GROUNDWATER FLOW IN A GLACIAL TILL CATCHMENT. 2at Groundwater level (m) ao Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Noy Dec 4989 Fig. 7, Seasonal groundwater Nuctuations in three slope positions. The magnitude of groundwater fevel fluctuations is greatest in the upper catchment (P22) where the thickness of unsaturated sediments is ‘grealest and decreases towards the stream (POS and P20-02). Piezometer locations are shown in Fig. 3. adjacent to the stream remain nearly saturated most of the year and baseflow is sustained during dry periods. The amount of available storage in the unsaturated sediments is not strictly dependent on sediment thickness but is also determined by the porosity and the moisture content of the sediments. The moisture content and the thickness of unsaturated sediments are, in turn, influenced by many other factors such as surface topography, the hydraulic properties of the unsaturated sediments, evapotranspiration and the con- figuration of the groundwater table. Although hydraulic conductivity, surface topography and sediment thickness are discussed separately, the fluxes, flowpaths and discharge areas of groundwater flow are détermined by the interactions among various physical properties. Even within a catchment as small as Harp 421, knowledge of only the physical properties is insufficient to predict their effect on stream discharge since the relative importance of these properties varies both spatially and temporally with fluctuating groundwater levels. Therefore, it is necessary to specify the range of hydrologic conditions for which the possible effects of given physical properties influence stream discharge. Spatial and temporal pattern of stream discharge Fluctvations in groundwater levels significantly influence stream discharge in Harp 4-21. Stream discharge remains low over a large range of groundwater Ievels and then increases significantly for small increases in groundwater levels (Fig. 8), These large changes in stream discharge suggest that the relative importance of different physical properties, hydrological processes and pathways change as groundwater levels fluctuate, The rapid increase in streamMJ.RINTON BT AL. s ‘Stream discharge, St (U's) i 348.8 : 348.9 Groundwater level, P20-02 {m) ge Fig. &, Stream dischargeat SI as.a function of piezometric levels adjacent to the lower portion of the stream (920-02, 0,69 m depth), Similar results are found for other piezometers in proximity of the stream (for ‘example P03), Piezometer locations are shown in Fig. 3. discharge for high groundwater levels can be attributed to the higher effective hydraulic conductivities of the soils relative to the underlying tills and to the gentle topographic slopes adjacent to discharge areas. As groundwater levels increase, there is an increase in the saturated thickness within the soils and a consequent increase in flow within the soils. Furthermore, preferential pathways such as macropores in the upper soil horizons may only become significant flowpaths when these horizons become saturated by high ground- water levels. As previously discussed, increasing groundwater levels also result in a Jargg expansion of discharge areas along gentle slopes and an increase in saturated overland flow. Fluctuations in groundwater levels also significantly influence the spatial distribution of stream discharge. The average proportion of discharge origi- nating upstream of S4 increases from 43% when groundwater levels are low to moderate in the autumn to 69% when groundwater levels are highest in the spring (Table 2). These changes are related to the differences in topographic slope adjacent in the upper and lower portions of the stream. As groundwater levels rise, upstream areas of soil and surface saturation expand substantially owing to the gentle topographic slope (Figs. 5(B) and 6) and the relative importance of upstream sources of stream discharge increases as a result of increasing groundwater discharge and saturation overland flow (Fig. 9). Since the expansion of saturated areas in the lower catchment is limited by steeper slopes (Fig. 5(A)), the resulting increase in discharge is smaller so that the telative proportion of discharge from the lower catchment decreases as