Appendix E Rosgen Classification

Similar documents
Stream Classification

PolyMet NorthMet Project

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

Rosgen Classification Unnamed Creek South of Dunka Road

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

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

Why Stabilizing the Stream As-Is is Not Enough

Tom Ballestero University of New Hampshire. 1 May 2013

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

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

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

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

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

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

Appendix III-A Descriptions of Channel Habitat Types

REACH 1 T37S-R14W-S07NW

Fluvial Geomorphology

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

ODFW AQUATIC INVENTORY PROJECT OREGON PLAN FOR SALMON & WATERSHEDS STREAM RESTORATION HABITAT REPORT

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

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

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

Why Geomorphology for Fish Passage

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

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

Ways To Identify Background Verses Accelerated Erosion

4 CHANNEL HABITAT TYPING

ODFW AQUATIC INVENTORY PROJECT STREAM REPORT

OBJECTIVES. Fluvial Geomorphology? STREAM CLASSIFICATION & RIVER ASSESSMENT

ODFW AQUATIC INVENTORY PROJECT STREAM REPORT

Four Mile Run Levee Corridor Stream Restoration

Geomorphic Assessment of City Center Athletic Club Development Impacts on Existing Stream Channel Stability, Lenexa, KS.

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

Fish Passage at Road Crossings

A classification of natural rivers

NATURAL RIVER. Karima Attia Nile Research Institute

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

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

(3) Sediment Movement Classes of sediment transported

Vermont Stream Geomorphic Assessment. Appendix E. River Corridor Delineation Process. VT Agency of Natural Resources. April, E0 - April, 2004

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

ODFW AQUATIC INVENTORY PROJECT OREGON PLAN FOR SALMON & WATERSHEDS STREAM RESTORATION HABITAT REPORT

Streams. Stream Water Flow

mountain rivers fixed channel boundaries (bedrock banks and bed) high transport capacity low storage input output

Do you think sediment transport is a concern?

Characteristics of Step-Pool Morphology in the Mountain Streams of Japan

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

(3) Sediment Movement Classes of sediment transported

Appendix E Methods for Streambed Mobility/Stability Analysis

Running Water Earth - Chapter 16 Stan Hatfield Southwestern Illinois College

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

Step 5: Channel Bed and Planform Changes

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

Landscape Development

GENERAL SUMMARY BIG WOOD RIVER GEOMORPHIC ASSESSMENT BLAINE COUNTY, IDAHO

River Nith restoration, cbec UK Ltd, October 2013 APPENDIX A

Modeling Post-Development Runoff and Channel Impacts from Hydromodification: Practical Tools for Hydromodification Assessment

Page 1. Name:

Assessment. Assessment

Vermont Stream Geomorphic Assessment. Appendix J. Vermont Regional Hydraulic Geometry Curves

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

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

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

Lab Final Review 4/16/18

Appendix B. Stream Classification & Valley Types

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

ALDER ESTABLISHMENT AND CHANNEL DYNAMICS IN A TRIBUTARY OF THE SOUTH FORK EEL RIVER, MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1

FLUVIAL GEOMORPHOLOGY OF THE ENTIAT RIVER, WA, AND IMPLICATIONS FOR STREAM RESTORATION

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

Surface Water and Stream Development

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

Assignment 1. Measuring River Characteristics- Vernon Creek. Applied Fluvial Geomorphology Field Techniques EESc 435

Squaw Creek. General Information

Valley Segments, Stream Reaches, and Channel Units

ADDRESSING GEOMORPHIC AND HYDRAULIC CONTROLS IN OFF-CHANNEL HABITAT DESIGN

Rivers T. Perron

Stream Simulation: A Simple Example

SECTION G SEDIMENT BUDGET

Natural Shoreline Landscapes on Michigan Inland Lakes

Fluvial Geomorphology Assessment of Northern Connecticut River Tributaries

The how, why, and lessons learned

Case Study 2: Twenty-mile Creek Rock Fords

GEOL 652. Poudre River Fieldtrip

Dan Miller + Kelly Burnett, Kelly Christiansen, Sharon Clarke, Lee Benda. GOAL Predict Channel Characteristics in Space and Time

Weathering, Erosion, Deposition, and Landscape Development

Conceptual Model of Stream Flow Processes for the Russian River Watershed. Chris Farrar

Stream Entrainment, Erosion, Transportation & Deposition

CASE STUDIES. Introduction

Design and Construction

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

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

Rapid Geomorphic Assessments: RGA s

Rivers and Streams. Streams. Hydrologic Cycle. Drainage Basins and Divides. Colorado River Drainage Basin. Colorado Drainage Basins.

