ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS BASED ON MORPHOLOGY,
HYDRAULIC PROCESSES, SEDIMENTARY PROCESSES, AND FACIES ASSEMBLAGES
TERENCE C. BLAIR ~ANDJOHN G. McPHERSON 2.
t Blair & Associates, 1949 Hardscrabble Place. BouMer, Colorado 80303 USA
: MobilExploration and ProducingAustralia Pry. Ltd, P.O. Box 4507, Melbourne 3001, Australia
Aasr~cr: Contrary to common contemporary usage, alluvial fans are a
naturally unique phenomenon readily distinguishable from other sedimen-
tary environments, including gravel-bed rivers, on the basis of morphology,
hydraulic processes, sedimentologic processes, and facies assemblages. The
piedmont setting of alluvial fans where the feeder channel of an upland
drainage basin intersects the mountain front assures that catastrophic fluid
gravity flows and sediment gravity flows, including sheetfloods, rock falls,
rock slides, rock avalanches, and debris flows, are major constructional
processes, regardless of climate. The unconfinement of these flows at the
mountain front gives rise to the high-sloping, semiconical form that typifies
fans. The piano-convex cress-profile geometry inherent in this form is the
inverse of the tranghlike cross-sectional form of river systems, and pre-
cludes the development of floodplains that characterize rivers. The rela-
tively high slope of alluvial fans creates unique hydraulic conditions where
passing fluid gravity flows attain high capadty, high competency, and upper
flow regime, resulting in sheetfloods that deposit low-angle antidune or
surface.parallel planar-stratified sequences. These waterlaid facies con-
trust with the typically lower-flow-regime thick-bedded, cross-bedded, and
lenticular channel facies, and associated floodplain sequences, of rivers.
The uneonfinemeat of flows on fans causes a swift decrease in velocity,
competency, and capacity as they attenuate, inducing rapid deposition that
leads to the angular, poorly sorted textures and short radii typical of fans.
This condition is markedly different than for rivers, where sediment gravity
flows are rare and water flows remain confined by channel walls or spill
into floodplains, and increase in depth downstream. The distinctive pro-
cesses that construct alluvial fans, coupled with the secondary surficial
reworking of their deposits, yield unique facies assemblages that permit
the easy differentiation of fan sequences even where the gcomorphic context
has been lost, including in the rock record. The fault-proximal piedmont
setting critical for their preservation makes properly identified alluvial-
fan deposits in the rock record an invaluable tool for reconstructing and
interpreting the tectonic and strafigraphic evolution of ancient sedimentary
basins and their contained register of Earth history.
INTRODUCTION
Early studies of alluvial fans, including the work of Smith (1754) in
northern England, Saussure (I 779, 1784, 1796a, 1796b) in the northern
French Alps, Surrell (1841, 1870) in the southern French Alps, and Drew
(1873) in the Himalaya of northeastern India, established the distinctive
characteristics and conditions for development that embody and naturally
separate alluvial fans from rivers and river deltas. These characteristics
include: (1) the occurrence and restriction of alluvial fans to piedmont
settings where a channel draining an upland catchment emerges from the
mountains; (2) the transverse orientation of fans with respect to the moun-
tain front; (3) the evolutionary nature of fan drainage basins from initial
topographic irregularities to established watersheds; (4) the rare and cat-
* On assignment from: Mobil Research and Devdopment Corporation, P.O.
Box 650232, Dallas, Texas 75265-0232 USA.
JOURNAL(1FSEDIMENTARYResEarCH.VOL.A64. No. 3, Jt:LS, 1994, P. 450--489
Copyright¢) 1994,SEPM(Socielyfor Sedimentar3,Geology) 1073-130X/94/0A64-450/$03,00
astrophic nature of water discharge during depositional events; (5) the
importance of the steepness and contributary channel pattern of the drain-
age basin for funneling discharge to fuel flash floods; (6) the transportation
of sediment from the upland catchment to the fan site by a combination
of mass wasting and water-flow events; (7) the initiation of fan sedimen-
tation as the result of flow expansion when discharge becomes unconfined
upon leaving the catchment; (8) the poorly sorted and angular coarse gravel
•textures of fan deposits; (9) the significantly higher depositional slopes of
fans compared to rivers; (10) the limited (commonly _< 10 kin) length of
fan radii; (11) the recognition of flow-direction variances on coalesced and
noncoalesced fans; (12) the planar but not horizontal bedding of fans
oriented roughly parallel to their surface; (13) the recognition of both
depositional and erosional processes on fans; and (14) the knowledge that
fans of similar character exist in both desert and nondesert climates. Other
fan attributes established by the early researchers include: (1) the concepts
of fan apex, incised channel, intersection point, and compound fans; (2)
.the differentiation of fans from higher-sloping talus accumulations and
from associated glacial, fluvial, or lacustrine facies on the basis of both
morphological and sedimentological criteria; (3) knowledge of the inter-
fingering relationships between fans and associated environments; (4) rec-
ognition of the common straight, piano-concave, or segmented form of
radial profiles; (5) documentation of the piano-convex cross-fan profile;
(6) recognition that overall fan slopes decrease with radial extent and
drainage-basin size; and (7) identification of a positive correlation between
fan slope and sediment caliber.
This foundation was expanded upon during the late 1800s and early
1900s by scientists who provided: (1) the initial recognition and obser-
vation of sheetflooding, landslides, and debris flows on alluvial fans (Heim
1882; McGee 1897; Bonney 1902; Rickmers 1913; Pack 1923; Black-
welder 1928; Woodford and Harriss 1928); (2) the distinction between
coalesced piedmont fans and tributary braidplains (Haast 1864); (3) ob-
servations on the relationship between heavy thunderstorms, flash floods,
and catastrophic sedimentation in deserts (McGee 1897; Pack 1923; Black-
welder 1928); (4) scientific descriptions of the processes and characteristics
of fan deltas (Gilbert 1890); (5) a linkage between processes and resultant
facies of fans in modern and ancient settings (Trowbridge 1911; Lawson
1913; Tieje 1923; Blackwelder 1928); (6)documentation of the relevance
of secondary processes such as overland flows to remolding fan surfaces
(McGee 1897; Pack 1923; Blackwelder 1928); (7) recognition that fans in
piedmont zones commonly abut and are crosscut by basin-margin faults
controlling valley development (Gilbert 1890; Trowbridge 1911; Eckis
1928; Longwell 1930); and (8) a rationalization of tectonic cyclothems
between fans and neighboring lake or fiver environments (Davis 1898).
Despite the solid foundation of alluvial-fan knowledge provided by this
early scientific research and subsequent case studies, contemporary geol-
ogists commonly hold to the view that there is no real distinction between
fans and rivers based on the perception that braided-stream (and even
meandering-stream) processes are dominant in both settings, or that this
distinction is possible only where debris-flow deposits are present (Booth-
royd and Nummedal 1978; Collinson 1978, 1984; Miall 1978a, 1978b,
1981, 1984, 1985, 1990, 1992; Off 1982; Ethfidge 1985; Fraser and Suttner
1986; Nemec and Steel 1987, 1988; Dunne 1988; Harvey 1989; Nemec
1990, 1993; Postma 1990; Reading and Orton 1991). Additionally, many
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS 451

TABLE l.--Recent debris-flow events classified by desert or non-desert settings ("Desert" depositional sites are those with < 50 em/yr average precipitation)

Non Non-
Reference Location Desert Desert Reference Location Desert Desert
Sanssure 1784 France X Everett 1979 West Virginia X
Perkins 1870 Vermont X Wasson 1979 NSW Australia X
Hitchcock 1885 New Hampshire X Suwa and Okuda 1980; Okuda et al. 1980 Japan X
Conway 1893 NW India X Pierson 1980, 1981 New Zcataad X
Davis 1901 Switzerland X Pomeroy 1980 Pennsylvania X
Bonney 1902 France X BIong 1981; Pickup et al. 1981 Papua New Gtunea X
Clcland 1902 Massachusetts X Eisbacher and Clagu¢ 1981 British Columbia X
Rickmers 1913 Turkestan X Fink et al. 1981; Fairchild 1987 Washington X
Pack 1923; Blackwelder 1928 Utah X Jian and Defu 1981; Jian et al. 1983 China X
Chawner 1935 California X Rapp and Nyberg 1981; Elfstrom 1987 Sweden X
Troxell and Peterson 1937 CC.alifomia X Smart 1981 FEastJava X
Moneymaker 1939 Tennessee X Evans 1982; Martin et al. 1984 British Columbia X
Sharp 1942 Yukon Territory X Jackson ct al. 1982; Van Dine 1985 Alberta X
Fryxell and Horberg 1943 Wyoming X Larssen 1982 Spitsbergen X
Wentworth 1943; White 1949 Hawaii X Mills 1982; Neary et al. 1986 North Carolina X
Weolley 1946; Croft 1962 Utah X Moscr and Hoheosinn 1982 Austria X
Eisenlohr 1952 Pennsylvania X Renwiek et aI. 1982 California X
Gifford 1953; Grove 1953 England X lnnes 1983, 1985 Scotland X
Sharp and Nobles 1953 California X Harvey 1984 Spain X
Common 1954; Baird and Lewis 1957 Scotland X Kochel and Jolmson 1984 Virginia X
Haldermann 1956 Tanganyika X Kojan and Hutchinson 1984 Peru X
Mason and Foster 1956 Japan X Plafkcr and Eficksen 1984 Peru X
Hack and Goodlet 1960 Virginia X Clague et al. 1985; Boris 1986 British Columbia X
Rapp [960; Hoppe and Eckman 1964 Sweden, Norway X Gallino and Pierson 1985; Benda 1990 Oregon X
Andersson and Hussey 1962 Alaska X Link et al. 1985 Nevada X
Mullineanx and Crandell 1962 Washington X Harvey 1986; Wells and Harvey 1987 England X
Beaty 1963, 1970, 1974, 1990 California X Jian and Jingrnag 1986 China X
Bull 1963, 1964; Hooke 1967 California X Kostaschuk et al. 1986 Alberta X
Denny 1965; Lustig 1965 California X Pomeroy and Thomas 1986 Alabama X
Hawley and Wilson t965 Nevada X Addison 1987 Wales X
Winder 1965 Albert,.. X Church and Miles 1987 British Columbia X
Carry 1966; Costa and Jaffett 1981 Colorado X Ellen and Flemi~ 1987 California X
Lemke 1966; Anderson et al. 1969 Alaska X Grypta and Barthowlemew 1987 Virginia X
Engelen 1967 Italy X Harvey and Renwick 1987 England X
Waldron 1967 Costa Rica X Jackson et al, 1987 Alberta X
Prior et aL 1968, 1970, 1971 Ireland X Koehel 1987, 1990; Clark 1987 Virginia X
Broscoeand Thomson 1969 Yukon Territory X Neary and Swirl 1987 North Carolina X
Crozier 1969; Pain 1971 New Zealand × Osterkamp and Hupp 1987 California X
Hutchinson [970; Beven el al. 1978 England X Schlemon et al. 1987 California X
Johnson 1970; Campbell 1974, 1975 California X Webb et al. 1987, 1988 Arizona X
Johnson and Rahn 1970 Pennsylvania X Brazier et al. 1988 Scotland X
Tufesoo 1970; Balteanu 1976, 1986 Romania X Eyles et al. 1988 Alberta X
Ryder 1971; Eisbacher 1980 British Columbia X Eyles and Koesis 1988 British Columbia X
So 1971 Hong Kong X Harris and Gustafson 1988 Yukon Territory X
Woodruff 1971 Virginia X Jenkins et at. 1988; Luokman 1992 Scotland X
Beaumont 1972 Iran X Ohmori and Hirann 1988 Japan X
Prior and Stephens 1972 Ireland X Sorriso-Vatvo 1988 Italy X
Temple and Rapo 1972 Tanzania X Hubert and Filipov 1989 California X
Jones 1973 Brazil X Jacobson et al. 1989 Virginia X
Williams 1973 South Australia X Jibson 1989; Larsen and Simon 1993 Puerto Rico X
Williams and Guy 1973 Virginia X Kashiwaya et al. 1989; Ono 1990 Japan X
Azimi and Desvarreax 1974 France X King et al. 1989 Papua New Guinea X
Hulchinson el aL 1974 Ireland X Naef el al. 1989, 1990 Switzerland X
Morton and Campbell 1974, 1979 California X Anderson and Andmon 1990 California X
Glancy and Harmsen 1975 Nevada X Coromnios and Alonso 1990 Spain X
Blongand Dunkerley 1976 NSW Australia X Derbyshire and Owen 1990 Pakistan X
Bogucki 1976 North Carolina X Haebedi et al. 1990 Switzerland X
Rapp and Stromquist 1976 Sweden, Norway X Kellel-hals and Church 1990 British Columbia X
Shroder 1976 Malawi X Matthewson et ah 1990 Utah X
Selby 1976 New Zealand X Rickenmann 1990 Switzerland X
Statham 1976 Wales X Roesli and Schindler 1990 Switzerland X
Tanaka 1976; Iso et al. 1980 Japan X Whitehouse and MeSaveny 1990 New Zealand X
Bogucki 1977; Renwick 1977 New York X Zimmerman 1990 Switzerland X
Cooley et al. 1977 Arizona X Costa 1991 Italy X
Wasson 1977 Tasmania X Gottesfeld et at. 1991 British Columbia X
Wasson 1978a Pakistan X Wohl and Pearthree 1991 Arizona X

argue that alluvial fans have been defined only in broad, geomorphic terms
that are difficult to detect in the rock record. Furthermore, despite over-
whelming evidence to the contrary (Table 1), it is widely held that the
facies variability found on fans is controlled dominantly by dimate. Un-
fortunately, these and other inaccurate concepts about alluvial fans, rather
than those generated through case-study research, are the key ones pre-
sented in textbooks, review articles, or short-course summaries published
during the last 25 years, creating widespread confusion about this envi-
ronment.
On the basis of an extensive study of modern alluvial fans in a variety
of global settings, we conclude, counter to contemporary thought but con-
sistent with the early scientists, that there is a fundamental and natural
452 T E ~ N C E C. BLAIR AND JOHN G, McPHERSON
distinction between fans and other sedimentary environments, including
gravel-bed rivers. This distinction is reflected, and readily determined by,
the morphology, hydraulic and sedimentary processes, and resultant facies
and facies assemblages of alluvial fans. The uniqueness of the facies as-
semblages also facilitates the clear and simple differentiation of fans even
in settings where the geomorphic context is lost, including in the strati-
graphic record. The purpose of this paper, therefore, is to attempt to
reestablish the natural distinctiveness and geological relevance of alluvial
fans by examining their diagnostic characteristics. The first step in achiev-
ing this goal is to identify the major problems with the key concepts that
dominate the currently popular alluvial-fan framework.
PROBLEMSUNDERMININGALLUVIAL-FANKNOWLEDGE
The change in thought away from the scientific appreciation for the
natural distinctiveness of alluvial fans recognized by early researchers
occurred mainly between 1950 and 1980. This change was facilitated by
a proliferation of geomorphic studies of fans in the southwestern United
States and laboratory modeling studies of fans combined, in the 1970s,
with renewed development and application of sedimentary facies analysis.
However, unlike the original views of alluvial-fan systems that were con-
ceived from, and were deeply rooted in, case studies of modern fans, the
new views on alluvial-fan sedimentology and facies that emerged by the
1970s were generated mostly through speculative conversion of the results
ofgeomorphic and laboratory studies into stratigraphic models, or through
uncritical application of data generated from the study of rivers. The
subsequent widespread use and expansion of these speculative models and
concepts have incited the publication of hundreds of interpretations of
ancient sequences thought to represent fan deposits, but which have no
ties to real modern analogs. The speculative models and concepts, fur-
therrnore, have led to the progressive formulation of a now widely held
facies framework for alluvial fans that has little in common with, and
mostly contradicts, the results of case-study research. Six prominent con-
cepts that form the foundation of this faulty facies framework are that:
(I) the facies variabilityof alluvial fans is controlled principally by climate;
(2) fans are constructed by braided distributary channels and thereby are
a part of the braided-stream environment; (3) the facies of fine-grained
rivers and their deltas are also present on alluvial fans: (4) the results of
laboratory sandbox experiments can be applied to fans without field ver-
ification; (5) facies models generated from interpreted ancient sequences
can validly be applied to other ancient sequences; and (6) sheetflooding
is a braided-stream process involving only sand, and occurring only in
the medial or distal part of the fan.
The Braided-Oistributary-Ckannel Problem
Alluvial-fan sedimentation is widely attributed to sedimentation from
a network of braided distfibutary channels on the basis of the common
observation of shallow channels showing this pattern on modern fan sur-
faces(Davis 1938; Blissenbach 1954; Hooke 1967; Bull 1972, 1977; Hayes
and Kana 1976; Miall 1978a, 1984, 1992; Rachocki 1981; Nilsen 1982,
1985; Richards 1982; Tunbridge 1983; Hayward 1985; Nemec and Steel
1988). A further assumption derived from this observation is that the
sedimentary processes, facies, and stratigraphy of alluvial fans built by
the braided distributary channels are identical to those of braided streams,
such as the Durance and Ardeche rivers of southeastern France described
by Doegias (1962). The principal problem with this braided--distributary-
channel concept is the notion that the processes apparent on the surface
of an alluvial fan are those responsible for its deposition (Blair 1985a,
1987b). Furthermore, the assumption that the sedimentary processes and
resultant facies of alluvial fans with surficial braided distributary channels
are the same as those documented in braided rivers is tenuously based on
only comparative morphology, not on stratigraphic studies of documented
sedimentation events, or from hydraulic considerations. This "surface is
the key to the stratigraphy" methodology has long conflicted with the case-
study descriptions of constructive depositional events on alluvial fans, in
which shallow distfibutary channels were documented to form by the
simple surficial remolding and masking of the nonchannelized aggrada-
tional sequences through minor rill-like erosion either during falling flood
stage or by subsequent noncatastrophic discharge (McGee 1897; Pack
1923; Blackwelder 1928; Chawner 1935; Beaty 1963; Denny 1967; Broscoe
and Thomson 1969; Blair 1985a, 1987b; Clague et al. 1985). Despite their
unsubstantiated basis, however, the braided-distributary-channel process
and facies model have become established as key components of the
alluvial-fan facies framework in wide use today.
The Reclassification of Braided Rivers and Their Deltas ~ Alluvial Fans
A second problematic concept entails the redassification of braided
rivers and their deltas as alluvial fans. Although many studies of braided
rivers and braid deltas have been conducted by researchers who did not
confuse them with the fan system (e.g., Krigstrom 1962; Fahnestock 1963;
Reimnitz 1966; Williams and Rust 1969; Collinson 1970; McDonald and
Banerjee 1971; Church and Ryder 1972; Rust 1972; Fahnestock and Brad-
ley 1973; Bluck 1974; Smith 1974; Ward et al. 1976; Hein and Walker
1977; Southard et al. 1984), other workers examining identical features
chose, on an apparently arbitrary basis, to commence calling them alluvial
fans. The Alaskan Copper River and associated braid deltas studied by
Reimnitz (1966), for example, were reclassified as outwash fans or fan
deltas (Boothroyd 1972; Boothroyd and Ashley 1975; Gustavson 1974;
Galloway 1976); the deltas of the Icelandic braided streams and outwash
plains of Krigstrom (1962), Bluck (1974), Ward et al. (1976), and Hine
and Boothroyd (1978) were converted to "humid" alluvial fans (Num-
medal and Boothroyd 1976; Boothroyd and Nummedal 1978); the Yallahs
River delta of Burke (1967) became the Yallahs fan delta (Wescott and
Ethridge 1980; Wescott 1990); and the interrnoraine-outwash-plain de-
posits of Fraser and Cobb (1982) were converted to glacial alluvial fans
(Fraser 1989; Fraser and DeCelles 1993). The sole justification for these
conversions was provided by Boothroyd and Nummedal (1978, p. 643):
"We suggest that braided streams and alluvial fans are not separated in
time and space, but that braided-stream deposits are a major component
of semi-arid alluvial-fan deposition . . . . and that glacial-outwash fans
may serve as a perfectly good example of braided-stream deposition lead-
ing to a model for humid alluvial-fan deposits."
Although the reclassification of braided streams and braid deltas as
alluvial fans appears arbitrary, and was immediately questioned on sci-
entific grounds (Rust 1979; Rust and Koster 1984), this redesignation has
been widely incorporated and established as fact in most subsequent text-
book, review-article, or short-course summaries on alluvial fans.
The Reclassification of Fine-Grained Rivers and Dellas as Alluvial Fans
A series of events that paralleled the reclassification of braided-stream
systems as alluvial fans also occurred for generally fine-grained river and
delta systems. Following Davis' (1901) redesignation of the Yellow River
delta of eastern China and the Merced River delta of central California
as fans, other similar features have also been so classified, including the
Kern River and neighboring lacustrine deltas in California (Grabau 1913;
Cherven 1984); a crevasse splay of the Mississippi River in Missouri (Ray
1964); the Mehran River delta of lran (Baltzer and Purser 1990); the Gum
Hollow delta of Texas (McGowen 1971); the Markanda and adjoining
deltas of northern India (Mukerji 1976; Parkash et al. 1983); the Assini-
boine River delta in Manitoba (Rannie et al. 1989; Rannie 1990); and the
Okavango swamp of Botswana (McCarthy et al. 1988, 1991, 1992; Stan-
istreet et at. 1993; Stanistreet and McCarthy 1993). More perplexingly,
several river tributaries also were reclassified as alluvial fans, foremost
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS
being the Kosi River of northeastern India. Though the Kosi exhibits
characteristics typical of an alluvial-plain environment, such as a nearly
flat slope, dominance of overbank deposition, and channel and channel-
divide morphology (Gole and Chitale 1966; lnglis 1967; Rust 1979), and
though its westward shifting pattern is caused by tectonic tilt (Arogyas-
wamy 1971; Williams 1982), this river has been widely promoted by others
as an alluvial fan (Holmes 1965; McGowen and Groat 1971; Schumm
1977; McGowen 1979; Sehumm et al. 1987; Wells and Dorr 1987a, 1987b;
Gohain and Parkash 1990; Singh et al. 1993). The success of this pro-
motion is realized by the establishment of the Kosi River in the literature
not only as a major alluvial-fan facies model, but also as the archetypal
example of a large "wet" alluvial fan. Other river tributaries, like the Kosi,
have also been classified arbitrarily as alluvial fans (Geddes 1960; Hu-
relbrink and Fehrenbacher 1970; Ori 1982; Wells and Dorr 1987a, 1987b;
Bhardwaj and Singh 1992; Mohindra et al. 1992).
The Problematic Climatic Classification Schemefor Alluvial Fans
Another widely held alluvial-fan concept is the "wet" and "dry" climate
classification scheme. This concept continues to thrive, and is widely
promoted in the literature, despite long-lived and overwhelming evidence
to the contrary (e.g., Table 1). The modern version of the climate classi-
fication scheme for alluvial fans, rooted in earlier works (Davis 1905,
1930, 1938; Barrell 1908; Blackwelder 1928; Blissenbach 1954), was es-
tablished in the late 1970s, when the terms "dry" or "mudflow" were
introduced for fans formed by ephemeral stream flow, and "wet" or "flu-
vial" for fans formed by perennial stream flow (Schumm 1977). The "wet"
and "dry" designation, however, assumed incorrectly that fans traversed
by perennial rivers could not be dominated by debris flows, and that fans
traversed by ephemeral channels could not be dominated by water-flow
deposits. This climate classification scheme was later adjusted (McGowen
1979), with "dry," or debris-flow-dominated, fans designated as those that
form in arid or semiarid regions, and "wet," or fluvial-dominated, fans
as those that form in humid regions. This association conflicted with the
vast literature already available documenting the presence of debris flows
and water flows on fans in desert and nondesert settings alike (Table 1).
The Kosi River of India and the braided streams of southeastern Alaska
were provided as examples of"wet" alluvial fans in this modified scheme,
leading to a tie between the idea of a braided-distributary fan and that of
a fluvial-dominated, "wet fan", an association now widely promoted in
the literature.
Recently, the climate classification scheme has been further modified to
link fan forms and processes with climate (Nemec and Steel 1987, 1988;
Dunne 1988; Nemec 1990, 1993; Postma 1990; Reading and Orton 1991;
Nilsen 1993; Stanistreet and McCarthy 1993). In this version, alluvial
fans with the "classic" semiconical form are concluded to be built exclu-
sively by debris flows under desert conditions (the "dry" type). As a
corollary to this conclusion, fans constructed by water flows (the "wet"
type) lack the classical fan form, particularly the comparatively high slope,
and are deposited under humid climatic conditions. This scheme has
gained momentum in the literature even though: (1) fans with the char-
acteristic semiconical morphology constructed principally of water flows
have been documented in both desert and nondesert settings (Harvey 1984;
Blair 1985a, 1987b; Wells and Harvey 1987; Nemec and Postma 1993);
and (2) fans with the "classic" form and constructed by debris flows are
widely known in both desert and nondesert settings (Table 1).
The Problem with Laboratory Models
The use, without field verification, of the results of laboratory models
as a basis for developing sedimentological concepts of alluvial fans has
led to two kinds of conceptual problems. The first stems from applying
to natural fan systems conclusions drawn from "random-walk" computer
453
simulations (e.g., Price 1974, 1976; Rachocki 1981; Chang 1982; Nemec
and Steel 1988). The basis for these conclusions is the erroneous assump-
tion that fans are constructed by braided-distributary-channel systems.
The second problem derives from the application of small-scale laboratory
modeling of sandbox "fans" to natural fans. This application assumes as
valid the probably unrealistic premise that fan processes and products can
be modeled at a small scale. Despite this limitation, three widely used
concepts have emerged from such experiments, including the "sieve lobe"
process, the "Trollheim fan" facies model, and a model relating fan stra-
tigraphy and drainage-basin evolution.
The concept of sieve-lobe deposition on alluvial fans was generated
from laboratory studies of fan-shaped features -< 1 m in radius built of
granules and sand (Hooke 1967). On the basis of the assumption that these
sandbox studies reflect natural systems, it was proposed that features on
natural fans with morphologies similar to the laboratory "sieve lobes"
were deposited by the same process. An examination of the identified
natural-fan "sieve lobes," however, revealed them to be the product of
water winnowing of the surface of clast-rich debris-flow lobes and levees,
a process capable of producing the same forms as those identified in the
laboratory experiments as sieve lobes (Blair and McPherson 1992, 1993).
Unfortunately, the still unsubstantiated basis for "sieve lobes" has not
prevented them from becoming widely designated in the literature as one
of the key fan-building processes.
A second conceptualization generated from laboratory sandbox exper-
iments and applied to natural fans without field verification is the facies
model in which debris-flow deposits dominate the proximal fan, interbed-
ded debris-flow and channel deposits the medial fan, and fluvial deposits
the distal fan (Hooke 1967, 1987, 1993; Spearing 1974; Fraser 1989). This
model, based on experiments using sand and mud, is suggested to be the
most common facies motifofnatural fans, although the only real example
offered to date has been the Trollheim fan of Deep Springs Valley, Cali-
fornia. A recent study of the Trollheim fan to better document this facies
scheme, however, found it to be composed entirely of debris-flow and
washed debris-flow deposits (Blair and McPherson 1992, 1993). Despite
the unproven basis of this facies model, it is the most widely accepted
and invoked scheme for interpreting ancient sequences.
A third concept based on sandbox experiments is the speculative model
linking fan drainage-basin evolutionary stages to fan stratigraphic patterns
(Fraser and DeCelles 1993). This model associates the results of laboratory
work (e.g., Schumm 1977; Hooke and Rohrer 1979; Schumm et al. 1987)
with drainage-basin theory of rivers to create a stratigraphic model for
fans consisting of initial coarsening-upward and then fining-upward se-
quences. Two main problems arise with this methodology, one related to
the still questionable relevance of sandbox modeling of fans, and one
associated with the direct application of river drainage-basin theory to
fans, including the stages of elongation, elaboration, maximum extension,
and abstraction. The latter supposes that alluvial-fan and river drainage
basins have identical characteristics and history, a questionable assump-
tion considering that they show major differences in size, tectonic stability,
relief ratios, Shreve magnitude values, stream order, and length of stream
segments of specific order. A final problem with this conceptualization is
that the proposed stratigraphic model is not supported by data from mod-
em fans, but instead by studies of Lower Tertiary fluvial sequences in
Wyoming and Montana (Kraus 1984) reinterpreted to represent the de-
posits of alluvial fans (DeCelles et al. 1987, 199 la, 199 lb).
Tile Application of Facies Models Generatedfrom Rock-Record Sequences
Manyalluvial-fan facies models are underpinned by interpretations of
ancient sequences (i.e., "the past is the key to the past"), a practice iden-
tiffed long ago as unsound (Allen 1965). Most of these models remain
entirely speculative because of their interpretive foundation. The most
widely used example of this type is the facies model generated from the
454 TERENCE C BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON

