DOCSLIB.ORG

Alluvial Bar Morphology and Dynamics in the Middle Rio Grande

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

AlluvialAlluvialAlluvial BarBarBar MorphologyMorphologyMorphology andandand DynamicsDynamicsDynamics ininin thethethe MiddleMiddleMiddle RioRioRio Grande:Grande:Grande: ApplicationApplicationApplication tototo HabitatHabitatHabitat RestorationRestorationRestoration forforfor thethethe RioRioRio GrandeGrandeGrande SilverySilverySilvery MinnowMinnowMinnow Mike Harvey MMussetter EEngineering, IInc. WORKWORK CONDUCTEDCONDUCTED FOR:FOR: z New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission z Middle Rio Grande ESA Collaborative Program WHATWHAT ISIS AA BARBAR ?? “Discrete alluvial feature formed by deposition and modified by erosion” ? – Can be mid-channel or bank-attached – Can be subaerial or subaqueous – Can be stationary or mobile – Can be vegetated or unvegetated PROJECTPROJECT OBJECTIVESOBJECTIVES z Evaluate bar changes over time in response to changes in flow, sediment supply and channel morphology z Develop a bar classification z Relate fluvial processes to bar types z Apply results to river/habitat restoration 9 STUDY SITES MEI 1935 1955 1972 1992 1996 2001 MEI ModifiedModified BraidingBraiding IndexIndex ((GermanoskiGermanoski,, 1989)1989) 2( L ) n MBI = ∑ BraidBar + bars LChannel LChannel EXPECTEDEXPECTED MBIMBI RESPONSESRESPONSES ((GermanoskiGermanoski andand SchummSchumm,, 1993;1993; GermanoskiGermanoski andand Harvey,Harvey, 1993)1993) z If D50 increases, and there is sediment supply: > MBI z If D50 increases, and there is no sediment supply: < MBI z If the bed aggrades: > MBI z If the bed degrades: < MBI Pena Blanca Central Avenue 7.00 1600 3.00 1400 Modified Braid Bar Index Modified Braid Bar Index 6.00 1400 Alternate Bar Index 1200 Alternate Bar Index 2.50 Active Channel Width Active Channel Width 1200 5.00 1000 2.00 1000 4.00 800 800 1.50 3.00 600 Bar Index Bar Index 600 1.00 2.00 400 400 Average Channel Width (ft) Average Channel Width (ft) 0.50 1.00 200 200 0.00 0 0.00 0 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 Year Year Bernardo 4.00 1600 Modified Braid Bar Index 3.50 Alternate Bar Index 1400 Active Channel Width 3.00 1200 2.50 1000 2.00 800 Bar Index 1.50 600 1.00 400 Average Channel Width (ft) 0.50 200 0.00 0 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 Year Escondida 2.50 1000 Modified Braid Bar Index 900 Alternate Bar Index 2.00 Active Channel Width 800 700 1.50 600 500 Bar Index 1.00 400 300 Average Channel Width (ft) 0.50 200 100 0.00 0 1947 1957 1967 1977 1987 1997 Year Bosque del Apache San Marcial 3.00 2000 1.20 250 Modified Braid Bar Index Modified Braid Bar Index 1800 Alternate Bar Index Alternate Bar Index 2.50 1.00 Active Channel Width 1600 Active Channel Width 200 1400 2.00 0.80 1200 150 1.50 1000 0.60 Bar Index 800 Bar Index 100 1.00 0.40 600 Average Channel Width (ft) Average Channel Width (ft) 400 50 0.50 0.20 200 0.00 0 0.00 0 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 1972 1982 1992 2002 Year Year HierarchicalHierarchicalHierarchical BarBarBar ClassificationClassificationClassification forforfor thethethe