STUDY PERFORMANCE REPORT

Similar documents
Limitation to qualitative stability indicators. the real world is a continuum, not a dichotomy ~ 100 % 30 % ~ 100 % ~ 40 %

Big Wood River. General Information

Stream Simulation: A Simple Example

7. STREAMBED TEXTURE ANALYSIS

Bishopville Prong Study

Squaw Creek. General Information

Channel responses to the removal of Gold Ray and Savage Rapids Dam. Prepared by Desirée Tullos and Cara Water

Design and Construction

Coarse Sediment Augmentation on Regulated Rivers. Scott McBain McBain & Trush, Inc.

Dam Removal Analysis Guidelines for Sediment

Implementing a Project with 319 Funds: The Spring Brook Meander Project. Leslie A. Berns

Diameter of objects moved (mm)

Geomorphic Importance of Winter Peak Flows and Annual Snowmelt Hydrographs in a Sierra Nevada Boulder-Bedrock River

!"#$%&&'()*+#$%(,-./0*)%(!

Stream Classification

Do you think sediment transport is a concern?

Sediment Traps. CAG Meeting May 21, 2012

River Response. Sediment Water Wood. Confinement. Bank material. Channel morphology. Valley slope. Riparian vegetation.

Sediment and sedimentary rocks Sediment

Texture. As A Facies Element. The Geometrical aspects of the component particles of a rock. Basic Considerations

(3) Sediment Movement Classes of sediment transported

Appendix O. Sediment Transport Modelling Technical Memorandum

Fish Passage at Road Crossings

Technical Memorandum. To: From: Copies: Date: 10/19/2017. Subject: Project No.: Greg Laird, Courtney Moore. Kevin Pilgrim and Travis Stroth

Stream Restoration and Environmental River Mechanics. Objectives. Pierre Y. Julien. 1. Peligre Dam in Haiti (deforestation)

Summary of Hydraulic and Sediment-transport. Analysis of Residual Sediment: Alternatives for the San Clemente Dam Removal/Retrofit Project,

B-1. Attachment B-1. Evaluation of AdH Model Simplifications in Conowingo Reservoir Sediment Transport Modeling

Fate of historic metal releases from the Coeur d Alene mining district Northern Idaho

Project Proposal. Lyme Brook. Newcastle-under-Lyme. 3 rd July 2015

Rapid Geomorphic Assessments: RGA s

MISSION CREEK WATERSHED (2002 Report Year 4)

Calculation of Stream Discharge Required to Move Bed Material

Experimental Study of the Sediment Trap Effect of Steel Grid-Type Sabo Dams

(3) Sediment Movement Classes of sediment transported

GEOL 652. Poudre River Fieldtrip

Aquifer an underground zone or layer of sand, gravel, or porous rock that is saturated with water.

Estimated Sediment Volume: Bridge Street Dam Impoundment, Royal River, Yarmouth, Maine

Appendix E Rosgen Classification

The effectiveness of check dams in controlling upstream channel stability in northeastern Taiwan

Final Report. Prepared for. American Rivers, California Trout, Friends of the River and Trout Unlimited

Upper Manistee River Instream Fish Habitat Assessment

CR AAO Bridge. Dead River Flood & Natural Channel Design. Mitch Koetje Water Resources Division UP District

Lower Susquehanna River Integrated Sediment & Nutrient Monitoring Program

Sediment Transport V: Estimating Bed-Material Transport in Gravel-Bed Rivers. UC Berkeley January 2004 Peter Wilcock

Habitat Assessment. Peggy Compton UW-Extension Water Action Volunteers Program Coordinator

Technical Memorandum No

Dam Removal Express Assessment Models (DREAM). Part 2: Sample runs/sensitivity tests

L.O: SLOWING STREAMS DEPOSIT (SORT) SEDIMENT HORIZONTALLY BY SIZE.

Diego Burgos. Geology 394. Advisors: Dr. Prestegaard. Phillip Goodling

Channel Morphology in Carnation Creek: 2009 Survey Results

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Detroit District. Sediment Trap Assessment Saginaw River, Michigan

Teacher s Pack Key Stage 3 GEOGRAPHY

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STREAM CONDITIONS AND HABITAT TYPES IN REACH 4, REACH 5 AND REACH 6.