Precambfian Van Horn Sandstone of Texas, having sandstone and con- within an incised channel to a down-fan expansion site called the inter-
glomerate in the "proximal fan," cross-bedded pebbly sandstone in the section point (Fig. l). The expansion of flows in response to their instan-
"middle fan," and planar-bedded sandstone in the "distal fan" (McGowen taneous unconfinement upon passage beyond either the apex or the in-
and Groat 1971). Though no modern fan with this facies pattern has ever tersection point initiates sedimentation typically over a pie-piece-shaped
been documented, the Van Horn model has become widely accepted as fan segment called the active depositional lobe (Fig. l; Blair and Mc-
fact, and typically is promoted as the key example of the "wet" alluvial- Pherson 1994). The arc length of this lobe is a function of its slope, radial
fan system in textbooks, review articles, and professional short-course length, and microtopography combined with the volume, velocity, vis-
summaries. The extent of the problem created by this activity is dem- cosity, and momentum of the typical flows. Autocyclic switching of the
onstrated by the large number of ancient deposits interpreted as alluvial position of the active depositional lobe across the fan through time main-
fans based on the Van Horn model. tains the semiconical form (Denny 1967). The optimal conditions that
promote sedimentation at the fan site through flow expansion on the
Slw.etfloodProblems semiconical form create radii that rarely exceed 10 km in length (e.g.,
Anstey 1965, 1966).
Sheetflooding constitutes one of the main aggradational processes of The geometric aspects of the semiconical composite fan morphology
alluvial fans, yet, as a result of the promulgation in the literature of un- contrast strongly with those of rivers. Alluvial-fan radii extend outward
substantiated ideas in lieu of those generated by case studies, the nature from the apex and the mountain front in all possible directions at a rel-
of sheetflooding is widely misunderstood. The literature, for example, atively similar slope to form an arc commonly of 180" (Figs. 1, 2). In
promotes alluvial-fan sheetflooding as a process related to flow in braided contrast, the linear or sinuous channel geometry of a river system results
distributary channels similar to braided streams. This conclusion, and its in a relatively uniform direction of the principal slope axis, with laterally
corollary that equates the facies of braided distributary channels on fans oriented flows occumng only during overbank spilling into the floodplain,
with those of braided rivers, remains unproven, and is in direct conflict or into interdistributary bays in the case of fiver deltas (Fig. 2). Also, the
with the case-study results (e.g., McGee 1897; Koster 1978; Rust and characteristic short radial length of alluvial fans contrasts with river lengths
Gostlin 1981; Hogg 1982; Wells and Dohrenwend 1985; Blair 1985a, of hundreds to even thousands of kilometers (Fig. 2). Furthermore, relief
1987b; Wells and Harvey 1987). Other aspects of alluvial-fan sheetflooding along the steepest 10 km of fans is commonly 300-2000 m, whereas the
commonly presented in textbooks or review articles that directly conflict relief of the most proximal long profile of rivers or their deltas in alluvial
with the case-study research are that: (1) sheetftood facies consist mainly basins typically is much less than 70 m (Fig. 2).
of sand; (2) sheetflooding is a process primarily restricted to fans in deserts;
(3) individual beds in a sheetflood package represent unique depositional
events; (4) "fining-upwards" sheetflood deposits originate by waning flood Cross-Profile Characteristics
flow; and (5) sheetflooding is restricted either to the mid-fan setting, in A third major distinction between fans and rivers derived from their
some accounts, or the distal fan, in other accounts. contrasting morphology is the cross-profile character. The cross profile of
a fan displays its trademark piano-convex shape, whereas that of a channel
THE NATURAL DIFFERENTIATIONOF AILUVL~&FANS has an opposite trough or piano-concave geometry (Fig. 2). The cross
ON THE BASIS OF MORPHOLOGY profile of a river is further differentiated from that of a fan by the common
Counter to this contem~rary facies framework, but consistent with the presence of nearly flat, flanking floodplains and, in the case of a fiver delta,
results of case-study research, we conclude that alluvial fans represent a by flanking interdistributary bays. Additionally, maximum fan cross-pro-
naturally unique and fundamental sedimentary environment easily dis- file relief is commonly 300-2000 m, whereas total cross-profile relief on
tinguishable from gravel-bed rivers and other environments on the basis rivers typically is << 15 m (Fig. 2). A key aspect of these geometrical
of morphology, hydraulic and sedimentary processes, and resultant facies differences is that flows related to aggradation on fans invariably become
and facies assemblages. The most distinctive feature of alluvial fans that unconfined, whereas in river systems they either remain confined in the
readily allows their differentiation from rivers in modem settings is their channel trough or spill laterally into quieter overbank floodplains or in-
morphology (Surrell 1841, 1870; Drew 1873). Inasmuch as the overall fan terdistributary bays. In contrast, the piano-convex cross profile of alluvial
form is the net sum of multiple depositional and erosional events, it is fans precludes the presence of floodplains (Fig. 2).
referred to as the composite morphology (Blair and McPherson 1994).
The most significant attributes of the composite morphology of an alluvial Radial Slope Characteristics
fan that makes them easily distinguishable from other environments are
the semiconical shape, restricted radial length, piano-convex cross-profile, The fourth major difference between fans and rivers caused by their
and comparatively high values of radial slope. distinctive morphology is the magnitude of their depositional slopes. Al-
luvial fans have average slope values ranging from 1.5° to 25°, with values
of 2° to 12° most typical (Figs. 3, 4; Table 2). In contrast, the average
Semiconical Form and Rest~cted Radial Length
depositional slopes of even the proximal sectors of aggrading gravel-bed
The characteristic semiconical composite shape of alluvial fans is a or sand-bed rivers in sedimentary basins are significantly less, rarely ex-
consequence of the transfer of sediment-charged flows from an upland ceeding 0.4° (Figs. 3, 4; Table 3; McPherson et al. 1987). Slightly higher
drainage basin to the fan site through a point source located where the slopes are noted for degrading rivers adjusting to a major drop in base
feeder channel intersects the mountain front (Fig. 1). The feeder channel, level, and higher slopes as found in intramontane gravelly streams where
representing the highest-order stream in the upland drainage basin, is so the channel bed is controlled by the presence of either bedrock or the
named because it serves as the ultimate conduit for the transfer of sediment moraine of recently retreated alpine glaciers, such as the White River of
yielded from the lower-order channels of the drainage basin to the site of Washington (Fahnestock 1963), the Rubicon River of California (Scott
deposition at the valley margin (stream-order terminology used herein and Gravlee 1968), the Peyto and Hilda glacial outwash streams of Alberta
follows Horton 1945, as modified by Strahler 1957). The point where the (McDonald and Banerjee 1971; Southard el al. 1984), and the Big Thomp-
feeder channel intersects the mountain front is called the apex because of son River and other streams of Colorado (Costa 1983; Jarrett 1984). These
its position at the tip of the fan (Drew 1873). Sedimentary flows either streams are excluded from our survey because they are ultimately char-
expand upon leaving the drainage basin at the fan apex or are transferred acterized by erosional rather than depositional regimes, similar to the
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS 455

'Recap :ire fault

abandc trace
tan 1o

Debds-flow
levees,
lobes, &
gullies

Clast-poc :loned lobe:

debrisfloq g, winnowing
s to produce
det el mantles
'~JlU~l
lobe Recent debris-flow debris-flow lobe
levees & lobes

B .ii.

m!t~. ~ i.P; . ~ . k
~it i'.~ i .4

b
/° o o , ~o ~'~° ~"'-~2"~" abandoned
l~_lJ ° ~f~"/~ ", L):lT" ' ~ /'I " ° ° ~\" %-":~ channe,
Proxlmal,4an • "..'~ ~ ° o ]--~J"~'-,~. ~ - . . " ~ of :.:i' ?C"~~] distributarv

V ~ ~-<:':'.~.":I minor gullying

Fio. l.-Schematic diagrams showingthe
" "U ~ ' ~n. . . .". . . J. . . '. . . . . . "o. . ~~. o /" / o ~ ~' ' ~Z "' .f %. " ." " ' modified lower drainage basin, and primary and second-
/~":-:r.--J--.,...J~\ ' .'' ~ i '." .'": i" ~ ~ sheeiflood
ary depositionalfeatures of alluvial fans, in-
Olderf a ~ ~l ~~ : .~ ~.~-~.-L:. ~ deposits cludingthose dominated by A) debris-flowpro-
gullyi~ ~ r ~ ~[ J~\:.'lx \. '.. ~.~ ~,,,><.,,. ......... cesses and B) sheetfloodprocesses.
r e ~ ~ " w. " • ~ Sufficial Abbreviations:A = fan apex; FC = drainage-
biofurbation~soil DiItlml4an braided-distributary basin feederchannel; IC = incised channel on
formation undsldtt Active deposRionel lobe channels fan; IP = fan intersectionpoint.

channels of an alluvial-fan drainage basin. Like the fan drainage-basin
channels, sediments stored in these higher-sloping upland rivers have
distinctive facies and context, but with a low chance for preservation in
the rock record because of their presence in an erosional rather than a
depositional setting.
With the exceptions of fan drainage basins, other bedrock-confined up-
land channels, or recently deglaciated valleys, compiled data illustrate the
two unique slope modes in sedimentary basins representing alluvial fans
and rivers (Tables 2, 3; Figs. 3, 4). The data furthermore show that de-
positional slopes of 0.5-1.5 ° are uncommon in aggrading alluvial basins.
This interruption, referred to herein as the natural depositional slope gap,
separates the typical depositional slopes of rivers from those of alluvial
fans (Fig. 4), precluding a continuum between these environments. Data
on the longitudinal profiles and average slopes of the various rivers and
river deltas that we feel have been classified incorrectly as alluvial fans
(Table 3B) are also plotted in Figures 3 and 4, for comparison, with those
of known fans and rivers. As illustrated, all of these examples have slopes
identical to rivers or river deltas, and unlike alluvial fans. Our reclassifi-
cation of these features as rivers is supported also by their piano-concave
cross profiles and laterally flanking floodplains, greater longitudinal lengths,
and common confinement of water flows due to the presence of channel
banks (Fig. 2).
Another aspect of the major slope differences between alluvial fans and
rivers is their unique relationship to modal sediment texture (Tables 2,
3). A plot of average slope versus modal grain size reveals two unique
fields that correspond directly to alluvial fans and rivers, respectively, also
illustrating the natural division between these two environments (Fig. 5).
The slope in each of these fields increases with increasing grain size, con-
456 TERENCE C. BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON

Geologkal Feature I Wwid Fans Riien River Deltas I

--

Flow Expansion Angle I

I
180' I Negligible 180' I
c' e 8'
Radial Rofib

Radial Relief Over 10 Km

Cross-Profile

Cross-Proflle Relief
Geornorphic Setting
I 300to>2m0rn

Piedmont
I
b' d
1 to70m

1 to15m
d' f
I

I
- 1 to70m

0.1 to 2.0 m
Most Continental Settlngs Most Continental Settings
I
1

Propenstty for Unconfined Flows v w High Very Low High

Floodplains Present? No Yes Yes
Radial Slope Values 1.S'to 25' 4.5' c0.S
I I
-

Typical Sediment Mode p e w s to Boulders Sand to Cobbles Mud to Pebbles i

Rate of Slope Gain Relative to Grain Sie I
--

Very High I Low Low I

I
---

Effect of Vegetation I Very Minor I Major 1 Major

Relative Drainagskisin Sie
Rellef Ratio of Drainage Basin
Propensity for Generating Flashfloods
Sediment-Gravity-FlowActbity
Typical Water Flow Conditions
Magnitude of Tractive Forces
flow Competency
Effect of Slope Failures on Sedimentation
Closts Entrainable by Flow 1 m Deep
Flow Capacity
A Flow Depth Downsbpe
I Very Small to Small
I Very High
Very High
Very Common
I Supercritical
I Very High
I Very High
vW High
Med Bouklen to Pebbles Med Pebbles to Crs Sand
Very High
Greatly Decreases
I Moderate to Large 1 Moderate to ~ a a
I Low 1 Low 1 -
Low to Moderate Low to Moderate
Rare Rore (exceot at front)
I Subcritical I Subcritical I
I Moderate I Lowto Moderate I
I Low to Moderate I Low to Moderate I
Low to Moderate Low (except at front)
Granubs to Med Sand
Moderate Moderate
Slightly Increases Slightly Decreases
--

A flow Width Downslope I GreatIv Increases I Sllahtlv Increases 1 Moderatek Increases I

I I I I
- --

A Flow Competency Downslope Greatly Decreases Slightly Increases Slightly Decreases

-

A Flow Carxlcth/ Dawnslope I Greatlv Decreases I Sllahtlv Increases I Sliohtlv Decreases

- --
I
A Water Diihorge Downslope Greatly Decreases Greatly Increases Consistent
Frequency of Aggradatlonal Events I
I

Very Rare Common to Rare Common to Rore

I
FIG.2.-Comparison of typical morphologic, hydraulic, and sedirnentologic properties of alluvial fans, rivers, and river deltas in sedimentary basins.
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS 457

aspects that combine to produce these unique conditions are: (1) the valley-
\ Alluvial Fans
margin position of a fan where the feeder channel draining an upland
1,800 -
Rivers
catchment basin emerges from the mountains; (2) the comparatively high
.... Rivers Calle;I Fans
"\° fan surface slopes awaiting drainage-basin discharge (Figs. 3, 4); and (3)
the rapid down-fan attenuation of flows triggered by their unconfinement
1,600-
and resultant expansion at the fan site.
\, \,
1,400 - \ \-\ Hydraulic EHects of the Alluvial-FanSetting
"\, "\, The component of the hydraulic environment of an alluvial fan that is
E \ \
a function of its setting at the mouth of a feeder channel is the state of
1,200 - the flows arriving from the catchment. Such flow states are conditioned
directly by the drainage basin and therefore are an external effect on the
\ • 3 hydraulic environment of the fan. The major attributes of the drainage
"~ 1,000
basin that give rise to the unique hydraulic conditions at the fan site
\ \, include: (1) the presence of steep slopes commonly mantled by sediment;
6 (2) the occurrence of rapid snowmelt or heavy rainfall events that facilitate
\, sediment transfer to the fan site; and (3) the typically catastrophic nature
SO0 of the water and sediment discharge events from the drainage basin to the
fan, which are caused by the relief and morphology of the catchment, and
8 ~'- 7 also by the low stream order and short lengths of a given stream order
6OO that characterize the drainage net of the catchment (Surrell 1870; Horton
10
1945; Strahler 1957, 1964). Alluvial-fan drainage basins are especially
11
well-suited for creating flash floods from either rapid snowmelt or major
400- precipitation events because of the efficiency with which overland flow is
concentrated and accelerated downslope as a result of the inherent relief.

2:t
I 12

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i i i i i i
0 2 4 6
Radial Length (km)
Fic. L-Long profiles of representative alluvial fans (Plots 1-8), reaches of
gravel-bedrivers (Plots 9.--12),and features previouslyinterpretedas alluvial fans
but reclassifiedby us as rivers or river deltas (Plots 13-16).Verticalexaggeration:
l0 x. Note the similaritiesbetween the profilesof the reclassifiedrivers or river
deltas and the river profiles,and their dissimilaritieswith the alluvial-fanprofiles.
Plotted features, indexed by number, am: (1) Black Birch fan, New Zealand; (2)
Torrent de Rabioux fan, France; (3) Hanaupah fan, California; (4) Torrent du
Borgeat fan, France; (5) Alamo Canyon fan, New Mexico; (6) Trollheim fan,
California;(7) MilnerCreekfan, California;(8) Tjeurajakkafan, Sweden;(9) Amite
River, Louisiana',(10) Feather River, California;( 11) Durance River, France;(12)
Donjek River, Yukon Territory; (13) Kosi River "fan," India; (14) Kern River
"fan," California;(15) Reno River "fan," Italy; and (I 6) Skeidara River "fan,'"
Iceland. See Tables 2 and 3 for additional information.
sistent with the proportionality relationship (e.g., Drew 1873; Tolman
1909; Blissenbach 1952). The rate and irregularity of change, however,
are significantly higher for fans than for riven, reflecting fundamental
differences in the characteristic morphology and sedimentary processes of
these two environments (Fig. 5). Additionally, the data plots of the river
and river deltas we believe are incorrectly called alluvial fans (Table 3B)
fall distinctly in the river field rather than in the alluvial-fan field of this
graph (Fig. 5), thereby further supporting our reclassification.
THE NATURALDIFFERENTIATIONOF ALLUVIALFANS ON THE BASIS OF
HYDRAULICCHARACrEIt
The unique geomorphic setting and composite morphology of alluvial
fans create hydraulic conditions for water flows that are significantly dif-
ferent from those of other continental sedimentary environments. Three
13
Additionally,the presence of numerous first-order channels in fan drainage
14 basins that funnel over short distances into short, higher-order streams
15 results in rapid transfer of overland flow to the feeder channel, also pro-
16
moting flash flooding (Patton and Baker 1976; French 1987; Patton 1988).
The typical bowl-like shape of a fan drainage basin is an additional factor
t i i in catastrophic discharge by causing the coincident arrival of overland
8 10 flow to the feeder channel from all parts of the catchment, maximizing
the height of the potential flash flood peak (Strahler 1957; Patton 1988).
Upland drainage basins also serve to promote flash floods by inducing
condensation and precipitation as passing air masses are forced to rise
over the mountains (Hayden 1988). The siting of alluvial fans where feeder
channels reach the mountain front not only makes them favorable loca-
tions for receiving catastrophic flash floods, but also catastrophic mass-
wasting events such as rock falls, rock slides, rock avalanches, and debris
flows, because of the inherent relief of the catchment.
A result of the hydraulic conditions of an alluvial fan where the feeder
channel of an upland catchment intersects the mountain front is the poorly
sorted, coarse gravelly texture of the transported sediment. Barring the
special case of loosely consolidated conglomerate with well rounded clasts
as a source, the sediment delivered to the fan site is angular and poorly
sorted because of its origin from fractured bedrock, the short transport
distance to the fan, and the rapid and catastrophic nature of the active
sediment-transport mechanisms. Although rare conditions, such as sedi-
ment derivation from a drainage basin underlain solely by mudrocks, may
result in fine-grained fans (e.g., Leggett et al. 1966), the fan setting at the
mouth of an upland catchment almost invariably assures that the deposits
are coarse-grained because of their generation from the fractured bedrock
underlying the steep drainage-basin slopes.
The dominance of catastrophic sedimentation events on alluvial fans
promoted by the hydraulic conditions of the drainage basin, as well as the
angular, poorly sorted, and coarse-grained textures of the resulting de-
posits, contrast with the processes and products imposed by the hydraulic
character of the drainage basins of river systems in alluvial basins. River
drainage basins typically have better integration, higher stream order,
greater length of a given stream order, and significantly lower relief ratios
(Fig. 2). Such conditions make the generation of flash floods less domi-
nating; instead, floods of relatively longer duration and lower discharge
 458 TERENCE C. BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON

60
1 Rivers (n=22)
[~ Riverscalledfans(n=18)
50
I Fans(n=237)

o
---> 40

~ 30

Fit. 4.-Histogram of representative modem

E 20 alluvial fans, rivers, and rivers called fans cate-
gorized by average slope. The plotted rivers
Z and "rivers called fans" are those listed in Ta-
ble 3. Alluvial fan plots include the Table 2 en-
10 tries plus additional data sets from Death Val-
ley, California; Walker Lake, Nevada;
Chamonix, France; and the Southern Alps
piedmont in the vicinity of the Rakaia and
o-p Waimakariri rivers, New Zealand. Note scale
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 change at 1.0". The natural deposifional slope
gap, spanning ~ 0.5-1.5", separates the fiver
Slope (in degrees) and alluvial fan slope realms.

peaks are promoted. Storage of water in either lloodbasins or as ground-
water also provides noncatastrophic base flow to the rivers. Catastrophic
processes like those o f alluvial fans may be operative in the low-order
tributaries of a river system, but their ability to transport sediment within
the fiver is hindered or prevented by the low depositional slopes.
Hydrulic Effects of the Radial Slopes of Alluvial Fans
The steepness of average radial slopes of alluvial fans relative to the
average longitudinal slopes of rivers or fiver deltas in sedimentary basins
(Figs. 2.-4) significantly effects the hydraulic conditions of passing water

TABLE2.- Morphologic and sedimentologicparameters of representativealluvialfans •

Ave. Ah per
Feature Class Location Reference Slope I0 km ModalTexture
Cucamongaalluvial fan AF Eureka Vallye,Calif. 1.6° 279 S bid cob pub gravel
Alamo Canyon alluvial fan AF S. New Mexico 2.1° 366 S bid peb cob gravel
Furnace Creek alluvial fan AF Death Valley,Calif. 2.6° 454 C/S pub cob gravel
Deadman Canyon fan-delta AF~ WalkerLake, Nevada 2.8° 489 C/S cob m-f bid gravel
Cottonwood Canyon fan AF Owens Valley,Calif. Beaty 1963 2.8° 489 C cob m-f bid gravel
Lone Tree Creek alluvial fan AF Owens Valley,Calif. Beaty 1963 3.0* 524 C cob m-f bid gravel
Penrod Canyon fan-ddla AF~ WalkerLake, Nevada 3.2° 559 S/C cob f-m bid gravel
Smith Mountains fan AF Death Valley,Calif. 3.4° 594 S bid pub cob gravel
Roaring River fan Lobe 3 AF Colorado Blair 1985a; 1987b 3.4° 594 S bid peb cob gravel
Gower Gulch fan-delta AF~ Death Valley,Calif. 3.5° 612 Pebbly cobbly mud
Trail Canyon fan-delta AF~ Death Valley,Calif. 3.8° 664 C pub cob f bid gravel
Copper Canyon fan-della AFA WalkerLake, Nevada 4.1° 717 S/C fbld cobble gravel
Hanaupah fan-delta AFA Death Valley,Cali£ 4.3° 752 C pub cob f bid gravel
Milncr Creek alluvial faa AF Owens Valley,Cali£ Bcaty 1963 4.4° 769 C cob m-f bid gravel
Copper Canyon fan-della AFA Death Valley,Calif. 4.6° 805 S/C peb cob gravel
N. Copper Canyon fan-delta AFA Walker Lake, Nevada 4.6° 805 S/C cob f-m bid gravel
Roaring River fan Lobe 2 AF Colorado Blair 1985a; 1987b 4.6° 805 S f-m boulder gravel
Natural Bridgefan-delta AFA Death Valley,Calif. 5.1° 892 C/S cob fbid gravel
Roaring River fan Lobe 1 AF Colorado Blair 1985a; 1987b 5.7° 998 S m-c boulder gravel
Rose Creek fan-della AFA Walker I_ake,Nevada 6.2° 1086 C/S cob fbld gravel
Ton-eat du Borgeatfan AF Chamonix, France 7.4" 1299 C cob f bid gravel
S. Badwaterfan-della AFA Death Valley,Calif. 7.6' 1334 C/S cob f bid gravel
Torrent de la Creuse fan AF Chamonix, France 8.(7' 1405 C cob m-f bid gravel
Trollhelm alluvial fan AF Deep SpringsV., Calif. Blair and McPherson 1992 8.4" 1477 C cob f boulder gravel
Rifle Range alluvial fan AF Walker Lake, Nevada 11.4° 2016 C/s cob pebble gravel
N. Badwaterfan-delta AFA Death Valley,Calif. 12.3" 2180 C cob m-f bid gravel
Leath Gill alluvial fan AF N. England Wellsand Harvey 1987 14.6° 2604 C/S pub cob gravel
Ravin de Voullourdesfan AF Chamonix, France 18.0* 3249 C/S cob f-m bid geavel
Thrush Gill alluvial fan AF N. England Wellsand Harvey 1987 18.4° 3327 C/S pub cob gravel
Charlanon alluvial fan AF Chamanix, France 24.6° 3759 C cob m-c bid gravel
* Abbreviations: AF = Alluvial Fan; AFA = Fan-Delta; S = sandy; C = clayey; pub = pebble; cob = cobble; bid = boulder; f = ffine-gr~uned;m = medium-
grained; c = coarse-grained. Unreferenced entries are from research by the authors.
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS 459

21.0- t

20.0-
Stage I rock-ava~nche-
dominated fops
19.0-

18.0-

17.0-

1~.0"

15.0-

14.0~

13.0~

11.0,

9.o

8.0
e•
7.0, Stage 2 to 3
aebC6-flow o~
• water-flow faro
6.0.

5.0.

