Ways To Identify Background Verses Accelerated Erosion

Similar documents
OBJECTIVES. Fluvial Geomorphology? STREAM CLASSIFICATION & RIVER ASSESSMENT

Stream Classification

Fluvial Geomorphology

Why Stabilizing the Stream As-Is is Not Enough

Riparian Assessment. Steps in the right direction... Drainage Basin/Watershed: Start by Thinking Big. Riparian Assessment vs.

Why Geomorphology for Fish Passage

May 7, Roger Leventhal, P.E. Marin County Public Works Laurel Collins Watershed Sciences

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

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

NATURE OF RIVERS B-1. Channel Function... ALLUVIAL FEATURES. ... to successfully carry sediment and water from the watershed. ...dissipate energy.

Overview of fluvial and geotechnical processes for TMDL assessment

NATURAL RIVER. Karima Attia Nile Research Institute

Tom Ballestero University of New Hampshire. 1 May 2013

PolyMet NorthMet Project

Business. Meteorologic monitoring. Field trip? Reader. Other?

Step 5: Channel Bed and Planform Changes

Avoiding Geohazards in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands by Using Natural Stream Principles

Appendix E Rosgen Classification

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

Diagnostic Geomorphic Methods for Understanding Future Behavior of Lake Superior Streams What Have We Learned in Two Decades?

Bank Erosion and Morphology of the Kaskaskia River

Rosgen Classification Unnamed Creek South of Dunka Road

Fish Passage at Road Crossings

Field Methods to Determine/ Verify Bankfull Elevation, XS Area & Discharge

Assessment. Assessment

ADDRESSING GEOMORPHIC AND HYDRAULIC CONTROLS IN OFF-CHANNEL HABITAT DESIGN

CASE STUDIES. Introduction

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

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

Dolores River Watershed Study

Discharge. Discharge (Streamflow) is: Q = Velocity (L T -1 ) x Area (L 2 ) Units: L 3 T -1 e.g., m 3 s -1. Velocity. Area

The how, why, and lessons learned

Stream Geomorphology. Leslie A. Morrissey UVM July 25, 2012

Application of Fluvial Geomorphologic Techniques At Abandoned Mine Sites 1. David A. Greenfield 2 Dennis M. Palladino 3

Probabilistic Evaluation of a Meandering Low-Flow Channel. February 24 th, UMSRS

Watershed Assessment of River Stability and Sediment Supply: Advancing the Science of Watershed Analysis

A GEOMORPHOLOGICAL APPROACH TO RESTORATION OF INCISED RIVERS. David L. Rosgen 1

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

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

Rapid Geomorphic Assessments: RGA s

Upper Truckee River Restoration Lake Tahoe, California Presented by Brendan Belby Sacramento, California

Geomorphology Geology 450/750 Spring Fluvial Processes Project Analysis of Redwood Creek Field Data Due Wednesday, May 26

Geomorphology Studies

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

GEOL 1121 Earth Processes and Environments

Four Mile Run Levee Corridor Stream Restoration

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

Do you think sediment transport is a concern?

GENERAL SUMMARY BIG WOOD RIVER GEOMORPHIC ASSESSMENT BLAINE COUNTY, IDAHO

Fluvial Geomorphic Guidelines

GEOL 652. Poudre River Fieldtrip

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

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

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

FUTURE MEANDER BEND MIGRATION AND FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS NEAR RIVER MILES 200 TO 191 OF THE SACRAMENTO RIVER PHASE III REPORT