Wetland & Floodplain Functional Assessments and Mapping To Protect and Restore Riverine Systems in Vermont. Mike Kline and Laura Lapierre Vermont DEC

June 9, R. D. Cook, P.Eng. Soils Engineer Special Services Western Region PUBLIC WORKS CANADA WESTERN REGION REPORT ON

SECTION G SEDIMENT BUDGET

Estimation of Bed Load Transport in River Omi, South Western Nigeria using Grain Size Distribution Data

Gold Ray Dam Removal Monitoring: OSU Summary. Prepared by Desiree Tullos and Cara Walter

PART 2:! FLUVIAL HYDRAULICS" HYDROEUROPE

Sediment Transport Mechanism and Grain Size Distributions in Stony Bed Rivers. S.FUKUOKA 1 and K.OSADA 2

Daniel Koning, Peggy Johnson, and John Hawley. New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources

Page 1. Name:

1. The map below shows a meandering river. A A' is the location of a cross section. The arrows show the direction of the river flow.

Teacher s Pack Key Stages 1 and 2 GEOGRAPHY

MATHEMATICAL MODELING OF FLUVIAL SEDIMENT DELIVERY, NEKA RIVER, IRAN. S.E. Kermani H. Golmaee M.Z. Ahmadi

Erosion Rate is a Function of Erodibility and Excess Shear Stress = k ( o - c ) From Relation between Shear Stress and Erosion We Calculate c and

Carmel River Bank Stabilization at Rancho San Carlos Road Project Description and Work Plan March 2018

Course Objectives. School Name: Date:

A STUDY OF LOCAL SCOUR AT BRIDGE PIERS OF EL-MINIA

Tikrit University College of Engineering Civil engineering Department

River floodplain regime and stratigraphy. Drs. Nanette C. Kingma.

IDENTIFICATION OF RECEPTOR SITES FOR CAPTIVE-BRED FRESHWATER PEARL MUSSELS (MARGARITIFERA MARGARITIFERA)

Carex nudata, a native sedge, as facilitator of restoration goals following passive restoration

River Restoration and Rehabilitation. Pierre Y. Julien

Open Channel Flow Part 2. Ch 10 Young, notes, handouts

Annotated Bibliography of River Avulsions Pat Dryer Geography 364 5/14/2007

N 2 3. Lake Huron. St. Clair River. Black River Assessment. Figure 1. Major tributaries to the Black River. 1. Berry Drain 2. Elk Creek.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

Waterbury Dam Disturbance Mike Fitzgerald Devin Rowland

Four Beetles Project Mendocino National Forest

Session C1 - Applying the Stream Functions Pyramid to Geomorphic Assessments and Restoration Design

UPPER TUOLUMNE RIVER ECOSYSTEM PROJECT Preliminary Sediment Source and Sediment Transport Capacity Evaluation: O Shaughnessy Dam to Poopenaut Valley

What discharge (cfs) is required to entrain the D 84 (84 th percentile of sediment size distribution) in Red Canyon Wash?

Lecture Outline Wednesday - Friday February 14-16, 2018

Water flowing in the stream can move sediments along the stream channel because of an exchange of energy from the

ODFW AQUATIC INVENTORY PROJECT RESTORATION MONITORING STREAM HABITAT REPORT. Peggy Kavanagh, Trevan Cornwell TOLEDO SOUTH Coast Range Lora Tennant

11/22/2010. Groundwater in Unconsolidated Deposits. Alluvial (fluvial) deposits. - consist of gravel, sand, silt and clay

SAND. By A S M Fahad Hossain Assistant Professor Department of Civil Engineering, AUST

Black Gore Creek 2013 Sediment Source Monitoring and TMDL Sediment Budget

Technical Memorandum No Sediment Model

Geomorphic Assessment of the Middle and Lower Swan Lake Watershed, Calhoun Division of Two Rivers National Wildlife Refuge.