MiddleMiddleMiddle RioRioRio GrandeGrandeGrande Subaqueous Perennial Bar Type Location Elevation or Subaerial Vegetation Linguoid Mid-channel Bed Subaqueous No Braid Mid-channel Level-1,2 Subaerial No Alternate Bank-attached Level-1 Subaerial No Mid-channel Mid-channel Level-1,2 Subaerial Yes Bank-attached Bank-attached Level-1,2 Subaerial Yes MEI Linguoid bar L-1 braid bars L-1 bank-attached bar L-2 braid bar mud drape L-1 braid bar L-1 mid-channel bar L-2 braid bar L-1 braid bar Linguoid bar L-2 mid-channel bar L-2 braid bar L-1 mid-channel bar L-2 mid-channel bar L-2 bank-attached bar L-1 bank-attached bar HYDRAULICHYDRAULIC ANALYSISANALYSIS z One-dimensional HEC-RAS models – Fixed-bed analysis – Calibrated to gauged flow at time of survey and 2005 peak flow (Tetra Tech. (2005) CentralCentral SiteSite Bar Inundation Analysis 8000 0% 5-yr 7000 1% 2.9-yr 1% 2.9-yr 6000 Mean Inundation Discharge 1% 2.7-yr 1% 2.7-yr Minimum Inundation Discharge 5000 4% 1.9-yr Maximum Inundation Discharge 4% 1.7-yr Mean Channel Capacity 5% 1.6-yr 6% 1.5-yr 7% 1.4-yr 7% 1.4-yr 6% 1.5-yr 4000 8% 1.4-yr 3000 12% 1.1-yr Discharge (cfs) 17% 1.05-yr 16% 1.1-yr 2000 21% 1.03-yr 29% <1.01-yr 1000 47% <1.01-yr 51% <1.01-yr Mean-daily exceedance percent and peak flood return interval of inudation discharge show n next to plotted value. 92% 95% <1.01-yr 91% <1.01-yr 0 98% Linguoid Bar Level-1 Alternate Level-2 Level-1 Mid- Level-1 Bank- Level-2 Mid- Level-2 Bank- Braid Bar Bar Braid Bar Channel Bar Attached Bar Channel Bar Attached Bar Bar Feature BARBAR INUNDATIONINUNDATION FREQUENCYFREQUENCY && DURATIONDURATION Table ES-1. Summary of frequency and duration of inundation of the classified bar types at sites without excessive aggradation or degradation.* Inundation Days per Percent of Bar Type Recurrence Year of Year Interval Inundation Inundated Level 1 braid bars < 1 year 290 80% Alternate bars < 1 year 290 80% Level 2 braid bars < 1 year 146 <40% Level 1 mid-channel bars 1.5 years 90 25% Level 1 bank-attached bars 1.5 years 90 25% Level 2 mid-channel bars 2 years 36 <10% Level 2 bank-attached bars 2 years 36 <10% *excluding the Pena Blanca, Bernalillo, Escondida and San Marcial sites. BARSBARS ANDAND SHEARSHEAR STRESSSTRESS Table ES-2: Comparison of maximum in-channel shear stresses to the prevalence of bars in the sand-bed sites. Maximum In- Channel Shear Site Names Prevalence of Active Bars Stresses (lb/ft2) Central Avenue <0.1 moderate to high number of active bars Bosque del Apache, San Marcial 0.1 high number of active bars Bernardo, La Joya, Lemitar 0.12 - 0.15 active bars are present Belen 0.2 moderate number of active bars Escondida 0.3 virtually no active bars BARSBARS ANDAND VEGETATIONVEGETATION z Shear stress limit for vegetation establishment ~ < 1 psf z Shear stress limit for vegetation removal ~ > 6 psf CentralCentral SiteSite –– CrossCross SectionSection 22 4953 Peak Exceedance Percent 1 2 5 10 203040506070 Ground Elevation Lingouid Bar Mean-Daily Duration L1 Braid Bar Peak Frequency 4952 L2 Braid Bar 100-yr Shear Stress L1 Mid-ch Bar 50-yr Computed Water- 25-yr 4951 Surface Elevation 10-yr 7,600 cfs 5-yr 4950 t) 5,410 cfs f 2-yr 4,450 cfs 