River Morphology. EAD 511 River management

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

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

4 CHANNEL HABITAT TYPING

APPENDIX A REACH DECRIPTIONS. Quantico Creek Watershed Assessment April 2011

Technical Memorandum No Sediment Model

SELBY CREEK STREAM HABITAT RESTORATION AND RIPARIAN REVEGETATION PROJECT: GEOMORPHIC ANALYSIS AND REVIEW

FINAL GEOMORPHIC ASSESSMENT REPORT BIG WOOD RIVER BLAINE COUNTY, IDAHO

Stream Entrainment, Erosion, Transportation & Deposition

HAW CREEK, PIKE COUNTY, MISSOURI-TRIB TO SALT RIVER ERODING STREAM THREATHENING COUNTY ROAD #107, FOURTEEN FT TALL ERODING BANK WITHIN 4 FT OF THE

Appendix III-A Descriptions of Channel Habitat Types

SCOPE OF PRESENTATION STREAM DYNAMICS, CHANNEL RESTORATION PLANS, & SEDIMENT TRANSPORT ANALYSES IN RELATION TO RESTORATION PLANS

STREAM MODULES: SPREADSHEET TOOLS FOR RIVER EVALUATION, ASSESSMENT AND MONITORING **

Technical Supplement 3E. Rosgen Stream Classification Technique Supplemental Materials. (210 VI NEH, August 2007)

APPENDIX B Hydraulic Considerations for Pipeline Crossings of Stream Channels

Perspectives on river restoration science, geomorphic processes, and channel stability

Kaskaskia Morphology Study Headwaters to Lake Shelbyville

GLG598 Surface Processes and Landform Evolution K. Whipple Fall 2012 VERDE RIVER: FLOW MECHANICS, ROUGHNESS, AND SHEAR STRESS

Streams. Stream Water Flow

PR206 NARRATIVE Updated 16 June 2015

Forest Service AOP Meeting Objectives of Stream Simulation: Examples and Talking Points

Squaw Creek. General Information

Field Observations and One-Dimensional Flow Modeling of Summit Creek in Mack Park, Smithfield, Utah

Working with Natural Stream Systems

River Restoration and Rehabilitation. Pierre Y. Julien

Natural Shoreline Landscapes on Michigan Inland Lakes

PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY. By Brett Lucas

SECTION G SEDIMENT BUDGET

The Importance of Riparian Vegetation in Channel Restoration: Moving Towards Quantification in Design

MEANDER MIGRATION MODEL ASSESSMENT FOR THE JANUARY 2005 STORM, WHITMAN PROPERTY, SAN ANTONIO CREEK, VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

Two-Stage Channel Design

STABILIZATION OF THE H&CT RAILWAY STONE DAM WALTER E. SKIPWITH, PE, JOYCE CRUM, AIA AND JOHN BAUMGARTNER, PE. Introduction.

Geomorphic Assessment of the Lower Boise River, Idaho

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

LOMR SUBMITTAL LOWER NEHALEM RIVER TILLAMOOK COUNTY, OREGON

Measuring Streambank Erosion Bank Profiles to more Robustly Estimate Recession Rates and Calibration of the AnnAGNPS-CEAP Model

Erosion Surface Water. moving, transporting, and depositing sediment.

The last three sections of the main body of this report consist of:

Upper Mississippi River Basin Environmental Management Program Workshop

Session 1 Healthy Streams Stream Hydraulics Natural Channel Design

CHANNEL GEOMORPHIC RESPONSES TO DISTURBANCES ASSESSED USING STREAMGAGE INFORMATION

Estimating Scour. CIVE 510 October 21 st, 2008

UPPER KETTLE CREEK FISH HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN TRIBUTARIES ADDENDUM

Chapter 3 Erosion in the Las Vegas Wash

High-Gradient Streams

Transcription:

Ways To Identify Background Verses Accelerated Erosion Establish Background Condition From Old Ground Photos, Aerial Photos, and Maps Compare Rate Over Time At the Same Location, or for Reaches

Channel and Bar Width and Active Erosion Length (aerial photo and cross-section) section) BAR RIVER 1939 1944 1953 1994 2000 Length DON. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. WILSON 147 200 260 280 575 BARKER WILSON 107 136 155 170 180 250 TANN. N. WILSON 136 150 160 DILL KILCHIS 80 89 140 180 290 345 L. GOM KILCHIS 55 92 120 150 223 385 M. GOM KILCHIS 67 91 130 160 178 120