4.0- / Clast-poot debris-

@ flow-Oom~Oecl ~an @ •
~a.o-

~, Scolechange

Typical Rivers
0.5- F~. 5.-Semiquamitative cross plot of the
__o___J. modal texture versus average depositional
_N.,.__,,,~._.~--~-- - - - ~ : , ~ d r o - - ' Y T , ~ " b ? ~ ° 9 - - • - - - - -'+" slope of the representative alluvial fans (dia-
o,
monds), rivers (solid circles), and rivers ques-
tionably classified as alluvial fans (open circles)

o= tl.-F ~o~

Modol toxturo of deposits (values, In ore, approximate boundaries)

"l!+
'~y == listed in Tables 2 and 3. Note that the alluvial
fans and rivers are clearly differentiated in this
plot, and that the "alluvial fans" of previous
writers we reclassify as rivers distinctly plot in
the "rivers" realm.

flows. Three key hydraulic parameters of flows that are strongly influenced definition of the Froude number (Eq 2):
by the different slopes are velocity, flow regime, and shear stress. On fans,
as with riven, these flow parameters are a function of many complex and V RH2:3SL:2 (1)
interacting variables (Simons and Richardson 1966; Richards 1982; Mid- n
dleton and Sonthard 1984; French 1987). The most important of these
variables for the gravel ± sand load typical of the active tracts of braided V
Fr = (2)
rivers and water-flow-dominated fans are: (1) slope; (2) flow depth; and gl:2Dt/2
(3) resistance to flow, principally caused by the bed materials (Simons and
Richardson 1962, 1966). where V = average flow velocity in meters per second; Rn = hydraulic
Effects on Vdocity and Flow Regime.- The effect of the steepness of radius in meters; S = slope in meters/meter, n = Manning roughness
the surface of an alluvial fan on flow velocity and hydraulic regime, and coefficient, Fr = Froude number, g = gravitational acceleration constant
its contrast with the lower slopes of gravel-bed rivers, can be illustrated of 9.8 m/s2; and D = average flow depth in meters. The Manning roughness
qualitatively by the Manning equation for flow resistance (Eq 1) and the coefficient n is an empirically derived factor that accounts for the physical
460 TERENCE C. BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON

TJ,st~ 3.-Morphologic and sedimentologtc parameters of representative rivers and river deltas*

Ave. Ah per
Feature Class Location Reference Slope 10 km ModalTexture
A) Gravel-Bedded and Sand-Bedded Rivers
Brahmalmtra River SBR Bangladesh Coleman 1969 0.004* 0.7 Silty vfsand
Tana River SBR N. Norway Collinson 1970 0.01" 1.7 C-m sam
Colorado River SBR Texas McGowen and Garner 1970 0.02* 3.5 Pebbly ve-c aand
South Saskatchewan River SBR Saskatchewan Cant and Walker 1978 0.02* 3.5 M-f sand
Amite River GBR Louisiana McGowen and Garner 1970 0.03* 5.2 S cob peb gravel
Rio Grande SBR W. Texas Harms and Fahnestock 1965 0.04* 7.0 Vf-f sand
Red River SBR Texas/Oklahoma Schwartz 1978 0.04* 7.0 Vf-fsand
Babbage River GBR Yukon Temtory Forbes 1983 0.04* 7.0 S cob peb $rnvel
Knik River GBR SE .Maska Fahnestook and Bradley 1973 0.06* 10.5 S pebble gravel
Rio Chama GBR New Mexico Barnes 1967 0.07* 12.2 S bid peb cob gravel
Salt River GBR Arizona Barnes 1967 0.11* 19. I Boulder cobble gravel
South Platte River SBR Colorado Smith 1970 0.12" 20.9 Pebbly ve-c mad
Feather River GBR C. California Blair et at. 1991 O.12" 20.9 S bid ~b-cob gravel
Rio Grande SBR C. New Mexico Nordin and Beverage 1965 0.14" 24.4 F-m sand
Bella Coola River GBR British Columbia Church 1983 0.14" 24.4 S peb cob gravel
River Durance GBR SE France Doe#as 1962 0.15" 26.2 Cobble pebble gravel
Auranga River SBR India Gupta and Dun 1989 0.17" 29.7 Pebbly e sand
West Fork Bitterroot River GBR Montana Barnes 1967 0.26* 45.4 Boulder"cobble gravel
Kicking Horse River GBR British Columbia Smith 1974 0.28* 48.9 Pebble gravel
Matanuska River GBR SE Alaska Falmestock and Bradley 1973 0.29* 50.6 S peb cob sravel
Donjek River GBR Yukon Territory Rust 1972 0.34* 59.3 Cob peb gravel
South Fork Clearwater River GBR Idaho Barnes 1967 0.36* 62.8 Boulder gravel
B) Rivers or River Deltas Questionably Classifiedas Alluvial Fans or Fire-Deltas
Yellow River alluvial fan MDRA Fastem China Davis 1901; Graban 1913 0.01" 1.7 Silt
Markanda terminal fan MDILA N India Mukelji 1976; Park.ashet at. 1983 0.0 I* 1.7 Muddy vf sand
Charleston, Missouri "fan" SBR Missouri Pay 1964 0.02* 3.5 Very fine sand and mud
Mehran River "fan delta" SBILA SE Iran naltzer and Purser 1990 0.02* 3.5 Silty fine mad
Kosl River "alluvial fan" SBR E. India Wells and Dorr 1987a 0.02* 3.5 Silty f-m sand
Okavango "alluvial fan" MDRA N. Botswana McCarthy el at. 1991 0.02* 3.5 Vf sandy mud
Gandak "megafan" MDR NC India Mohindra et at. 1992 0.02* 3.5 Silt and clay
Portage la Prairie "fan" SBRA Manitoba Rannie et at, 1989 0.03* 5.2 Coarse sand
GUt Hollow "fan delta" SBRg Texas McGowen 1971 0,09* 15.7 Fine sand
Kern River "fan" SBRA Califorma Cherven 1984 0,10" 17.4 Pebbly e sand
Copper River "fan-delta" GBRA SE Alaska Galloway 1976 0,13" 22.7 Muddy m-f rand
Leba River "alluvial fan" ERR Poland Rachouki 1990 0,13" 22.7 Pebbly f-m sand
Reno River"fan'" GBR N Italy Ori 1982 0.14" 24.4 Sandy peb gravel
Gija River "humid fan" GBR SE Iceland Boolhroyd and Nummedal 1978 0.17" 29.7 S cob peb gravel
Skeldara River "humid fan" GBR SE Iceland Boothroyd and Nummedal 1978 0.21" 36.7 S cob pch gravel
Merced River "fan" SBRA California Davis 1901; Cherven 1984 0.22* 38.4 Cob peb c sand
Yana River "alluvial fan" GBRA SE Alaska Boothroyd and Ashley 1975 0.30* 52.4 S peb cob [travel
Scott River "alluvial fan" GBRA SE Alaska Boothroyd 1972 0.34* 59.3 S peb cob gravel
* Abbreviations: GBR = Gravel-Bedded River; GBRA = Gravel-Bedded River Delta; SBR = Sand-Bedded River; SBRA = Sand-Bedded River Delta; MDR =
Mud-Dominated River; MDRA = Mud-Dominated River Delta; ERR = Expanding River Reach; S = sandy; C = clayey; peb = pebble; cob = cobble; bid = boulder;
vf = very fine-grained; f = fine-grained; m = medium-grained; c = coarse-grained; vc = very coarse-grained.

elements resisting flow, such as bed materials, vegetation, and channel
banks (e.g., Chow 1959; Barnes 1967). For simplicity, the average flow
depth D can be substituted for the hydraulic radius RH in Eq 1 because
of the unchannelized nature of flows on alluvial fans and the large width-
to-depth ratios (> 10) of braided streams, to obtain
Dv3S,/2
V = - - (3)
n documented much less often. In contrast, flows on fans are suspected to
Eq 3 shows that, for given bed roughness and water depth, velocity is
proportional to the square root of the slope. Therefore, with bed roughness
and depth held constant, the Manning equation predicts that the velocity
of a flow across a fan surface with an average slope of 2° would be two
times greater than the flow in a steeply sloping (0.4°) river. This difference
increases to a factor of 3 for fans with a slope of 4° and to a factor of 4
for fans with a slope of 6°. These important differences assume that Eq 3
is valid over the range of flows occurring on alluvial fans or in rivers with
these slopes, an assumption not fully verified for the alluvial-fan slopes
because data on resistance coefficients for such slopes are limited. The
consistency between the flow parameters predicted by Eq 3 and data gen-
erated from documented flows across the Mosaic Canyon fan in Death
Valley, California (Beaumont and Oberlander 1971) and the Roaring River
fan in Colorado (Blair 1985a, 1987b), however, suggests that use of this
equation for steeper slope values is approximately valid.
Because the Froude number for a flow is directly proportional to velocity
(Eq 2), the large slope differential between alluvial fans and rivers also
significantly affects the flow regime. River flow is most commonly ob-
served to be suberitical (Fr < 1); supercfitical flow (Fr > 1) has been
be almost invariably supercritical because velocity is significantly greater
(Blair 1985a, 1987b). This conclusion is supported by the Roaring River
fan and Mosaic Canyon fan case studies (Beaumont and Oberlander 1971;
Blair 1985a, 1987b), where Froude numbers of 1.3-2.8 were calculated,
and all indicators of suberitical flow, including lower-flow-regime sedi-
mentary structures in the resultant deposits, were absent.
The effect of the steepness of alluvial fans on flow regime, and its contrast
with gravel-bed rivers, can be explored in more detail by calculating the
slope (critical slope, S,.) at which flows change state from suberitical to
supercritical for given values of depth and Manning's n (Fig. 6). Solving
the Manning equation (Eq 3) for velocity, and substituting this term for
velocity into the definition of the Froude number (Eq 2) leads to a rela-
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATCTR4LDlSTINCTION FROM RIVERS

Typical
Composite
Slopes
of Low-
Sloping
Alluvial-
Fans

Natural
....... OF RIVERS IN Depositiona
SEDIMENTARY BASINS Slope
Gap

Typical
River
Slopes
4 6 8 10
Water Depth (m)
FIG.6.-Cross plot of water depth versus critical slope S, for given Manning roughness values ranging from 0.024 to 0.040 and calculated usmg Eq 5. Turbulent
supercritical hydraulic conditions exist for depth-slope scenarios above and to the right of the S, curves, and subcritical hydraulic conditions characterize the field
below and to the left of the curves. Note that the typical depth-slope realms for alluvial fans and gravelly rivers are present on opposite Limbs of the S,curves, with
inflections occumng in the natural depositionalslope gap. Also note that hydraulic conditions are exclusively supercritical for the alluvial-fanrealm, and are commonly
subcritical in the river realm.

tionship between Froude number, flow depth, flow resistance, and slope: roughness values typical of boulder-bed or bedrock-encased mountain
streams (e.g., Fahnestock 1963; Barnes 1967; Jarrett 1984)are not included
in this plot, though their trend probably is the same, because such streams
are found in settings considered by us as reflective of fan and river drainage
By equating Fr to unity, the critical slope for a given Manning coefficient basins rather than the sites of deposition in sedimentary basins.
and average flow depth simplifies to The curve of critical slope for each Manning roughness coefficient in
Figure 6 divides the depth-slope conditions into two fields, one where
flows are turbulent supercritical, and the resultant sedimentary structures
indicative of the upper flow regime (above and to the right of the curve),
and the other where flows are turbulent subcritical, and the resultant
This derivation assumes that flows are uniform and steady, that the sedimentary structures indicative of the lower flow regime (below and to
Manning equation is valid over the range of flows found on alluvial fans the left of the curve). The key feature of all of the curves of critical slope
and in rivers, and that n is a dimensionless variable-assumptions not is the existence of an almost vertical limb for slope values r 1.5" and an
fully known or met. This limitation dictates that Eq 5 is an approximation. almost horizontal limb for slope values I0.4" (Fig. 6). Of significance is
The determination of the critical slope for given depth and resistance the fact that the typical depth-slope field for water flows on alluvial fans
conditions using Eq 5 defines another significant parameter illustrating the falls in the pan of the plot where the curves of critical slope are vertical
fundamental division between alluvial fans and rivers (Fig. 6), suggesting and asymptotic with the y-axis, and the typical depth-slope field for grav-
that the limitations of Eq 5 are minor. Figure 6 is a plot of S,on a slope- elly rivers in sedimentary basins falls in the region of the horizontal limb
depth diagram for given Manning roughness coefficients typical of sandy of these curves (Fig. 6). Additionally, the tight inflection of the curves of
pebble to cobble gravel, and pebble to boulder gravel bed material found critical slope is in the range of slopes (0.5-1 So) coincident with the natural
on alluvial fans constructed of water flows and in proximal gravelly braided gap in depositional slopes (Fig. 6).
rivers. The Manning roughness coefficients used in this diagram, ranging This critical-slope relationship supports observations that water flows
from 0.024 to 0.040, delineate the common range for water flows in on alluvial fans are almost invariably supercritical, and that water flows
sedimentary basins over beds with the above textures based on theoretical in gravelly rivers in sedimentary basins are mainly subcritical. The rapid
and case-study determinations (e.g., Boyer 1954; Barnes 1967; Limerinos transition between these hydraulic realms coincident with the natural gap
1970; Beaumont and Oberlander 197 I; Blair 1987b; French 1987). Higher in depositional slope provides an explanation for why there is not a con-
462 TERENCE C. BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON
8 o
r-
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Depth (m)
FIG.7.-Cross plot of shear stress r,, vs. flowdepth for slows typicalof rivers
(0,1--0.4°) and waterlaidalluvialfans (1.5--6.0°).
tinuum in sedimentary basins between alluvial-fan and fluvial environ-
ments. This natural hydraulic distinction is further enhanced by the spilling
of overbank water flows of rivers into its floodplains, where resistance is
greatly increased by vegetation or other obstacles (e.g., Barnes 1967), a
situation foreign to natural fans. Additionally, the presence of channel
walls, another feature atypical of fans but common to rivers, adds signif-
icantly to flow resistance, especially where width-depth ratios are < 10.
Effects on Shear Stress.-The slope differential between fans and broad
rivers (width-to-depth ratios > 10) also significantly affects the tractive
force (to), or bed shear stress, of water flowsin these environmentsbecause
To has a direct relationship with both depth and slope, as given by the
DuBoys (1879) Equation:
ro = ~DS (6)
where 3' = the specificweight of the fluid, assumed for comparison in this
discussion to be 1,000 kg/m 3 (the value for water with minimal suspended
load). Shear stress is an important variable of water flow inasmuch as it
affects the caliber (competency) and volume (capacity) of sediment that
can be transported by a flow (e.g., Shields 1936; Baker and Ritter 1975',
Costa 1983). The effect of slope on ro can be illustrated by plotting ro for
given D and S values typical of river and alluvial-fan environments. This
plot (Fig. 7) shows that ~-ovalues for common fan slopes are significantly
higher than for those of rivers, regardless of depth. For example, for D =
1.0 m, ro is five times greater on low-sloping (1.5°) fans than in steep (0.3°)
rivers of alluvial basins, increasing to 10 times for fans with an average
slope of 3.0°, and to 20 times for those sloping at 6.0° (Fig. 7).
The relevance of the slope differential between fans and rivers on flow
competency is demonstrated by plotting the minimum or critical shear
stress (r,) necessary, with respect to depth and slope, to initiate sediment
transport of gravel clasts. This relationship is estimated by extrapolating
the Hjulstr6m curve (Novak 1973), or calculated by combining the em-
m
o
o
Ih=
a
m
c
o
Q.
O
U
0 1 2 3 4 5
Depth (rn)
FIG.&-Depth-slope conditionsnecessary to entrain gravel clasts of varying
size based on the empiricalrelationshipof Costa (1983; Eq 7) relatingparticle
size (d) and shear stress (re).
pirical equation (Fxt 7) of Costa (1983) for determining the r~ needed to
move gravel clasts of various sizes (as measured by the intermediate axial
length, d) with the shear stress definition (Eq 6), obtaining Eq 8:
~-,,= 0.056d T M (7)
,rDS = 0.056d T M (8)
The results of this equation for various gravel sizes are plotted in Figure
8, assuming a constant value for "r of 1,000 kg/m ~. This plot illustrates,
as is obvious from Fxl 6, that the competency of a water flow increases
with both depth and slope. It further demonstrates the minimum or critical
slope needed to initiate motion of various sizes of gravel clasts for given
depth. For example, when D = 1.0 m, the graph predicts that the largest
clasts that can be entrained in rivers with slopes of -< 0.4° are coarse
pebbles (d = 6 cm), whereas coarse cobbles (d = 15 cm) can be entrained
on low-sloping (1.5°) fans, fine boulders (d = 30 cm) on moderate sloping
(3.0") fans, and boulders 50 cm across on fans with a 6.0° slope. In contrast,
a depth of 3.0 m is necessary to initiate the movement of a coarse cobble
(d = 12.8 cm) in a high-sloping (0.4°) river, a depth at which medium to
coarse boulders are capable of being entrained on alluvial fans (Fig. 8).
Thus, for any given depth condition, markedly higher competency is at-
tained by flows on alluvial fans than on high-gradient rivers of alluvial
basins because of the major slope differential.
Many factors, such as the complexities associated with entrainment(e.g.,
Sundborg 1956), and the empirical nature of Eq 7, complicate the actual
shear stress needed to entrain gravel, shifting the location of the curves in
 ALLUVIAL E4NS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS 463

i ! ! ii!I! i i i i 1111
6" ,,.,~, , . I . . . . . . . . I . . . I . I . . . . . . . .

,[lO
N ! ~ i i| SUSPENDED|!
4 -~ .......................................~.........................................~........................................i......................................
.......... :\i .................. i ......................................... ........... .................................
Q ~ t i BEDLOAD i t TRANSPORI'/
3 -~ .......................................~.........................................~....................................... i .......................................

o:. ..........iiiiiii:iii\i..........i.. iiiii\i ...........................

iiiiiii\ii..........................

°:!
8. ~ ~ ......................................

1000 100
~ ......................................... ; ........................................ i....................................

10 1 0.1
....................... ~ ............. :.........L...~.....£_..L..i_ ~_.~, ........................ ~ ............. ~.......Z...... ~_...s....z...s....
Grain Size (in mm)
!: i i iiiii ! :: i i i
i i i i i i i ~ i i i i i ii B) 0
O.1 ; ; ; ; ;;;I i i i i iii .................... i

10 100 ........ i ...................................i .....................................i....... ~,;H[~3X

Maximum Intermediate Diameter
of Bedload (cm)
I~
...................... iiilIi ........... ; ..........
4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i i P°" i-
Fro. 9.-Estimated relationship between the largest clast size (d) that can be "t .........................................
T........................ ......
°
roiled in a water flow versus the maximum grain size (d) that can be suspended
in the same flow based on settling velocities and entrainment values relative to
shear stress (after Walker 1975a, 1975b). The plot indicates, for example, that a
flow capable of entraining a clast with a diameter of 40 cm is also able to suspend ~2
sediment with a diameter of 8 mm. ~

Figure 8, though the shapes remain the same (Costa 1983). For example,
tight packing or equidimensionality of gravel clasts tends to increase rc
for a particular gravel size, causing a shift of these curves towards the
upper-fight part of the graph. In contrast, factors such as loose packing, Grain Size (in mm)

•
presence of sand on the bed, presence of suspended load (which increases
'7), hydraulic lift, and tabular or elongate clasl shape, all commonly lessen
6 .................................
rr,. needed to move a gravel clast of particular size, shifting the curves in
Figure 8 toward the origin (e.g., Fahneslock and Haushild 1962; Bradley
et aL 1972; Baker and Ritter 1975; Costa 1983). Another element that
promotes a shift of these curves toward the origin is the fact that the shear
stress needed to roll a clast of a specific size already in motion is less than g,
that needed to initiate the motion. This effect is important because initial t~
clast motion caused by slope failure or channel-bank undercutting may c 3 ........................................

occur in rivers but is especially common for coarse sediment in alluvial-

fan drainage basins, defining another fundamental variant between these
environments (Fig. 2). 02
A second aspect of the greater ro in water flows caused by the steeper
slopes of alluvial fans relative to rivers is the mode (bed load, suspended
load, or wash load) of transport of sediment of varying caliber. Particles
transported in a flow as bed load roll, bounce, or slide, whereas suspended
load moves within the water column mostly without touching the sediment
0
1000 100 10 I 0.1
bottom because of turbulence (e.g., Komar 1988). The wash load, repre- Grain Slze (In ram)
senting particles so fine that they are transported without exchange between
the flow and bed, is differentiated because it is capable of transport in FiG. 10.-The effect of slope on sediment transport modes for flow depths of
nearly unlimited quantities at rates equal to the flow velocity, unlike the A) 1.0 m, B) 0.5 m, and C) 0.25 m on the basis of combining data from Figures
7, 8, and 9. Grain-size classes are abbreviated as follows: mBLD = medium
rest of the suspended load (Komar 1988). The maximum sediment size boulders; tBLD = fine boulders; vcP = very coarse pebbles; cP = coarse pebbles;
that can be moved as suspended load or wash load increases with r,.because mP = medium pebbles; fP = fine Pebbles; Gm = granules; yeS = very coarse
of the concomitant increase in the component of lift associated with flow sand; c and mS = coarse and medium sand; fand vfS = fine and very fine sand.
turbulence (Walker 1975a, 1975b; Komar 1988). Sediment of increasing
caliber shifts from the bed-load to the suspended-load mode, or from the
464 TERENCE C. BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON

6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , , ] , , ,e,

SEDIMENTARY PROCESSES ACTIVE O N ALLUVIAL FANS

e

Pdmarv Processes Seconck~mt Processes

A) Generated by Bedrack Cliff Follure " W i n n o w i n g b y O v e r l o n d Flow

i • i S~cllment-Gravltv Flows "RIIling e n d Gullying
0 "Rockfalls "Ralnsplosh Erosion
4 ...............................
~.................................~..................................÷ .........................~.............................
"Rock S~Ides *Wind Erosion or Deposition
0 i . Alluvial Fans
0 *Rock Avalanches "Rant Rooting
B) Generated by Colluvlal Slope Failure "Animol Burrows
C
m
:~dlrnent-~,r~Itv Flows 'Sediment Weathering

41 'Colluvlal Slides 'Soll D e v e l o p m e n t

Q.
o
J
*Cohesive Debris Flows *Groundwater Flow
m "Noncoheslve Debris Flows *Case Hardening
° i Fluld-Grovttv Flows *Subsurface Cementation
i
1 ...............................................................~-.........................; ...............................i 'Sheetfloods *Lateral Erosion
*incised-Channel Floods *Tectonic Faulting or Folding

Rivers
0 e, , , , = , , , , i , , J , , L , , , L ~ L
FIG. 12.-List of primary versussecondaryprocessesactive on alluvialfans.
0 20 46 60 80 100

Change in Shear Stress (kg/sq m) a s HydraulicEffectsof Flow Unconfinementon AlluvLalFans

Depth D e c r e a s e s from 1.11 m to 11.1 m A second aspect of the hydraulic conditions of an alluvial fan caused
by its morphology is the typically rapid expansion and resultant flow
FIG. 1l.-Change in shearstress r,, vs. slopefor water flowsdecreasingin depth attenuation that occurs at the apex or intersection point due to loss of
from 1.0 to 0.1 m. Alluvial-fanand fiver realms are labeled.
confining channel walls (e.g., Bull 1972; Blair 1985a, 1987b; French 1987;
Beer and Jirka 1988). How attenuation beyond the apex or intersection
point greatly promotes sediment deposition due to the swift lowering of
suspended-load to the wash-load mode, as turbulence becomes stronger shear stress and the attendant drop in velocity, capacity, and competency
because the higher lift values can offset the settling velocities of progres- (Figs. 2, 7, 8, 10). The percentage and absolute decrease in shear stress
sively larger grains (Komar 1988). By combining empirical equations re- and velocity are a function ofslope and the magnitude of attenuation that
lating the shear stress necessary to entrain clasts of variable size (Fig. 8) occurs. A decrease in flow depth from 1.0 m to 0.1 m (90%), for example,
with the shear stress necessary to support particles of variable size in results in a 90% decrease in the shear stress. Such attenuation lowers the
suspension, a relationship can be developed for the maximum size of shear stress by 94.6 kg/m 2 for flows on a slope of 6°, 47.2 kg/m2 for flows
sediment that can be transported as bed load versus the maximum particle on a slope of 3°, and 23.6 kg/m 2 for flows on a fan slope of 1.5° (Fig. 11).
size that can be transported as suspended load for a specific flow (Fig. 9; The relevance of these changes can be illustrated by the drop in competency
Walker 1975a, 1975b). The boundary between the wash load and sus- experienced by flows attenuating by this amount. The change in maximum
pended load can also be estimated by arbitrarily relating this threshold to clast size that can be transported by flows thinning from 1.0 m to 0.1 m
particle diameters 90% smaller than those defining the boundary between is from medium boulders to pebbles on a 6° slope, from fine boulders to
bed load and suspended load (Komar 1988). pebbles on a 3* slope, and from cobbles to fine pebbles on a 1.5" slope
The effect of slope on the sediment sizes that define the boundaries (Fig. 8). In contrast, the absolute value of the decrease in shear stress
between bed-load, suspended-load, and wash-load realms can be estimated attained under identical conditions, but for typical river slopes, are 1.6-
by combining data from Figures 7, 8, and 9 for specific flow depths (Fig. 4.7 kg/m2(Fig. 1!), or changes in competency from fine pebbles to granules
I0). For example, given a flow depth of 1.0 m, particles with diameters and from coarse pebbles to fine pebbles, respectively (Fig. 8). These losses
of-< 280 mm (fine boulders and smaller) can be transported on a fan with represent just 3-13% of those experienced in the alluvial-fan realm. The
an average slope of 3*, with the 7-280 mm fraction (fine pebbles to fine effect of flow attenuation on the transport mode of clasts of varying size
boulders) moving as bed load, the 0.7-7 mm fraction (medium sand to also is significant, as shown by the competency plots for depths of 1.0,
fine pebbles) moving as suspended load, and the < 0.7 mm mode (-< 0.5, and 0.25 m (Fig. 10 A-C).
medium sand) moving as wash load (Fig. 10A). At the same flow depth, The rapidity and magnitude of flow attenuation on alluvial fans, and
fans with an average slope of 1.5" are able to move clasls with diameters the resultant drop in competency and capacity, is another way by which
of 4-180 mm (pebbles and cobbles) as bed load, 0.4-4.0 mm (medium fans and rivers can be fundamentally separated in nature. The rapid de-
sand through granules) as suspended load, and the < 0.4 mm (_< fine creases in depth associated with unconfined and expanding flowsis strongly
sand) as wash load (Fig. 10A). In contrast, steeply sloping (0.3°) rivers promoted on alluvial fans by their semiconical morphology, but hindered
with a flow depth of 1.0 m can move clasts 1.5..-45mm (granules to very or prevented in rivers by the open-pipe morphology of their channels (Fig.
coarse pebbles) in size as bed load, 0.17-1.5 mm (fine to very coarse sand) 2). In fact, the depth of water flows in rivers usually increases downslope
as suspended load, and < 0.17 mm (_< very fine sand) as wash load (Fig because of the addition of discharge from multiple tributaries, causing the
10A). The magnitude of these differences is the same for all flow depths shear stress, velocity, competency, and capacity to increase also if channel
(Fig. 10A-C), illustrating that the increased competency for each of the width and slope remain constant (e.g., Leopold and Maddock 1953).
transport modes as a function of slope is significant. This relationship Therefore, not only is there a more rapid loss of velocity, competency,
explains why fine sand, very fine sand, silt, and clay particle sizes, common and capacity on alluvial fans relative to rivers because of the differential
to rivers, are rare on waterlaid alluvial fans (e.g., Blair 1987b). magnitude of their slopes, but also because of the promotion, versus hin-
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS 465

