Upper Fraser River Watershed, British Columbia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SEDIMENT ROUTING APPLIED TO PALEOENVIRONMENTAL RECONSTRUCTION IN THE UPPER FRASER RIVER WATERSHED, BRITISH COLUMBIA Randy William Dirszowsky A thesis submitted in confomity with the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Graduate Department of Geogtaphy in the University of Toronto @ Copyright by Randy William Dirszowsky, 2001 National Library Biblioth ue nationale ofCanada du Cana3 a . .. Rcqumbansd et Bibliogaphic Services =Iiographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington ûttawa ON K1A ON4 OüawaON K1AûN4 Canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la Flational Liîbra~~of Canada ta Bibliotheque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, disûiiute or sell reproduire, prêter, disûibuer ou copies of this thesis in microfonn, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la fome de microfiche/nlm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni ta thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or othenirise de ceileîi ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. SEûtIUENT ROtlTtNG APPLtED TO PALEOENVIRONMEMTAL RECONSTRUCTlON IN THE UPPER FRASER RIVER WATERSHED, BRITISH COLUMBIA Randy William Dirszowsky, Doctor of Philosophy, 2001. Graduate Department of Geography, University of Toronto. ABSTRACT Closely related floodplain and delta sites near Moose Lake, British Columbia (Canadian Rocky Mountains) are examined for evidence of environmental change and to assess the effects of upstream storage and reworking of sediment on downstream sedimentary records. The simultaneous development of composition-based provenance techniques facilitates the interpretation of downstream sediments in terms of source area, sediment production processes and hydroclimatic forcing. Initially, Fraser River bed material is used to characterize upstream source areas and to estimate mixing of source materials downstream. Although sedirnentary rocks provide minimal contrast in ternis of geochemical trace elements, it is possible to distinguish sediments €romhnro main watershed source areas based on major elernents associated with carbonate and aluminosilicate bedrock lithologies. Complications arise due to the effects of particle size. hydrodynamic sorting, and transport-related and post- depositional alteration. Currently the Moose River sub-basin contributes a greater proportÏon of the total and fine-grained sedirnent load delivered to Moose Lake than expected based on catchment area. The imbalance is related to greater elevations, runoff, and glacier cover in the sub-basin. A substantiat area of the Moose Lake-Fraser River delta-top floodplain derives from the early half of the Holocene, and is characterized by fragmentary. low-discharge paleochannels containing bed materials characteristic of the uppermost Fraser River. Most floodplain development since ca. 4 ka BP records persistently higher sediment loads, aggradation and larger, more active channels. Detailed variations in the composition of laterally and vertically accreted floodplain sediments and of channel morphology reflect regionally documented glacier advance and retreat stages. Except for possible till deposits in the northwest, most valley-fiIl below Moose Lake and the delta is glaciolacustrine in origin. deposited rapidly as ice retreated up-valley at the end of the Wisconsinan. A large proportion of the delta was apparently constructed prior to ca. 10 ka BP and is either paraglacial or deglacial in origin. It is estimated that progradation and channel shifting on the delta surface could account for a graduai increase of up to 21% in distal lacustrine accumulation rates over Neoglacial time. More episodic variations likely occurred due to channel splitting and meander cutoff on the floodplain. I would like to thank Joe Desloges first of al1 for overseeing this project and providing sound advice and funding along the way. Bill Mahaney, Tony Davis. Brian Greenwood. Rorke Bryan, Tony PRce. Larry Band, and Peter Ashmore sewed as reviewers at various times and must be thanked for their constructive comments and suggestions for improving the research design and thesis itself. Bill Mahaney and Tony Davis are to be especially thanked for their sometimes off-base intellectual and moral support. Ron Hancock provided expert knowledge and humour. as well as a nuclear reactor (SLOWPOKE II, fomerly at the University of Toronto). Without access to Bill and Ron's equipment and technical expertise, this project would not have been possible. B.C. Parks kindly granted permission to work in Mt. Robson Provincial Park, and a special word of thanks