1.5-yr 4949 3,490 cfs Elevation ( 4948 2,110 cfs 1,055 cfs 4947 737 cfs 329 cfs 4946 Shear Stress (lb/ft2) 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 4945 1000 1200 1400 1600 0 100 200 300 Station (ft) Number of Days (Mean-Daily Duration) BARSBARS ANDAND DEPOSITIONDEPOSITION z Based on surveys of L1 and L2 bars in Albuquerque Reach, pre- and post- 2005 high flows z Comparison based on 0.5 ft contour- interval topographic mapping POST-HIGH FLOW SEDIMENT DEPOSITION 2005 L1 L1 L2 L2 L1 Upstream Bar Downstream High Flow Bar High Flow L1 Upstream Bar Low Flow BARSBARS ANDAND DEGRADATIONDEGRADATION z Degradation causes hydrologic abandonment of bars z If restoration is being considered is the bed currently stable? z If degradation continues, restoration will be compromised Abandoned L-2 mid-channel bar BernalilloBernalillo SiteSite Bar Inundation Analysis 14000 Mean Inundation Discharge Minimum Inundation Discharge 0% 100-yr 12000 Maximum Inundation Discharge Mean Channel Capacity 10000 0% 13.5-yr 0% 10.1-yr 0% 8.6-yr 8000 0% 4.6-yr 0% 4.4-yr 0% 4.2-yr 0% 3.6-yr 6000 Discharge (cfs) 4% 1.8-yr 6% 1.6-yr 4000 9% 1.2-yr 8% 1.3-yr 11% 1.2-yr Identified in Study Reach No Level-1 Bank-Attached Bars 20% 1.03-yr 2000 32% 32% <1.01-yr 31% <1.01-yr Mean-daily exceedance percent and peak flood return 33% interval of inudation discharge show n next to plotted value. 0 No Linguoid Bars Identified in Study Reach Linguoid Bar Level-1 Alternate Level-2 Level-1 Mid- Level-1 Bank- Level-2 Mid- Level-2 Bank- Braid Bar Bar Braid Bar Channel Bar Attached Bar Channel Bar Attached Bar Bar Feature BernalilloBernalillo SiteSite –– CrossCross SectionSection 1010 5060 Peak Exceedance Percent 1 2 5 10 203040506070 Mean-Daily Duration Peak Frequency 5058 Shear Stress 100-yr 5056 50-yr 25-yr 8,940 cfs 10-yr 7,600 cfs 5-yr t) f 5054 5,410 cfs 2-yr 4,450 cfs 1.5-yr 3,490 cfs 5052 Elevation ( Elevation 2,110 cfs Ground Elevation L1 Braid Bar 5050 1,055 cfs Alternate Bar 882 cfs L2 Braid Bar 737 cfs L1 Bank-att Bar 5048 L2 Mid-ch Bar L2 Bank-att Bar Computed Water- Shear Stress (lb/ft2) Surface Elevation 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 5046 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 0 100 200 300 Station (ft) Number of Days (Mean-Daily Duration) BernalilloBernalillo SiteSite 2 Reach Averaged Hydraulics, D50=37 mm (WC4) XS8 Hydraulics, D50=37 mm (WC4) 1.5 1 Dimensionless Grain Shear 0.5 RI (years) 1.5 2 5 10 25 50 100 0 1000 3000 5000 7000 9000 11000 13000 Discharge (cfs) CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS z Bar indices reflect changes in flow, sediment supply and channel morphology z Bar classification is a communication tool, and provides first-cut hydraulic assessments CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS z Active braid bars require average shear stresses < 0.2 psf z Inundation of bars leads to vertical growth and reduced frequency and duration of inundation z Degradation will adversely affect restoration efforts, so vertical stability must be assessed APPLICATIONAPPLICATION TOTO RESTORATIONRESTORATION Bridge Blvd.
Recommended publications
  • (P 117-140) Flood Pulse.Qxp

