2000
DOI: 10.3133/cir1214
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Water quality in the upper Colorado River basin, Colorado, 1996-98

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…First, differential C-Q metrics showed increasing concentration of trace metal (Fe and Mo) and nutrients (P and DOC) as the water flowed in the floodplain (downstream) section of the East River. Herein, median concentration of total P (446 ppb) was found to be higher when compared to other similar headwater streams (Spahr, 2000), and exceeding the state limit of 110 ppb (Colorado Water Quality Control Commission, 2012). Further increase in recreation activities and urbanization of these mountainous watersheds can significantly add to the concentrations of both P and N. However, the downstream reach seems to be adequate in reducing instream N concentration.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…First, differential C-Q metrics showed increasing concentration of trace metal (Fe and Mo) and nutrients (P and DOC) as the water flowed in the floodplain (downstream) section of the East River. Herein, median concentration of total P (446 ppb) was found to be higher when compared to other similar headwater streams (Spahr, 2000), and exceeding the state limit of 110 ppb (Colorado Water Quality Control Commission, 2012). Further increase in recreation activities and urbanization of these mountainous watersheds can significantly add to the concentrations of both P and N. However, the downstream reach seems to be adequate in reducing instream N concentration.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…Flow alteration and changes to the temperature and sedimentation regimes induced by these control structures have severely impacted the biological communities (Osmundson, Ryel, Lamarra, & Pitlick, ; Rader & Ward, ). Additional anthropogenic impacts include urban runoff, agricultural return flows, and mine drainage; in general, salinity, sediments, nutrients, and heavy metal concentrations increase along the river (Spar et al, ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Analysis of salt concentration and flow in the Colorado River found that there was some decrease in salt load due to salinity control projects from 1986 to 1993. However, it was not clear whether the salinity project was exclusively responsible for such reductions as salinity trends in the Colorado River has decreased upstream and downstream of salinity control projects (Spahr et al, 2000;Vaill and Butler, 1999;Butler, 1996). Climate, as well as other natural or anthropogenic factors has masked change due to the salinity control projects (Butler, 1996).…”
Section: Impact Of Climate On Salt Mobilisationmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Irrigated agriculture in this region contributes 11% of salt load in the Colorado River at the US/Mexico border and has been targeted for salinity control projects since 1979 (Spahr et al, 2000). Channel lining and farm irrigation efficiency improvements at full implementation aim to reduce salt mobilised by groundwater seepage by 7 and 5 t/ha/yr respectively (Butler, 1996).…”
Section: Reducing Deep Percolationmentioning
confidence: 99%