Average Erosion Rates BAR RATE RATE RATE RATE RATE 1939-1944 1944 1939-195 1953 1944-1953 1953 1953-1994 1994 1994-2000 ft./yr. ft./yr. ft./yr. ft./yr. ft./yr. DONALD 3.8 1.5 2.2 BARKER 5.8 4.8 2.1 0.4 1.7 DILL 6.3 4.3 5.7 1.0 12.2 L. GMS 4.3 4.8 3.1 0.6 8.1 M. GMS 4.8 4.5 4.3 0.7 3.0

Accelerated Cont. Recognizing Stages II, III and IV in CEM Headcuts

Echo Creek, UT Stage II after Straightening to accommodate Highway

Echo Creek, UT End of Bridge Apron

Echo Creek UT Downstream at Stage III to IV Trying to Meander & Develop F. P.

Accelerated Erosion Cont. Scour Under Tree Roots Increases Significantly from Year to Year Trees Actively Slumping Into Stream No Sediment Deposits (scour regime) Vertical Side Slope Sloughed Material Readily Removed Slumping Trees FIASC

Vertical Side Slope and No Sediment at Base of Slope Miami River OR

Accelerated Erosion Cont. Cultural Features Exposed (later) Ground Photograph Comparison (later) Bank Pins (later) Will Stream Transport Sediment Load (transport limited and easier to erode streambank than transport coarse sediment load)

What are the Reach Specific Mass Failure and Fluvial Causes of Streambank Erosion These Tend to Work in Combination with Each-Other

Mass Failure-Flow Flow Causes of Streambank Erosion Bank Materials (composition and stratigraphy), Height, Overhang, High Pore Pressure, Seepage Forces, Liquefaction, Upwelling Flow, Rotational and Planer Failure. Boundary Shear Stress or Tractive Stress (especially washing out soft layers or matrix material in gravels)

How are Rates of Streambank Erosion Determined Aerial Photograph Comparison

South Fork Stillaguamish 1963 &2003

1991 2003 2004

Measurement of bank profiles. Real-time validation of bank loss (recession). Considered validation. Add representative streambank distance on profile to derive volume. If representation is in question, add more bank profiles!

Bank Pins

South Fork Stillaguamish Bank Loss Pins and Cultural Features

Rates Cont. Reference to cultural or known features and or ground photographs comparison.

Cultural Features S.F. Stillagaumish

Cultural Features Stillaguamish

Cultural Features Little Washougal, WA

Cultural Feature Right of Way Fence Stage III

VARIOUS RATING PROCEDURES ROSGEN (Bank Erosion Hazard Index, see Section Six in Binder) RECKENDORF (Erosion Rating Index) RECKENDORF RAPFAHRS (Rapid( Assessment Procedure For Aquatic Habitat, Riparian and Stream Bank see Section Six in Binder) RAPFAHRS (example in Walla Walla Basin, WA)

Data Needs FLUVIAL-GEOMORPHIC DATA ARE NEEDED TO EVALUATE: STREAMBANK EROSION PROBLEMS, AND SOLUTIONS

Fluvial-Geomorphic Data Needed Erosion Rate Establish Accelerated Erosion Bankfull Discharge Gage Data (peak verses mean daily) Regional Curves (Leopold Example) Manning Equation Continuity Equation Regional Equat.. like USGS, & ORWRD Establish Bankfull indicators to Determine Width, Depth and Area, and Estimate Velocity

Manning s equation v 1.486 2 3 n 1 2 Where: r s A r = = WP s = ft ft ft ft 2 hydraulic radius rise divided by run n = mannings roughness coefficient n, which is dimensionless Q = a v Where: a = area in ft 2 v = velocity in fps

What Is Bankfull By definition, the flow in a stream goes over bank and floods when it exceeds bankfull. Leopold defined as the first flat depositional surface formed by the stream and flooded by the stream at a frequent interval The recurrence interval for bankfull flow is very frequent, and has been reported in the literature to have between a 1.0 and 3.0 year average recurrence interval.