    (P 117-140) Flood Pulse.Qxp

    117 THE FLOOD PULSE CONCEPT: NEW ASPECTS, APPROACHES AND APPLICATIONS - AN UPDATE Junk W.J. Wantzen K.M. Max-Planck-Institute for Limnology, Working Group Tropical Ecology, P.O. Box 165, 24302 Plön, Germany E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT The flood pulse concept (FPC), published in 1989, was based on the scientific experience of the authors and published data worldwide. Since then, knowledge on floodplains has increased considerably, creating a large database for testing the predictions of the concept. The FPC has proved to be an integrative approach for studying highly diverse and complex ecological processes in river-floodplain systems; however, the concept has been modified, extended and restricted by several authors. Major advances have been achieved through detailed studies on the effects of hydrology and hydrochemistry, climate, paleoclimate, biogeography, biodi- versity and landscape ecology and also through wetland restoration and sustainable management of flood- plains in different latitudes and continents. Discussions on floodplain ecology and management are greatly influenced by data obtained on flow pulses and connectivity, the Riverine Productivity Model and the Multiple Use Concept. This paper summarizes the predictions of the FPC, evaluates their value in the light of recent data and new concepts and discusses further developments in floodplain theory. 118 The flood pulse concept: New aspects, INTRODUCTION plain, where production and degradation of organic matter also takes place. Rivers and floodplain wetlands are among the most threatened ecosystems. For example, 77 percent These characteristics are reflected for lakes in of the water discharge of the 139 largest river systems the “Seentypenlehre” (Lake typology), elaborated by in North America and Europe is affected by fragmen- Thienemann and Naumann between 1915 and 1935 tation of the river channels by dams and river regula- (e.g.
  • Measurement of Bedload Transport in Sand-Bed Rivers: a Look at Two Indirect Sampling Methods

    Measurement of Bedload Transport in Sand-Bed Rivers: a Look at Two Indirect Sampling Methods

    Published online in 2010 as part of U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2010-5091. Measurement of Bedload Transport in Sand-Bed Rivers: A Look at Two Indirect Sampling Methods Robert R. Holmes, Jr. U.S. Geological Survey, Rolla, Missouri, United States. Abstract Sand-bed rivers present unique challenges to accurate measurement of the bedload transport rate using the traditional direct sampling methods of direct traps (for example the Helley-Smith bedload sampler). The two major issues are: 1) over sampling of sand transport caused by “mining” of sand due to the flow disturbance induced by the presence of the sampler and 2) clogging of the mesh bag with sand particles reducing the hydraulic efficiency of the sampler. Indirect measurement methods hold promise in that unlike direct methods, no transport-altering flow disturbance near the bed occurs. The bedform velocimetry method utilizes a measure of the bedform geometry and the speed of bedform translation to estimate the bedload transport through mass balance. The bedform velocimetry method is readily applied for the estimation of bedload transport in large sand-bed rivers so long as prominent bedforms are present and the streamflow discharge is steady for long enough to provide sufficient bedform translation between the successive bathymetric data sets. Bedform velocimetry in small sand- bed rivers is often problematic due to rapid variation within the hydrograph. The bottom-track bias feature of the acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP) has been utilized to accurately estimate the virtual velocities of sand-bed rivers. Coupling measurement of the virtual velocity with an accurate determination of the active depth of the streambed sediment movement is another method to measure bedload transport, which will be termed the “virtual velocity” method.
  • BIG RIVER ECOSYSTEM: Program 2