is due to Wayne Van Velzen, Hugo Mulyk and their staff for many good field ideas and generous logistical support. Greg Redies retrieved samples from the back country when Our own efforts were thwarted. The B.C. Ministry of Transportation generously allowed access to their records in Prince George. and Mark Pratt and Nick Polysou, in particular, are to be thanked. Much of the field work for this project depended on the equipment and expertise of colleagues "out west". Derald Smith, Brandon Beierle and Leif Burge (University of Calgary) made vibracoring possible. I am especially grateful to Brandon. who spent several extra days in the field to assist. Marko Mah (University of Alberta, Geophysics) generously spent a week in the field teaching us the art of seismic surveying as well as many hours post-processing the data. I am of course deeply indebted to my 'reguiaf crew of hardworking field assistants: John Roppa. Angela Vahaviolos and Ross Glenfield each of whom performed well beyond the cal1 of duty. Beth Kawecki, Adam Henley. Bill Dinzowsky, Robert lantria and Adam Horwitz also provided fieid andior lab assistance which I greatly appreciate. l would not have sutvived this endeavour without stimulating discussion, camaraderie and good vibes from some of my friends who are also colleagues: Kyle Hodder. Eliane Raymond, Andrew Stewart and Seem Ahmad; and some of rny friends who are not: Jonathan Seaquist. Michelle Perera and Douglas Converse. Thanks also to Johanne Sanschagrin, Donna Jeynes and Andrea Cottom for essential perspective. Parts of this work are dedicated to Mom. Bean and Erica. ABSTRACT ......................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................v LIST OF TABLES ................................................... viii LIST OF FIGURES ................................................... ix CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1. 1 BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE .................................. 1 1.2 OBJECTIVES .................................................. 6 1.3SETTlNG ...................................................... 7 1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS ................................. Il CHAPTER 2: SEDIMENT SOURCES AND MIXING IN THE UPPER FRASER RIVER WATERSHED 2.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................. 13 2.2 STUDYAREA ................................................. 15 2.2.1 Hydrology ................................................ 19 2.3 SAMPLING AND ANALYTIC METHODS ............................ 19 2.4 RESULTS .................................................... 22 2.4.1 Fine Grained Geochemistry of River Bed Material ................. 22 2.4.2 Factor Analysis of Geochemical Data ........................... 25 2.4.2.1 Raw Elernent Factors ................................... 26 2.4.2.2 Adjusted Data Factors .................................. 31 2.4.3 Mineralogy and Lithology of River Bed Material ................... 34 2.4.3.1 Clay Fraction Mineralogy ................................ 34 2.4.3.2 Clast Llhology ........................................ 34 2.4.4 Bed Material Mixing at Tributary Junctions ....................... 37 2.4.4.1 Distinction of Moose River-Fraser River Sedirnent ............. 37 2.4.4.2 Sediment Mixing Calculations ............................. 38 2.4.4.3 Mixing at Upstream Tributary Junctions ..................... 41 2.5 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION ................................... 44 2.5.1 Geochemistry of River Bed Sediments and Source Areas ........... 44 2.5.2 Geochemical Source Indicaiors ............................... 47 2.5.3 Sediment Mixing at Tributary Junctions ......................... 48 2.5.4 Source Area Contributions ................................... 50 2.6 CONCLUSIONS ............................................... 53 CHAPTER 3: StZE-COMPOStTtON REtATiONSHtPS tN AtLUVlAt AND LACUSTRINE SEDIMENTS OF THE UPPER FRASER RIVER. BRITISH COLUMBIA 3.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................. 55 3.2 SETTING ....................................................57 3.3 METHODS ................................................... 60 3.4 RESULTS ....................................................62 3.4.1 Particle Size Characteristics of Analyzed Sediments ............... 62 3.4.2 Downstream Bed Material Variations ........................... 66 3.4.3 Geochemical Cornposlion ................................... 68 3.4.3 Size-Composition Relations .................................. 70 3.5 DISCUSSION .................................................78 3.6 CONCLUSIONS ...............................................84