drance, of flow attenuation related to their contrasting morphology (Fig. repose (30-40°), but can range from ~15 ° to 56° (Campbell 1975). Al-
Procesos
2). The net effect of these variable conditions is the rapid promotion of luvial-fan drainage basins may have slopes underlain principally by bed- primarios: 1. flujos
sedimentation on the fan close to the point of unconfinement, producing rock, principally by colluvium, or, most commonly, by mixtures of the de gravedad
the characteristically limited radii and poorly sorted deposits of alluvial two (Fig. 13). Different primary processes are activated depending on (colapso de altas
pendientes de
fans. Rivers in sedimentary basins, on the other hand, do not attain the whether the destabilized slope materials are of bedrock or colluvium, and roca o 2.
high levels of competency and capacity displayed by fans because of their whether a sediment gravity flow or fluid gravity flow is instigated. From desestabilizacion
de coluviones), 3.
lower slopes, but they are capable of transporting sand and gravel signif- the perspective of alluvial-fan facies analysis, therefore, primary fan pro- flujos de gravedad
icantly greater distances by the maintenance of channel walls and the cesses can be grouped into three types: (1) sediment gravity flows generated fluidos por
augmentation of depth and shear stress as discharge increases downslope. by collapse of bedrock cliffs in the drainage basin; (2) sediment gravity desestabilizacion
de coluviones.
flows generated by destabilization of colluvial slopes in the drainage basin;
and (3) fluid gravity flows generated by destabilization of colluvial slopes
SEDIMENTMI¥PROCESSES.ANDRESULTANTFACIESOF ALLUVIALFANS
in the drainage basin (Figs. 12, 13).
Primary VersusSecondary Alluvial-Fan Processes
Primary Sediment Gravity Processesamt Facies Res~ltingfrom
The unique setting, composite form, and hydraulic conditions of alluvial Bedrock Cliff Failures
fans yield a set of distinctive processes and facies assemblages. The sed-
imentary processes operative on fans are of two basic types we call primary Rock falls, rock slides, and rock avalanches represent a gradational
and secondary (Fig. 12). Primary processes are those that actively transport spectrum of sediment gravity processes significant to fan construction
sediment from the drainage basin to the fan site. The development of generated by failure, under the force of gravity, of bedrock cliffs present
alluvial fans at the mouth of the feeder channel of an upland catchment in the drainage basin (Fig. 14). All of these processes derive from the
guarantees that primary fan processes are catastrophic but rare, and that progressive lowering of the internal friction and shear strength of the
the deposits are angular, poorly sorted, and coarse-grained. Important bedrock through fracturing and weathering. Ultimately, bedrock cliffs fail
processes of this type are rock falls, rock slides, rock avalanches, colluvial upon attaining a threshold of instability where the force of gravity can no
slides, debris flows, and sheetfloods (Fig. 12). Primary processes usually longer be countered. This threshold may be exceeded by time, the addition
cause fan construction or aggradation, and act concomitantly with the of water and ice, or, perhaps most importantly, by coseismic ground mo-
enlargement of the drainage basin due to sediment removal. Primary- tions (Hadley 1964; Morton 1971; Garwood and Janos 1979; Harp et al.
process events are therefore characteristically of short duration but of high 1981; Keefer 1984; Plafker and Ericksen 1984; Statham and Francis 1986;
impact on fan evolution and stratigraphy. Cotecchia 1987; Beaty and DePolo 1989; Harp and Keefer 1989; Slosson
Secondary processes, in contrast, are those that remobilize or modi~ et al. 1992). Unlike in other primary fan processes, water does not play a
in-place sediment previously deposited on the fan by the primary processes prerequisite or indispensable role during the initiation, transportation, or
(see discussion in Blair and McPherson 1994). They include overland flow, deposition of sediment gravity flows generated by bedrock cliff failures.
rains#ash erosion, wind reworking, plant rooting, animal burrowing, sed- Specific mountain-front situations that do promote fan sedimentation via
iment weathering, soil development, faulting, groundwater movement, cliff failures are: (1) where mountain-front faults are splayed, and meta-
case hardening, and toe erosion by the activity of neighboring rivers, lakes, stable bedrock blocks are tectonically formed; (2) where syntectonic or
oceans, or glaciers (Fig. 12). Secondary processes typically result in fan inherited fracture patterns in an uplifted mass parallel the mountain front
erosion or degradation, and are commonly represented in the fan stratig- or feeder channel; (3) where the mountain front is composed of well-
raphy as thin lags of winnowed clasts, soils, bioturbated horizons, or cemented sedimentary strata dipping at a high angle, with destabilization
diagenetically altered zones. Except for faulting and perhaps some overland related to slip along locally weak bedding planes (DeGraff 1978; Pearce
flows and toe-erosion events (e.g., Beaumont and Oberlander 1971), sec- and O'Loughlin 1985; Cruden 1988; Schultz and Southworth 1989); (4)
ondary processes are associated with normal or noncatastrophic condi- where other types of prominent geological discontinuities, such as meta-
tions. Although they generally have minimal effect on fan construction, morphic foliation planes or unconformities between well-cemented and
secondary processes usually dominate the fan surface due to the long poorly cemented rocks, dip at a high angle near the mountain front (e.g.,
recurrence intervals that characterize primary processes. Stratigraphic se- Hadley 1964; Dawson el al., 1986); (5) where the slopes become over-
quences of alluvial fans, in simplest terms, therefore, are a record of steepened through increasing relief (Plafker and Eficksen 1984); and (6)
catastrophic but infrequent primary events separated by surfaces or thin where large exfoliated blocks develop in the vicinity of the mountain front
beds produced under "normal" conditions by the secondary processes (Da Costa Nunes et al. 1984).
(Blair 1985a, 1987b; Blair and McPherson 1992, 1993, 1994). Rock Falls.-Rock fall, the simplest of the sediment gravity processes
All primary alluvial-fan processes are instigated by failure of drainage- produced by failure of bedrock cliffs, encompasses the downward move-
basin slopes and the downward transfer of the destabilized materials. The ment of individual, typically gravel-size clasts under the force of gravity
slope materials are trans~rted to the fan either as fluid gravity flows (i.e., (Drew 1873; Gardner 1983). These clasts commonly are angular due to
water flows), in which sediment is moved by the force of water; or as their liberation from fractures or joints in the bedrock. Rock-fall deposits
sediment gravity flows, in which sediment is transported by the force of commonly mantle the bases of bedrock cliffs in the drainage basin or the
gravity acting directly on the materials (e.g., Middleton and Hampton mountain front (Figs. 13, 15A-B), forming talus or colluvial cones where
1976). Fan drainage-basin slopes consist of two unique material types, funneled through a bedrock notch (Church et al. 1979}. Some rock-fall
bedrock and colluvium. Bedrock typically is present as ledges or cliffs that clasts, particularly boulders, may roll or bounce to the fan site (Beaty 1989;
form steep (50-90°) slopes in the drainage basin (Fig. 13). In contrast, Beaty and DePolo 1989), where they constitute outsized clasts in the
colluvium constitutes the commonly gravel-dominated, poorly sorted sed- sediment (Fig. 15A).
iment loosened from the bedrock cliffs through weathering (e.g., Drew Rock Slides.-Rock slides, in contrast to rock falls, constitute larger
1873; Sharpe 1938; Rapp and Fairbridge 1968; Rahn 1986; Kite 1987; blocks (Fig. 14) that break away from bedrock cliffs along faults or fractures
Nelson 1992), and accumulated at the base of, along the front of, or in and move either rapidly or imperceptibly, and either continuously or
chutes between cliffs in the drainage basin (Fig. 13). Clay, silt, and sand episodically, downslope as a coherent mass above a basal glide plane
may be added to the colluvium though bedrock weathering or wind trans- (Varnes 1978). The typically curved excavation of the intact bedrock formed
portation. Slopes formed of colluvium commonly are near the angle of by detachment of a rock slide is called the slide scar (Fig. 15B). Rock slides
466 TERENCE C. BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON

F~o. 13.-Variations in the abundanceof bedrock slopes and colluvialslopes in drainage basinsof alluvialfans of differingstagesof evolution,and underlainby
contrastinglithologies.A) Metamorphicbedrockcliffs 1500m high mantledat their bases by colluviumcharacterizethe Le Vorgeatfan drainagebasin;Chamonix-
Mont Blanc,France.The rock-avalanchedepositsthat dominatethis steep (20°) incipient(Stage 1) fan resulted from bedrockclifffailures in the drainagebasin. B)
Exfoliatedgranodioriticcliffsdominatethe drainagebasinof this fan near Cartago,California.Colluviummantlesthe lowerdrainage-basinslopes.The fan is constructed
of shcetltooddepositsderivedfromcolluvial-slopefailuresand rock-avalanchedepositsderivedfrom the exfoliatedbedrockslabs.This fan,with its third-orderfeeder
channel,is typicalof Slage 2 of development.Drainage-basinreliefis 2000 m. C) Interstratifiedlimestoneand shaleextensivelymantledby colluviumcomprisethe
slopes of the Lead Canyonfan drainagebasin, Alamogordo,New Mexico.The fan consistsof debris-flowdepositsgeneratedfrom the failureof eolluvialslopes, and
small rock avalanchesderived from failuresof the upper limestonecliffs. These characteristics,and the third-order feeder channel,are typicalof Stage 2 of fan
evolution. Drainage-basinreliefis 350 m. D) Overviewof the 3 km longLittle River fan near Mt. Hutt, New Zealand.Drainage-basinslopesconsistof about equal
amountsof fracturedand tightlycementedmetasedimentarybedrockand colluvium,withcolluviumaccumulatingin chutesor first-orderchannels.Sheetflooddeposits
generated by eolluvialslope failuresdominate the fan stratigraphy.The advanced drainage net, includinga fifth-orderfeeder channel,and the prominent incised
channel,are typicalof Stage 3 of evolution.Drainage-basinreliefis 1900m.

are differentiated from rock falls by their sliding transport mechanism, as panied by partial to complete disintegration and pulverization, producing
opposed to the rolling or bouncing phenomena of rock-fall movement a brecciated or granular mass called a rock avalanche (Fig. 14; Harrison
(Sharpe 1938; Mudge 1965). Also, the basal zone of a rock slide, unlike and Falcon 1937; Mudge 1965; Shreve 1968; Browning 1973; Hsu 1975;
that of rock-fall deposits, typically is brecciated because of the penetrative Hunt 1975', Porter and Orombelli 1980; Yarnold and Lombard 1989;
shear stresses generated along the glide plane during motion as a result of Monastersky 1992; Topping 1993; Yarnold 1993). Rock avalanches typ-
the weight of the overlying mass. Rock-fall deposits almost invariably are ically undergo deposition in the piedmont zone due to the lessening of
present along the base of a rock-slide scar due to the brecciation of the slope and the lateral expansion of the mass (Nicoletti and Somso-Valvo
bedrock in the vicinity of the detachment horizon (Fig. 15B). Rock-slide 1991). The actual runout distance also is related to the kinetic energy of
deposits either accumulate near the base of the bedrock slopes (Fig. 15B; the fall and the potential energy acquired during downslope movement
Grainger and Kalaugher 1987) or as isolated blocks on the fan. Especially from gravity, both of which increase with the vertical drop (Melosh 1987;
large rock slides, such as the Artist's Point detachment block in Death Fauque and Strecker 1988; Yarnold and Lombard 1989; Hart 1991; Top-
Valley, represent masses that have been transported by imperceptible ping 1993). Rock avalanches differ from rock falls by the size of the bedrock
rotation along listrie faults. mass, the number of particles involved, and the granular-flow versus roll-
Rock Avalanches.- The failure of a large, fractured bedrock cliffperhaps ing or bouncing transport mechanism. Rock avalanches differ gradation-
most commonly occurs as a rapid and catastrophic downward fall accom- ally from rock slides by the more pervasive disintegration of the bedrock
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS
I resent the sedimentary products of rock avalanches developed from a
~3
¢J
~
O present as completely brecciated mounds > 50 m high (Fig. 16A-B), or
"0
ckAv~anches3
Degree of Disintegration & Pulverization . ~
FIG. 14.--Interrelationshipsbetween sediment gravity processesgenerated by
the collapseof bedrockcliffsin the drainagebasin,includingrock falls,reek slides,
and rock avalanches. The gradational boundaries between these processesare a
function of the size of the failedbedrockmass and its degreeof disintegrationand
pulverization.At leastthree rock-avalanchedepositsare definable,includingthose
with: (1) matrix-rich to matrix-poor sheared clast textures;(2) matrix-poorgran-
ular textures; and (3) matrix-rich granular textures.
mass resulting from greater in situ weathering prior to failure, or from the
higher degree of shattering and disaggregation acquired during collision
of the falling mass with the piedmont slope or during subsequent lateral
motion (Fig. 14).
The deposits of individual rock avalanches on alluvial fans have variable
but usually diagnostic geomorphic and sedimentologic characteristics that
make them distinguishable from other sediment-gravity-flow types (Long-
well 1951; Koop 1952; Burchfiel 1966; Gates 1987; Yarnold and Lombard
1989; Ryder et al. 1990; Hart 1991; Yarnold 1993). Large bedrock slope
failures experiencing moderate drop can accumulate in conical masses 5
to > 100 m thick at the mountain front (Fig. 15C-E). Other documented
morphologies of large Holocene rock avalanches are: (I) elongated or
equidimensional mounds as high as 100 m and with hummocky surface
topography (Fig. 16A-B); (2) arcuate to U-shaped levee and snout forms
1-100 m high with either low or high length-to-width ratios (Fig. 16C-D;
also see Fauque and Strecker 1988); and (3) continuous lobes up to 10 m
thick and extending downslope several kilometers. The deposits of small
rock avalanches have either a U-shaped levee and snout form (Fig. 16E)
or a continuous lobate form (Figs. 15F, 16F) with 0.5 to > 5 m of relief
(Gates 1987; Cluer 1988; Harp and Keefer 1989). The upslope end of
rock-avalanche levees or lobes of any size may be continuous with the
mountain front (Figs. 15C, 16E-F), or detached from it by either small
(Fig. 16C) or great (Fig. 16A) distances.
Three intergradational types of rock-avalanche deposits can be differ-
entiated on the basis of degree of shattering, disintegration, and pulveri-
zation of the bedrock mass. These differences are manifested in the deposits
as either breeciated or granular gravel textures containing high to low
proportions of cataclastic matrix (Fig. 14). One of the most widely noted
rock-avalanche textures consists of pervasively shattered, but typically
intact or only slightly expanded, angular clasts or blocks of bedrock em-
bedded within variable proportions of cataclastic matrix (Fig. 16B). This
texture, characterized by fabrics such as jigsaw breccia or crackle breccia,
is typical of the deposits of the southwestern United States and France
467
called megabreccias (Longwell 1951; Koop 1952; Burchfiel 1966; Shreve
1968; B. Johnson 1984; Yarnold and Lombard 1989). Megabreccias rep-
falling bedrock mass that undergoes significant brittle or shear deformation
during motion but in which the coherence of the mass is preserved due
to relatively low levels of disintegration and internal mixing (Yarnold and
Lombard 1989; Yarnold 1993). In the Lake Hills rock-avalanche deposits
of Panamint Valley, California, for example, the megabreccia facies is
a sheared basal zone 70 m thick above which fractured but intact bedrock
slabs were carried in a sediment gravity flow transitional between a rock
slide and a rock avalanche.
Rock avalanches formed from descending bedrock masses that expe-
rience greater degrees of disintegration, either as a result of more extensive
in situ weathering prior to failure or loss of coherence during transpor-
tation, are characterized by granular and typicallyangular gravelly deposits
containing high (Fig. 15D-E), moderate (Figs. 15F, 16D), or low (Fig.
16E-F~ volumes of interelast matrix. The development of rock avalanches
from bedrock masses that disintegrate extensively during motion, even
for just short distances (Fig. 15C-E), are most reflective of a high degree
of weathering and fracturing of the bedrock prior to failure. The height of
the fall and the impact resistance to the bedrock mass by the piedmont
slope also influence the degree of disintegration of falling bedrock masses.
Avalanches developed from highly disintegrated bedrock masses may be
deposited in mounds close to the mountain front (Fig. 15C-E), or be
transformed into a downslope-moving granular flow, the latter yielding
arcuate to U-shaped levee-snout deposits or continuous lobate deposits
< 1 m to hundreds of meters thick (Fig. 16C-F) and covering < 1 km
to tens of square kilometers (e.g., Harrison and Falcon 1937; Crandell et
al. 1984). Rock avalanches may be contained in, and even frill,the incised
channel of a fan (Ryder el al. 1990). All types of rock-avalanche deposits
are differentiated from the facies of other sediment gravity flows by: (1)
lack of bedding, or large scale of bedding; (2) sheared and angular character
of the gravel dasts, including the presence of jigsaw-breccia or crackle-
breccia fabrics; (3) poor sorting or lack of sorting, including the presence
of massive boulders, blocks, or bedrock slabs; (4) generally monomictic
or zoned composition of gravel clasts; (5) cataclastic rather then pedogenic
origin of the matrix fines; (6) very large volume of sediment per deposi-
tional event; (7) a distinctive hummocky surface that may contain ponds;
and (8) a highly deformed basal zone, including the presence of elastic
dikes and imbricate thrusts, formed by the rapid and unidirectional em-
placement of the mass (Mudge 1965; Francis et at. 1985; Fauque and
Strecker 1988; Yarnold and Lombard 1989; Yarnold 1993).
Sediment Gravity Processes and Facies Resulting from
Colluvial Slope Failures
Collnvial Slides.- Sediment gravity flows on alluvial fans generated by
colluvial slope failures include all varieties of debris flows plus their an-
tecedent coiluvial slides (Fig. 12). Colluvial slides consist of intact masses
of destabilized colluvium that move either slowly, intermittently, or rap-
idly downslope above a detachment horizon called a glide plane (Varnes
1978; Bovis 1986; Cronin 1992). The glide plane may develop at a zone
of weakness within the colluvium, such as a clayey horizon or the water
table, or it may constitute the contact between the eolluvium and the
underlying bedrock. The deposits of colluvial slides reflect the character-
istics of the slope materials, usually consisting of unsorted or very poorly
sorted clayey gravel, the size and shape of which typically is controlled by
the splitting properties of the bedrock involved (Kite 1987; Mills 1987).
Colluvial slides can be triggered in a dry or undersaturated state, such as
in response to earthquakes (Keefer 1984), but more often are initiated by
addition of rainfall or snowmelt in volumes su~cient to saturate the sed-
iment (Caine 1980; Ellen and Heming 1987; Reneau et al., 1990). Colluvial
468 TERENCE C. BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON

FIc. 15.-Delx~sitional forms and facies of sediment gravity flows on alluvial fans generated by the collapse of bedrock cliffs in the drainage basin. A) View of loose
boulders transported to the piedmont zone from a fault-bounded mountain front as rock fall, Owens Valley, California. Rock-fall particles are shaped by the fracture
pattern of the uplifted granite. B) A large rock-slide block (RS) along the Black Mountain front at Badwater, Death Valley. Vehicle (arrow) for scale. Note the prominent
mantle of partially dissected rock-fall talus (t) along the lower part of the detachment scar above the block. This colluvium constitutes a source of debris flows that
reach the South Badwater fan (right-center). Total relief on mountain front is 1350 m. C) Rock-avalanche cone formed on 9 May 1991 by the collapse of a segment
of the upper limestone bedrock cliffs in the Maltertal Valley, Herbriggen, Switzerland. Note the highly weathered exposed bedrock in the scar (S) and the darker-
colored rock-fall talus (t) that had already accumulated at the base of the scar only 30 days after the failure. D) Close-upofa 4 m high vertical cut (V) of the distal
part of the Herbriggen avalanche revealing an unstratified, unsorted, matrix-rich clayey pebble to boulder gravel texture. E) Road cut of unstratified and unsorted,
matrix-rich pebble to boulder rock-avalanche deposits of the Le Vorgeat fan, Chamonix-Mont Blanc, France. These features, and the monomictic and angular nature
of the gravel, indicate a depositional origin similar to the Herbrigsen rock avalanche. Fieldbook for scale (arrow). F) Vertical view of a 1.5 m thick bed of internally
unstratified and unsorted, angular to subangular, pebbly to bouldery rock-avalanche deposit containing moderate matrix content, and encased by sheetflood sequences.
Boundary Stream fan, South Island, New Zealand.
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NA TUTL4L DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS 469

Fie. 16.-Depositional forms and facies of sediment gravity flows on alluvial fans generated by the collapse of bedrock cliffs in the drainage basin. A) View of 90
m high mounded rock-avalanche deposits (center) on the distal Panamint Canyon fan, Panamint Valley, California. B) Close-up of the highly shattered limestone
megabreccia deposits on the distal Panamint Canyon fan rock avalanche. C) Overview of arcuate and nearly fiat-topped, wedge-shaped rock-avalanche (RA) fen
deposits up to 90 m thick; Owens Valley, California. D) Matrix-rich, monomictic (rhyolitic) and massively bedded, angular pebble to boulder deposits of the rock
avalanche illustrated in Figure 16C. E) Downfan view of 1.5 m high, matrix poor, granular rock-avalanche deposit displaying a U-shaped, paired levee and snout
morphology, Deep Springs Valley, California. F) Overview of lobate, matrix-poor, bouldery rock-avalanche (RA) fan deposits; Deep Springs Valley. Note the jointed
and fractured granodioritic bedrock in the drainage basin from which these avalanches are derived.
470 TERENCE C. BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON
slopes fail most commonly when saturated because of the lowered resisting
forces caused by increased hydrostatic pore pressure and decreased shear
strength of the sediment (Campbell 1975; Hollingsworth and Kovacs 1981;
Moser and Hobensinn 1982; Wieczorek 1987; Costa 1988, 1991; Math-
ewson et al. 1990). The presence of clay in the colluvium enhances both
of these factors by lowering permeability and providing strength to the
interstitial fluid phase. Colluvial slides may undergo deposition on the fan
if derived directly from the mountain front or from especially small and
steep drainage basins (Boris 1985, 1986). More commonly, a saturated
clay-rich colluvial slide disintegrates during transport and is transformed
into a debris flow.
Debris Flows.-Debris flows are characterized by a mixture of sedi-
mentary particles and small percentages of entrained water and air that
move downslope under the force of gravity (Blackwelder 1928; Sharp and
Nobles 1953; Johnson and Rahn 1970; Fisher 1971; Varnes 1978; A.
Johnson 1984). Debris flows represent the most significant type of sedi-
ment gravity flow with respect to the volume of sediment delivered to
alluvial fans, and as such, have been studied extensively (Table 1). They
are initiated by two mechanisms, the most common one involving trans-
formation of a disintegrated colluvial slide into a debris flow by entrain-
ment of air and water through the jostling, deformation, and loss of particle
individuality as it moves downslope (Johnson and Rahn 1970; Campbell
1974, 1975; Costa 1988). This transformation requires the presence of
water in the eolluvium, and is therefore most apt to occur during or
immediately after excessive rainfall or snowmelt. The second initiation
mechanism occurs where fast-moving water intersects a drainage-basin
slope mantled by abundant sediment. The ensuing reaction, in which the
water dissipates its energy by dispersing clasts through churning, tossing,
and mixing, can result in rapid entrainment of sediment, air, and water
to produce a debris flow (A. Johnson 1970, 1984). Generation of debris
flows by either mechanism is promoted in alluvial-fan drainage basins by
their commonly steep and poorly sorted colluvial slopes combined with
a converging drainage net that concentrates both sediment and overland
flows (e.g., Reneau et al. 1984, 1990; Reneau and Dietrich 1987).
Once initiated, a debris flow continues to move until gravity forces
decrease to the point where they no longer can overcome the shear strength.
Debris flows move in a laminar manner, causing them to be nonerosive
even though they can transport clasts weighing several tons (Johnson 1970;
Rodine and Johnson 1976). Sediment particles in debris flows are sup-
ported by the high density and strength of the flow caused by cohesive,
dispersive, and buoyant forces (Middlelon and Hampton 1976; Costa
1984, 1988). The differential response of boulders to buoyant and dis-
persive forces, caused by small differences in density between them and
the rest oftbe material, results in the concentration of boulders at the top,
front, and sides of the flow (Fisher 1971). Cessation of a debris flow
ultimately results from thinning to the point where the plastic yield strength
equals the shear stress (Johnson 1970), a process aided by dewatering and
a lessening of slope at the fan site. Debris flows may also be halted by the
damming effect of the coarse clasts at the flow front and sides (Pierson
1985), or by their jamming against obstacles in the flow path (Blair 1987b).
Debris-flow deposition on alluvial fans typically occurs in the form of
either: (1) paired levees up to 2 m high and extending tens of meters
downfan, where they may be joined by a snout (Fig. 17A-B); or(2) radially
elongated lobes 1-20 m wide, tens of meters long, and up to 2 m thick
(Fig. 17A, C-E) (Sharp and Nobles 1953; Johnson 1970; Pierson 1980,
1981; Costa 1984; Takahashi 1991). Large debris flows may even produce
a depositional lobe that covers the entire fan. Levee ± snout deposits are
more abundant in the proximal fan, whereas lobe deposits are more com-
mon distally; both forms may develop with this radial relationship from
a single depositional event (Fig. 17A). Multiple beds can also form during
a single debris-flow event as a result of flow surging, a phenomenon in-
stigated by addition of new material to the flow through intermittent slope
or bank failure and sloughing, or repetitive development and breaching
of dams formed by interaction of clasts and channel constrictions (Fig.
17A; Blackwelder 1928; Fryxell and Horberg 1943; Sharp and Nobles
1953; A. Johnson 1984). In all of these cases, the deposits commonly are
poorly sorted, contain matrix, and are either clast-supported (Fig. 17E),
matrix-supported (Fig. 17C-D), or both, depending on position in the
deposit (Fig. 17B). Levees and snouts tend to be more coarse grained and
more thickly and discontinuously bedded than associated lobes because
of selective coarse-fraction sorting by a moving debris flow, and because
of the varying morphology of the deposits (Fig. 17B). Debris-flow deposits
deficient in gravel clasts are termed clast-poor (Fig. 17D), and those con-
taining an appreciable percentage of gravel, clast-rich (Fig. 17B-C, F).
Clasl-rich debris flows lacking clay-size sediment, such as the one that
occurred 15 July 1982 on the Roaring River fan of Colorado, are called
noncohesive debris flows (Jarrett and Costa 1986; Blair 1985a, 1987b).
The surfaces of all types of debris-flow sequences typically are slightly
eroded and winnowed by secondary processes, especially overland flows
(Broscoe and Thompson 1969; Blair and McPherson 1994). The resulting
fan stratigraphy caused by this primary and secondary process relationship
are debris-flow deposits in beds 1 to >_ 100 cm thick (with the thickest
beds typically filling gullies or constituting levees) separated by winnowed
lags and gully fills that developed between debris-flow episodes from sec-
ondary processes (Fig. 17n.
Primary Fluid Gravity Processes and Facies Resultingfrom
Collavial Slope Failures
Two types of fluid gravity flow, sheetfloods and incised-channel floods,
are primary processes on alluvial fans(Fig. 12). Both flow conditions result
from flashy concentration ofrunofffrom snowmelt or rainfall over drain-
age-basin colluvial slopes, leading to sediment-laden and catastrophic wa-
ter discharge downslope. Debris flows fail to be generated in this situation
because of the low concentration of clay in the colluvium, insutficient
sediment concentration, or slow rate of sediment entrainment by the flow.
Colluvial sediment on the drainage-basin slopes is introduced to the water
flow by slumping, sloughing, or entrainment, and moved to the fan site
as bed load or suspended load. The sediment content of these flows may
range from low to hyperconcentrated.
Sheettioods.-The most common and important fluid gravity process
in the construction of alluvial fans is sheetflooding (Hogg 1982; Blair
1985a, 1987b; Wells and Harvey 1987). Sheetfloods are rare and cata-
strophic, unconfined water flows that expand as they move down fan.
They develop when sediment-charged flash floods reach a fan and atten-
uate because of the lack of channel walls, and the multidirectional slope
of the fan surface caused by its semiconical form. The most prevalent
sheetflood facies consists of vertically alternating planar-bedded couplets
10-30 cm thick of locally bouldery, pebble and cobble gravel regularly
interstratified with laminated, pebbly granule gravel or granular coarse
sand (Fig. 18A-E). The planar-bedded sets typically dip 2-8 °, parallel to
the fan surface (Fig. 18A). The coarse gravel member of a sheetflood
couplet commonly has a well-developed fabric with the long axes of the
clasts oriented perpendicular to slope, and with the a-b planes usually
dipping up fan. These beds have a discontinuous sheetlike geometry in
vertical view, and in plan view span I-3 m in width and >_ 5 m in length,
elongated parallel to slope. The finer-grained component of a sheetflood
couplet typically consists of laminated pebbly sand, or, if the system is
deficient in sand, of pebbly granule gravel (Fig. 18A-D). The finer-grained
beds generally are more extensive than their coarse-grained counterparts,
with lateral continuity for up to 10 m. Sheetflood-couplet stratigraphy is
best developed where the coarse fraction is moderately sorted and consists
mainly of pebbles and fine cobbles. The couplets are less regular, but still
planar-bedded, where local boulders, coarse cobbles, or tree trunks are
present on the fan surface, inducing flow separation and crescent scouring
(Fig. 18D; Karcz 1968; Richardson 1968; Blair 1987b; Blair and Me-
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS 471

Fi6. ] 7.-Alluvial-fan facies deposited by debris flows.A) Recent (August, 1984) debris-flow levees (L) and downslope lobes on a fan near Dolomite, Owens Valley.
B) Side view of a recently deposited (Spring, 1989) matrix-rich, matrix-supported to clast-supported, bouldery to pebbly debris-flow levee. Note the containment of
pulverized tree logs (below field book). Ravin des Vouillordes fan, Chamonix-Mont Blanc, Francce.C) Side-view of 0.5 m thick clast-rich and malrix-rich debris-flow
lobe deposited in 1984 on the fan shown in A. Army shovel (arrow) for scale. D) Overlapping clast-poor debris flowson the Copper Canyon fan, Walker Lake, Nevada.
The lower flow (foreground) occurred during the summer of 1982; the upper one during the summer of 1990. Winnowing and slight gullying of the lower deposit by
secondary overland flows occurred during the intervening 8 years. E) One meter high vertical section ofa clast-rich, matrix-poor debris-flow lobe deposited on the
Panamint Canyon fan in Panaminl Valley during August of 1984. F) Slope-perpendicular, 6 m high quarry wall in the debris-flow-dominated Rifle Range fan, Walker
Lake, Nevada. The preserved stratigraphy consists of lenticular debris-flow beds 10-100 cm thick separated by thin (_< 10 cm) lags. These lags were produced by
fine-fraction winnowing of the debris flows by secondary overland water flows between debris-flow events. Scale-bar {S) is 1.5 rn long.
472 TERENCE C. BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON

•" ~:'!"~ I~ :": i I~'~~ ''~ " "~ 3~'.!