GLG362/GLG598 Geomorphology K. Whipple October, 2009 I. Characteristics of Alluvial Channels

Working with Natural Stream Systems

The Effects of Hydraulic Structures on Streams Prone to Bank Erosion in an Intense Flood Event: A Case Study from Eastern Hokkaido

ODFW AQUATIC INVENTORY PROJECT STREAM REPORT. Jennifer Bock / Eric Evans / LaNoah Babcock HUC NUMBER: LLID:

Dolores River Watershed Study

EFFECTS OF RIPARIAN RETENTION (IN WATERSHEDS) ON ALLUVIAL FANS

27. Running Water I (p ; )

Transcription:

Appendix E

Stream Type s Using the morphometric parameters described above, stream reaches are classified into 7 major stream types (Aa+ through G) based on s (1996) criteria. The relevant stream classifications for the Project Area are described below. Aa+ Stream Type This stream type typically occurs in debris avalanche terrain, zones of deep deposition such as glacial tills and outwash terraces, or landforms that are structurally controlled or influenced by faults, joints, or other structural contact zones. Aa+ channels are characterized by very high gradients (>10 percent), high entrenchment (low entrenchment ratio [<1.4]), low sinuosity (1.0 1.1), and a low width-to-depth ratio (<12). The bedforms associated with this stream type are typically cascade or step/pool morphology with vertical steps and deep scour pools. Aa+ channels are typically described as high energy/high sediment supply systems due to the steep channel slopes and narrow/deep channel cross-sections. A Stream Type This stream type typically occurs in areas of high relief, zones of deep deposition, or landforms that are structurally controlled. A channels are characterized by moderate to steep gradients (4-10 percent), high entrenchment (low entrenchment ratio [<1.4]), low sinuosity (1.0 1.2), and a low width-to-depth ratio (<12). The bedforms associated with this stream type are typically cascade or step/pool morphology with associated plunge or scour pools. A stream types typically exhibit a high energy/high sediment transport potential and a relatively low in-channel sediment storage capacity. B Stream Type This stream type primarily exists on moderately steep to gently sloped terrain in areas where structural contact zones, faults, joints, colluvial-alluvial deposits, and structurally controlled valley side-slopes limit the development of a wide floodplain. B channels are characterized by moderate to steep slopes (4-10 percent), moderate entrenchment (entrenchment ratio of 1.4 2.2), low sinuosity (>1.2), and a moderate width-to-depth ratio (>12). The bedforms associated with this stream type are typically rapids and scour pool morphology which may be influenced by debris constrictions and local confinement. Streambank erosion rates are typically low, and are generally considered to be vertically and laterally stable, particularly when the dominant bed particle size is bedrock, and boulder. 1

ROSGEN LEVEL 1 STREAM CLASSIFICATION DEFINITIONS The following provides a brief overview of the Level 1 stream classification system used to type the study stream. The Level I classification is a broad-level delineation of stream types that are distinguished based on the following four morphometric parameters: Entrenchment Ratio describes the degree of vertical containment of the channel in its valley. Entrenchment ratio is computed as the width of the flood prone area at an elevation twice the maximum bankfull depth divided by the top width of the bankfull channel. Low entrenchment values indicate that the channel is vertically constrained, whereas a high entrenchment ratio indicates that the channel can greatly enlarge its width during high flow events. Width-Depth Ratio is an index of the channel cross-sectional shape, and is computed as the ratio of the bankfull width/mean bankfull depth. High values indicate the channel is relatively broad and shallow, whereas low values indicate that the channel is narrow and deep. Channel shape affects the distribution of energy within the channel. Channels with a high width-depth ratio tend to develop shear stress near the banks, while a low width-depth ratio indicates shear stress is more distributed across the bed. Water Surface Slope (i.e., gradient) is the water surface gradient at bankfull discharge (usually approximated by the bed slope). Gradient is a significant factor representing the potential energy of the channel which strongly influences sediment transport capacity. Sinuosity is a characterization of the channel planform, and is calculated as the stream length divided by the valley length. Higher sinuosity is associated wit a meandering channel planform, and lower sinuosity is associated with straighter channels. Sinuosity carries the least weight of the four parameters in the classification system. 2