Impacts of Upstream Disturbances on Downstream Sediment Yield and Morphology in the Presence of Best Management Practices

Sediment Sampling and Analysis for Stream Restoration Projects

ES 105 Surface Processes I. Hydrologic cycle A. Distribution % in oceans 2. >3% surface water a. +99% surface water in glaciers b.

6.11 Naas River Management Unit

Rivers T. Perron

MaxDepth Aquatics, Inc.

NATURAL RIVER. Karima Attia Nile Research Institute

Chapter 6 Pages of Earth s Past: Sedimentary Rocks

1. Base your answer to the following question on the map below, which shows the generalized bedrock of a part of western New York State.

Transcription:

STUDY PERFORMANCE REPORT State: Michigan Project No.: F-80-R-8 Study No.: 230702 Title: Effects of sediment traps on Michigan river channels Period Covered: October 1, 2006 to September 30, 2007 Study Objectives: To quantify the effect of sediment removal efforts on the channel morphology of select Michigan streams. More specifically, to 1) identify the rate and spatial extent of change in riverbed elevation and substrate conditions, and 2) relate these data to hydrologic, gradient, and valley characteristics of each stream. Summary: I re-surveyed previously-established transects in the Baldwin and Little Manistee rivers. Data collected in 2007 continue to show that excavation of sediment traps generally had only small effects on mean channel depth and substrate, with changes occurring both upstream and downstream of the trap. Trap excavation initiated a headcut above the sediment trap at six of the seven reaches surveyed in this study. The lateral position of the channels at all sites remained constant, indicating little side cutting had occurred. Changes in channel area remain variable among study sites and appeared as likely to occur at transects proximal to sediment traps as at transects located further upstream or downstream. Findings: Jobs 2, 3, and 4 were scheduled for 2006-07, and progress is reported below. Job 2. Title: Survey bed elevations and substrate conditions. I re-surveyed bed elevations and recorded substrate composition from visual observations and pebble counts at previouslyestablished transects in the Baldwin and Little Manistee rivers. One transect below the sediment trap on the Baldwin River was lost in 2007 (the permanent transect pins were missing) and is therefore removed from subsequent analyses. Differential GPS coordinates will be used in an attempt to re-establish this transect in 2008. Job 3. Title: Analyze data. When compared to data collected in previous years (Table 1 and 2), data from 2007 continue to show variable changes in depth and substrate in stream reaches where sediment traps were constructed. Similar to other reaches in this study, initial excavation created a headcut upstream of the sediment trap in the Baldwin River. Channel depth upstream of the sediment trap increased by 0.9 ft from 2006-07, one year after the trap was first excavated, while channel depth downstream of the sediment trap increased by 0.4 ft during the same time period (Table 1). Although these changes in depth are more substantial than those observed in other study reaches, they are partially due to the large amount of loose sediment in transit within this system. Visual observation data indicated that silt and detritus substrates increased upstream and downstream of the trap, while sand decreased (Table 2). However, pebble count data collected in 2006 and 2007 indicate that 100% of the particles above and below the trap are still sand or finer and show no increase in coarser substrates (Figure 1). Lateral position of the channel remained the same throughout the reach. Little change has occurred in bed elevations and substrate upstream and downstream of a trap that has been operating since 2002 in the Little Manistee River. Contrary to expectation, the mean depth throughout the entire study reach has become shallower since the first survey was 1

conducted in 2002, indicating that the channel is aggrading (Table 1). No net change in visually observed substrate occurred upstream of the trap from 2002 07, while sand decreased and gravel increased slightly below the trap during the same time period (Table 2). Since the increase in gravel substrate downstream of the sediment trap cannot be explained by an increase in mean channel depth, it appears that observer bias continues among different field crews. Pebble count data collected in 2005 and 2007 support the observation that little change in substrate has occurred in the study reach and indicate that overall, coarser particle sizes are more frequent upstream of the sediment trap compared to downstream (Figure 2). The shape and lateral position of the channel was constant from 2002 to 2007, reflecting only minor adjustments and varying little by transect location (upstream or downstream of the sediment trap). The spatial extent of change in channel form (particularly cross-sectional area) at both sites was variable and displayed no discernable pattern. Changes in channel form were as likely to occur close to sediment traps as at transects located further upstream or downstream. Job 4. Title: Write annual performance reports. This progress report was prepared. Prepared by: Todd C. Wills Date: September 30, 2007 2

