptual framework for restoration ecology. Restor Ecol 4(2):93–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Huntoon PW (1970) The hydro-mechanics of the groundwater system in the southern portion of the Kaibab Plateau, Arizona. University of Arizona, Tucson, ArizonaGoogle Scholar
  22. Huntoon PW (1974) The karstic groundwater basins of the Kaibab Plateau, Arizona. Water Resour Res 10(3):579–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Huntoon PW (2000) Karstification associated with groundwater circulation through the Redwall Artesian Aquifer. National Speleological Society, Incorporated, Grand Canyon, ArizonaGoogle Scholar
  24. Incelli E, Mork L. 2015. Upper Deschutes Watershed Council Technical ReportGoogle Scholar
  25. Jackson RB, Carpenter SR, Dahm CN, McKnight DM, Naiman RJ, Postel SL, Running SW (2001) Water in a changing world. Ecol Appl 11(4):1027–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jones CJR, Springer AE, Tobin BW, Zappitello SJ, Jones NA (2017) Characterization and hydraulic behaviour of the complex karst of the Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park, USA. Geological Society, Special Publications, London, p 466–475Google Scholar
  27. Jowett IG, Payne TR, Milhous RT (2014) SEFA-system for environmental flow analysis. software manual. Version 1.21, Instream Flow Group, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Fort Collins, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  28. Kauffman JB, Beschta RL, Otting N, Lytjen D (1997) An ecological perspective of riparian and stream restoration in the western United States. Fisheries 22(5):12–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kennedy TA, Muehlbauer JD, Yackulic CB, Lytle DA, Miller SW, Dibble KL, Kortenhoeven EW, Metcalfe AN, Baxter CV (2016) Flow management for hydropower extirpates aquatic insects, undermining river food webs. BioScience 66(7):561–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kiernan JD, Moyle PB, Crain PK (2012) Restoring native fish assemblages to a regulated California stream using the natural flow regime concept. Ecol Appl 22(5):1472–1482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Korsu K, Huusko A, Muotka T (2010) Impacts of invasive stream salmonids on native fish: using meta-analysis to summarize four decades of research. Boreal Environ Res 15(5):491–500Google Scholar
  32. Lake PS, Bond N, Reich P (2007) Linking ecological theory with stream restoration. Freshw Biol 52(4):597–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marsh PC, Douglas ME (1997) Predation by introduced fishes on endangered humpback chub and other native species in the Little Colorado River, Arizona. Trans Am Fish Soc 126(2):343–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meybeck M (2004) The global change of continental aquatic systems: dominant impacts of human activities. Water Sci Technol 49(7):73–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Olden JD, Poff NL, Bestgen KR (2008) Trait synergisms and the rarity, extirpation, and extinction risk of desert fishes. Ecology 89(3):847–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Oliveira IDC, Silva DDD, Guedes HA, Dergam JA, Ribeiro CBDM (2016) One-and two-dimensional ecohydraulic modeling of Formoso river (MG). Eng Agríc 36(6):1050–1062Google Scholar
  37. Omana Smith E, Healy BD, Leibfried WC, Whiting DP (2012) Bright Angel Creek Trout reduction project winter 2010- 2011 Report. Fort Collins, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  38. Payne TR, Jowett IG (2013) SEFA - computer software system for environmental flow analysis based on the instream flow incremental methodology. Proceedings of the 2013 Georgia Water Resources Conference, 10–11 April, 2013Google Scholar
  39. Peterson JH, Paukert CP (2005) Development of a bioenergetics model for humpback chub and evaluation of water temperature changes in the Grand Canyon, Colorado River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 134:960–974.  https://doi.org/10.1577/T04-090.1
  40. Pine III WE, Healy BD, Omana Smith E, Trammell M, Speas D, Valdez R, Yard M, Walters C, Ahrens R, Vanhaverbeke R (2013) An individual-based model for population viability analysis of humpback chub in Grand Canyon. North Am J Fish Manag 33(3):626–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Richter BD, Sparks RE, Stromberg JC (1997) The natural flow regime. BioScience 47(11):769–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Poff NL, Zimmerman JK (2010) Ecological responses to altered flow regimes: a literature review to inform the science and management of environmental flows. Freshw Biol 55(1):194–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Price AL, Peterson JT (2010) Estimation and modeling of electrofishing capture efficiency for fishes in wadeable warmwater streams. North Am J Fish Manag 30(2):481–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Propst DL, Gido KB, Sterrerud JA (2008) Natural Flow regimes, nonnative fishes, and native fish persistence in arid-land river systems. Ecol Appl 18(5):1236–1252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. R Studio (2012) RStudio: integrated development environment for R. RStudio Inc, Boston, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  46. Richter B, Thomas G (2007) Restoring environmental flows by modifying dam operations. Ecology and Society 12(1): 12.  https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-02014-120112
  47. Robinson AT, Childs MR (2001) Juvenile growth of native fishes in the Little Colorado River and in a thermally modified portion of the Colorado River. North Am J Fish Manag 21(4):809–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Roni P, Beechie TJ, Bilby RE, Leonetti FE, Pollock MM, Pess GR (2002) A review of stream restoration techniques and a hierarchical strategy for prioritizing restoration in Pacific Northwest watersheds. North Am J Fish Manag 22(1):1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ross LE (2005) Interpretive three-dimensional numerical groundwater flow modeling, roaring springs. Northern Arizona University, Grand Canyon, ArizonaGoogle Scholar
  50. Ruhí A, Olden JD, Sabo JL (2016) Declining streamflow induces collapse and replacement of native fish in the American Southwest. Front Ecol Environ 14(9):465–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. SC ACIS Site: Phantom Ranch. http://scacis.rcc-acis.org/. Accessed 25 Jan 2018