'~"

Flo. 18.-Alluvial-fan facies deposited by sheetfloods. A) Slope-parallel, 5 m high exposure of sheetflood couplets of the Little River fan, South Island, New Zealand.
11) Close-up of slope-parallel trench wall displaying interstratified pebble gravel and laminated pebbly sand couplets formed during the 15 July 1982 sheetflood on
the Roaring River fan in Colorado. Note the thin (15 cm) set of preserved low-angle strata (arrow) with foresets that dip u~lope. Scale bar is 0.5 m long. C) Cobbly
and coarse pebbly planar beds interstratified with laminated granular fine pebble gravel t~ical of the sheetflood-couplet facies, Alamo Canyon fan, New Mexico.
Scale-bar increments are 10 cm. D) Slope-parallel, 1 m high view of Roaring River sheetflood deposits in a trench cut immediately downslope from a tree. Flow
separation and scour created by the tree trunk produced less regular sheetflood couplets. E) Sheetflood couplet sets encase a 1 m thick set of cross-bedded gravel
(arrow) with upslope dipping foresets. Scale bar is 1.5 m long. Proximal Little River fan, South Island, New Zealand. F) Overview of Roaring River sheetflood deposits,
including the proximal gravelly component bordered distally by a sand-skirt facies. Note the channels on the sheetflood surface eroded by flow convergence during
falling flood stage.
 ALLU~TAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS 473

FIG. 19.-Alluvial-fan faciesdeposited in incisedchannels. A) Lenticularboulder lag present on the floor of the Little River fan incised channel, New Zealand. B)
A massive-beddedlag of boulders lines the incised channel of this fan in southern Death Valley.The lag in both examples formed through the winnowing of finer
sediment from the sheetfloodsequences into which the incised channels are carved.

Pherson 1994). In addition to the Colorado, New Mexico, and New Zea- 17% of the surface (Blair 1987b). Hydraulic reconstructions revealed that
land examples shown in Figure 18, the gravelly and sandy alluvial-fan this sheetflood had an average depth of 0.5 m, a velocity of 3-6 m/s, and
sheetflood couplet facies has been described from modem fans in Cali- Froude numbers of 1.4-2.8. Numerous sheetflood couplets can be depos-
fornia (Van de Kamp 1973; Blair and McPherson 1994), Spain (Harvey ited during one flash-flood event, as documented by the accumulation of
1984), England (Wells and Harvey 1987), and Crete INemec and Postma as many as 15 such couplets from the 15 July 1982 sheetflood on the
1993). Roaring River fan in Colorado (Blair 1985a, 1987b). This study revealed
Three other sheetflood facies types are found in association with the that fan aggradation occurs through the autocyclic development, destruc-
planar-bedded couplet facies. The first encompasses low-angle cross-bed- tion, and redevelopment of standing-wave trains across the fan surface
ded sandy cobble to pebble gravel with foresets that usually dip up fan through time, with new trains initiated in the slightly deeper water present
(Fig. 18B, E) or progressively change from an up-fan to a down-fan dip laterally to the most recently deposited sediment sheets (Blair 1987b).
direction in cuts oriented parallel to fan slope (Zielinski 1982). This facies The coarse-gravel fraction ofthe planar-bedded sheetflood couplet facies
is less common than the planar-bedded sheetflood couplets within which and the antidune cross-bedded facies is transported selectively as bed-load
it commonly is found in sets 10--100 cm thick (Fig. 18B, E). Another less pulses within the supercritical standing-wave trains, where flow depth and
common sheetflood facies consists of lenticles of gravel in sinuous ridges velocity are greatest (Blair 1987b). Bed load is deposited either during
aligned perpendicular to fan slope (Koster 1978; Rust and Gostlin 1981; upslope migration of the antidunes, as indicated by the presence of up-
Wells and Dohrenwend 1985). These features, called transverse fibs slope-dipping cross beds, or during the downslope wash-out phase of the
(McDonald and Day 1978), appear to represent deposits from sheetfloods standing waves and the antidunes, as denoted by the common upslope
with low sediment concentrations. A third sheetflood deposit type consists dip of lhe a-b planes of elongated gravel clasts in the coarse unit of a
of pebbly sand or sand with discontinuous parallel-laminated bedding in sheetflood couplet (Fig. 18A-E). Downslope-dipping cross beds may lo-
a skirt that accumulates distally to gravelly sheetflood deposits (Fig. 18F; cally result from preservation of the lee side of the antidune, or by down-
Zielinski 1982; Blair 1985a, 1987b). Bedding is less regular in this sand- slope accretion across the lee of the bed form during washout of the
skirt facies if obstacles like plants or gravel clasts are present in the flow standing waves (e.g., Middleton 1965; Zielinski 1982). The fine pebbles,
path. granules, and sand forming the finer-grained unit of a sheetflood couplet
Alluvial-fan sheetflood facies are different from other types ofwaterlaid represent sediment transported in the standing-wave trains as suspended
deposits because of the distinctive hydraulic conditions (high Froude num- load, consistent with the bed-load and suspended-load competency rela-
ber, high flow attenuation rate, and high deposition rate) under which they tionships shown in Figure 9. This size fraction is deposited by fall-out
accumulate. How conditions in major sheetfloods invariably are super- coincident with, and subsequent to, the wash-out phase of the standing
critical due to the effect of the relatively high slope of the fan surface (Fig. waves. Like their gravelly counterparts, sandy sheetflood deposits of the
6). Alternating phases of transportation and deposition of coarse gravel distal fan skirt also form under supercfitical flow conditions, but in flows
and fine gravel _+ sand in a sheettlood on an alluvial fan, which gives rise with reduced competency related to lessening of the slope.
to the couplet facies, are caused by the changing hydraulic conditions Local preservation of upslope-dipping antidune sets (Fig. 18D-E) in-
related to flow expansion and decreasing slope, as well as to intrinsic dicates that the standing waves depositing these bed forms terminated
variations in depth and velocity typical of supercritical flow. More spe- through gradual subsidence, instead of by breaking and shooting down-
cifically, sheetflood deposition is a product of the migration and washout slope (Simons and Richardson 1966). Selective preservation of the couplet
of submerged antidune bed forms present on the fan surface beneath trains facies of the wash-out phase of the standing-wave cycle over the cross-
of standing waves that repetitively initiate, enlarge, migrate upsiope, break bedded facies of the upslope migration phase is a function of the termi-
violently, shoot downslope, and then dissipate by mingling with the rest nation of the standing-wave trains more typically by breaking, combined
of the sheetflood (McGee 1897; Zielinski 1982; Blair 1985a, 1987b). An with relatively shallow flow depths typical ofsheetfloods. The preservation
aerial photograph of an active sheetflood on the Roaring River fan of of upslope-dipping antidune sets up to 100 cm thick in sheetflood se-
Colorado, for example, captured the presence of 43 slope-parallel trains quences (Fig. 1BE)requires both gradual dissipation of the standing-wave
of standing waves distributed on a 320 m long fan lobe, encompassing energy and relatively deep flow conditions during deposition. The decrease
474 TERENCE C. BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON
Coarse gravelly debris flows
(Type I fan) or sheetfloods
(Type II fan); +/- rockfalls,
rock slides, rock avalanches, Cobb y pebb v &sandv debris
ised-channel flows flows (Type I Ilan) or sheetfloods
\ ~ ~ / (Type II fan), & incised-channel
.Talus or\ Rockfalls,~ ~ flows; +/-rockfalls, rock slides,
~'1~.~l~uw ~ o ~ ' s , \~ ~ or rock avalanches
°n°i
Precursor Stage I Stage 2
Stage
in flow depth that inevitably accompanies the expansion of a sheetflood
down fan implies that preservation of cross-bedded antidune sets is most
likely in the proximal fan, where flow depth is greatest.
Another feature common to known sheetflood events is the remolding
of the low-relief and soft sediment surface through erosion as the flood
abates, or by subsequent overland flows. Gravel-armored rills, gullies, and
channels with a braided distributary pattern commonly result from this
kind of erosion, with the armor protecting the bulk of the sheelflood strata
from being reworked (Blair 1985a, 1987b). Lack of recognition of the
significance of catastrophic sheetflooding on alluvial fans has been attrib-
uted to the fact the deposits of these events are rare, and quickly become
masked by secondary overland-flow processes (Blair 1985a, 1987b; Blair
and McPherson 1994).
Incised Channels.- The second kind of fluid-gravity-flow deposit found
on alluvial fans consists of incised-channel fills. Incised channels, repre-
senting an extension of the drainage-basin feeder channel onto the fan,
have walls as high as l0 m (Figs. 1, 19A). The steepness of the fan slope
causes large water flows in incised channels, as in sheetfloods, to be tur-
bulent and supereritical (Fig. 6). Incised channels serve to contain sedi-
ment-charged flash floods across the upper part of the fan, transferring
them to a more distal locality prior to their expansion into a sheetflood.
Containment of a flash flood within an incised channel allows fluid gravity
flows to maintain their velocity, depth, competency, and capacity for a
greater distance from the apex than on fans lacking incised channels. If
present, therefore, incised channels cause the active depositional lobe to
be positioned down fan from the apex. The lessening of slope that may
occur between the feeder channel and the incised channel can cause a
passing flash flood to selectively deposit its coarse (boulder) fraction due
to decreased competency. Alternatively, flash floods passing through in-
cised channels may erode the sides and base, leaving a coarse (bouldery)
lag (Fig. 19A-B). This facies is especially common in uplifted fault-bound-
ed slivers of the upper fan. Incised channels may also be the site of sed-
iment-gravity-flow deposition if there is a decrease in slope between the
feeder channel and the incised channel (Clague et al. 1985), although this
material may be reworked by subsequent floods. The principal facies that
results from incised-channel deposition, therefore, is a thick bed of boulder
deposits with or without interbeds of other primary process types, and
inset within sequences of older nonchannelized facies such as sheetflood
or debris-flow deposits.
Relatlonsl@s BetweenAllavial-Fan Faciesand
Drainage-Basin Development
Strong and causal relationships exist between the primary sedimentary
processes active on alluvial fans and the evolutionary stage of the fan
F~. 20.-Schematic cross-sectionaldepiction
of alluvial-fanevolutionarystages and their re-
lationship to dominant sedimentaryprocesses
and faciesassemblages(drawn with 2 × verti-
cal exaggeration).Depositionalslopes increase
towards the left, and fan radii increasetoward
the fight. Stagesrefer to the common morpho-
logic and sedimentologicevolutionary schemes
Stage 3 that fans and their drainage basins ideally fol-
low as they increase in size.
drainage basins. Sediment gravity flows triggered by collapse of bedrock
cliffs are especially important in constructing alluvial fans during their
early stages of development because of the concomitant nascent stage of
evacuation of the drainage basin (Figs. 13A, 15C, 16F, 20; Sorriso-Valvo
1988). Drainage-basin development typically is initiated by either rock
fall of weathered material along localized zones of weakness in the bedrock,
such as fractures, faults, and lithologic discontinuities, or by more cata-
strophic collapse along these same bedrock weaknesses to produce rock
slides or rock avalanches (Figs. 13A, 15B-C; Grainger and Kalaugher
1987). These processes generate talus cones at the mountain front that
commonly precede fan inception, and build the incipient fan platform
upon which the more typical composite fan form is later established (Fig.
20). The drainage basins during this nascent phase of fan development,
cailed Stage 1 or the incipient-fan stage (Blair and McPherson 1994), are
characterized by steep, bedrock.dominated slopes and an undeveloped o r
poorly developed drainage net consisting mainly of first-order channels
(Figs. 13A, 15B-C, 16F, 21A). The related fans typically are of high slope
(12-25 °) and short radial length due to the predominance of sediment-
gravity-flow facies generated by failures of bedrock cliffs (Figs. 20, 21A).
Examples of fans in this stage of evolution are the Herbriggen fan in
Switzerland (Fig. 15C), many fans in the Chamonix valley of France (Fig.
13A), and the rock-avalanche-dominated fans of Deep Springs Valley,
California (Fig. 16F).
Colluvial slides, debris flows, or sediment-laden fluid gravity flows be-
come important primary processes that actively construct alluvial fans
and enlarge their drainage basins once a bowl-like morphology of the
catchment has been sufficiently developed through rock-fall, rock-slide,
and rock-avalanche processes to accommodate the buildup of slope-man-
tling colluvium (Figs. 13B.-C, 20). This relationship exists because the
colluvial-slide, debris-flow, and fluid-gravity processes require for their
initiation a mantle of colluvium generated through bedrock weathering
coupled with convergence of rainfall or snowmelt runoff over this sedi-
ment. When these drainage-basin conditions are met, either debris flows
or fluid gravity flows, depending mainly on the content of colluvial clay,
begin to deliver sediment to the fan site, and become the dominant primary
process (Figs. 13B--C, 20). Short (< 1 kin) incised channels may also
develop on the fan during this phase. Sediment gravity processes generated
by failures of bedrock cliffs continue to transport detritus during this stage,
in addition to the sedimentary processes triggered by failures of colluvial
slopes, because of the persistence of bedrock cliffs in the drainage basin
(Fig. 13B-C). This phase of alluvial-fan and drainage-basin evolution is
designated Stage 2 (Fig. 20; Blair and McPherson 1994).
The occurrence ofcolluvial slope failures during Stage 2 promotes future
sediment transportation by either debris-flow or fluid-gravity processes
because the typically spoon-shaped scar left by an evacuated colluvial slide
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS
0 1 2 3
I I I I
km
or slump creates additional hollows within which sediment and water
continue to be funneled because of topographic convergence. The creation
or enlargement of these hollows leads to further slope destabilization, and
ultimately to expansion of the drainage net to include short second-order
or third-order feeder channels by establishment of new first-order channels
(Figs. 13B--C,21 B; Patton 1988;Sorriso-Valvo 1988). The typically higher
frequency and runout capability of either debris flows or sheetfloods rel-
ative to rock falls, rock slides, rock avalanches, and colluvial slides favors
the radial extension of an alluvial fan during Stage 2 to values of 1 to
perhaps 5 kin, coupled with a decrease in the composite slope to 5-15 °
(Figs. 20, 21B). These factors cause Stage 2 fans to plot in different fields
of a diagram of slope versus modal grain size than those of Stage 1 fans
(Fig. 5). Examples of fans with attributes typical of Stage 2 include the
Roaring River fan of Colorado, the Grotto Canyon fan and fans between
Badwater and Morman Point in Death Valley, California (Fig. 21B), the
Lead Canyon fan of New Mexico (Fig. 13C), and the Boundary Stream
fan near Glenthorne Station, South Island, New Zealand.
475
Ft~. 2 l.-Plan viewsof examplesof alluvial-
fan and their drainagebasins from Death Val-
ley, California,displayingvarious stages of de-
velopment. Depictedexamplesinclude:A) two
Stage 1 fans (left) and one Stage 2 fan (fight)
near Badwater;B) the Stage 2 Grotto Canyon
fan near StovepipeWells,and C) the Stage 3
Trail Canyonfan. Note variationsbetweenthe
evolutionarystages of drainage-basinsize, fan
size, feeder-channelorder, and presenceand
length of incised-fanchannels.
Stage 3 in the evolution of alluvial fans involves continued expansion
of the drainage net concomitant with lengthening of fan radii. The latter
effect arises from extension of the incised channel to values of > 1 kin,
promoting active deposition progressively farther from the mountain front
(Figs. 13D, 20, 21C). Primary fan processes generated by failure ofcolluvial
slopes in the drainage basin dominate sedimentation during this stage,
coincident with expansion of the drainage net to produce a larger number
of first-order channels, and establishment of feeder channels commonly
of fourth or fifth order (Figs. 13D, 21C). Sediment gravity processes gen-
erated by the failure of bedrock cliffs may also operate during Stage 3
because of the continued presence of such cliffs in the drainage basin,
although these sediment-gravity deposits on the fan are likely to be over-
whelmed by debris-flow or sheetflood deposits. The net result of this
progradational phase of construction is the attainment of fans with radii
of 3 to _> l0 kin, and with slopes decreasing to 2-8° (Figs. 13D, 20, 21C).
These characteristics are partly conditioned by (1) whether sheetflooding
or debris flows are the dominant process, (2) the nature of the adjoining
476 TERENCE C. BL41R AND JOHN G. McPHERSON

Rock-avalanche deposit

~ Debris-flow levee
Gravelly, matrix-rich,
" stacked debris-flow lobes

Winnowed surfaces

VvVvVv~"

F Uplifted ~ ~..~.-.=:'~,~.~,
bedrock jv ;z~. ~ ' ,
v~v~v~v~v v LI--~ l~J

A Rock-slide deposit Rock-avalanche deposits

Rock-slide deposit Rock-avalanche deposits

Fi6. 22.-Schematic radial cross sections of sedimentary facies based on case studies by the authors for Stage 2 or 3 alluvial fans, including A) a debris-flow-
dominated (Type I) fan and B) a sheetflood-dominated(Type II) fan. Verticalexaggeration:2 x.

depositional environment downslope, and (3) the availability of accom-
modation space for fan lengthening in the basin. Examples of modern fans
in Stage 3 of development include the Trail Canyon, Hanaupah Canyon,
and Titus Canyon fans of Death Valley, California, the Cucamonga fan
of Eureka Valley, California, and the Little River fan of New Zealand
(Figs. 13D, 2 IC). Once achieved, Stage 3 conditions persist until inter-
rupted by renewed tectonic subsidence at a rate sufficient to cause the
basin-floor environments to migrate over the fan (Blair 1985b, 1987a,
1987c; Blair and Bilodeau 1988), or until the fan is extensively eroded by
adjoining environments like rivers or valley glaciers.
Prevalence of Sheetflaod Versms Debris.Row Facies on an
EpolvingAlluvial Fan
Most modern alluvial fans, except those in Stage 1 of development, are
dominated by either cohesive debris-flow sequences or sheetflood se-
quences (Figs. 1, 20, 22; Table 4). This relationship results from the more
frequent instigation of primary fan processes by failures ofcolluvial slopes,
rather than bedrock slopes, once the fan drainage basin has evolved suf-
ficiently to generate and house such slope materials. Though both cohesive
debris-flow and sheetflood deposits can be present on the same fan, lith-
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS 477

Fro. 23.-Vertical views ofsandy gravel facies deposited by high-gradient rivers. A) Overview ofa 7 m high cut through sandy and bouldery, rounded to submunded,
thickly bedded gravel deposits of the proximal Rakaia River, New Zealand. B) Close-up of 2 m high cut of imbricated, clast-supported, and crudely bedded rounded
cobble-pebble gravel deposits of the Waiau River, New Zealand. C) Two-meter set of thickly bedded, imbricated cobble and pebble channel gravel overlain by a 1.5
m thick unit of extensively rooted overbank mud; Truckee River, Nevada. D) Exposure I m high of rounded and imbricated cobble-pebble gravel with an interstmtified
wedge-planar set of cross-bedded pebbly sand; Truckee River, Nevada. E) A trench wall 70 cm high of planar cross-bedded and low-angle-bedded sandy pebble gravel;
Fall River, Colorado. F) Interval 5 m thick of cross-bedded pebbly sand interstratified with cobble pebble gravel; Kern River terrace, Bakersfield, California.
478 TERENCE C. BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON

ologic and weathering conditions in the drainage basin usually promote TABLE4.--Characteristics of Type ! versus Type H alluvialfans
one of these processes to the near exclusion of the other (Blair and Mc-
Pherson 1994). The key factors responsible for promotion of debris-flow Feature Type I Alluvial Fan Type II Alluvial Fan
deposition over sheetflood deposition on a fan are: (1) adequate clay con- Dominant primary process Debris flows, especially lobe Sheetfloods, especially cou-
tent in the sediment of the drainage basin to allow a debris flow to develop and facies facies pier lacies
Minor primary processes Rockfall, rock slide, rock av- Rockfall, rock slide, rock av-
when water-saturated colluvial slopes fail, and (2) a straight and short alanche, colluvial slide, in- alanche, collnvial slide, in-
feeder channel configuration for expediting movement of debris flows to cised channel cised channel, noncohesive
the fan site (Table 4; e.g., Wasson 1978b; Evans 1982; Blair and Mc- debris flow
Dominant secondary pro- Winnowing by overland flows Winnowing by overland flows
Pherson 1994). Sheetflood deposits, by contrast, dominate over debris- ceSseS and wind to produce desert and wind to produce desert
flow deposits on fans where (1) the drainage-basin bedrock weathers to pavements,boulderman- pavements, gullies, and
produce clay-deficient sediment, hindering development of debris flows ties, gullies, and shallow shallow dismbulary chan-
channels nels
duringcolluvial slope failure, or 2) the size, storage capacity, and roughness Typical grain sorting and size Very poorly sorted clayey Poorly sorted sandy and
of the catchment or feeder channel commonly incite deposition of debris boulder, pebble, and cobble bouldery cobble to pebble
flows before they reach the fan site. Clay-deficient colluvial sediment gravel gravel
commonly is generated in drainage basins underlain by (I) quartzite or Downfan trend in maximum Relatively constant Typically decreases from
clast size boulders to pebbles or sand
quartzose sandstone and conglomerate, (2) granitic or gneissic bedrock Typical grain shape Angular Angular to subangular
weathering under arid climatic conditions, or (3) rapidly uplifted and Typical stratification style Poorly or subtly stratifiod ex- Wel]-stratified coarse gravel
eroded, tightly indurated rocks of any lithology subjected to minimal cept for secondary win- and sandy fine gravel cou-
nowed surfaces piers
chemical weathering but intense mechanical weathering (Table 4). Drain- Presence of granular or sandy Rare Common
age basins with significant colluvial clay production, in contrast, typically interbeds
are developed in bedrock at least partly composed of (I) pelitic meta- Presence of a distal sand- Rare Common
skirt facies
morphic rocks, (2) aphanitic volcanic rocks, (3) shale, or (4) feldspar-rich Presence of depositional ma- Common Rare
coarsely crystalline igneous rocks weathering in a humid climate (Table trix clay
4). Draiuage-basin size Small to moderate Small to large
Feeder channel length Short to moderate Moderate to long
Variations in the configuration of alluvial-fan drainage basins, or in the Typical bedrock lithology an- Pelitic metamorphic rocks, Quartzite, quartz-rich con-
lithology of the bedrock underlying these drainage basins, can cause even dertying the drainage basin shale, aphanitic volcanic glomemte or sandstone;
neighboring fans to be dominated by contrasting processes. These rela- rocks, or marie platonic also granitic or gneissic
rocks; also granitic or rocks weathering under
tionships are illustrated by three groups of fans in southeastern Spain 8neissic rocks weathering arid climate
(Harvey 1984, 1988, 1990), Death Valley, California, and south-central under humid climate
New Mexico. The desert fans derived from gneissic rocks in one area of Clay abundance in the drain. Moderate to abundant Rare
the Spanish case study are dominated by fluid gravity processes, whereas age-basin colluvial slopes
Common average slope value 5 to 15* 2 to 8°
neighboring fans derived from pelitic metamorphic rocks or mudstone Downfan slope style Constant or straight Distally decreasing or piano-
consist mainly of debris-flow deposits. A similar scenario exists in Death concave
Valley, where fans derived from the Smith Mountain granitic pluton and Permeability Low High
Porosity Low High
clay-deficient conglomerate and sandstone are dominated by sheetfloods, Connectivity of permeable Low High
whereas those derived from the adjoining pelitic metamorphic rocks of units
the Black Mountains contain abundant debris-flow deposits. A third ex-
ample is the sheetflood-dominated Marble Canyon and Alamo Canyon
fans of New Mexico. Sheetflood processes dominate these fans, in contrast
to their neighbors such as the Lead Canyon fan (Fig. 13C), where debris types also have significantly differing petrographic character, including
flows and rock avalanches are prevalent. The shectflood dominance on permeability, porosity, and lateral and vertical connectivity of permeable
the former fans is not due to lithologic differences, but instead is a product units, with relevance to groundwater flow and, in ancient settings, to
of their large drainage basin and high-capacity feeder channel, within potential as hydrocarbon reservoir or seal systems (Table 4).
which sediment-gravity-flow deposition is induced, and runout to the fan The extent of secondary reworking of the debris flows in a Type I fan
site is hindered. typically is minor, resulting in stratigraphic sequences characterized pre-
The natural partitioning of alluvial fans on the basis of whether or not dominantly by stacked debris flows separated by thin winnowed gravel
they are mainly constructed of cohesive debris-flow or sheetflood deposits lags produced mainly by wind, overland flows, or rill or gully erosion (Figs.
gives rise to a fundamental facies classification scheme for fans. Fans l 7F, 22A). The drainage-basin conditions of some debris-flow-dominated
dominated by clast-rich or clast-poor debris flows are designated Type I fans are conducive to episodic production of sediment-deficient overland
fans, and those dominated by shcetflood deposits, Type lI fans (Figs. l, flows capable of more extensively winnowing the surfaces of previously
17, 18, 22; Table 4; Blair and McPherson 1994). Sediment gravity flows deposited debris flows, particularly in proximity to the fan apex and within
generated by bedrock cliffcollapse may be interspersed within the debris- the incised channel. This is the case where fan drainage basins are especially
flow or sheetflood sequences of a Type I or Type II fan, perhaps most large or sediment-deficient, or where clay production is retarded. The net
abundantly in the core (Stage 1) or in the proximal part of the fan body result is a stratigraphy characterized by primary debris flows interbedded
(Figs. 15F, 20, 22). Incised-channel deposits may be inset within the debris- with coarse, unsorted gravel lags containing outsized and hydraulically
flow sequences (Type I) or sheetflood sequences (Type I1) of fans that have incompatible clasts, and bedded granules and pebbles. This variant of a
reached Stage 2 or 3 of development (Figs. l, 19). Type I fans tend to cohesive debris-flow-dominated fan is designated Type IB, in contrast to
have constant (straight) slopes with values between 5 and 15°, in contrast examples subjected to minimal secondary reworking (Fig. 1710, and called
to Type 11 fans, which typically have distally decreasing slopes of 2-8 ° Type IA. Likewise, secondary reworking of the surface of primary sheet-
that gives rise to a concave profile (Fig. 22; Table 4). The maximum clast flood deposits may range from minimal to moderate, giving rise to a Type
size of Type II fans typically decreases downslope, whereas maximum IIA fan in the former case and a Type IIB fan in the latter. The carving
clast size tends to be constant on Type I fans. Distal fan sand skirts and of shallow rills and gullies with a braided distributary pattern is a partic-
proximal-fan to medial-fan granular to sandy interbeds are common in ularly common secondary process on Type II alluvial fans because of the
Type II fans but rare in Type I fans (Fig. 22; Table 4). These variant fan high erodibility of the surface sediment.
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS
OIN IN G WATER
•-•'-•.......•.•J
SUiiAERiAL~'-~.__..~.~.DY "rYPE Marine Perennial Lake
COMPONENT OF DELTA
Alluvial Fan Coastal Fan-Delta Perennial-Lacustrine
Fan-Delta
0 _ Bedload-Dominated Coastal Bfaid Delta Perennial-Lacustrine
z~ River Braid Delta
Suspended-Load- Coastal Perennial-Lacustrine
D o m l n a l e d River Floodplain Delta Floodplain Delta
CONTRASTING SEDIMENTARYPROCESSESAND FACIES OF GRAVELLY RIVERS
The facies and facies assemblages of rivers, even those dominated by
coarse gravel, are readily distinguishable from the facies and facies assem-
blages of alluvial fans as a result of major differences in the conditions
that affect sedimentation in these two environments. The most common
facies of coarse-gravel-bed rivers, for example, consists of thickly bedded
to crudely and horizontally stratified, clast-supponed, sandy to bouldery,
pebble-cobble gravel deposited as longitudinal bars within the active chan-
nel tracts (Fig. 23A-D; Doeglas 1962; Williams and Rust 1969; Boothroyd
1972; Church and Ryder 1972; Rust 1972; Fahnestock and Bradley 1973;
Bluck 1974, 1979, 1982; Eynon and Walker 1974; Smith 1974; Arche
1983; Forbes 1983; Southard et al. 1984; Desloges and Church 1987; Blair
et at. 1991; Reinfelds and Nanson 1993). Gravel clasts in these deposits
commonly are rounded, and elongated clasts are imbricated with a-b
planes oriented perpendicular to slope and dipping upstream. Deposits
commonly associated with these gravel sets are low-angle-bedded gravel
or sand (Fig. 23A, C). Other facies types documented in the active channel
tracts of modem gravel-bed or pebbly-sand-bed rivers include planar cross-
bedded (Fig. 23E], trough cross-bedded (Fig. 23~, epsilon-bedded, or
horizontally bedded deposits, and associated ripple-stratified or horizon-
tally bedded drapes of sand, silt, and mud (McKee et al. 1967; Coleman
1969; McGowen and Garner 1970; Smith 1970, 1972; Cant and Walker
1978; Gustavson 1978; Arche 1983; Campbell and Hendry 1987; Dawson
and Bryant 1987). Channel-fill facies of river systems commonly are pres-
ent in sequences >_ 10 m thick that pinch out laterally against older channel
or overbank sediment. This facies assemblage typically is bordered by,
and interstratified with, fine-grained floodplain facies that accumulate from
overbank flows (Fig. 23D; Reinfelds and Nanson 1993).
The common facies of gravel-bed or pebbly-sand-bed rivers are absent
on alluvial fans because of their unique hydraulic conditions (Figs. 3.-.6).
The common lower-flow-regime structures of rivers, for example, do not
develop on fans because the high fan slope induces supercritical flow
conditions (Fig. 6). In addition, flow attenuation on fan surfaces favors
either shallow flows or rapidly shallowing flows rather than sustained,
deeper flows necessary for the development of structures with high relief,
such as cross-bedded sets. Furthermore, the conical morphology of fans
precludes the development of floodplains because of the continuity of slope
in all directions from the apex. Ponds, likewise, do not form on alluvial
fans, except under rare circumstances such as behind arcuate rock-ava-
lanche deposits, because of the maintained high slope. Moreover, except
for the single incised channel and minor gullies, lenticular channel-fill
deposits do not exist on even those fans dominated by fluid gravity flows
because of the predominance of conditions that promote sheetflooding.
Reciprocally, the processes typical of fans, such as sediment gravity flows,
are uncommon in rivers of alluvial basins because of the major morpho-
logic and hydraulic differences between these environments. The rapidly
expanding and supercritical character of sheetfloods on alluvial fans, and
their hallmark couplet facies, for example, do not develop in fiver systems
because of the maintenance of flow depth and width, the commonly better
sorting of sand and gravel due to sustained flow and transport conditions,
and the typically subefitical flow states of rivers. Therefore, alluvial fans
and rivers, even those rivers dominated by gravel, have virtually no facies
479
E p h e m e r a l Lake
Ephemeral-Lacustrine
Fan-Delta
Ephemeral-Lacustrine
Braid Delta
FEo.24.--Classificationof the deltas of allu-
Ephemeral-Lacustrine vial fans and rivers bordered by marine, peren-
Floodplain Delta nial-lacustrine,and ephemeral-lacustrineenvi-
ronments.
in common. The distinctive facies assemblages that form in these two
environments readily facilitates their simple differentiation in the rock
record.
EXAMPLES OF ANCIENT ALLUVIAL-FAN
ANDGRAVELLY-RIVER
FACIESAKSEMBLAGES
Although the ability to distinguish between ancient stratigraphic se-
quences deposited by alluvial fans and those deposited by gravelly rivers
is readily possible, past publications demonstrate that this differentiation
commonly is not achieved. This confusion is a direct product of the
inaccurate sedimentological concepts and facies models for alluvial fans
that have been promoted in textbooks, review articles, and professional
short-course summaries during the last 25 years. Another factor that has
hindered the distinction of alluvial-fan and river facies in the rock record
is the still nascent state of modem alluvial-fan sedimentology. The facies
of sediment gravity processes generated by the failure of bedrock cliffs
present in the drainage basin, for example, have had limited recognition
in the rock record, most likely because of the only recent sedimentological
appreciation of these features in modem settings rather than by their
absence, particularly in ancient basin-marginal settings. Rock-avalanche
deposits recently have been documented from various exhumed Tertiary
basin fills in the southwestern United States, including in the Death Valley
region (Hedges et al. 1987, 1989, 1990; Saylor and Hodges 1991; Topping
1993), Salton Trough-Gulf of California area (Kerr 1984; Ken"and Kidwell
1991), Mojave Desert (Fedo and Miller 1992), Nevada (sehmitt and Brown
1991), and in Arizona (Krieger 1977; Yarnold and Lombard 1989; Yarnold
1993). Coherent rock-slide blocks have been described in the Upper Oli-
gocene-Miocene alluvial-fan deposits of the Death Valley region (Saylor
and Hodges 1991), the Miocene Horse Camp Formation of central Nevada
(Schmitt and Brown 1991), and in a Miocene half-graben of southeastern
California (Fedo and Miller 1992). A rock fall origin has recently been
proposed for deposits in the Lower Jurassic of the eastern Canadian Fundy
Basin (Tanner and Hubert 1991). Debris-flow alluvial-fan facies, in con-
trast, have been more commonly documented fi'om extensional basin fills
in the rock record. Examples include the Plio-Pleistocene Dead Sea rift
fill (Manspeizer 1985), the Neogene basin fillsof southern California (Crowell
1982; Kerr 1984; Link 1984; Hendrix and Ingerso11987; Kerr and Kidwell
1991; Fedo and Miller 1992), Tertiary basin fills of the East African rift
system (Burggraf and Vondra 1982), the Lower Jurassic Fundy Basin of
eastern Canada (Tanner and Hubert 1991), the Devonian-Carboniferous
of the Gaspe Peninsula, Canada (Rust 198 I), and the Devonian Hornelen
Basin of Norway (Steel et al. 1977; Gloppen and Steel 1981).
Documented alluvial-fan sequences dominated by sheetflood deposits,
like the deposits of sediment gravity processes generated by the failure of
bedrock cliffs, have only rarely been reported in the rock record, prob-
ably because of the lack of their recognition rather than their absence.
Thick (100+ m) sequences of sheetflood stratification have been docu-
mented in the Triassic Mount Toby Conglomerate of Massachusetts (Hand
el al. 1969), the Jurassic Todos Santos Formation of southeastern Mexico
(Blair 1985b, 1987c), the Oligocene-Miocene Pantano Formation of
southern Arizona (Balcer 1984), the Oligoccnc-Mioccne Simmler For-
480 TERENCE C BILAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON
GEOLOGICAL RELEVANCEOF ALLUVIAL-FANVERSUSRIVERSEQUENCESIN THE ROCK RECORD
AlkJvk~l-Fonor Coorw-Gralned~
Geological Feature Fa.-DoUo ~ ~ oeua Oepmlts
Dependable Indicatorof Yes No
~:~:lleo-PiocImo¢~t~t'tlr~l
Deperldoble Indicator of Bosin-Morgln
Chorocte~tz:eclby Dip-~p or Strlke-SUpFauits Yes NO
Dependable Jncllcatorof C~ial Zone
Involvea In Active Tectonlsm Yes No
Dependol~e Indicoto~of Yes No
Elongate BasinOdentatlan
Dependobte Indicator of Long-LivedFault Yes No
Impllcoted Distance to AssociatedFault 0-15 km [3-1,000skms
Relative Qua,ty of ProvenanceData Very High Low to High
marion of southern California (Ballance 1984), the Miocene Salton Trough
basin of southern California (Van de Kamp 1973; Kerr and Kidwell 199 !),
and in the Miocene--Pliocene deposits of the Ridge Basin of southern
California (Blair and McPherson, unpublished). Other possible examples
of alluvial-fan sheetflood facies include Pleistocene deposits described by
Houmark-Nielsen (1983) and Sneh (1979), and Permo-Carboniferous suc-
cessions in England discussed by Laming [1966). The inset relationship
between incised-channel and sheetflood facies on individual Stage 2 or 3
alluvial fans buried by lacustrine deposits have also been documented in
the Jurassic Todos Santos Formation of Chiapas, Mexico (Blair 1987c).
Examples in the rock record of sequences consisting of the facies typical
of modern gravel-bed or pebbly-sand-bed streams are numerous. Ancient
gravel-bed successions include the Upper Tertiary of Idaho (Kraus and
Middleton 1987), Nebraska (Goodwin and Diffendal 1987), Italy (Billi et
al. 1987), and the Yukon Territory (Morison and Hein 1987); Lower
Tertiary deposits of western Wyoming (Kraus 1984) and Spain (Nijman
and Puigdefahregas 1978); Upper Jurassic deposits of southeastern Mexico
(Blair 1987c), Permian-Triassic deposits of Spain (Ramos and Sopena
1983); and Devonian. Carboniferous deposits along the North Atlantic
continental margins (Cant and Walker 1978; Rust 1981). Unfortunately,
publications on ancient sequences with sedimentological features typical
of rivers but interpreted as alluvial fans abound in the geological literature.
CLASSIFICATION OF TIlE DELTAS OF ALLUVIALFANS AND RIVERS
The distinctive morphology, hydraulic processes, sedimentary process-
es, and facies assemblages of alluvial fans and of riven provide a clear
and definitive basis for a classification of the deltas of these environments,
as originally proposed by McPherson et al. (1986, 1987, 1988a). The deltas
of alluvial fans (fan deltas) are differentiated from river deltas, without
gradation, in this classification scheme (Fig. 24]. In contrast, river deltas
grade from bed-load-dominated, coarse-grained types (braid deltas) to
suspended-load-dominated, meandering to straight, typically fine-grained
delta types. The logical key to differentiating each of these deltas types is
determining if their subaerial component is an alluvial fan, a braided river,
or a suspended-load-dominated fiver (McPhersen et al. 1986, 1987, 1988a,
1988b).
The McPherson et al. classification scheme can be extended to provide
a framework for further division of the deltas of fans and rivers by focusing
first on whether the feature building into an adjoining water body is an
alluvial fan, a braided fiver, or a floodplain-dominated river, and secondly
on whether the adjoining water body is either the ocean, a perennial lake,
or an ephemeral (playa) lake (Fig. 24). In this extended scheme, like the
original (McPherson et at. 1986, 1987, 1988a), the natural distinctiveness
of alluvial fans and rivers is delineated by the nongradational boundary
or RmD-G¢~'~:IIZlverof
I~lvw Della Deposit=
No
No
No
No
No
0-1,003s kms Fit. 25.-Summary of the geologicalrele-
vance of distinguishingalluvial fans and fan
Low deltas from rivers, braid deltas, and floodplain
deltas in the stratigraphicrecord.
between these environments. Also, the natural transition between the high-
er-gradient, relatively coarse-grained, bed-load-dominated braided rivers
and the lower-gradient, finer-grained, suspended-load-dominated rivers is
maintained. Likewise, the uniqueness of the lacustrine and oceanic water
bodies is denoted, as are the natural gradations that can occur through
time between perennial and ephemeral lakes.
The nine permutations that result from crossing the three fan or river
types with the three water-body types provides nine categories that aid in
the classification of these environments (Fig. 24). Alluvial fans bordering
the ocean are more precisely termed coastal fan deltas in this scheme, with
the term coastal implying a marine shoreline but not a lacustrine shoreline,
consistent with its typical usage. Alluvial fans bordering lakes are termed
lacustrine fan deltas in this scheme, also consistent with general usage.
Inasmuch as lakes vary from perennial to ephemeral, so must lacustrine
fan deltas. Lacustrine fan delta can be modified, therefore, to account for
these variances, giving rise to the terms perennial-lacustrine fan delta and
ephemeral-lacustrine fan delta (Fig. 24). The term lacustrine fan delta
typically has been used synonymously with the proposed perennial-lacus-
trine fan delta term, whereas just "alluvial fan" has been commonly used
for features that would classify in the proposed system as ephemeral-
lacustrine fan deltas. Usage of the adjectival terms "perennial-lacustrine"
and "ephermal-lacustfine," however, portray more precisely the specific
lake setting and its possible influence at the time of alluvial-fan deposition.
Braid deltas also can be subdivided by the nature of the adjoining water
body, resulting in coastal braid deltas, perennial-lacustrine braid deltas,
and ephemeral-lacustrine braid deltas (Fig. 24). In all cases, these features
correspond to the coarse-grained realm of river delta systems (McPherson
et al. 1986, 1987, 1988a). Likewise, the fine-grained (or common), flood-
plain-dominated river delta systems can be subdivided into coastal flood-
plain deltas, perennial-lacustrine floodplain deltas, and ephemeral-lacus-
trine floodplain deltas (Fig. 24). Traditionally, the term delta has been
applied only to what are called coastal floodplain deltas in this scheme
(e.g., Coleman and Wright 1975), with all other delta types in the past
commonly forced into the alluvial-fan or fan-delta categories, fueling the
need for a more careful delineation of these natural systems (McPherson
et al. 1986, 1987, 1988a). Also, braid deltas or floodplain deltas of peren-
nial lakes have, in the past, usually been referred to more generally as
"lacustrine deltas," or erroneously as "fan deltas", whereas their ephem-
eral-lake counterparts have been variably and inconsistently referred to
as "inland deltas," "dry deltas", "alluvial fans", or "terminal fans". We
recommend discontinuing the use of the two latter terms for these features
because of their inaccurate implications with respect to the fundamentally
different entities of fans versus rivers. Also, we suggest that the adjectival
term "ephemeral-lacustrine" is a more descriptive and definitive alter-
native to the first two terms.
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS
Several depositional settings or styles that have been associated with
alluvial fans are not incorporated in this scheme. The term "Gilbert delta"
(after Gilbert 1890) is not used, for example, because it refers to a specific
delta-front facies assemblage (bottomset-foreset-topset beds) that can be
present in any of the coastal or perennial-lake delta types listed in the
classification. Also, river tributary environments, such as the Kosi River
and Gandak River of India and the Reno River ofltaly, are not accounted
for in this scheme because they do not represent the deposits of either
alluvial fans, fan deltas, or river deltas. Instead, they should be classified
for what they are, deposits of the river environment. Another feature
designated by some as an "alluvial fan" are expanding fiver reaches com-
monly developed where a stream enters a topographically controlled wider
valley, such as the expanding reach of the l_eba River of Poland (e.g.,
Rachocki 1990) and the Huaco and Jachal rivers of Argentina (Damanti
1993). Expanding fiver reaches are not included in the above classification
because they have no characteristics in common with deltas or alluvial
fans, and instead should simply be classified as rivers with locally ex-
panding reaches.
GEOLOGICAL IMPORTANCEOF DISTINGUISHINGALLUVIAL-FAN
ANDRIVER
DEPOSITS IN THE STRATIGRAPHICRECORD
Properly distinguishing alluvial-fan deposits from river deposits in the
stratigraphic record provides an invaluable tool for reconstructing the
paleogeographic and paleotectonic elements of Earth history. The unique
geologic significance of fan deposits derives from an understanding of the
modern conditions known to be optimal for the development of alluvial
fans, including: (1)juxtaposition of an uplifted mountain block and a
valley; (2) presence of a feeder channel draining an upland catchment and
transversely issuing into the valley at the mountain front; (3) production
of sediment in the drainage basin through physical and chemical weath-
ering; and (4) intense but infrequent precipitation to create flash flood
discharge needed for transporting sediment from the drainage basin to the
fan site (Surrell 1841, 1870; Blair and McPherson 1994). Modem topo-
graphic settings where alluvial fans occur include: (1) valleys marginal to
uplifted structural blocks bounded by typically high-angle (~_ 25°) normal
or strike-slip faults (e.g., Hunt and Mabey 1966); (2) within compressional
belts such as the Himalaya system (Drew 1873}; (3) where tributary chan-
nels transversely enter incised river valleys, such as along the Colorado
River in Arizona (Webb et al. 1988); (4) where streams enter deglaciated,
moraine-rimmed valleys (e.g., Blair 1987b); and (5) along bedrock spurs
where relief is created by differential erosion (e.g., Sorriso-Valvo 1988;
Harvey 1990).
Alluvial fans developed in association with high-angle normal or strike-
slip faults are by far the most plentiful because of the optimal conditions
for fan development created by continental extensional terranes, such as
the western North American Basin and Range province, the Middle East-
em Dead Sea rift, and the East African rift system. Extensional-basin
settings are especially conducive to development of alluvial fans because
mountain-block relief is tectonically developed and maintained for sig-
nificant periods of time (~ 50 million years), with individual faults en-
during for tens of millions of years and individual fans from 0.2 to 7
million years (Blair and Bilodeau 1988). The maintenance of relief is
important to fan development because of the significant promotion of
weathering created by the effects of gravity on slope erosion, as well as for
providing ample time for drainage basins to evolve. The presence of relief,
along with the typical drainage network that develops through time, also
is important in promoting catastrophic flash floods capable of moving