    BIG RIVER ECOSYSTEM: Program 2

    BIG RIVER ECOSYSTEM: A Question of Net Worth PURPOSE To explore biodiversity at the ecosystem level. KERA CONNECTIONS to Life Science Program 2 Core Content: Structure and Function in Living Systems Academic Expectations: 2.2 Patterns, 2.3 Systems, 2.4 Models & Scale ANSWERS TO Process Skills: Observation, Modeling aFIELD NOTES OBJECTIVES 1. In a hot and hostile environment, Students should be able to: the evaporated water cannot be 1.identify five “big river” organisms incorporated into living cells (as 2.construct a diagram showing interactions between living and we know them). nonliving parts of an ecosystem 2. An extremely cold environment, 3. discuss factors that affect the level of biodiversity in their river basin. or frozen desert, does not allow cells to utilize water. VOCABULARY 3. Answers will vary but should Teachers may wish to discuss the following terms: display logical flow of water and aquatic, commercial, ecosystem, water cycle and watershed. allow for recirculation in a loop. 4. Arteries and veins. aFIELD NOTEBOOK 5. A pumping heart. Ideas for Teachers 6. Diagram A shows many different A. Develop a concept map for the water cycle. Include these items in types of ecosystems in close the concept map: clouds, groundwater, apple tree, stream, precipita- proximity. tion, condensation, evaporation, harvest mouse, snowflakes, sun and 7. Add a watering hole, plant a humans. What other cycles are needed to maintain an ecosystem? miniature forest, create a B. Biospheres, containing algae, brine shrimp and water, are often meadow of wildflowers. Most shown in advertisements. Analyze how the biosphere is self-main- importantly, break up a monocul- taining.
  • Deposition Patterns and Rates of Mining-Contaminated Sediment Within a Sedimentation Basin System, S.E

    Deposition Patterns and Rates of Mining-Contaminated Sediment Within a Sedimentation Basin System, S.E

    BearWorks Institutional Repository MSU Graduate Theses Spring 2017 Deposition Patterns and Rates of Mining- Contaminated Sediment within a Sedimentation Basin System, S.E. Missouri Joshua Carl Voss Missouri State University - Springfield, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://bearworks.missouristate.edu/theses Part of the Environmental Indicators and Impact Assessment Commons, Environmental Monitoring Commons, and the Hydrology Commons Recommended Citation Voss, Joshua Carl, "Deposition Patterns and Rates of Mining-Contaminated Sediment within a Sedimentation Basin System, S.E. Missouri" (2017). MSU Graduate Theses. 3074. http://bearworks.missouristate.edu/theses/3074 This article or document was made available through BearWorks, the institutional repository of Missouri State University. The orkw contained in it may be protected by copyright and require permission of the copyright holder for reuse or redistribution. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DEPOSITION PATTERNS AND RATES OF MINING-CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT WITHIN A SEDIMENTATION BASIN SYSTEM, BIG RIVER, S.E. MISSOURI A Masters Thesis Presented to The Graduate College of Missouri State University ATE In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science, Geospatial Sciences in Geography, Geology, and Planning By Josh C. Voss May 2017 Copyright 2017 by Joshua Carl Voss ii DEPOSITION PATTERNS AND RATES OF MINING-CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT WITHIN A SEDIMENTATION BASIN SYSTEM, BIG RIVER, S.E. MISSOURI Geography, Geology, and Planning Missouri State University, May 2017 Master of Science Josh C. Voss ABSTRACT Flooding events exert a dominant control over the deposition and formation of floodplains. The rate at which floodplains form depends on flood magnitude, frequency, and duration, and associated sediment transport capacity and supply.
  • Lesson 4: Sediment Deposition and River Structures

    Lesson 4: Sediment Deposition and River Structures

    LESSON 4: SEDIMENT DEPOSITION AND RIVER STRUCTURES ESSENTIAL QUESTION: What combination of factors both natural and manmade is necessary for healthy river restoration and how does this enhance the sustainability of natural and human communities? GUIDING QUESTION: As rivers age and slow they deposit sediment and form sediment structures, how are sediments and sediment structures important to the river ecosystem? OVERVIEW: The focus of this lesson is the deposition and erosional effects of slow-moving water in low gradient areas. These “mature rivers” with decreasing gradient result in the settling and deposition of sediments and the formation sediment structures. The river’s fast-flowing zone, the thalweg, causes erosion of the river banks forming cliffs called cut-banks. On slower inside turns, sediment is deposited as point-bars. Where the gradient is particularly level, the river will branch into many separate channels that weave in and out, leaving gravel bar islands. Where two meanders meet, the river will straighten, leaving oxbow lakes in the former meander bends. TIME: One class period MATERIALS: . Lesson 4- Sediment Deposition and River Structures.pptx . Lesson 4a- Sediment Deposition and River Structures.pdf . StreamTable.pptx . StreamTable.pdf . Mass Wasting and Flash Floods.pptx . Mass Wasting and Flash Floods.pdf . Stream Table . Sand . Reflection Journal Pages (printable handout) . Vocabulary Notes (printable handout) PROCEDURE: 1. Review Essential Question and introduce Guiding Question. 2. Hand out first Reflection Journal page and have students take a minute to consider and respond to the questions then discuss responses and questions generated. 3. Handout and go over the Vocabulary Notes. Students will define the vocabulary words as they watch the PowerPoint Lesson.
  • Geomorphic Classification of Rivers