groundwater levels increase. ‘Changes in the spatial distribution of stream discharge during storms are similar to the seasonal changes since increasing groundwater levels adjacentGROUNDWATER FLOW IN A GLACIAL TILL CATCHMENT 243 TABLE 2 Seasonal change in the spatial pattern of stream discharge Location Percentage of the stream discharge at SI October-November 1989 April 1990 55 742 2242 84 4347 +5 83 616 13 82 3946 B43 si 100 100 * The proportion of discharge al $5 is underestimated since some stream discharge flows along the surface around the $5 weir. Groundwater levels were low to moderate in October and November 1989, and high in April 1990, Stream discharge at S2 is determined as the difference between discharge at SI and $3. Stream gauging locations are shown in Fig. 1. to the upper stream result in a relative increase in upstream discharge during storms. Although there are differences in the stream response between storms, there is a basic pattern common to several storms. During the initial portion of the storm, a greater proportion of stream discharge originates in the lowermost portion of the catchment where groundwater levels are close to or at the ground surface and saturation overland flow occurs readily (Fig. 10). Along the upper portion of the stream, groundwater levels respond more slowly with increasing distance from the stream, resulting in a more gradual increase and a later peak in stream discharge at 84. Consequently, the 08 g sa Discharge at St &_& g 03| Soe 2508 0500 9502 804 0508 3808 Groundwater level, POS (m) Fig. 9. The proportion of stream discharge at $4 relative to S1 as a function of piezomettic levels in POS near the upper portion of the stream, Data collected during storms and at baseflow ere included. The locations of stream gauging site $4 and piczometer POS are shown in Figs. | and 3, respectively.us MJ. HINTON ET AL. DeEhaRS erst Discharge (is 4090 |° 20-02 (346.88 (348.86 © sass 3g na f> 47-00. 5 sea Z 2012 S301 + & sea Pso-02 3034 Ifo 363.0 j 3629 Oct20 oclZt Octez oct2s Ocled 1989 Fig. 10, Changes in stream discharge (A), the proportion of stseam discharge at S4 relative to $1 (B) and plezometric levels along the lower (C) and upper (D-E) portions of the stream during the rainstorm on 20 October, 1989. Piezometer and stream gauging locations are shown in Figs. 1 and 3. proportion of discharge at $4 increases throughout the remainder of the storm, and peaks following the storm when groundwater levels in the upper catchment are peaking and groundwater levels in the lowermost catchment have declined. The proportion of discharge at S4 then gradually decreases as water levels along the upper portion of the stream decrease. Similar spatial changes in the proportion of stream discharge are observed during spring melt episodes, However, the magnitude of these changes are much smaller than in the autumn since the relative increase in discharge from baseflow to peak flow is smaller and since further expansion of discharge areas adjacent to the upper portion of the stream produces a smaller relative increase in the upstream discharge area.GROUNDWATER FLOW I’ A GLACIAL TILL CATCHMENT 24s The similarities between the seasonal and storm patterns of stream discharge suggest that examination of the seasonal changes in hydrologic pathways could be helpfui for understanding some of the changes in flow pathways that occur as a result of groundwater level fluctuations during storms. However, caution must be used when making such comparisons since the pattern and degree of saturation in the catchment change prior to each storm and may significantly influence the flow pathways and stream response for each storm. CONCLUSIONS Groundwater flow plays a significant role in controlling streamflow in Harp 4-21, Groundwater flow contributes directly to stream discharge and governs the formation of discharge areas that influence both groundwater and event water contributions by saturation overland flow. To understand how ground- water flow influences streamflow generation and water flowpaths in glacial till catchments it is useful to study the physical properties that control ground- water flow, The combined effects of surface topography, sediment thickness and hydraulic conductivity