Bankfull Cont. Recent studies in the Northwest indicate that the bankfull frequency is between 1.0 and 1.5 years in average recurrence interval. At the 1.5 year average recurrence interval, a stream gets out of bank two out of three years, or with a 67% chance that the stream will get out of bank in any one year.

Bankfull Cont. The bankfull surface of a stream is not always is not always the top of a streams bank, especially where there are multiple flood plains and terrace surfaces (to be illustrated later)

Bankfull Cont. Do to natural and anthropogenic caused downcutting and widening the stream can become entrenched and contain flood events within its banks. In rare situations (do to deteriorated watershed conditions) streams can become entrenched because of excessive sedimentation of the flood plain (see Trimble, 1981, Southwestern Wisconsin).

Six Mile Crk, Fritz Durst Farm, Dane Co, WI (38 mi 2 ) Bankfull indicators above water surface: 1.4 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.0 lowest encroachment of woody vegetation & washed

Six Mile Creek, Fritz Durst Farm, Dane Co, WI (38 mi 2 ) Data From Two Different Classes Average bankfull channel dimensions: W = 23 D = 2.3 W/D = 10 ER >2.2 Rosgen E4/5 & CEM Stage I W = 24, D = 2.4 W/D = 10 ER >2.2 Rosgen E4/5 & CEM Stage I

Yahara River, Deforest, Dane Co, WI (47 mi 2 ) slope break & 1st flat, depositional surface = bankfull surface 10/16/01

Yahara River, Deforest, Dane Co, WI (47 mi 2 ) Twice Max. Bankfull Depth upland surface (#4) abandoned floodplain surface (#3) flood prone surface (#2) bankfull surface (Surface #1)

Hydraulic Geometry (Bankfull Channel Dimensions) Madison, WI Vicinity (based on field measurements made 10/16-18 and 10/23-25/01) 1000.0 Bankfull Q (Mannings) y = 22.635x 0.52 R 2 = 0.8603 Width, Depth, Area, Bankfull Q (feet, feet, square feet, cfs) 100.0 10.0 1.0 Cross Section Area y = 8.0742x 0.55 R 2 = 0.9599 y = 0.9647x 0.22 R 2 = 0.8941 Depth Width y = 8.3693x 0.32 R 2 = 0.8535 1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0 Drainage Area (square miles) Sample Regional Curve for Streams Near Madison, WI

Bankfull Discharge Leopold Regional Curve

Regional Bankfull Dimensions Leopold (1978)

Regional Curve WI Hydraulic Geometry (Bankfull Channel Dimensions) Madison, WI Vicinity (based on fi 10/16-18 and 10/23-25/01) 1000.0 Bankfull Q (Mann 0.5258 y = 22.635x R 2 = 0.8603 100.0 10.0 Cross Section A 0.549 y = 8.0742x R 2 = 0.9599 Widt 0.325 y = 8.3693x R 2 = 0.8535 0.224 y = 0.9647x R 2 = 0.8941 Dept 1.0 1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0 Drainage Area (square

Regional Curve in Arizona

BANKFULL FIELD EVIDENCE OR INDICATORS 1. The first flat depositional surface above the active channel. 2. The lowest extent of woody vegetation along the edge of the streambank. 3. The top of the zone of washed roots (roots exposed in the bank)

BANKFULL INDICATORS CONTINUED 4. A break in the slope angle of the streambank. 5. The tops of the point bars or other sediment deposits (This is typically considered the lowest elevation to be considered as potentially the bankfull surface.) 6. The average elevation of the highest surface of the channel bars.

