Figure 18 - uploaded by George N Zaimes
Content may be subject to copyright.
![Gaining (effluent) and losing (influent streams) [from "Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices, 10/98, by the Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (FISRWG)].](profile/George-Zaimes-2/publication/242088160/figure/fig4/AS:667660312383497@1536194031956/Gaining-effluent-and-losing-influent-streams-from-Stream-Corridor-Restoration.png)
Gaining (effluent) and losing (influent streams) [from "Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices, 10/98, by the Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (FISRWG)].
Source publication
Similar publications
Available in - www.countrysidesurvey.org.uk/archiveCS2000/Report_HTML/07/index.htm or nora.nerc.ac.uk /4298
Citations
... Streams and rivers are considered to be in a state of dynamic equilibrium when the sediment delivered to the channel is in balance with the capacity of the stream to transport and discharge that sediment [1]. Stream channels alternatively experience periods of alluvial deposition, followed by erosional downcutting of the alluvium, followed by periods of additional deposition. ...
The Haw River, a high order river in the southeastern United States, is characterized by severe bank erosion and geomorphic change from historical conditions of clear waters and connected floodplains. In 2014 it was named one of the 10 most threatened rivers in the United States by American Rivers. Like many developed areas, the region has a history of disturbance including extensive upland soil loss from agriculture, dams, and upstream urbanization. The primary objective of this study was to identify the mechanisms controlling channel form and erosion of the Haw River. Field measurements including bank height, bankfull height, bank angle, root depth and density, riparian land cover and slope, surface protection, river width, and bank retreat were collected at 87 sites along 43.5 km of river. A Bank Erosion Hazard Index (BEHI) was calculated for each study site. Mean bank height was 11.8 m, mean width was 84.3 m, and bank retreat for 2005/2007-2011/2013 was 2.3 m. The greatest bank heights, BEHI values, and bank retreat were adjacent to riparian areas with low slope (<2). This is in contrast to previous studies which identify high slope as a risk factor for erosion. Most of the soils in low slope riparian areas were alluvial, suggesting sediment deposition from upland row crop agriculture and/or flooding. Bank retreat was not correlated to bank heights or BEHI values. Historical dams (1.2-3 m height) were not a significant factor. Erosion of the Haw River in the study section of the river (25% of the river length) contributed 205,320 m3 of sediment and 3759 kg of P annually. Concentration of suspended solids in the river increased with discharge. In conclusion, the Haw River is an unstable system, with river bank erosion and geomodification potential influenced by riparian slope and varied flows.