within the catchment largely control the direction of groundwater flow and the locations and extent of groundwater discharge areas in Harp 4-21. No single physical property of the catchment is sufficient to explain the pattern of groundwater flow and flow pathways completely. It is also important to recognize that the relative importance of these physical properties changes both spatially and temporally as a result of fluctuating groundwater levels. Although the role of sediment thickness on streamflow generation is frequently ignored, results from Harp 4-21 show that decreasing sediment thickness may be as important as convergent topography in producing surface saturation and groundwater discharge. Furthermore, the pattern of sediment, thickness within the catchment also influences its hydrological regime. Much. of the infiltration during wet periods is stored within the thick unsaturated sediments in the upslope portions of Harp 4-21. Infiltration during spring melt causes large increases in groundwater levels which sustains baseflow during dry periods. Very different hydrological regimes are found in nearby catchments where the streams are ephemeral and the lack of available storage in the thin sediments results in higher effective runoff during spring melt (e.g. Wels et al., 1991b). The influence of sediment thickness on groundwater flow and stream discharge also depends on other factors such as the hydraulic conductivity, surface topography and the configuration of the water table. Consequently, it is useful to consider the importance of these factors to predict246 MJ. HINTON ET AL. how sediment thickness will affect groundwater flow and streamflow in a particular catchment. If the role of sediment thickness is to be examined in larger catchments, then there is a need to develop more practical geophysical methods that can be used to determine sediment thickness at many locations over larger areas. The hydraulic conductivities of the tills do not show any large-scale pattern of layering despite the presence of compact layers in boreholes and exca- vations, The lack of low hydraulic conductivities within the soil suggests that the effective permeability of the soils is greater than that of the tills so that groundwater flow from the catchment is greatly dependent on water levels in the soils. The extremely heterogeneous nature of the tills and the difficulties of instrumenting the tills does not allow a detailed description of its hydraulic properties from piezometer tests. For applications in which detailed knowl- edge of the hydraulic properties is not required, instrumentation and methods that provide larger-scale measurements of the effective hydraulic properties of the tills may be preferable. Surface topography indicates the direction of groundwater flow where groundwater levels are very close to the ground surface. However, it is incorrect to assume ‘a priori’ that the direction of groundwater flow is perpen- dicular to surface contours everywhere in a catchment. In Harp 4-21, sub- catchment divides based on topographic contours and groundwater equi- potentials are substantially different. Furthermore, spatial differences in groundwater level fluctuations indicate that the locations of subcatchment boundaries change with fluctuating groundwater levels. Hydrological models based on DEMs would be best applied if the DEM was based on groundwater equipotentials rather than surface topography. However, data for ground- water equipotentials are rarely available in most catchments such that it is necessary to use topography to select catchment boundaries, even though this can result in significant errors in the predicted spatial pattern of stream discharge. Groundwater levels significantly influence the spatial pattern of stream discharge and the relative importance of different flowpaths in Harp 4-21. Consequently, fluctuating groundwater levels may have a significant impact on stream chemistry. Knowledge of the groundwater levels in a catchment prior to a storm may be useful for determining the stream response to a storm and for identifying differences in the dominant flowpaths during storms. To model the effect of such spatial differences in hydrologic processes using hydrological and hydrochemical models would require distributed models such as TOPMODEL (Beven and Kirkby, 1979) and DEM based models (Moore and Grayson, 1991) since lemped models such as Birkenes (Chris- topherson et al., 1982) do not account for spatial differences in flow processes.GROUNDWATER FLOW IN A GLACIAL TILL CATCHMENT. 