    Geomorphic Classification of Rivers

    9.36 Geomorphic Classification of Rivers JM Buffington, U.S. Forest Service, Boise, ID, USA DR Montgomery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA Published by Elsevier Inc. 9.36.1 Introduction 730 9.36.2 Purpose of Classification 730 9.36.3 Types of Channel Classification 731 9.36.3.1 Stream Order 731 9.36.3.2 Process Domains 732 9.36.3.3 Channel Pattern 732 9.36.3.4 Channel–Floodplain Interactions 735 9.36.3.5 Bed Material and Mobility 737 9.36.3.6 Channel Units 739 9.36.3.7 Hierarchical Classifications 739 9.36.3.8 Statistical Classifications 745 9.36.4 Use and Compatibility of Channel Classifications 745 9.36.5 The Rise and Fall of Classifications: Why Are Some Channel Classifications More Used Than Others? 747 9.36.6 Future Needs and Directions 753 9.36.6.1 Standardization and Sample Size 753 9.36.6.2 Remote Sensing 754 9.36.7 Conclusion 755 Acknowledgements 756 References 756 Appendix 762 9.36.1 Introduction 9.36.2 Purpose of Classification Over the last several decades, environmental legislation and a A basic tenet in geomorphology is that ‘form implies process.’As growing awareness of historical human disturbance to rivers such, numerous geomorphic classifications have been de- worldwide (Schumm, 1977; Collins et al., 2003; Surian and veloped for landscapes (Davis, 1899), hillslopes (Varnes, 1958), Rinaldi, 2003; Nilsson et al., 2005; Chin, 2006; Walter and and rivers (Section 9.36.3). The form–process paradigm is a Merritts, 2008) have fostered unprecedented collaboration potentially powerful tool for conducting quantitative geo- among scientists, land managers, and stakeholders to better morphic investigations.
  • Sedimentation and Shoaling Work Unit

    Sedimentation and Shoaling Work Unit

    1 SEDIMENTARY PROCESSES lAND ENVIRONMENTS IIN THE COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY l_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7 I .a-.. .(.;,, . I _e .- :.;. .. =*I Final Report on the Sedimentation and Shoaling Work Unit of the Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program SEDIMENTARY PROCESSES AND ENVIRONMENTS IN THE COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY Contractor: School of Oceanography University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 Principal Investigator: Dr. Joe S. Creager School of Oceanography, WB-10 University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 (206) 543-5099 June 1984 I I I I Authors Christopher R. Sherwood I Joe S. Creager Edward H. Roy I Guy Gelfenbaum I Thomas Dempsey I I I I I I I - I I I I I I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PREFACE The Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program This document is one of a set of publications and other materials produced by the Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program (CREDDP). CREDDP has two purposes: to increase understanding of the ecology of the Columbia River Estuary and to provide information useful in making land and water use decisions. The program was initiated by local governments and citizens who saw a need for a better information base for use in managing natural resources and in planning for development. In response to these concerns, the Governors of the states of Oregon and Washington requested in 1974 that the Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission (PNRBC) undertake an interdisciplinary ecological study of the estuary. At approximately the same time, local governments and port districts formed the Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce (CREST) to develop a regional management plan for the estuary. PNRBC produced a Plan of Study for a six-year, $6.2 million program which was authorized by the U.S.
  • Topographic Forcing of Tidal Sandbar Patterns for Irregular Estuary Planforms

