Application of sedimentary-structure interpretation to geoarchaeological investigations in the Colorado River Corridor, Grand Canyon, Arizona, USA

Draut, Amy E.; Rubin, David M.; Dierker, Jennifer L.; Fairley, Helen C.; Griffiths, Ronald E.; Hazel, Joseph E.; Hunter, Ralph E.; Kohl, Keith; Leap, Lisa M.; Nials, Fred L.; Topping, David J.; Yeatts, M. W. M.

doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2007.04.032

Cited by 22 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At each site, the importance of aeolian sand transport in shaping the landscape was evident from geomorphic characteristics (dune forms and coppice‐dune accumulation of sand), and was confirmed by the presence of aeolian sedimentary structures in shallow pits and trenches [ Hunter , 1977; Rubin and Hunter , 1982]. More extensive stratigraphic analyses were conducted at sites 9, 11, and 25 [ Draut et al , 2005, 2008]. Sandbar growth from the 2004 and 2008 controlled floods was assessed by direct field observation, including repeat ground‐based photography, and, locally, topographic surveys [ Draut and Rubin , 2005, 2006, 2008; Draut et al , 2009a, 2009b, 2010a, 2010b]; sandbar growth from the 1996 flood was assessed by using aerial photographs in the archives of the USGS Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC) in Flagstaff, Arizona.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… Hereford et al , 1993]. Because aeolian sediment is important as a cover that protects some archeological sites from erosion [ Davis et al , 2000; Draut et al , 2008], a transition from active, migrating dunes toward non‐migrating, crusted dunes incised by gullies would have had substantial implications for geomorphic alteration not only of sediment deposits but also of archeological sites in the river corridor downstream of Glen Canyon Dam. Gully erosion, which typically washes sediment downslope into the Colorado River [ Hereford et al , 1993], is now one of the foremost challenges to preservation of archeological sites in Grand Canyon National Park, many of which occur in and on heavily crusted relict aeolian and fluvial sediment deposits [ Hereford et al , 1993; Balsom et al , 2005; Pederson et al , 2006; Draut et al , 2008; Collins et al , 2009; Anderson and Neff , 2011].…”

Section: Conceptual Model and Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of river regulation on aeolian landscapes, Colorado River, southwestern USA

Draut

2012

J. Geophys. Res.

Self Cite

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] Connectivity between fluvial and aeolian sedimentary systems plays an important role in the physical and biological environment of dryland regions. This study examines the coupling between fluvial sand deposits and aeolian dune fields in bedrock canyons of the arid to semiarid Colorado River corridor, southwestern USA. By quantifying significant differences between aeolian landscapes with and without modern fluvial sediment sources, this work demonstrates for the first time that the flow-and sediment-limiting effects of dam operations affect sedimentary processes and ecosystems in aeolian landscapes above the fluvial high water line. Dune fields decoupled from fluvial sand supply have more ground cover (biologic crust and vegetation) and less aeolian sand transport than do dune fields that remain coupled to modern fluvial sand supply. The proportion of active aeolian sand area also is substantially lower in a heavily regulated river reach (Marble-Grand Canyon, Arizona) than in a much less regulated reach with otherwise similar environmental conditions (Cataract Canyon, Utah). The interconnections shown here among river flow and sediment, aeolian sand transport, and biologic communities in aeolian dunes demonstrate a newly recognized means by which anthropogenic influence alters dryland environments. Because fluvial-aeolian coupling is common globally, it is likely that similar sediment-transport connectivity and interaction with upland ecosystems are important in other dryland regions to a greater degree than has been recognized previously.Citation: Draut, A. E. (2012), Effects of river regulation on aeolian landscapes, Colorado River, southwestern USA,

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conceptual Model and Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of river regulation on aeolian landscapes, Colorado River, southwestern USA