247 The heterogeneous tills, variable sediment thickness and variable hillslope gradients found in Harp 4-21 are typical of many glacial till catchments in the Canadian Shield. Despite similarities between many of these catchments, their hydrological responses often differ. From a simplistic understanding of hydraulic conductivity, surface topography and depth of sediments in Harp 4-21, it has been possible to explain some of the observed patterns of ground- water flow and stream discharge in a complex groundwater flow system. Therefore, these properties may also be useful for predicting the differences in hydrological processes between catchments. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We gratefully acknowledge the field assistance of R.A. MacLean, J. Ailles and G, Rennie. Many other people helped instrument the study site and collect field data, Their help is greatly appreciated. George Schneider collected and analysed the geophysical data. We also acknowledge the assistance of Peter Dillon, Bruce LaZerte and the Dorset Research Center (Ontario Ministry of the Environment) which provides financial and logistical support, and unpublished data. Wilfrid Laurier University provided a research grant to M.C, English, M.J. Hinton is supported by an NSERC postgraduate research grant, REFERENCES Agriculture Canada Expert Committee on Soil Survey, 1987. The Canadian System of Soil Classification. 2nd edn., Agriculture Canada Publication 1646, Supply and Services, Canada, Ottawa, Ont,, 164 pp. Anderson, M,G, and Burt, T.P,, 19784. The role of topography in controlling throughflow generation. Earth Surf. Processes, 3: 331-344. Anderson, M.G. and Burt, T.P., 1978b. Towards more detailed field monitoring of variable source areas, Water Resour, Res., 14: 1123-1131, Aravena, R., Schiff, S.L., Trumbore, S.E., Dillon, PJ. and Elgood, R., 1992. Evaluating dissolved inorganic carbon cycling in a forested lake watershed using carbon isotopes. Radiocarbon, Vol. 34, No, 3. Beven, K., 1978. The hydrological response of headwater and sideslope areas. Hydrol, Sci. Bull, 23: 419-437. Beven, K, and Germann, P., 1982, Macropores and water flow in soils. Water Resour. Res., 18: 1311-1325. Beven, K.J. and Kirkby, M.J., 1979. A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology. Hydrol, Sci. Bull., 24: 43-69. Bottomley, D.J., Craig, D. and Johnston, L.M., 1984, Neutralization of acid runoff by groundwater discharge to streams in Canadian Precambrian Shield watersheds. J. Hydrol., 75: 1-26. Bottomley, D.J., Craig, D, and Johnston, L.M., 1986. Oxygen-18 studies of snowmelt runoff in a small precambrian shield watershed: implications for streamwater acidification in acid-sensitive terrain, J. Hydrol, 75: 1-26.248 MJ, HINTON ET AL, Christopherson, N., Seip, H.M. and Wright, R.F., 1982, A modet for streamwater chemistry at Birkenes, Norway. Water Resour. Res., 18: 977-996. Dankevy, S., 1989. Groundwater flow and chemistry in a small acid-stressed sub-catchment of the Canadian Shicld. Master’s Project, University of Waterloo, Ont. (unpublished). Devito, K.J., Dillon, PJ. and LaZerte, B.D., 1990. Phosphorous and nitrogen retention in five Precambrian Shield wetlands, Biogeochemistry 8: 185-204. Pilon, PJ, Lusis, M., Reid, R. and Yap, D., 1988. Ten-year trends in sulphate, nitrate and deposition in central Ontario. Atmos. Environ., 22: 901-905. Dunne, T. and Black, R.D., 1970a. An experimental investigation of runoff production in permeable soils, Water Resour. Res., 6: 478-490. Dunne, T. and Black, R.D. 1970b. Partial area contributions to storm runoff in a small New England watershed. Water Resour. Res., 6: 1296-131 Dunne, ., Moore, T.R. and Taylor, C.H., 1975. Recognition and prediction of runoff-produc- ing zones in humid regions, Hydrol. Sci, Bull., 20: 305-327. Freeze, R.A. and Cherry, J.A., 1979. Groundwater. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 604 pp. Fritz, P,, Cherry, LA., Weyer, K.U. and Sklash, M., 1976. Storm runoff analyses using environmental isotopes and major ions. In: Interpretation of Environmental Isotopes and Hydrogeochemical Data in Groundwater Hydrology. [AEA-STI/PUB/429, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, pp. 111-130. Gillham, R.W., 1984. The capillary fringe and its effect on water-table response. J. Hydral., 67: 307-324, Goodrich, D.C. and Woolhiser, D.A., 1991. Catchment hydrology. Rev. Geophys., Supplement, U.S. National Report to Union of Geodesy and Geophysics 1987-1990: 202-209, Hooper, R.P. and Shoemaker, C.A., 1986. A comparison of chemical and isotopic hydrograph separation, Water Resour. Res., 22: 1444-1454. Hvorsley, M.J., [951. Time lag and soil permeability in groundwater observations. US Army Corps Engineering Waterways Experimental Station, Bull. 36, Vicksburg, MS. Jeffries, D.S. and Snyder, W.R., 1983. Geology and geochemistry of the Muskoka-Haliburton study area, Data Rep. DR 83/2, Dorset Research Centre, Dorset, Ont. Kirkby, M.J. and Chorley, R.I., 1967. Throughfiow, overland flow and erosion. Bull. Int. Assoc, Sci, Hydrol,, 12: 5-21. LaZerte, B.D, and Dillon, P.J., 1984. Relative importance and anthropogenic versus natural sources of acidity in lakes and streams for Central Ontario. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 41: 1664-1677. Likens, G.E,, Bormann, H., Pierce, R.S., Eaton, J.S. and Johnson, N.M.. 1977. Biogeochemis- try of a forested ecosystem, Springer, New York, NY, 146 pp. Lozano, F,C., Parton, W.5., Lau, J.K.H. and Vanderstar, L., 1987. Physical and chemical properties of the soils at the southern biogeochemical study site. MOE BGC Rep. Ser., BGC-018, Faculty for Forestry, University of Toronto, Ont. MacLean, R.A., 1992. The role of the vadose zone in the generation of runoff from a headwater basin in the Canadian Shield. Master’s Thesis, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ont. (unpublished). Maulé, C.P. and Stein, J., 1990. Hydrologic flow path definition and partitioning of spring meltwater, Water Resour. Res, 26: 2959-2970. Moore, I.D, and Grayson, R.B., 1991. Terrain-based catchment partitioning and runoff prediction using vector elevation data. Water Resour. Res., 27: 1177-1191.GROUNDWATER FLOW IN A GLACIAL TILL CATCHMENT, 249, Moore, R.D,, 1989. Tracing runoff sources with deuterium and oxygen-18 during spring melt in a headwater catchment, Southern Laurentians, Quebec. J. Hydrol., 112-135-148. Redpath, B,, 1973. Seismic refraction exploration for engineering investigations. Technical Report E-US Army Corps Engineering Waterways Experimental Station, Explosive Excavation Research Laboratory, No. E-73-4, Livermore, CA, 55 pp. Rodhe, A., 1981. Spring flood, meltwater or groundwater? Nord. Hydrol., 12: 21-30. Rodhe, A,, 1984, Groundwater contribution to stream flow in Swedish forested till soil as estimated by oxygen-18. In: Isotope Hydrology 1983. IABA-SM-270/65, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, pp. 55-66. Rodhe, A., 1987. The origin of streamwater traced by oxygen-I8. Uppsala University, Department of Physical Geography, Division of Hydrology, Report Series A, No. 41, 260 pp. Rustad, §., Christopherson, N., Seip, H.M. and Dillon, P.J., 1986. Model for stréamwater chemistry of a tributary to Harp lake, Ontario. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 43: 625-633. Schiff, $.L, Aravena, R., Trumbore, 8.E. and Dillon, P.J., 1990. Dissolved organic carbon cyeling in forested watersheds: a carbon isotope approach. Water Resour. Res, 266: 2949-2957. Scip, H.M., Seip, R., Dillon, P.J. and de Grosbois, E., 1985. Madel of sulphate concentration in a small stream in the Harp Lake catchment. Can, 5. Fish, Aquat. Sci., 42: 927-937. Shibatanni, R., 1988. Melwater processes and runoff mechanisms in @ small Precambrian - Shield watershed during snowmelt. Master's Thesis, Trent University, Peterborough, Ont., 193 pp, (unpublished). Sklash, M., 1986, Final report on an environmental isotope survey to determine the role of groundwater in snowmelt runoff in the APIOS Harp 5 watershed, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, IRI 18-36, Toronto, Ont., 94 pp. Sklash, M.G. and Farvolden, R.N., 1979, The role of groundwater