poorly sorted and commonly coarse-grained sediment to the fan site (e.g.,
Surrell 1870). Seismic shocks associated with active teclonism also aid
fan construction by destabilizing the colluvial and bedrock slopes of the
drainage basin (e.g., Keefer 1984). Moreover, tectonic fracturing related
to faulting significantly promotes bedrock weathering both through its
physical disintegration, and its incitement of chemical weathering related
481
1o the increased rock surface area susceptible to wetting and oxidation in
the fracture network (Blair and McPherson 1994).
In contrast, three of the other four modem settings where fans develop
(lateral to incised rivers, bedrock spurs, and degiaciated valleys) are not
conducive to long-term fan development, owing to the lack of a mechanism
for maintaining reliefat the sites combined with the attendant slower rates
of sediment production and lower potential for catastrophic sediment-
transport events to the fan. Long-term development of alluvial fans is also
hindered in the settings of the tectonic margins of compressional regimes,
such as within thrust belts or along the margins of foreland basins, owing
to the promotion of more integrated drainage basins caused by the ridge-
and-valley thrust-belt topography. Such settings promote the development
of rivers instead of fans. Additionally, fan development is hindered in
these latter tectonic settings by the instability of the active basin margins
or intraorogenic valleys because of the strong lateral component of tectonic
deformation.
An important consideration in the study of alluvial fans in the rock
record is the preservation potential of the various modem settings in which
fans occur. Except for sites adjoining uplifted blocks bounded by high-
angle normal or strike-slip faults, all of the modem settings where fans
develop have a low potential to be preserved in the stratigraphic record.
In the case of intraorogenic thrust-belt valleys or thrust-fault-marginal
basins, the low preservation potential is caused by lateral instability of
the basin margin, the dominance of river systems, and recycling of the
thrust-front deposits through time. Alluvial fans that form lateral to incised
rivers, deglaciated valleys, or bedrock spurs formed by differential erosion,
have limited potential for preservation because of their occurrence in
generally erosional, rather than tectonically subsiding situations. There-
fore, subaerial modem settings containing alluvial fans with the greatest
potential for preservation in the rock record include: (1) dip-slip-domi-
nated extensional basins formed in extending continental terranes, such
as the Basin and Range province or the East African rift system; (2)
transtensional basins formed along prevalent strike-slip faults, such as the
Izabal graben of Guatemala and the Dead Sea Basin along the Israel-
Jordan border; and (3) back-arc and fore-arc extensional terranes, such as
the Salar de Atacama basin of northern Chile (Flint et al. 1991, 1993).
Alluvial-fan settings with less ideal but still possible preservation potential
include local rifts formed in otherwise compressional domains, such as
the Lake Baikal basin.
Properly identified alluvial-fan sequences in the rock record therefore
delineate specific paleogeographic and paleotectonic conditions, including:
(1) geomorphic juxtaposition of a bedrock block and an actively subsiding
valley (i.e., piedmont setting); (2) presence of a zone of regional subsidence
associated with either crustal extension or transtension; (3) presence of a
dip-slip or strike-slip fault at the boundary between the bedrock block and
the sedimentary basin; (4) close proximity (usually < 5-10 km) to the
basin-marginal faults; (5) persistence of tectonic subsidence of the normal
or strike-slip faulted basin; and (6) persistence of the plan-view location
of the fault zone for millions of years (Fig. 25). Additionally, the transverse
orientation of fans with respect to basin margins allows for the reconstruc-
tion of the plan-view configuration of the usually linear extensional basins
(e.g., Blair 1987c). Moreover, the typically < 10 km of maximum transport
of fan sediment from the mountain front, combined with the catastrophic
(i.e., rapid) nature of this limited transport, produces sedimentary deposits
harboring high-quality provenance information useful in reconstructing
detailed paleogeological settings (Fig. 25).
The scientific relevance of properly differentiating alluvial-fan and fiver
deposits in the rock record can be illustrated by comparing the paleogeo-
morphic, paleogeographic, and paleotectonic information that can be in-
ferred from fluvial deposits. Although both coarse-grained and fine-grained
river systems can be present in piedmont settings and in close proximity
to active faults, they are not exclusively developed there; commonly they
are hundreds to even thousands of kilometers away from the piedmont
zone (Fig. 25). River deposits, even the coarse-grained variety, therefore,
482 TERENCE C BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON
am not an unequivocal indicator of proximity to tectonic relief, and are
a poor indicator of the precise location of an active faull. Additionally,
fluvial sequences in the rock record also are not suggestive of specific
sedimentary basin settings because they may be deposited in almost any
type ofsubaefial basin (Fig. 25). Furthermore, the possibly long transport
distances that sedimentary panicles may travel in rivers, and their poten-
tially long residence time in the system, significantly lowers the quality of
the provenance and paleogeologic information that can be obtained from
the sediment because of mixing, and because of the selective loss of labile
grain lypes through weathering, abrasion, and sorting. This situation con-
trasts with the high quality of provenance information that can be obtained
from fan sediment (Fig. 25).
In spite of the considerations discussed above, many recent authors
(Nemec and Steel 1987, 1988; Dunne 1988; Nemec 1990, 1993; Postma
1990; Reading and Orton 1991; Nilsen 1993) have challenged the im-
portance of alluvial-fan deposits to paleogeographic and paleotectonic
reconstructions of ancient sedimentary basins. Such conclusions arise from,
and demonstrate, the ultimate problem with acceptance of the currently
popular but highly inaccurate conceptual framework for alluvial fans in
which this environment has been expanded to include virtually the entire
fluvial realm. The clear distinction of alluvial fans and rivers not only
reflects the natural uniqueness of these environments, but also provides
an invaluable tool that greatly enhances our scientific ability to decipher
the stratigraphic record and its contained register of the history of the
Earth.
CONCLUSIONS
Alluvia[ fans are a natural phenomenon readily distinguishable from
other continental sedimentary environments, including gravel-bed rivers,
on the basis of morphology, hydraulic and sedimentary processes, and
sedimentary facies assemblages. Alluvial fans are semiconical accumula-
tions of coarse-grained and angular sediment deposited where the feeder
channel of an upland drainage basin intersects the mountain front. Fans
are steep (2-25 °) and of limited length (generally < 10 km). They are
constructed mainly by catastrophic fluid gravity flows (sheetfloods and
incised-channel floods) or sediment gravity flows (rock falls, rock slides,
rock avalanches, colluvial slides, and debris flows) generated through fail-
ure of bedrock cliffs or colluvial slopes in the drainage basin. The surfaces
of these primary deposits typically are remolded by secondary processes,
such as wind erosion and overland flow. The unique facies assemblages
of alluvial fans, and their limited chance for preservation in the rock record
except in high-an#e, fault-proximal settings, creates a geological entity
that is invaluable for reconstructing paleogeographic and paleotectonic
events of the Earth's past.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank Mobil Research and Development Corporation and
Blair & Associates for support of this and related research on alluvial fans and
fan deltas conducted around the world during the last eleven years. Blair undertook
part of this research while at the University of Colorado and University of New
Mexico. Assistance by personnel at the Rare Books Collection of the Library of
Congress in Washington D.C., the Musre Alpin in Chamonix-Mont Blanc, and
the Mobil Research and Devdopment Corporation library in Dallas was instru-
mental to this research. P. Carling is thanked for providing access to the Smith
(1754) article, and T. Zielinski for providing an English translation of his anide.
Mobil Research and Development Corporation kindly granled permission to pub-
lish this article and provide page-charge support. The manuscript benefitted from
the efforts of JSR reviewers and editors, including L.E. Frostick, P.F. Friend,
Associate Editor V.P. Wright, Editor J.B. Southard, and Editorial Assistant L.K.
McFarren.
REFERENCES
A~D~so~,K., 1987,Debris [towduringintense rainfall in Snowdunia,North Wales:a preliminary
study: Earth Surface Processesand Landforms, v. 12, p. 561-566.
ALLEN,J.R.L., 1965, A review of the origin and characteristics of recent alluvial sediments:
Sedimentology,v. 5, p. 89-.191.
Asomson,D.M., ReWOLDS,R.C., asp BRows,J., 1969,Bentonitedebris flowsin northernAlaska:
Science, v. 164, p. 173-174.
ANDerSON,S.P., asp ANDERSON,R.S., 1990, Debris-flowbenches: dune-contact deposits record
paleo-saud dane positions in north Panamint Valley, lnyo County, California: Geology,v.
18, p. 524-527.
AnDerSSOn,G.S., AspHto~v, K.M., 1962,.Alluvialfan development at Franldin Bluffs,Alaska:
Iowa Academyof SciencesProceedings,v. 69, p. 310-322.
AnsrEv,R.L., 1965, Physicalcharacteristics of alluvial fans: United States Army Natick Lab-
oratory, Technical Report ES-20, 109 p.
A~stev, R.L., 1966, A comparison of alluvial fans in west Pakistan and the United States:
Pakistan Geographical Review, v. 21, p. 14-20.
ARCHe,A., 1983, Coarse-grainedmeander lobe deposits in the Jarama River, Madrid, Spain,
in Collinsoo, J.D., and Lewin, J., eds., Modem and Ancient Fluvial Systems:International
Associationof SedimentologistsSpectal Publication 6, p. 313-322.
Arorv~swAMv,R.M.P., 1971, Some geological factors influencingthe behavior of the Kosi:
Geological Survey of India Records, v. 96, p. 42-5 I.
Az~, C., ar~i~DeswrRtux,P., 1974,A study of poe specialtype of raudflowin the French Alps:
Quarterly Journal of EngineeringGeology, v. 7, O. 329-338.
BA~ro,P.D., ~so lxwts, W.V., 1957, The Cairngorm flood, 1956: Scottish Geographical Mag-
azine, v. 73, p. 91-100.
BAKER,V.R., AnDR~rrtr, D.F., 1975,Competenceof rivers to transport coarsebedload material:
Geological Socielyof America Bulletin, v. 86, p. 975-978.
BaLCER,R.A., 1984,Stratigraphyand depositional historyof the Pantano Formation (Oligocene-
Early Miocene), Pima County, Arizona [unpublished M.S. thesis[: Tucson, University of
Arizona, 107 p.
B^LuAncE,P.F., 1984, Sheet-~owdominated gravel fans of the non-marine middle Cenozoic
Simmler Formation, central California: Sedimentary Geology,v. 38, p. 337-359.
BALrV,NU,D., 1976, Two case studies of raudflows in the Buzau Subcarpathlans: Geografiska
Annaler, v. 58A, p. 165-..-171.
BALr~,U,D., 1986, The importance of mass movement in the Romanian Subcarpathia:Zeit-
schfifl fiir GeomorphologieSupplementband 58, p. 173-190.
BaLrZZEr,F., mo PtrRSER,B.H., 1990, Modem alluvial fan and deltaic sedimentationin a foreland
tectonic selling:the LowerMesopotaraian Plain and Arabian Gulf: SedimentaryGeology,v.
67, p. 175..-197.
BARNES,H.H., JR., 1967, Roughnesschamctemtics of natural channels: United StatesGeological
Survey Water-SupplyPaper 1849, 213 p.
BARaEtL,J., 1908,Relations between climate and terrestrial deposits:Journal of Geology,v. 16,
p. 159-190, 255-295, 363.-384.
BEarY,C.B., 1963,Origin of alluvial fans,White Mountains, Californiaand Nevada: Association
of American Geographers Annals, v. 53, p. 516..-535.
BEarY,CK, 1970,Ageand estimated rate of accumulationof an alluvial fan, White Mountains,
California: American Journal of Science, v. 268, p. 50--77.
BEatv, C.B., 1974, Debris flow,s,alluvial fans, and revitalized catastrophisrn: Zeitschrift flit"
GeomorphologieSupplementband 2 I, p. 39-51.
BeATY,C.B., 1989, Great boulders I have known: Geology,v. 17, p. 349-352.
Bury, C.B., 1990, Anatomy of a White Mountain debris flow-the making of an alluvial fan,
in Rachocki, A.H., and Church, M, eds., Alluvial Fans-A Field Approach: New York,
Wiley, p. 69-90.
B~v¢, C.B., ANDD~Poto, CM., 1989, Energeticearthquakes and boulders on alluvial fans: is
there a connection?:SeismologicalSociety of America Bulletin, v. 79, p. 219-224.
B~AUMONLP., 1972, Alluvial fans along the foothills of the Elburz Mountains, It'an: Palaeo-
geography,Palaeodiraatology,Palaeoeeology,v. 12, p. 251-273.
B~umonr, P., mD OBER~nDer,TM., 1971, Observations on stream dischargeand competence
at Mosaic Canyon, Death Valley,California: GeologicalSocietyof America Bulletin,v. 82,
p. 1695--1698.
BEER,J.A., mn JIr~, G.H., 1988,Computationsof high-velocityflowson alluvialfans:American
Society of Civil Engineers,National Conferenceon Hydraulic Engineering,Proceedings,p.
167-172.
BENDA,L, 1990,"ihe influenceof debris flowson channelsand valley floors in the OregonCoast
Range, U.S.A.: Earth SurfaceProcessesand Iandforms, v. 15, p. 457.-466.
BevEs,K., Lawson,A., ann McDonaLO,A., 1978,A landslip/debrisflow in Bilsdale,North York
Moors, September 1976: Earth Surface Processes,v. 3, p. 407-.419.
B,art~w~, B.D., mD S~N~,,A., 1992, Sedimentologyof a recent alluvial fan of Ganga River,
Rishikesb, India: GeologicalSocietyof India Journal, v. 39, p. 457..-465.
B~u, P., MAGt,M., and Sa~a~,M, 1987,Coarse-grainedlow-sinuosityriver deposits: examples
from Plio-Pleistocene;Valdarno Basin, Italy, in Ethridgs, F.G., Flores, RM., and Harvey,
M.D., eds., Recent Developments in Fluvial Sedimentology:SEPM Special Publication 39,
p. 197-204.
BLacgweto~s,E., 1928,Mudflowas a geologicagent in semi-arid mountains: GeologicalSociety
of America Bulletin, v. 39, P. 465--484.
BLaiR,T.C., 1985a, Depositiunal chronology,sedimentary processes,and the resultingvertical
stratification sequencesin the Roaring River alluvial fun, Rocky Mountain National Park,
Colorado, in Flores, RM., and Harvey, M.D., eds., Field Guidebook to Modern and Ancient
Fluvial Systems in the United Stales: Fort Collins, Colorado, Proceedingsof the Third In-
ternational Fluvial Conference,p. 96--101.
BrA~R,T.C., 19fiSh,Nunraarine sediraentolegicalreRponseto tecloulsm in rift basins: a com-
parison of the Jurassic Todos Santos Formation, Chlapas, Mexico,with Quaternary deposits
in Death Valley, California (abstract): SEPM Annual Mid-Ycar Meeting Abstracts, v. 2, p.
11-12.
Bt~lr, T.C., 1987a,Hydrologicand tectonic controls on alluvial fan/fan-delta flood basin sed-
imentation, southwesternUnited States, and their implicationsto the development of cyclic
 ALLUIqAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS
marginal fan and flood-basin megasoquences: International Symposium on Fan Deltas, Geo-
logical Institute, Bergen, Norway, p. 121-122.
Bla~ T.C., 1987b, Sedimentary ~ocesses, vertical stratification sequences, and geomorphology
of the Roaring River alluvial fan, Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado: Journal of
Sedimentary Petrology, v. 57, p. 1-18.
BLmR,T.C., 1987c, Tectonic and hydrologic controls on cyclic alluvial fan, fluvial, and lacustrine
ri~-basin sedimentation, Jurassic-lowermost Cretaceous Todos Santos Formation, Chiapas,
Mexico: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 57, p. 845-862.
Btms, T.C., BAseR,F., xnn Tusses, J., 1991, Cenozoic fluvial-facies architecture and aquifer
heterogeneity, Oroville, California, Superfnnd Site and vicinity, in Tyler, N., and Miall, A.D.,
eds., Three Dimensional Facies Architect~ of Terrigenous Clastic Sediments and Its Im-
plications for Hydrocarbon Discovery and Recovery: SEPM Concepts in Sedimentology and
Paleontology, v. 3, p. 147-159.
B~Ja, T.C., Ant BiLeo~u, W.L., 1988, The development of tectonic cyclothems in rift, pull-
apart, and foreland basins: sedimentary response to episodic tectonism: Geology, v. 16, p.
517-520.
BL~IS,T.C., AnDMcPnEsson, J.G., 1992, The Trollbeim alluvial fan and facies model revisited:
GeologJeal Society of America Bulletin, v. 104, p. 762-769.
BuAIr,T.C., Ann MrPnerson, J.G., 1993, The Trollbeim alluvial fan and facies model revisited,
Reply to R.L. Hooke: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 105, p. 564--567.
BLair, T.C., AnDMcPH~sson, J.G., 1994, Alluvial fan processes and forms, in Abrahams, A.D.,
and Parsons, A.J., eds., Genmorphology of Desert Environments: London, Chapman & Hall,
p. 354-.402.
BUSS~nS~('H, E., 1952, Rdation of surface angle distribution to particle size distribution on
alluvial fans: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 22, p. 25-.-28.
B~lss~r~sacn,E., 1954, Geology of alluvial fans in strut-and regrons: Geological Society of Amer-
ica Bulletin, v. 65, p. 175-190.
Bu~n~, R.J., 1981, Stability analysis of Chim Shale mudslides, Papua. New Guinea, in Davies,
T.R.H., and Pearce, A.J., eds., Erosion and Sediment Transport in Pacific Rim Steoplands:
International Association of Hydrological Sciences Publication 132, p. 42--66.
B~ono, R.J., ann DunKerl~v, D.L., t976, landslides in the Razorback area, New South Wales,
Australia: Geogeafiska Annaler, v. 55A, p. 139-147.
B~c~, B.]., 1974, Stroclure and directional properties ofsorae valley sand ur deposits in southern
Iceland: Sedimentology, v. 21, p. 533-544.
But:c~, B.J., 1979, Structure of coarse grained braided stream alluvium: Royal Surety of Ed-
inburgh Traosaetions, v. 70, p. 181-221.
BrucE, B.J., 1982, Texture of gravel bars in braided streams, in Hey, R.D., Bathurst, J.C., and
Thoroe, C.R., eds., Gravel-bed Rivers: London, Wiley, p. 339-355.
Bo~;uc~, D.J., 1976, Debris slides in the Mt. LeCture area, Great Smoky Motmtaios National
Park, U.S.A.: G¢ografiska Annaler, v. 58A, p. 179-191.
B~x;uc~, D.J., 1977, Debris slide hazards in the Adirondack province of New York State:
Envirnomental Geology, v. 1, p. 317-328.
Burney, C.T.G.. 1902, Moraines and mudstreams ia the Alps: Geological Magazine, v. 9, p. 8-
16.
BOOT,fOrD,J.C., 1972, Coarse-grained sedimentation on a braided outwash fan, northeast Gulf
of Alaska: University of South Carolina Coastal Research Division Technical Report 6-CRD,
127 p.
Bc~t,rorn. J.C., ant Asnu~v,G.A., 1975, Processes, bar morphology, and sedimentary structures
on braided outwash fans, northeast Gulf of Alaska, in Jopling, A.V., and McDonald, B.C.,
eds., Glaciofluvialand GlaciolacostrineSedimentation: SEPM Special Publication 23, p. 192-
222.
~.)OTHROYD,J.C., A'qONUnMEDAL,D.. 1978, Proglacial braided outwash: a model for humid alluvial
fan deposits, in Miall, A.D., ed., Fluvial Sediraentology: Canadian Society of Petroleum
Geologists Memoir 5, p. 64 l-.668.
Boy,s, M.J., 1985, Earthflows in the Interior Plateau, southwest British Columbia: Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, v. 22, p. 313-.334.
Burrs, M.J., 1986, The morphology and mechanics of large-scale slope movemeol, with par-
ticular reference to southwest British Columbia, in Abrahams, A.D., ed., Hillslope Processes:
Boston, Allen & Unwin, p. 319-341.
Bo~rl, M.C., 1954, Estimatingthe Manning roughness coefficient from an average bed roughness
in open channels: American Geophysical Union Transactions, w 35, p. 957-961.
BaaDUe~,W.C., Fann~s-~oc~,R K , anD Rowe~mv, E.T., 1972, Coarse sediment transport by flood
flows on the Knik River, Alaska: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 83, p. 1261-
1284.
BRAZIER,V., WHI'VflNGTON,G., anD BALLStNTYNE,C.K,, 1988, Holocene debris cone evolution in
Glen Etive, western Grampian Hi#lands, Scotland: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms,
v. 13, p. 525-531.
B~ownlnG, J.M., 1973, Catastrophic rock slide, Mount Huasaracan, north-central Peru, May
31, 1970: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 57, p. 1335-1341.
B~¢~'oe, A.J., ANtTBo~sos, S., 1969, Observations on an alpine mudflow, Steele Creek, Yukon:
Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 6, p. 219-229.
Butt, W.B., 1963, Alluvial fan deposits in western Fresno County, California: Journal of Ge-
ology, v. 71, p. 243-251.
Bi~Lu,W.B., 1964, Geomorphology of sogmented alluvial fans in western Fresno County, Cal-
ifornia: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 352E, 128 p.
Butt, W.B., 1972, Recognition of alluvial fan deposits in the stratigraphic record, in Ri#y,
J.K., and Hamblin, W.K., eds., Recognition of Ancient Sedimentary Environments: SEPM
Special Publication 16, p. 63-83.
Bt,tu, W.B., 1977, The alluvial fan environment: Progress in Physical Geography, v. 1, p. 222-
270.
BIJrCI.InEL,B.C., 1966, Tin Mountain landslide, southeastern California, and the orivnofme-
gabreeeia: Geological Society of America Bulletin. v. 77, p. 95-100.
Busc~rav, D.R., Jr., mo Vonora, C.F., [982, Rift valley facies and paleoenvironments: an
483
example from the East African rift system of Kenya and southern Ethiopia: Zeitschrit~ ffftr
Geomorphologie Supplementhand 42, p. 43-73.
BurkE, K., 1967, The Yallahs basin: a sedimentary basin southwest of Kingston, Jamaica: Marine
Geology, v. 5, p. 45.-60.
CmNr, N., 1980, The rainfall intensity-duration control of shallow landslides and debris flows:
Geogvafiska Annaler, v. 62A, p. 23-27.
CAMPBEtt,J.E., ant Hentry, H.E., 1987, Anatomy of a gravellymeander lobe in the Saskatchewan
River near Nipawin, Canada, in Ethridge, F.G., Flutes, R.M., and Harvey, M.D., eds., Recent
Developments in Fluvial Sedimeotology: SEPM Special Publication 39, p. 179--190.
CaMPm.t, R.H., 1974, Debris flows originating from soil slips during rainstorms in southern
California: Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology, v. 7, p. 339-349.
Cam~eLt, R.H., 1975, Soil slips, debris flows, and rainstorms in the Santa Monica Mountains
and vicinity, southern California: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 851,
51p.
Cast, D.J., mn wau~r, R.G., 1978, Fluvial process and facies sequences in the sandy braided
South Saskatchewan River, Canada: Sedimentology, v. 25, p. 625-648.
CHANG,H.H., 1982, Fluid hydraulics of deltas and alluvial fans: American Society of Civil
Engineers Proceedings, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, v. 108, p. 1282-1295.
CH^~,n~r, W.D., 1935, Alluvialfan flooding, the Montroso, California flood of 1934: Crengraph-
ical Review, v. 25, p. 77.-88.
CHeryl, V.B., 1984, Early Pleistocene glacial outwash deposits in the eastern San Joaquin
Valley, California: a model for humid-regien alluvial fans: Sedimentology, v. 31, p. 823-
836.
CHow, V.T., 1959, Open Channel Hydraulics: New York. McGraw Hill, 680 p.
C~urcH, M., 1983, Pattern of instability in a wandering gravd bed channel, in Collinson, J.D.,
and Lewin, J., eds., Modern and Ancient Fluvial Systems: International Association of Sed-
imentologists Special Publication 6, p. 169-180.
CHURCH,M., AnDMItxs, M.J., 1987, Meteornlo#eal antecedents to debris flows in southwestern
British Columbia; some case studies, in Costa, J.E., and Wieczorek, G.F., eds., Debris Flows/
Avalanches: Process, Recognition, and Mitigation: Geological Society of America Reviews
in Engineering Geology, v. 7, p. 63-80.
CHURCH,M., and RYDER,J.M., 1972, Paragiacial sedimentation: a consideration of fluvial pro-
cesses conditioned by glaciation: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 83, p. 3059-
3072.
CauRcu, M., StocL R.F., ann RYDEr,J.M., 1979, Contemporary sedimentary environments on
Balfin Island, N.W.T., Canada: debris slope accumulations: Arctic and Alpine Research, 11,
p. 371-402.
CLaGOe,JJ., EvAns,S.G., ann Btow~, I.G., 1985, A debris flow triggered by the breaching of a
moraine-dammed lake, Klaltasine Creek, British Columbia: Canadian Journal of Earth Sci-
ences, v. 22, p. 1492-1502.
C~rK, G.M., 1987, Debris slide and debris flow historical events in the Appalachians south of
the glacial border, in Costa, J.E., and Wietzorek, G.E, eds., Debris Flows/Avalanches: Pro-
cess, Recognition, and Mitigation: Geological Society of America Reviews in Engineering
Geology, v. 7, p. 12~138.
CLEtAnD,H.F., 1902, The landslides of Mr. Greylock and Briggsville, Massachusetts: Journal
of Geology, v. 10, p. 513-517.
CLUEP., J.K., 1988, Leveed boulder flows on volcanic slopes of the Sonoran Desert, Arizona:
Joumal of Arid Envirooments, v. 15, p. 43-52.
CoteMan, J.M., 1969, Brahmaputra Riv~ channel orocesses and sedimentation: Sedimeotary
Geology, v. 3, p. 129-239.
Cotez~n, J.M., ant WgitHi, L.D., 1975, Modern river deltas: variability and processes of sand
bodies, in Broussard, M.L., ted., Deltas: Models for Exploration: Houston Geological Society,
p. 99-149.
COLLINSON,J.D., 1970, Bedforms of the Tuna River, Norway: Geograflska Anoaler, v. 52A, p.
31-56.
COLLEnS~n,J.D., 1978, Alluvial sediments, in Reading, H.G., ed., Sedimentary Environments
and Facies, 1st Edition: Oxford, Blackkwell,p. 15--60.
CotL=nmn, J.D., 1984, Alluvial sediments, in Reading, H.G., ¢d., Sedimentary Environments
and Facies, 2nd Editioo: Oxford, Blackwell, p. 20--63.
ComMon,R., 1954, A report on the Locbaber, Appin, and Benderloch floods, May, 1953: Scottish
Geographical Magazine, v. 70, p. 6..-20.
CoNwav, W.M., 1893, Exploration in the Musta# Mountains: Geographical Journal, v. 2, p.
289-299.
C(XaLEY,M.E., Aunstt~e, B.N., ANDEuLer, R.C., 1977, Effect ofthe catastrophic flood of Decem-
ber, 1966, North Rim area, eastern Grand Canyon, Ari2ona: United States Geological Survey
Professional Paper 980, 43 p.
COROMINaS,J., Ar~nAtosso. E.E., 1990, Geomo~hologtcal effects of extreme floods (November
1982) in the southern Pyrenees: International Association of Hydrological Sciences Publi-
cation 194, p. 295-302.
COSTA,J.E., 1983, Paleohydraulic reconstruction of flash-flood peaks from boulder deposits in
the Colorado Front Range: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 94, p. 986--1004.
COSTA,J.E., 1984, Physical geomorphology of debris flows, in Costa, J.E., and Finisher, P.J,
eds., Developments and Applications of Geomorphology: Berlin, SprinBer.Vedag, p. 268--
317.
CostA, J.E., 1988, Rhenloglc, geomorphic, and sedimentologic differentiation of water floods,
hyperconcentrated flows, and debris flows, in Baker, V.R., Kochel, R.C., and Parian, P.C.,
eds., Flood Geomorphology: New York, Wiley, p. 113-122.
CostA, .I.E., 1991, Nature, mechanics, and mitigation of the Val Pola landslide, Valtellina, Italy,
1987-1988: Zeitsohrifl fiJr Genmorpbologie, v. 35, p. 15-38.
Costa, J.E., AnDJaRrrrr, R.D., 1981, Debris flows in small mountain stream channels of Colorado
and their hydroloBic implications: Assodatino of Engineering Geologists Bulletin, v. 18, p.
309-322.
484 T E R E N C E C. B L A I R A N D J O H N G. M c P H E R S O N
Coteccrla, V., 1987, Earthquake-prone environments, in Anderson, M.G., and Richards, K.S,
eds., Slope Stability: Chichester. England. Wiley, p. 287-330.
CRAnDeLL,D.R., M~tLt~, C.D., Guc~es, H.X., CH~S~SeN, R.L., Arid NEq,HALL,C.G., 1984,
Catastrophic debris avalanche from ancestral Mount Shasta volcano, California: Geology, v.
12, p. 143..-146.