BANKFULL INDICATORS CONTINUED 7. The elevation of the upper limit of sand sized particles in the boundary sediment. 8. The elevation at which the width/depth ratio of the cross-section section is a minimum (requires plotting cross-section). section). 9. The elevation corresponding to the change in the relation of cross-sectional sectional area to top width. (from graph) 10. The elevation of float debris if used in combination with other features. 11. The area of washed rock if used in combination with the six other features.

Bankfull Top of Washed Root Zone

Bankfull Flood Plain

Fluvial-Geomorphic Data Needs (Continued) Other Appropriate Discharges and Frequencies (Applegate River example where needed to know effects of a specific flood) Discharge Distribution HEC-RAS

Fluvial Geomorphic Conditions Continued Bankfull Width (see cartoon example) Bankfull Depth (see cartoon example) Entrenchment Ratio Stream Slope (see cartoon example) Stream Sinuosity (see formula and example)

Bankfull Width and Depth Ratio & Entrenchment Ratio

Stream Slope

Sinuosity

Echo Cr. Sinuosity

Fluvial Geomorphic Conditions Continued Stream Bed Material Class (see Section Eight in Binder, and photographs) Rosgen Stream Classification System (see Section Seven, and Key to Classification)

Stream Geometry a = amplitude λ = a= wavelength b = beltwidth r = radius of curvature w = bankfull width at inflection point z = arc length (stream length between successive inflection points, i

Bed Material Class see Sec. 8 Alternative is Gravelometer for particle class to get d50

Rosgen Stream Classification

Rosgen Stream Classification

CONDITIONS CONT. Streambank Materials Streambank Stratigraphy Streambank Height Stream Side-slope CEM Streambank Stability Class Describe Mass Failure Observed (planer or rotational; preferential and or pop out) Streambank Stability Sampling for Soil Mechanics Analysis (? Rare Case) Stream Planform Condition (examples)

Stream Planform Montgomery and Buffington

5 Stages of CEM (Schumm et al) (Figure 1.1 from Schumm et al, 1981)

M & B Planform Types

M & B Interpretations

M & B Example Interpret.

CONDITIONS CONT. Vegetation (native and exotic examples) Vegetation Overhang (examples) Tree Overhang Tree Throw (examples) Backchannels (example) Upstream and Downstream Sedimentation LWD in Channel and on Bars

Conclusions Field data used for stream classification are most useful if it is used in both evaluation and in design. This is true for both Rosgen and CEM (Schumm et al. & Simon) stream classification systems.

Conclusions (Continued) The Rosgen, Schumm et al. (& Simon) and Montgomery and Buffington classification systems are complimentary even though they use different terminology. All three systems are broadly applicable.

Conclusions (continued) The Rosgen Stream Classification System is the most practical and applicable stream classification ever developed. It has no equal in terms of communication of what a stream looks like. However people do need training in its use particularly in how to identify bankfull stage for various stream types. Regional curves can be developed for bankfull depth, width, cross-sectional sectional area and discharge. Regional bankfull curves are and excellent tool to establish depositional features and their associated bankfull indicators in the field

Conclusions (Continued) The Rosgen Stream Classification System reflects both morphology and process. Rosgen s stream classification system is based on geomorphic measurements and indicators taken at bankfull discharge. The term bankfull discharge is sometimes used interchangeably with the term effective discharge and/or the term channel-forming flow; yet, their meanings are distinct and should be explained as such because under specific circumstances such as channel incision, bankfull discharge and effective discharge may vary significantly.

Conclusion (Continued) It is believed that the discharge or flow at the bankfull is most effective to carry sediments overtime (Leopold, 1994). Though the formation process of a natural channel is complex, there are quantifiable and consistent patterns for the process, especially at the bankfull stage (Leopold et al., 1964).

Conclusions (Continued) When Rosgen Stream Classification System is used in concert with the Schumm et al. CEM or the Simon CEM that reflect process and trend, one has an outstanding combination available for streambank practitioners.