in storm runoff. J. Hydrol, 43: 45-65, Ward, R.C,, 1984. On the response to precipitation of headwater streams in humid areas. J. Hydrol., 74: 171-189. . Wels, C,, Cornett, J. and LaZerte, B., 1990. Groundwater and wetfand contribution to stream acidification: an isotopic analysis. Water Resour. Res., 26: 2993-3003. Wels, C., Comett, J. and LaZerte, B., 1991a. Hydrograph separation: a comparison of geo- chemical and isotopic tracers. J. Hydrol., 122: 253-274. Wels, C., Taylor, C., Cornett, J. and LaZerte, B., 1991b. Streamflow generation in a headwater basin on the Precambrian Shield, Hydrol. Processes, 5: 185-199. Wills, J,, 1992. Estimating the hydrological and chemical importance of groundwater input into a Precambrian shield lake, Ontario. Master’s Thesis, University of Waterloo, Ont. (unpublished),Journal of Hydrology, 142 (1993) 251-271 251 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V,, Amsterdam Ol Critical shear stress and critical flow rates for initiation of rilling LE, Gilley’, W.J. Elliot”, J.M. Lafien* and J.R. Simanton® "USDA-ARS, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583, USA Agricultural Engineering Department, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA “USDA-ARS, Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN 47907, USA SUSDA-ARS, Tucson, AZ 85719, USA (Received 5 May 1992; accepted 8 June 1992) Niot, W.J, Laflen, J.M. and Simanton, J.R., £993. Critical shear stress and critical flow rates ion of rilling, J, Hydrol, 142: 251-271. ‘This study was conducted to identify critical shear stress and critical flow cates required to initiate rilling on selected sites, The data used in this investigation were collected from soils located throughout the USA where crop residues had been removed, and moldboard plowing and disking had occurred. Runoff and soil toss measurements were made on sites where simulated rainfall was applied to preformed rills. Multiple regression analyses were used to relate critical shear stress values and critical flow rates to selected soil properties, The soll-based regression equations were found to provide reliable estimates. Information ‘dented inthis study will improve our ability to understand and properly model upland runoff and erosion processes, INTRODUCTION The force per unit wetted area that acts on a surface is defined as shear Stress, t, and is expressed as 7 = ys q) where y is the specific weight of water, y is the flow depth, and S is the slope gradient, Critical shear stress, z,, occurs when the shear force exceeds the critical limit for soil detachment. The beginning of motion of soil particles is difficult to define. The most dependable data concerning incipient soil particle movement have resulted from laboratory experiments. Several equations for estimating bed load sediment transport have been Correspondence to; J.B. Gilley, USDA-ARS, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583, USA, 0022-1694/93/$06.00 © 1993 — Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. All rights reserved252, JB. GILLEY ET AL. derived which use shear stress as an independent variable (Laursen, 1958). These relations were originally developed to predict sediment transport in stream and river systems. Foster (1982) used similar concepts to derive the following equation for estimating ri!l sediment detachment capacity, D, = Kt — 1%) @ where K, is the zill soil erodibility factor. This equation was used in an erosion prediction model described by Nearing et al. (1989). Equation (2) can be rearranged to yield De To K +t @ The intercept of eqn. (3) is critical shear stress, and the inverse of the slope is the rill soil erodibility factor, Schoklitsch (1957) developed an equation which related bed load sediment transport to flow rate and slope gradient. A similar relation could be used to predict rill sediment detachment capacity where D, = K«(QS*? — 9.5%") 4 and XK; is the flow-related rill soil erodibility factor, Q is the flow rate, and Q, is the critical flow rate. . Equation (4) can be rearranged to yield a= z(pa) +o © Critical flow rate is represented by the intercept of eqn. (5), and the inverse of the slope is the flow-related rill soil erodibility factor. PROCEDURE Sediment detachment capacity was