Table 1. Summary of change in mean channel depth following sediment trap excavation for seven study reaches over a six-year period. Post-excavation data are in bold. Pre-excavation data were not collected in the Boardman or Little Manistee rivers. U = upstream, d = downstream of sediment trap. Mean channel depth (ft) Net River Location 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 N a change (ft) Au Sable u 1.9 2.0 1.9 301 0.0 d 1.9 2.1 2.1 599 0.2 Baldwin u 4.0 4.9 217 0.9 d 4.2 4.6 346 0.4 Boardman u 2.6 2.6 175 0.0 d 2.2 2.1 403-0.1 E. Br. Au Sable u 1.8 1.9 1.9 242 0.1 d 2.1 2.1 2.0 454-0.1 Little Manistee u 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.2 380-0.2 d 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.2 815-0.5 Silver Lead Cr. u 1.6 1.7 2.0 1.9 334 0.3 d 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 700 0.2 Twomile Cr. u 2.4 2.6 2.7 216 0.3 d 2.3 2.5 2.5 511 0.2 a Total number of depth measurements collected. 3

Table 2. Summary of net change in visually classified substrate data following sediment trap excavation for seven study river reaches. Pre-excavation data were not collected in the Boardman or Little Manistee rivers. Substrate categories (and dimensions in mm) were silt (0.004 0.063), sand (0.064 2), gravel (3 64), small cobble (65 128), large cobble (129 256) and other (clay, boulder, or wood). U = upstream, d = downstream of sediment trap. River Net change (%) (Time period) Location Silt or detritus Sand Gravel Small cobble Large cobble Other N a Au Sable u -5-9 14 0 0 0 276 (2002 04) d -2-10 4 0 0 8 547 Baldwin u 19-21 1 0 0 1 166 (2006 07) d 16-12 0 0 0-4 293 Boardman u -1 3-8 -5 0 10 161 (2003 04) d -3 6-5 -5 0 8 373 E. Br. Au Sable u 0-25 29 0 0-4 218 (2002 04) d 4-16 7 0 0 5 412 Little Manistee u 0 0 0 0 0 0 340 (2002 07) d 2-13 13-1 0 0 735 Silver Lead Cr. u 2-49 41 0 3 3 304 (2003 07) d 8-24 19 0 0-3 637 Twomile Cr. u -30 47 0 0 0-17 191 (2004 06) d -24 37 0 0 0-14 464 a Total number of substrate observations. 4

100% Percent finer than 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 Particle size (mm) 2006 upstream 2007 upstream 2006 downstream 2007 downstream Figure 1. Cumulative frequency of substrate particle size from pebble counts in the Baldwin River before (2006) and after (2007) sediment trap excavation. Substrate particle size categories (and dimensions in mm) were organic and clay (0 0.04mm), silt (0.05 0.062mm), sand (0.063 2mm), very fine gravel (2 4mm), fine gravel (5 8mm), medium gravel (9 16mm), coarse gravel (17 32mm), very coarse gravel (33 64mm), small cobble (65 128mm), large cobble (129 256mm), small boulder (257 512mm), and medium boulder (>512mm). 5

100% Percent finer than 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 Particle size (mm) 2005 upstream 2007 upstream 2005 downstream 2007 downstream Figure 2. Cumulative frequency of substrate particle size from pebble counts in the Little Manistee River four (2005) and six (2007) years after sediment trap excavation. Substrate particle size categories (and dimensions in mm) were organic and clay (0 0.04mm), silt (0.05 0.062mm), sand (0.063 2mm), very fine gravel (2 4mm), fine gravel (5 8mm), medium gravel (9 16mm), coarse gravel (17 32mm), very coarse gravel (33 64mm), small cobble (65 128mm), large cobble (129 256mm), small boulder (257 512mm), and medium boulder (>512mm). 6