Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
GSA Bulletin Signup for GSW Email News
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

GSA Bulletin; November 1994; v. 106; no. 11; p. 1494-1501; DOI: 10.1130/0016-7606(1994)106<1494:CATCDP>2.3.CO;2
© 1994 Geological Society of America
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by PIZZUTO, J. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Channel adjustments to changing discharges, Powder River, Montana

JAMES E. PIZZUTO1

1 Department of Geology, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware 19716

Sixteen years of annual surveys reveal how Powder River responds to varying discharges. During 1978, the second largest recorded daily mean discharge occurred. Cutbank migration, bed degradation, net bank erosion, and overbank deposition all contributed to increase the channel area at 12 cross sections by an average of 62%. During the ensuing years, the channel area decreased as sediment was stored in low-lying benches adjacent to the active bed of the channel.

The survey data indicate that the balance between bank erosion and deposition varies with discharge. In years when the annual maximum daily mean discharge is <60 m3/s (a flow of 60 m3/s has a recurrence interval of ~1.1 yr), bank erosion and deposition are approximately equal. In years when the annual maximum daily mean discharge is between 60 and ~150 m3/s (a discharge of 150 m3/s has a recurrence interval of ~2.7 yr), bank deposition exceeds bank erosion, and the channel contracts, often by developing benches. In years with higher discharges, the channel expands through net bank erosion. These results demonstrate that the channel of Powder River is influenced by a wide variety of formative discharges. Powder River's recent history of expansion and contraction and the development of prominent benches cannot be explained by equilibrium models based on a single, channel-forming discharge.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Geological Society of America BulletinHome page
J. R. Miller and J. M. Friedman
Influence of flow variability on floodplain formation and destruction, Little Missouri River, North Dakota
Geological Society of America Bulletin, May 1, 2009; 121(5-6): 752 - 759.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Sedimentary ResearchHome page
J. E. Pizzuto, J. A. Moody, and R. H. Meade
Anatomy and Dynamics of a Floodplain, Powder River, Montana, U.S.A.
Journal of Sedimentary Research, January 1, 2008; 78(1): 16 - 28.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Sedimentary ResearchHome page
Labyrinthine Facies Architecture of the Tortola Fluvial System and Controls on Deposition (Late Oligocene-Early Miocene, Loranca Basin, Spain)
Journal of Sedimentary Research, July 1, 2000; 70(4): 850 - 867.





JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by Geological Society of America