determined by Elliot et al. (1989) on soils located throughout the USA. The location, slope and particle size analyses of the soils are presented in Table 1. The soils were selected to cover a broad range of physical, chemical, mineralogical and biological properties. These properties resulted from diverse soil-forming factors acting through time, including climate, parent material, vegetation, biological activity, and topography. Each of the soils is considered to be of regional or national importance, The study areas were located on uniform slopes having homogeneous soil characteristics. Either corn or small grains had been planted the previous year. All surface residue was first removed, and the area was then moldboardINITIATION OF RILLING 253 TABLE | Location, slope and particle size analyses of selected soils Soil Location Average sill Particle size analysis = _C Slope (%) (% by weight) County State —_——_ Sand Silt Clay Academy Fresno cA 45 627 29.1 a2 Amariflo Howard ™ 36 85.0 a7 73 Barnes-MN Stevens MN 83 486 344 170 Barnes-ND_ ‘Sheridan ND 58 39.5, 36.0 45 Caribou Aroostook ME 88 410 4030127 Cecil Oconee GA 45 64.6 15.6 19.8 Collamer ‘Tompkins NY 87 10 78.0150 Frederick ‘Washington MD 12.8 25.1 58.3 16.6 Gaston Rown NC 64 35.5 254 (39.1 Grenada Panola MS 87 20 18 202 Heiden Falls TX 39 86 38.3 53.1 Hersh Valley: NE 6.6 wa 15.9 7 Hiwassee Oconee GA 40 63.7 21.6 147 Lewisburg Whitley IN 15 385 322 © ©293 Manor Howard MD 86 43.6 30.7257 Mexico Boone MO 39 3.3 68.7 26.0 Miami Montgomery IN 58 42 RI” 231 Miamian Montgomery OH 89 30.6 441 253 ‘Nansene Whitman, WA 61 20.1 688 ILL Opequon Allegany MD 120 377 312.311 Palouse Whitman WA 65 98 1 20.1 Pierre Jackson sD 66 9.6 409 495 Portneuf ‘Twin Falls 1D 5.6 215 674 id Sharpsburg Lancaster NE 57 48 55.4 39.8 Sverdrup Grant MN 42 75.3 16.8, 79 Tifton Worth GA 46 86.4 108 28 Whitney Fresno cA 14 110 218 12 Williams Sheridan ND Su 416 32.4 26.0 Woodward Harper OK W 43.7 424 B39 Zahi Roosevelt MT 16 46.3 297 © 240 plowed 3-12 months before the tests were conducted. After plowing, sites were disked lightly then maintained free of vegetation either by tillage or application of herbicide. Soil samples for site characterization were obtained and analyzed using standard procedures (Soil Survey Staff, 1984). Samples were collected at a254 JE. GILLEY ET AL. TABLE 2 Mean, minimum and maximum values of selected soil properties at the study sites Soil property Mean Minimum ‘Maximum Aluminum? 0.15 0.03 0.50 Caleium® 9.0 09 B Cation exchange capacity” 15 L7 39 Clay" a 28 3B Coefficient of linear extensibility 0.03 0.00 0.10 Tron* 12 0.20 45 Magnesium? 27 0.10 92 Organic carbon” 12 0.16 33 Potassium? 0.65 0.10 25 Sond 40 2.0 ot silt’ 39 35 B Sodium? 0.09 0.00 0.60 Soil water content at 0.3MPa* 2 49 34 Soil water content at 1,5MPa* 96 il 19 Very fine sand? 2 Lt “4 Water dispersible clay* 83 LL 25 “Values "Yalues in centimoles per kilogram. *Values in centimeters per centimeter. central location and at several satellite points as is typical in a standard soil survey. The following properties were measured at each site: cation exchange capacity; coefficient of linear extensibility; dithionite-citrate extractable aluminum and iron content; exchangeable calcium, magnesium, potassium and sodium; percentage of sample consisting of clay, organic carbon, sand, silt, very fine sand and water dispersible clay; and water retained by a soil sample at 0.3 and 1.5 MPa tension, Mean, minimum and maximum values of selected soil properties at the study sites are shown in Table 2. A plot diagram of a rainfall simulation site is shown in Fig. 1. The study areas were disked immediately preceding testing. Six rills, 0.46m across the slope by 9.0m long, were formed using a ridging tool mounted on a small tractor, A sheet metal border was placed at the top of each rill and a runoff collection device was located at the bottom. Details and dimensions of the rill plots are presented in Fig. 2. A portable rainfall simulator designed by Swanson (1965) was used to apply rainfall at an intensity of approximately 62mmh7'. Erosion data collection was divided into three periods: (1) rainfall only until equilibrium of rill flow occurred; (2) rainfall plus flow addition in increments at the top of