  52. Schenk ER, Hupp CR, Gellis A (2012) Sediment dynamics in the restored reach of the Kissimmee River Basin, Florida: a vast subtropical riparian wetland. River Res Appl 28(10):1753–1767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Seager R, Ting M, Held I, Kushnir Y, Lu J, Vecchi G, Huang HP, Harnik N, Leetmaa A, Lau NC, Li C (2007) Model projections of an imminent transition to a more arid climate in southwestern North America. Science 316(5828):1181–1184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Simon KS, Townsend CR (2003) Impacts of freshwater invaders at different levels of ecological organisation, with emphasis on salmonids and ecosystem consequences. Freshw Biol 48(6):982–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sowersby W, Thompson RM, Wong BBM (2016) Invasive predator influences habitat preferences in a freshwater fish. Environ Biol Fishes 99(2–3):187–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Spurgeon JJ, Paukert CP, Healy BD, Trammell M, Speas D, Omana-Smith E (2015) Translocation of Humpback chub into tributary streams of the colorado river: implications for conservation of large-river fishes. Trans Am Fish Soc 144(3):502–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Storfer A (1999) Gene flow and endangered species translocations: a topic revisited. Biol Conserv 87(2):173–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Stromberg JC (2001) Restoration of riparian vegetation in the south-western United States: importance of flow regimes and fluvial dynamism. J Arid Environ 49(1):17–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Stromberg JC, Beauchamp VB, Dixon MD, Lite SJ, Paradzick C (2007) Importance of low‐flow and high‐flow characteristics to restoration of riparian vegetation along rivers in arid south‐western United States. Freshw Biol 52(4):651–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Stromberg JC, Tiller R, Richter B (1996) Effects of groundwater decline on riparian vegetation of semiarid regions: the San Pedro, Arizona. Ecol Appl 6(1):113–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tobin BW, Springer AE, Kreamer DK, Schenk E (2018) Review: the distribution, flow, and quality of Grand Canyon Springs, Arizona (USA). Hydrogeol J 26(3):721–732.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-017-1688-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Trammell M, Healy B, Omana Smith E, Sponholtz P (2012) Humpback chub translocation to Havasu Creek, Grand Canyon National Park: implementation and monitoring plan. Natural Resource Report NPS/GRCA/NRR–2012/586. National Park Service, Fort Collins, COGoogle Scholar
  63. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (1990) Humpback chub recovery plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Denver, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  64. Usher HD (1984) A survey of present and future impacts of water depletions and additions on the aquatic and terrestrial habitats of roaring springs, bright angel, garden and pipe creeks. Final Report. Museum of Northern Arizona, Grand Canyon National ParkGoogle Scholar
  65. Valdez RA, Carothers SW, Douglas ME, Douglas M, Ryel RJ, Bestgen KR, Wegner DL (2000) Research and implementation plan for establishing a second population of Humpback Chub in Grand Canyon. Final Report to the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center, Flagstaff, ArizonaGoogle Scholar
  66. Valdez RA, Holden PB, Hardy TB, Ryel RJ (1987) Habitat suitability index curves for endangered fishes of the upper colorado river basin. prepared by biowest inc. for department of the interior, fish and wildlife service, region 6 office of endangered species. Denver Federal Center, Denver, COGoogle Scholar
  67. Voli M, Merritts D, Walter R, Ohlson E, Datin K, Rahnis M, Kratz L, Deng W, Hilgartner W, Hartranft J (2009) Preliminary reconstruction of a pre-European settlement valley bottom wetland, southeastern, Pennsylvania. Water Resour Impact 11:11–13Google Scholar
  68. Ward DL, Bonar SA (2003) Effects of cold water on susceptibility of age-0 flannelmouth sucker to predation by rainbow trout. Southwest Nat 48(1):43–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Ward DL, Morton-Starner R (2015) Effects of water temperature and fish size on predation vulnerability of juvenile humpback chub to rainbow trout and brown trout. Trans Am Fish Soc 144(6):1184–1191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Webb RH, Leake SA (2006) Ground-water surface-water interactions and long-term change in riverine riparian vegetation in the southwestern United States. J Hydrol 320(3):302–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Webb JA, Little SC, Miller KA, Stewardson MJ, Rutherfurd ID, Sharpe AK, Patulny L, Poff NL (2015) A general approach to predicting ecological responses to environmental flows: making best use of the literature, expert knowledge, and monitoring data. River Res Appl 31(4):505–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. White GC, Burnham KP (1999) Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Study 46(sup1):S120–S139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Whiting DP, Paukert CP, Healy BD, Spurgeon JJ (2014) Macroinvertebrate prey availability and food web dynamics of nonnative trout in a Colorado River tributary, Grand Canyon. Freshwater. Science 33(3):872–884Google Scholar
  74. Yackulic CB, Yard MD, Korman J, Haverbeke DR. J (2014) A quantitative life history of endangered humpback chub that spawn in the Little Colorado River: variation in movement. Growth, Surviv Ecol Evol 4(7):1006–1018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Yard MD, Coggins Jr LG, Baxter CV, Bennett GE, Korman J (2011) Trout piscivory in the Colorado River, Grand Canyon: effects of turbidity, temperature, and fish prey availability. Trans Am Fish Soc 140(2):471–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© This is a U.S. government work and its text is not subject to copyright protection in the United States; however, its text may be subject to foreign copyright protection. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Science and Resource ManagementGrand Canyon National ParkTusayanUSA
  2. 2.Kentucky Geological SurveyUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA
  3. 3.Museum of Northern Arizona Spring Stewardship instituteFlagstaffUSA

Personalised recommendations