    Topographic Forcing of Tidal Sandbar Patterns for Irregular Estuary Planforms

    EARTH SURFACE PROCESSES AND LANDFORMS Earth Surf. Process. Landforms 43, 172–186 (2018) Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Published online 14 July 2017 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/esp.4166 Topographic forcing of tidal sandbar patterns for irregular estuary planforms J. R. F. W. Leuven,* T. de Haas, L. Braat and M. G. Kleinhans Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands Received 17 October 2016; Revised 17 April 2017; Accepted 19 April 2017 *Correspondence to: J. R. F. W. Leuven, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected] This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. ABSTRACT: Estuaries typically show converging planforms from the sea into the land. Nevertheless, their planform is rarely perfectly exponential and often shows curvature and the presence of embayments. Here we test the degree to which the shapes and dimensions of tidal sandbars depend on estuary planform. We assembled a dataset with 35 estuary planforms and properties of 190 tidal bars to induce broad-brush but significant empirical relations between channel planform, hydraulic geometry and bar pattern, and tested a linear stability theory for bar pattern. We found that the location where bars form is largely controlled by the excess width of a channel, which is calculated as the observed channel width minus the width of an ideal exponentially widening estuary. In general, the summed width of bars approximates the excess width as measured in the along-channel variation of three estuaries for which bathymetry was available as well as for the local measurements in the 35 investigated estuaries.
  • Paseo De Las Iglesias Santa Cruz River Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study

    Paseo De Las Iglesias Santa Cruz River Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study

    Paseo de las Iglesias Santa Cruz River Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study Jennifer Becker, CFM & Thomas Helfrich, Project Manager of Pima County Flood Control District, Water Resources Division In partnership with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Good morning ladies and gentlemen. My name is Jennifer Becker. I’m a Program Coordinator with the Pima County Flood Control District, Water Resources Division and I will be presenting the results of the Paseo de las Iglesias Feasibility Study. This study is a joint effort by the Pima County Flood Control District and the US Army Corps of Engineers to determine if the Federal Government can share the costs of restoring the ecosystem along the the Santa Cruz River in south-central Tucson. Æ Next slide 1 SOME STAKEHOLDERS AND PARTICIPANTS Pima County State and federal agencies ¾ Department of Transportation Pima Association of Governments ¾ Cultural Resources San Xavier Nation, Tohono ¾ Natural Resources, Parks and O’odham Nation Recreation ¾ Real Property Local environmental organizations City of Tucson Local and national consulting ¾ Rio Nuevo companies ¾ Tucson Origins Cultural Park University of Arizona ¾ Economic Development Pima Community College ¾ Parks and Recreation ¾ Transportation Engineering Local neighborhood groups ¾ Comprehensive Planning Citizens In additions to the FCD & USACE, other participating stakeholders include various departments in Pima County and City of Tucson government, Arizona Department of Game and Fish, US Fish and Wildlife, local colleges & universities, local Indian Nations, environmental organizations, consulting companies, and individual citizens and citizen groups. Æ Next slide 2 Today’s Presentation • Study Area • Problem Summary • Public Involvement • Project Objectives • Study Considerations • Project Alternatives • Recommended Plan • Proposed Schedule • Documents and Contacts Today I would like to summarize the plan formulation process and present the findings of the study, including a description of the recommended plan to help to restore a functioning ecosystem.
  • The Arkansas River Flood of June 3-5, 1921