Data by Stream 3

Old Cow Creek Data Upstream from Diversion Downstream from Diversion RM -0.13 RM 0.15 RM 0.54 RM 0.93 RM 1.68 RM 1.85 RM 1.97 RM 2.8 RM 2.8 Wbfl 50 40 40 40 30 30 40 35 40 Max Dbfl 4.5 4 4 5 3 4.5 3.5 2 4.5 Avg Dbfl 4 3 3 4 2.5 3.5 3 1.5 3.5 Wfp 60 58 60 65 55 45 65 40 55 W/D 12.50 13.33 13.33 10.00 12.00 8.57 13.33 23.33 11.43 Entrenchment 1.20 1.45 1.50 1.63 1.83 1.50 1.63 1.14 1.38 Slope (ft/ft) 0.098 0.0062 0.062 0.062 0.062 0.062 0.048 0.048 0.048 Stream Boulder Boulder Boulder Gravel Rubble Rubble Rubble Boulder Boulder A2/A2a+ B2a B2a B2a/B4a B2a B2a B2a B2a B2a Note: RM 1.13-1.19 channel is a A2a+ at location of landslide; RM 1.19-1.27 channel is a B2a; RM 1.5-1.65 channel is a B1; RM 2.57-2.67 channel is a B1; RM 2.67-downstream channel is B2a. Bankfull Width (ft)= Wbfl Maximum Depth at Bankfull (ft)= Max Dbfl Average Depth at Bankfull (ft)= Avg Dbfl Floodprone Width (ft)= Wfp Width to Depth Ratio (Wbfl/Avg Dbfl)= W/D Entrenchment Ratio (Avg Dbfl/Wbfl)= Entrenchment 4

South Cow Creek Downstream from Diversion Data RM 0.17 RM 0.49 RM 0.55 RM 0.70 RM 1.0 RM 1.70 RM 2.63 RM 2.9 RM 3.03 Wbfl 32 30 30 35 30 35 40 58 53 Max Dbfl 3 2 3 2.5 3 3 7 4 6 Avg Dbfl 2.5 1.5 2 2 2 2 3.5 3 3 Wfp 52 40 55 50 50 55 50 68 65 W/D 12.80 20.00 15.00 17.50 15.00 17.50 11.43 19.33 17.67 Entrenchment 1.63 1.33 1.83 1.43 1.67 1.57 1.25 1.17 1.23 Slope (ft/ft) 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.049 0.049 0.086 Gravel/ Sm. Cobble Cobble Cobble Cobble Cobble Cobble Boulder Boulder Boulder Stream B3c B3c B3c B3c/B4c B2a B3c B2a B2a B2a Downstream from Diversion Data RM 3.05 RM 3.60 RM 3.75 Wbfl 58 40 38 Max Dbfl 4.5 4 4.5 Avg Dbfl 3.5 2 3.75 Wfp 80 60 63 W/D 16.57 20.00 10.13 Entrenchment 1.38 1.50 1.66 Slope (ft/ft) 0.086 0.046 0.043 Boulder Cobble Cobble Stream B2a B2a/B3a B2a/B3a 5

Hooten Gulch Upstream from Powerhouse Downstream from Powerhouse Data RM -0.14 RM -0.90 RM 0.07 RM 0.24 Wbfl 25 25 15 15 Max Dbfl 3 3 2 2.5 Avg Dbfl 2.5 2 1.5 2 Wfp 70 70 65 25 W/D 10.00 12.50 10.00 7.50 Entrenchment 2.80 2.80 4.33 1.67 Slope (ft/ft) 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 Cobble Cobble Gravel Gravel Stream B3 B3 B3/B4 B3/B4 6