Minnesota River Turbidity TMDL and Lake Pepin TMDL Meeting

Southern Research and Outreach Center, Waseca

Thursday, July 20, 2006

Title (View
Causes Menu/View ofMaster
and Consequences to edit)
Stream Instability
Karen Gran
Presenter name
 Stream “Instability”?

Copyright © Steve Baxter 2002

USGS
 Stream “Instability”?
Multi-thread, braided stream

High sediment load, High slope

Relatively coarse grain size,
High lateral mobility rates

USGS
 Stream “Instability”?

Copyright © Steve Baxter 2002

Add in photos of braided river

Wolman and Leopold, 1957

 Streams DO change, but they can
also be out of “equilibrium”.
‹ Natural processes can
be altered by changing
inputs to the system

‹ When development
encounters an active
stream, sometimes it is
forced to be “stable”
 Lane’s Balance for Alluvial Channels

Grain Size Distribution Slope

Sediment Supply Water Discharge

From Lane 1955

 Ex. Channelization
1) Straighten a
meandering channel
2) Add more runoff
Slope

Qw

Photo courtesy NRCS

- Increase slope
- Increase shear stress (τ=ρgDS)
- Increase bed erosion leading to degradation locally;
extra sediment leads to aggradation downstream
- Increased discharge could lead to channel widening/bank erosion
- Channel may attempt to “undo” the straightening, and create a
meandering form in straightened channel
Channel Evolution Model

Adapted from Simon 1994; USACOE 1990

 Independent Variables
imposed on the system
Grain Size Distribution

Sediment Supply Water Discharge

Vegetation
 Dependent Variables
Resulting from the combination of
sediment and water supply, grain size, and vegetation

Width, Depth, Slope, Sinuosity, Planform (braided/meandering)

Surface grain size, organization, bedforms

Lateral migration rates, Vertical changes (aggradation/degradation)

Vegetation
 How long will it take for the channel to respond
to imposed changes in water or sediment supply?

From Knighton 1998

Major forcings on the Minnesota River at different spatial and temporal scales.

Holocene
(<10,000 yr)

“Anthropocene”
(<~200 yr)

From Knighton 1998

 How do new fluvial landscapes
form and develop?
‹ Head-cutting;
Knick-point migration
‹ Network Extension
‹ Drainage Integration

From Les Hasbargen

 How do fluvial landscapes
form and develop?
‹ Head-cutting; Initially High Sediment Yields
Knick-point migration decaying “exponentially”
‹ Network Extension 300
Pasig-Potrero River

‹ Drainage Integration
250

Sediment Yield (mcm)

200

150

100

50

0
0 5 10 15
Years after Eruption
 Minnesota River
Landscape Evolution

Since valley formation by

Glacial River Warren:
‹ Adjustments to
mainstem slope
‹ Knick-point migration
on tributaries
‹ Drainage integration in
uplands – artificially
enhanced (draining of
wetlands and lakes,
ditching and tiling)
 Minnesota River
Landscape Evolution

Since valley formation by

Glacial River Warren:
‹ Adjustments to

Sediment Yield
mainstem slope
‹ Knick-point migration
on tributaries
‹ Drainage integration in
uplands – artificially ?
enhanced (draining of
wetlands and lakes, Time
ditching and tiling)
 Anthropogenic signal swamps
natural background rates
‹ Post-settlement rates of
sedimentation in Lake
Pepin have increased by
a factor of 10.
‹ Most of the sediment
comes from the
Minnesota River.
‹ Rates have increased
due to land-clearing,
drainage modification,
and development.

From Engstrom and Almendinger, 2000

Major post-settlement changes
‹ Land-clearing, mid-1800s
‹ Drainage modification (draining
wetlands, ditching, tiling)
‹ How do the two interact?

‹ How do changes in hydrology affect

sediment loading?
How might land-clearing affect the balance? Aggradation

Driftless Area of Wisconsin

1.5 meters of aggradation

Original floodplain

Copyright © Robert Pavlowsky 2002 New Diggins Branch, Galena River

 What happens after aggradation?

Whitewater River, Driftless Area of Minnesota

690’

680’

1992 ground surface

1989 ground surface
1939 ground surface
Pre-agricultural ground surface
670’
Data provided by Natural Resources Conservation Service
Slide courtesy Jason Moeckel, DNR
‹ Aggradation from land clearing
‹ Channel incision
‹ Formation of new floodplain within elevated
“floodplain”

What happens if you then increase peak flows

through drainage modification?

‹ Increased peak flows can move more sediment

‹ Higher shear stress on banks and bed can erode
more sediment
‹ Creation of wider floodplain
‹ If this new floodplain is inset into higher elevation
aggraded surface, there will be a net loss of
sediment to the stream (bank erosion will not be
balanced by point bar deposition)
 Additional effects from concentrated flow

Gullying

Focused scour
on banks and
bed
Photo courtesy Carrie Jennings
Photo courtesy NRCS

‹ How much sediment can be attributed specifically to

gullies? To concentrated flow entering rivers?
‹ We will see some of these features on the field trip.
 Possible consequences of stream
disequilibrium in Minnesota River?
‹ Recent hydrologic changes could mobilize “legacy” sediment
from post-glacial times to land-clearing

‹ If channel is incised, floodplain can become a sediment

source (not balanced by deposition)

‹ Ditches and channelized reaches may still be adjusting to

inputs, through degradation and widening, mobilizing more
sediment from banks and bed.

‹ Excess sediment can create habitat degradation, fill in

floodplain wetlands and depressions reducing storage, and
lower overall water quality
Sometimes, unstable banks have an obvious, local cause…

Copyright © Harriet Orr 2002

Sometimes, unstable banks have an obvious, local cause…

Source: NRCS
 Other times, locally unstable reaches are caused
by basin-scale changes in hydrology or land use,
and thus require basin-scale remediation.

Reminder: Streams are not inherently “unstable”, but they may be

out of equilibrium with imposed conditions, esp. if change was
rapid or recent. In some cases, the adjustment phase may
mobilize a lot of sediment…
 Unanswered questions on
Minnesota River
‹ What are the primary sources of sediment
entering the mainstem and Lake Pepin?
– Upland sources from overland flow and rilling
– Gullying in areas of concentrated flow
– Stored legacy sediment in floodplains
– Bluff erosion in incised reaches
‹ What is the dominant driver for excess
erosion? How much can be attributed to
changes in hydrology?
 On-going research by
Minnesota Geological Survey,
National Center for Earth-surface Dynamics,
St. Croix Watershed Research Station, et al.

‹ Developing new techniques for sediment

fingerprinting to separate upland from stream
bank sources (Le Sueur River; Beauford Creek)

‹ Sediment fingerprinting in Seven Mile Creek to

determine contributions from uplands, bluffs, and
stream bank/floodplain sources

‹ Century-scale sedimentation record on Redwood

Creek upstream of dam