    The Arkansas River Flood of June 3-5, 1921

    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ALBERT B. FALL, Secretary UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE 0ns SMITH, Director Water-Supply Paper 4$7 THE ARKANSAS RIVER FLOOD OF JUNE 3-5, 1921 BY ROBERT FOLLANS^EE AND EDWARD E. JON^S WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1922 i> CONTENTS. .Page. Introduction________________ ___ 5 Acknowledgments ___ __________ 6 Summary of flood losses-__________ _ 6 Progress of flood crest through Arkansas Valley _____________ 8 Topography of Arkansas basin_______________ _________ 9 Cause of flood______________1___________ ______ 11 Principal areas of intense rainfall____ ___ _ 15 Effect of reservoirs on the flood__________________________ 16 Flood flows_______________________________________ 19 Method of determination________________ ______ _ 19 The flood between Canon City and Pueblo_________________ 23 The flood at Pueblo________________________________ 23 General features_____________________________ 23 Arrival of tributary flood crests _______________ 25 Maximum discharge__________________________ 26 Total discharge_____________________________ 27 The flood below Pueblo_____________________________ 30 General features _________ _______________ 30 Tributary streams_____________________________ 31 Fountain Creek____________________________ 31 St. Charles River___________________________ 33 Chico Creek_______________________________ 34 Previous floods i____________________________________ 35 Flood of Indian legend_____________________________ 35 Floods of authentic record__________________________ 36 Maximum discharges
  • River Dynamics 101 - Fact Sheet River Management Program Vermont Agency of Natural Resources

    River Dynamics 101 - Fact Sheet River Management Program Vermont Agency of Natural Resources

    River Dynamics 101 - Fact Sheet River Management Program Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Overview In the discussion of river, or fluvial systems, and the strategies that may be used in the management of fluvial systems, it is important to have a basic understanding of the fundamental principals of how river systems work. This fact sheet will illustrate how sediment moves in the river, and the general response of the fluvial system when changes are imposed on or occur in the watershed, river channel, and the sediment supply. The Working River The complex river network that is an integral component of Vermont’s landscape is created as water flows from higher to lower elevations. There is an inherent supply of potential energy in the river systems created by the change in elevation between the beginning and ending points of the river or within any discrete stream reach. This potential energy is expressed in a variety of ways as the river moves through and shapes the landscape, developing a complex fluvial network, with a variety of channel and valley forms and associated aquatic and riparian habitats. Excess energy is dissipated in many ways: contact with vegetation along the banks, in turbulence at steps and riffles in the river profiles, in erosion at meander bends, in irregularities, or roughness of the channel bed and banks, and in sediment, ice and debris transport (Kondolf, 2002). Sediment Production, Transport, and Storage in the Working River Sediment production is influenced by many factors, including soil type, vegetation type and coverage, land use, climate, and weathering/erosion rates.
  • The Grand Bank's Southeast Shoal Concentrates the Highest Overall

    The Grand Bank's Southeast Shoal Concentrates the Highest Overall

    Template for Submission of Scientific Information to Describe Areas Meeting Scientific Criteria for Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas Title/Name of the area: Southeast Shoal, Grand Bank Presented by (Daniela Diz, WWF-Canada, Sr. Marine Policy Officer, [email protected]; tel: +1.902.482.1105, ext. 35) Abstract (in less than 150 words) The Grand Bank’s Southeast Shoal concentrates the highest overall benthic biomass of the Grand Banks. It also presents: a unique offshore capelin spawning and yellowtail nursery grounds, unique shallow, sandy habitat, cetacean and seabird aggregation and feeding grounds, American plaice nursery habitat, a spawning ground for the depleted Atlantic cod, reproduction area for striped wolffish, and unique populations of blue mussels and wedge clams. This area has been previously identified as an EBSA by DFO in Canada, and as a Vulnerable Marine Ecosystem (VME) indicator element by NAFO. Introduction (To include: feature type(s) presented, geographic description, depth range, oceanography, general information data reported, availability of models) The Southeast Shoal (area east of 51o W and south of 45oN) extends to the edge of the Grand Bank off Newfoundland. It straddles between areas of national jurisdiction and the high seas. Its unique features provide essential habitat for a number of species, playing an important role in the productivity of the Grand Banks ecosystems, which has sustained exceptionally abundant and commercially valuable marine life for centuries. It comprises a relict beach ecosystem containing unusual offshore populations of blue mussel and wedge clam, and offshore capelin spawning ground. The area is also important for threatened and/or declining species, given the currently severely altered state of the Northwest Atlantic ecosystem and the importance of the area as a nursery habitat for cod, home to an offshore spawning population of capelin (an important forage species for groundfish), a discrete population of humpback whales, and migrating leatherback and loggerhead turtles.