Draut

2012

J. Geophys. Res.

Self Cite

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Grain size distribution is widely used to elucidate transport processes and discriminate different depositional environments (e.g. Mason and Folk, 1958;Friedman, 1961;Visher, 1969;Mclaren and Blowles, 1985;Draut et al, 2008). For loess deposits, the grain size distribution is also employed as an indicator of winter monsoon (e.g.…”

Section: Sedimentological Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The paleolithic site of Longwangchan in the middle Yellow River, China: chronology, paleoenvironment and implications

Zhang

Wang

Qiu

et al. 2011

Journal of Archaeological Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…source‐bordering dunes) (Bullard and McTainsh, ) adjacent to the Colorado River (Fairley et al , ). Aeolian deposits at some sites can be tens to hundreds of centimeters thick (Draut et al , ; Hereford et al , ), similar to other archaeologically important areas located in the semi‐arid American southwest (e.g. Drakos and Reneau, ).…”

Section: Archaeological Site Erosion Along the Colorado River Corridomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, modern‐day erosion can also threaten any future interpretation by displacing or entirely removing artifacts from their original depositional context (Wainwright, ). Here we study these processes as they relate to archaeological site preservation in Grand Canyon, Arizona, USA (Figure ) where hundreds of archaeological sites are located within aeolian‐ and fluvial‐derived substrates in close proximity to the dam‐controlled, sediment‐limited Colorado River (Figure ), and where erosion of sites through gullying currently threatens site integrity (Fairley, ; Draut and Rubin, ; Draut et al , ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relations between rainfall–runoff‐induced erosion and aeolian deposition at archaeological sites in a semi‐arid dam‐controlled river corridor

Collins

Bedford

Corbett

et al. 2016

Earth Surf Processes Landf

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Process dynamics in fluvial-based dryland environments are highly complex with fluvial, aeolian, and alluvial processes all contributing to landscape change. When anthropogenic activities such as dam-building affect fluvial processes, the complexity in local response can be further increased by flood-and sediment-limiting flows. Understanding these complexities is key to predicting landscape behavior in drylands and has important scientific and management implications, including for studies related to paleoclimatology, landscape ecology evolution, and archaeological site context and preservation. Here we use multi-temporal LiDAR surveys, local weather data, and geomorphological observations to identify trends in site change throughout the 446-km-long semi-arid Colorado River corridor in Grand Canyon, Arizona, USA, where archaeological site degradation related to the effects of upstream dam operation is a concern. Using several site case studies, we show the range of landscape responses that might be expected from concomitant occurrence of dam-controlled fluvial sand bar deposition, aeolian sand transport, and rainfall-induced erosion. Empirical rainfall-erosion threshold analyses coupled with a numerical rainfall-runoff-soil erosion model indicate that infiltration-excess overland flow and gullying govern large-scale (centimeter-to decimeter-scale) landscape changes, but that aeolian deposition can in some cases mitigate gully erosion. Whereas threshold analyses identify the normalized rainfall intensity (defined as the ratio of rainfall intensity to hydraulic conductivity) as the primary factor governing hydrologic-driven erosion, assessment of false positives and false negatives in the dataset highlight topographic slope as the next most important parameter governing site response. Analysis of 4+ years of high resolution (four-minute) weather data and 75+ years of low resolution (daily) climate records indicates that dryland erosion is dependent on short-term, storm-driven rainfall intensity rather than cumulative rainfall, and that erosion can occur outside of wet seasons and even wet years. These results can apply to other similar semi-arid landscapes where process complexity may not be fully understood. Published 2015. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA

show abstract

Application of sedimentary-structure interpretation to geoarchaeological investigations in the Colorado River Corridor, Grand Canyon, Arizona, USA

Cited by 22 publications

References 34 publications

Effects of river regulation on aeolian landscapes, Colorado River, southwestern USA

Effects of river regulation on aeolian landscapes, Colorado River, southwestern USA

The paleolithic site of Longwangchan in the middle Yellow River, China: chronology, paleoenvironment and implications

Relations between rainfall–runoff‐induced erosion and aeolian deposition at archaeological sites in a semi‐arid dam‐controlled river corridor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About