CROFt,A.R., 1962, Some sedimentation phenomena along the Wasatch Mountain front: Journal
of Geophysical Research, v. 67, p. 1511-1524.
Croton, V.S., 1992, Compound landslides: nature and hazard potential of secondary landslides
within host landslides, in Slossen, J.E., Keene, A.G., and Johnson, J.A., eds, Landslides/
Landslide Mitigation: Geological Society of America Reviews in Engineering Geology 9, p.
I-9.
Csowt~t, J.C., 19fl2, The Violin Breccia, Ridge Basin, southern California, in Crowell, J.C.,
and Link, M.H., eds., Geology of the Ridge Basin, Southern California: SEPM Pacific Section,
p. 8%98.
Caoz~er, M.J., 1969, Earthflow occurrence during high-intensilyrain fall in eastern Otago (New
Zealand): Engineering Geology, v. 3, p. 325-334.
C~unsn, D.M., 1988, Thresholds for catastrophic instabilities in sedimentary rock dopes, some
examples from the Canadian Rockies: Zeitschrifl flit Gcomorphologte, v. 67, p. 67-76.
Curry, R,R., 1966, Observation of alpine mudflows in the Tenmile Range, central Colorado:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 77, p. 771-776.
Da Cosra Nunes, A.J., Costa Couto e Fosseca, A.MM., arid Hunt, R.E., 1984, Landslides of
Brazil, in Brnn~eo, D., and Prior, D.B., eds., Slope Instability: New York, Wiley, p. 419-
446.
DamAr~t~,J.E, 1993, Geomorphic and strurttmal controls on facies patterns and sediment com-
position in a modern foreland basin, in Matzo, M., and Puigdefabregns, C., eds., Alluvial
Sedimentation: International Assocmtion of Sedimcntologists Special Publication 17, p. 221-
233.
Dav~s, WM., 1898, The Triassic formations of Connecticut: United States Geological Survey
Annual Report 18, part 2, p. 1-192.
DAvis, W.M., 1901, Physical Geography: Boston, Ginn, 432 p.
Davis, WM., 1905, The geographical cycle in arid climates: Journal of Genlogy, v. 13, p. 381-
407.
Davis, W.M., 1930, Rock floors in arid and humid climates: Journal of Geology, v. 38, p. 1-
27.
DAvis, W.M., 1938, Sheet floods and struamfloods: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v.
49, p. 1337-1416.
DAWSON,A.G., Mattaews, J.A., AridSunrises, R.A., 1986, A catastrophic landslide (sturzstrnm)
in Vcrkilsdalen, Rondane National Park, south¢rn Norway: Geogrnfiska Annulet, v. 68A, p.
77-87.
Daws(~N,M.R., and B~vA¢~,I.D., 1987, Three-dimensional facies geometry in Pleistocene out-
wash sediments, Worcestershire, U.K., m Ethridge, F.G., Holes, R.M., and Harvey, M.D.,
eds., Recent Developments in Fluvial Scdimentolo~y: SEPM Spectal Publication 39, p. 191-
196.
DeCetl.~s, P.G., TOL~in, R.B., GRAHAM,S.A., SMITH,G.A., IN(ierSOtL,R.V., WHITe,J., SCHMInT,
C.J., Rice, R., Moxon, I., L~mve,L., HasoscHS, J.W., FoLo, M.F., Eowxros, D.P., CAvazza,
W., Ca, Dwelt, M., ANr~Barc,a~, E., 1987, Laramide thrust-generated alluvial-fan sedimenla-
tion, Sphinx Conglomerate. southwestern Montana: AmericanAssociation of Petrnleum Ge-
ologists Bulletin, v. 71, p. 135-155.
DeCetu~s,P.G., Gray, M.B., R~r~wav,K.D., Cote, R.B., P=V~tK,D.A., PeQue~, N., aNt~Stay,tAra,
P., 1991a, Controls on synorogeoic alluvial-fan architecture, Bcartooth Conglomerate (Pa-
leoeene), Wyoming and Montana: Sedimeotology, v. 38, p. 567-590.
DeCetL~S, P.G., GrAy, M.B., R~r~a~, K.D., COLE,R.B., SRIvAs~rava,P., PtQuerx, N., ANDPWmK,
D.A., 1991b, Kinematic history of a foreland uplift from Paleocene synorogenic conglomerate,
Beartooth Range, Wyoming and Montana: Geological Society of Ameriea Bulletin, v. 103,
p. 1458-.1475.
DeGrAvf, J.V., 1978, Regmnal landslide evaluation: two Utah examples: Environmental Ge-
ology, v. 2, p. 203--214.
Denny, C.S., 1965, Alluvial fans in the Death Valley region, California and Nevada: United
States Geological Survey Professional Paper 466, 62 p.
Denny, C.S., 1967, Fans and pediments: American Journal of Science, v. 265, p. 81-105.
Der~vsHme, E., ANnOwes, L.A., 1990, Qeaternary alluvial fans in the Karakoram Mountains,
in Rachocki, A.H., and Church, M., eds., Alluvial Fans-A Field Approach: New York,
Wiley, p. 27-54.
De.st~x;es,J.R., ann CHt rcu, M., 1987, Channel and floodplain fades ia a wandering grnvel-bed
river, in Ethridge, F.G., Flutes, R.M., and Harvey, M.D., eds., Recent Developments in
Fluvial Scdimoalology: SEPM Special Publication 39, p. 9%110.
DOeGLaS,D.J., 1962, The structure of sedimentary deposits of braided rivers: Scdimentology,
v. I, p. 167-193.
DREw, E, I fl73, ~luvial and lacustrine deposits and glacial records of the Upper Indus Basin:
Geological Society of London Quarterly Journal, v. 29, p. ,441-471.
DuBo*'s, M.P., 1879, Etudes du rbgime el ruction exercke par les eaux sur un lit a fond de
graviers indefiniment affouilable: Annals de Punts et Chanss/~es,Series 5, v. 18, p. 141-195.
Donne, L.A., 19fl8, Discussion of fan-deltas and braid-deltas: varieties of coarse-grained deltas:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 100, p. 1308-1309.
Fx KIS,R., 1928, Alluvialfans in the Cacamonga district, southern California: Journal of Geology,
v. 36, p. 111-141.
E~s~acHer,G.H., 1980, Debris torrents across the Alaska Highway near Muncho Lake, northern
British Columbia:Geological Survey of Canada, Current Research, v. 80-1C, p. 29-36.
E~saAcrer, G.H., ANDCuA~ue,J.J., 1981, Urban landslides in the vicinity of Vancouver, British
Columbia, with special reference to the Deceraber 1979 rainstorm: Canadian Geotechnical
Journal, v. 18, p. 205-216.
~seNtorr, W.S., JR., 1952, Floods of July 18, 1942, in north.central Pennsylvania: United States
Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1134-B, p. 59-158.
Ette~. S.D., As'oFteM~n¢;,R.W., 1987, Mobilization of debris flows from soil slips, San Francisco
Bay region, California, in Costa, J.E., and Wieczorek, G.F., eds., Debris Flows/Avalanches:
Process, Recognition, and Mitigation: Geological Society of America Reviews in Engineering
Geology, v. 7, p. 31--40.
EL~rrol,I, A., 1987, large boulder deposits and catastrophic floods: Geogrnfiska Annaler, v.
69A, p. 101-121.
EN~ELen,G.B., 1967, Landslides in the metamorphic northern border of the Dolomites (north
Italy): Engineering Geology, v. 2, p. 135-147.
ETHR,~E,F.G., 1985, Modern alluvial fans and fan deltas, in Recognition of Fluvial Depositiooal
Systems and Their Resource Potential: SEPM Short Course 19, p. 101-126.
EvANs,S.G., 1982, Landslidesand surticial deposits in urban areas of British Columbia: a review:
Canadian Geotechnical Journal, v. 19, p. 269.-288.
Evsrerr, A.G., 1979, Sccondary permeability as a possible factor in the origin of debris ava-
lanches associated with heavy rainfall: Journal of Hydrology, v. 43, p. 347-354.
EYe, N., Evtts, C.H., ANDMcCaRe, A.M., 1988, Late Pleistocene subaefial debris-flow facies
of the Bow Valley near Banff, Canadian Rocky Mountains: Scdimenttology, v. 35, p. 465--
480.
EYe, N., Ann Kocsls, S., 1988, Sedimentology and clast fabric of subaerial debris flow facies
in a glacia]ly-influenced alluvial fan: Sedimentary Geology, v. 59,1~. 15-28.
EYn~, G., ANDWAter, R.G., 1974, Facies relationshipsin Pleistocene outwash gravels, southern
Ontario: a model for bar growth in braid bars: Sedimantology, v. 21, p. 43-70.
Fau~srecK, R.K., 1963, Morphology and hydrology of a glacial stream-White River, Mount
Rainier, Washington: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 422-A, 70 p.
FA,n~tocg, R.K, ann BaaDeeY,W.C., 1973, Knik and Matanuska rivers, Alaska: a contrast in
braiding, in Morisawa, M., ed., Fluvial Geomorphology: State University of New York at
Binghamton, Publications in Geomurphology, p. 220-250.
Fa,nE~TOCg, R.K., ANDHAUS,~tD,W.L., 1962, Flume studies of the transport of pebbles and
cobbles on a sand bed: Geologcal Society of America Bulletin, v. 73, p. 1431-1436.
FmRCU~L~,L H., 1987, The importance oflahar initiation process, in Costa, J.E., and Wierzorek,
G.F., eds., Debris Flows/Avalanches: Process, Recognition, and Mitigation: Geological So-
ciety of America Reviews in Engineering Geology, v. 7, p. 51.--62.
Fauouq L, ann S~ecKer, M.R., 1988, Large rock avalanche deposits (Strurzstr/Jme, sturzstroms)
at Sierra Aconqulja, northem Sierras Pampeanas, Argentina: Ecologae Geologicae Helvetiae,
v. 81, p. 579-592.
FeDo, CM., a,D MiLLer,LM.G., 1992, Evolution of a Miocene half-grnban basin, Colorado
River extensional corridor, southeastern California: Geological Society of America Bulletin,
v. 104, p. 481--493.
FinK,J.H., MaLIN,M.C., D'ALu, R.E., and Gem~, R., 1981, Rheological properties ofmodflows
associated with the Spring 1980 eruptions of Mount St. HIelens volcano, Washington: Geo-
physical Research Letters, v. 8, p. 43-46.
FISHER,R.V., 1971, Features of coarse-grained, hi#-concentration fluids and their deposits:
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 41, p. 916-927.
FLINT,S., Tt'R,~ER,P., and JOLLeY,E.J., 1991, Depositional architecture of Quaternary fan-della
deposits of the Andean fore-arc: relative sea-level changes as a response to aseismic ridge
sulxiucction, in Macdonald, D.I.M., ed., Scdimentation, Tectonics, and Eastasy, Sca-level
Changes at Active Margins: International AssociationofSedimentologistsSpeeial Publication
Number 12, p. 91-103.
FLinT, S., TUrnER, P., JOLLEV,EJ., ANDHa~tLeY, AJ., 1993, Extensional tectonics in convergent
margin basins: an example from Salar de Atacama, Chilean Andes: Geological Society of
America Bulletin, v. 105, p. 603--617.
FOrRES,D.L., 1983, Morphology and sedimentology of a sinuous grnvd-bad channel system:
lower Bahbage River, Yukon coastal plain, Canada, in Colhnson, J.D., and Lewin, J., eds.,
Modern and Ancient Fluvial Systems: International Association of Scdimentologists Special
Publication 6, p. 195-206.
FRANOS,P.W., GaRnewer, M., Rau~Rez, C.E, ANDROTHEI~LD.A., 1985, Catastrophic debris
avalanche deposit of Socompa volcano, northern Chile: Geology, v. 13, p. 600-603.
FRASER,G.S., 1989, Claslic Dcpositional Sequences, Processes of Evolution and Principles of
interpretation: Englewoed Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 459 p.
FRaSEr, G.S., and COBB,J.C., 1982, Late Wisconsinian proglaeial sedimentation alo~ the West
Chicago moraine in northeastern Illinois: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 52, p. 473-
491.
FRASER,G.S., AnD DeCELLES,P.G., 1993, Geomorphic controls on sediment accumulation at
margins of foretand basins: Basin Research, v. 4, p. 233-252.
F~aser, G.S., ann Surnnex, L, 1986, Alluvial Fans and Fan Ddtas: Boston, International Human
Resources Development Corporation, 199 p.
FRENCH,R.H., 1987, Hydraulic Processes on Alluvial Fans: Amsterdam, Elsevier, 244 p.
FRVXELL,F.M., ann Horsero, L., 1943, Alpine mudflows in Grand Teton National Park, Wy-
oming: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 54, p. 457--472.
Gawno, G.L., ann PieRson,T.C., 1985, Pol~llie Creek debris flow and subsequent dam-break
flood of 1980, East Fork Hood River Basin, Oregon: United States Geological Survey Water-
Supply Paper 2273, 22 p.
GaLLoway, W.E., 1976, Sediments and stratigraphie framework of the Cooer River fan delta,
Alaska: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 46, p. 726--737.
GARD~SR,J.S., 1983, Accretion rates on some debris slopes in the ML Rae area, Canadian Rocky
Mountains: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 8, p. 347-355.
GaawcoD, N.C., and J~Nes, D.P., 1979, Earthquake-caused landslides: a major disturbance to
tropical forests: Science, v. 205, p. 997-999.
Gate, W.B., 1987, The fabric of ruekslide avalanche deposits: Association of Engineering
Geologists Bulletin, v. 24, p. 389-.402.
GeoDes, A., 1960, The alluvial morphology of the Indo-Gangetic plain: its mapping and geo-
graphic significance: Institute of British Geographers, Transactions, Publication 28, p. 253-
276.
GterorD, J., 1953, Landslides on Exmoor caused by the storm of 15 August 1952: Geography,
v. 38, p. 9-17.
G~eRT, G.K., 1890, Lake Bonneville: United States GGeologiualSurvey Monograph I, 438 p.
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM R I V E R S
GL~NCV,P.A., mv HAsmts, L., 1975, A hydrologic assessment of the September 14, 1974 flood
in EIdorado Canyon, Nevada: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 930, 28 p.
GLOWES,T.G., m9 Srm, R.J., [981, The deposits, internal structure, and geometry of six
alluvial fan-.fan delta bodies (Devonian, Norway)-a study in the significance of bedding
sequence in conglomerates, in Ethridge, F.G., and FFlores, R.M., eds., Recent and Ancient
Nonmarine Depositional Environments: Models for Exploration: SEPM Special Publication
31, p. 49.-69.
GOaAtN, K., ANNPA~gxSa,B., 1990, Morphology of the Kosi megafan, in Rachoc~, A.H., and
Church, M., eds., Alluvial Fans-A Field Approach: New York, Wiley, p. 151-178.
GOLE,C.V., ANDCHITALLS.V., 1966, Inland delta building activity of the Kosi River: American
Society of Civil Engineers Pr~dings, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, v. 92, no. HY2,
p. 111-126.
G~wln, R.G., ANDDtVF~'~NDAL,R.F., Ja., 1987, Paleohydrolngy of some Ogallala (Neogene)
streams in the southern Panhandle of N~raska, in Ethridge, F.G., Floces, R.M., and Harvey,
M.D., eds., Recent Developments in Fluvial Sedimenlology: SEPM Specml Publicalinn 39,
p. 149-158.
GorI'~LD, A.S., MAvrlt:w_S,R.W., ANDGOTIeiFELO,LMJ., 1991, Hulocen¢ debris flows and
environmental history, Hazelton area, British Columbia: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences,
v. 28, p. 1583-1593.
GR~e,~u, A.W, 1913, Principles of Stratigraphy: New York, Seilec, 1185 p.
GRAINGELP., AnnK~I.~U6HES,P.G., 1987, Intermittent sarong movements of a coastal landslide:
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 12, p. 597-603.
GnovE, A.T., 1953, Account ofa mudflow on Bredon Hill, Worc~tershim, April, 1951: Ge-
ologists' Association Proceedings, v. 64, p. I 1-13.
G~vvln, J.J., ~No BAt'rHOLOmW,M.J., 1987, Factors influeneuig the distribution of debris ava.
leaches associated with the 1969 Hurricane Camille in Nelson County, Virginia, in Schultz,
A.P, and Jibson, R.W., eds., Landslide Processes of the Eastern Umled States and Puerto
Rico: Geological Society of America Special Paper 236, p. 15-2ft.
GuPi^, A., ANnDuff, A., 1989, The Auranga: dc.scription of a tropical monsoon river. Zeitschrifl
flit"Genmorphulng~e, v. 33, p. 73-92.
GusrmsoN, T.C., 1974, Sedimentation on gravel outwash fans, Malaspina Glacier Foreland,
Alaska: Journal of Sethmentary Petrology, ~. 44, p. 374-389.
Gusrmsos, T.C., 1978, Bed forms and stratification types of modero gravel meander lobes,
Nueces River, Texas: Sedimentology, v. 25, p. 4OI-426.
H~sl, J., 1864, Formation of the Canterbury Plains: Christchurch, New Zealand, Press alice,
Session 22, 63 p.
HAcg, J.T., Aso Geo~Lr~, J.C.. 1960, Geomorphology and forest ecology of a mountain region
in the central Appelachians: United States Genlogical Survey Profcssional Paper 347, 66 p.
HAOtEy,J.B., 1964, Landslides and related phenomena accompan~ng Heb~n Lake earthquake
of August 17, 1959: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 435, p. 107-138.
HAEeEELI,W., RICrgtNMk~N,D., ANDZ~U~tRMANN,M., 1990, Investigation of 1987 debris flows in
the Swiss Alps: general concept and geophysical soundings: International Association of
Hydrological Sciences Publication 194, p. 303-310.
H^LOEI~t~M^NS,E.G., 1956, Recent landslidephenomena in the Rangwe volcanicarea, Tanganyika:
Tanganyika Notes and Records, v. 45, p. 3-14.
HAsp, B.M., W~SS~L,J.M., ANDHINES,M.O, 1969, Antidones in the Mount Toby Conglomerate
(Triassic), Massachusetts: Jouroal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 39, p. 1310-1316.
HARms,J.C., ANDFA,s~rocg, R.K., 196L Stratification, bed forms, and flow phenomena (with
an example from the Rio Grande), m Middleton, G.V., ed., Primary Scdim~tary Strnctares
and Their Hydrodynamic Interpretation: SEPM Slx.cial Publication 12, p. 84-115.
HARe, E.L., WnsoN, R.C, ~sD WIECZOeEg,G.F., 1981, Landslides from the February 4, 1976,
Guatemala earthquake: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 120,4-A, 35 p.
HARP, E.L., Aso K.E~m~, D.K., 1989, Earthquake-induced landslides, Mammoth Lakes area,
California, in Brown, WM., ed., Landslides in Central California: 281h International Geo-
logical Congress Field Trip Guidebook T381, p. 49-53.
HAggis, S.A., AriaG~s~rAvsos,C.A., 1988, Retrogressive slumps, debris flows, and river valley
development in icy, unconsotidated sediments on hills and mountains: Zeitschrift flit"Geo-
morphologie, v. 32, p. 441-.455.
H~sisos. J.V., Ann FALCON,N.L., 1937, The Saldmarrah landslip, south-west h'an: Geographical
Journal, v. 89, p. 42.-.47.
HAgz, M.W., 1991, Landslides in the Peninsular Ranges, southern California, in Walawender,
M J., and Hanan, B.B., eds., Geological Excursions in Southern California artd Mexico:
Geological Society of America Annual Meeting Guidebook, p. 349-371.
HA~vtv, A.M., 1984, Debris flows and fluvial deposits in Spanish Quaternary alluvial fans:
implications for fan morphology, in Koster, FEM., and Steel, R.J., eds., Scdimentolngy of
Gravels and Conglomerate: Canadian Society of Pctroteum Geologists Memoir 10, p. 123-
132.
HaavE¥, A.M., 1986, Geomorphic effects of a 100 year storm in the Howgill Fells, northe st
England: Zoitschfift f~ Creomorpholngie, v. 30, p. 71-91.
H A ~ , A.M., 1988, Controls of alluvial fan development: the alluvial fans of the Sierra de
Carrnseoy, Marcia, Spain: Catena, Supplement 13, p. 123-137.
HARVEY,A.M., 1989, The occurrence and the role of and zone alluvial fans, in Thomas, D.S.G.,
ed., Arid Zone Gen morphoiog y: New York, Wiley, p. 136..-158.
H~gv~, A.M., 1990, Factors influencing Quaternary fan development in sonthtmt Spain, in
Rachocki, A.H., and Church, M, eds., Alluvial Eans-A Field Approach: New York, Wiley,
p. 247-270.
HARVE¢,A.M., ANDRENwlcg,W.H., 1987, Holocene alluvial fan and terrace formation in the
Bowland Fells, northwest England: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 12, p. 249-
257.
H~V~E~,J.W., ANDWtLSOS,W.E., Ill, 19fi5,Quaternary geology of the winnemucua area, Nevada:
University of Nevada Desert Research Institute Techmcal Report 5, 66 p.
HAeD~N,B.P., 1988, Flood climates, in Baker, V.R., Kochel, R.C., and Patton, P.C., eds., Flood
Geomorphology: New York, Wiley, p. 13-26.
485
HAeES,M.O., ANDK.,,NA,T.W., 1976, Terrigenous Clasdc Deposit/anal Environments: Columbia,
University of South Carolina Coastal Rescarch Division Technical Report 11-CRD, 171 p.
HAYW^eD,A.B., 1985, Coastal alluvial fans (fan deltas) of the Gulf of Aqaba (Gulf of Eliot),
Red Sea: Sedimentary Geology, v. 43, p. 241-260.
HEi•, A., 1882, Der Bergsutrz van Elm: Deutsche Geologische Gcsellshaft, Zcitschrifl, v. 34,
p. 74-115.
HuN, FJ., ANDWAL~R, R.G, 1977, Bar evolution and development of stratification in the
gravelly braided Kicking Horse River, British Columbia: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences,
v. 14, p. 562-570.
HENDR~X,E.D., ANDINGERSOLL,R.V, 1987, Tectonics and alluvial sedimentation of the upper
OligoceneAower Miocene VasquezzFormation, Soledad basin, southern California: Geological
Soci~y of America Bulletin, v. 98, p. 647.-.663.
HINE,A.C., ANDBOOTHROVD,J.C., 1978, Morphology, processes, and recent sedimentary history
of a glacial-outwash plain shornline, southern Iceland: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v.
48, p. 901-920.
HrrcHcocN, C.H., 1885, The recent land-slide in the White Mountains: Science, v. 6, p. 84--87.
HaREs, ICV., McK.ENNA,L.W., ANDHAROIS6,M.B, 1990, Structural unroofing of the central
Panamint Mountains, Death Valley retion, southeastern California, in Wernicke, B.P, ed.,
Basin and Range Extensional Tectonics Near the Latitude of Los Vegas, Nevada: Geological
Society of America Memoir 176, p. 37?-390.
HO~ES, K.V., McKEssA, L.W., STOCK,J., KNkPP,J., PAGE,L., STERNLOF,g., SlLVERBERG,D., WUST,
G., ANpWALt,iS, J.D., 1989, Evolution of extensional basins and Basin and Range topography
west of Death Valley, California: Tectonics, v. 8, p. 453-467.
HomEs, K.V., WAt.g.Ea,J.D., ANDWERNECKE,B.P., 1987, Footwall structural evolution of the
Tocld Mountain detachment system, Death Valley region, sontheastem California, inCoward,
M.P., Dewey, J.F., and Hancock, P.L., eds., Continental Extensional Tectonics: Geological
Society of London Special Publication 28, p. 393..-408.
Hooo, S.E., 1982, Shectfloods, shectwash, sheetfiow, or?: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 18, p. 59-
76.
Hom~swoaTn, R.. AnD KOVACS,G.S., 1981, Soil slumps and debris flows: Prediction and pro-
tection: Association of EngineEring Geologists Bulletin, v. 18, p. 17-28.
HOLMES,A., 1965, Principles of Physical Geology: New York, Ronald, 1288 p.
Hoo~, R. LEB., 1967, Processes on arid-region alluvial fans: Jourual of CGeology,v. 75, p. 438--
460.
Hoogl=,R.L., 1987, Mass movements in semi-arid environments and the morphology ofalluvial
fans, in Anderson, M.G., and Richards, K.S., eds., SIo~ Stability: Chichester, England, Wiley,
p. 505-529.
Hooi~., R.L, 1993, The Trollheim alluvialfan and facies model revisited, Discussion: Geological
Society of America Bulletin, v. 105, p. 562-563.
Hoo~, R.L~B., ANDROaREe, W.L, 1979, Geometry of alluvial fans: effect of discharge and
sediment size: Earth Surface Processes, v. 4, p. 147-166.
HoP~. G., ANDECgMAn,S., 1964, A note on the alluvial fans of Lattjovngga, Swedish Lapland:
Geograflska Annaler, v. 46, p. 338-342.
HogloN, R.E., 1945, Erosional development ofstmuns and their drainage basins; hydrophysical
approach to quantitative morphology: C~ological Society of America BuflV.in, v. 56, p. 275.-
370.
HOUM^RK-NIELSEN,M., 1983, Depositional features of Late Wcichselian outwash fan, central east
Jylland, Denmark: Sedimentary Geology, v. 36, p. 51--63.
Hsu, K.J., 1975, Catastrophic debris streams (Sturzstrnms) generated by rockfalls: Geological
Society of America Bulletin, v. 86, p. 129..-140.
HUaERT,J.F., ANDF~upov, A.J., 1989, Debris-flow deposits in alluvial fans on the west flank of
the White Mountains, Owens Vallcy, California: Sedimentary Geology, v. 61, p. 177-205.
HuNL C.B., 1975, Death Valley: Geology, Ecology, and Archeology: Berkeley~ University of
California Press, 234 p.
HUNT,C.B., ANDMASEY,D.R., [966, General genlogy of Death Valley, California- Stratigraphy
and structure: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 494-A, 165 p.
HURELBR[NK,R.L., ANDFEHRENBAC,ER,J.B., 1970, Soils and stratigraphy of a portion of the Gala
Rivet fan of UttEr Pradesh, India: Soil Science Society of America Proceedings, v. 34, p.
911-916.
HUTCHINSON,J.N., 1970, A coastal mudflow on the London clay cliffs at l~ltinge, north Kent:
Gentechniclae, v. 20, p. 412..-438.
HutcHINSON,J.N., PRIOR,D.B., ANnSTEP,MS,N., 1974, Potentiallydangerous surges in an Antrim
mudslide: Quarterly Joamal of Engineering Geology, v. 7, p. 363--376.
[NGUS,C.C., 1967, Inhad delta building activity of the Kosi River, a discussion: American
Society of Civil En~neers Procecdinga, Journal of the Hysdmulics Division, no. HY1, v. 93,
p. 93-100.
IN~SS,J.L., 1983, Debris flows: Progress in Physical Geography, v. 7, p. 469-501.
[~Es, J.L, 1985, Magnitude-frequency relations of debris flows in northwest Europe: Geo-
grafiska Annaler, v. 67A, p. 23-32.
Iso, N., YAaA~wA,K., YOr~EZAw~,H., ANDMA~SU~., T., 1980, Accumulation rotes of alluvial
cones, constructed by debris-flow deposits, in the drainage basins of the Takahara River,
Gifu prefecture, central Japan: Geosraphical Review of lapan, v. 53, p. 699-720.
Jmr.son, L.E., JR., M_~CDeSALD,G.M, ANDWILSON,M.C., 1982, Paraglacial origin for terraced
river sediment in Bow Valley, Alberta: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 19, p. 2219-
2231.
JAcg.sos,L.E., Js., Kos~scauK, R.A., ANnMAclk~NALn,G.M, 1987, Identification of debris flow
hazard on alluvial fans in the Canadian Rocky Mountains, in Debris flows/avalanches: pro-
cess, recognition, and mitigation, Costa, J.E., et El. Geological Society of America Reviews
in Enginoa'ing Geology, v. 7, p. 115-124.
JACO~SON,R.B., Ceo~, E.D., AnD MCGEmtN,LP., 1989, Slope movements triggered by heavy
rainfall, November 3-5, 1985, in Virginia and West Virginia, in Sehultz, A.P., and Iibson,
R.W., eds., Landslide Processes of the Eastern United States and Puerto Rico: Geological
Society of America Special Paper 236, p. 1-13.
486 TERENCE C BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON
JAsrErr, R.D., 1984, Hydraulics of high-gradient streams: Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, v.
110, p. 151%1539.
JAR~rrr, R.D, AnDCosta, I.E., 1986, Hydrology, geomo~hology, and dam-freak modeling of
the July 15, 1982 Lawn Lake and Cascade Lake dam failures, Latimer County, Colorado:
United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 1369, 78 p.
JEM~nS, A., As~worr,, R.J., FER~USOS,R.I., GRtEVE,I.C., ROWU~G,P., ann Srorr, T.A., 1988,
Slope failures in the Ochil Hills, Scotland, November 1984: Earth Surface Processes and
Landforms, v. 13, p. 69-76.
J~son, R.W., 1989, Debris flows in southern Puerto Rico, in Sehaltz, A.P., and Jibson, R.W.,
eds., Landslide Processes of the Eastern United Slates and Puerlo Rico: Geological Society
of America Special Paper 236, p. 2%55.
J~mr~son,A.M., 1970. Formation of debris flow deposits, in Physical Processes in Geology: San
Francisco, Freeman, Cooper, p. 433---448.
Jo~r~soN,A.M., 1984, Debris flow, in Brnmden, D., and Prior, D.B., eds., Slope Instability: New
York, Wiley, p. 257-361
Jc,~r~sor~,A.M., AnD ILION, P.H., 1970, Mobilization of debris flows: Zeitschrifi fiir Geomor-
phologie Supplereentband 9, p. 168-186.
J~son, B., 1984, Blackhawk landslide, California, U.S.A., in Brnnsden, D., and Prior, D.B.,
eds., Slope Instability: New York, Wiley, p. 481-504.
Jt~s, F.O., 1973, Landslides of Rio de Janiero and Serfs das Araras escarpment, Brazil: United
States Geological Survey Professional Paper 697, 42 p.
K~rcz, 1., 1968, Fluviatileobstacle marks from the wadis of the Negev (southern Israel): Journal
of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 38, p. 1000-1012.
K~smwavA,K., O~tmt~Ra,T., ~nD K~waTan~,T., 1989, Tree ring information and rainfall char-
acteristic for landslide in the Kobe District, Japaa: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms,
v. 14, p. 63-71.
KzE~R, D.K., 1984, Landslides caused by earthquakes: Geological Society of America Bulletin,
v. 95, p. 406--421.
KeLLEa~At.S,R., ANDCaURC~,M., 1990, Hazard management on fans, with examples from British
Columbia, in Rachocki, A.H., and crumb, M, eds., Alluvial Fans-A Field Approach: New
York, Wiley, p. 335-354.
KERR, D.R., 1984, Early Neogene continental sedimentation in the Vallecito and Fish Creek
Mountains, western Saltun Trough, California: Sedimentary Geology, v. 38, p. 217-246.
KERR,D.R., t,No~OWELL,S.M., 1991, Late Cenozoic sedimentation and leetonics, western Salton
Trough, California, in Walawender, M J., and Hanan, B.B., eds., Geological Excursions in
Southern California and Mexico: Geological Society of Amefica Annual Meeting Guidebook,
p. 397-416.
KING,J., LOVEDAY,1., ANDSc.usteL R.L., 1989, The 1985 Bairaman landslide dam and resulting
debris flow, Papua New Guinea: Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology, v. 22, p. 257-
270.
KITE, J.S., 1987, Colluvial diamictons in the Valley and Ridge Province, West Virginia and
Virginia, in Schultz, A.P., and Southworth, C.S., eds., Landslides of Eastern North America:
Geological Survey Circular Report' No. 1008, p. 21-23.
KOCHEL,R.C., 1987, Holocene debris ltows in central Virginia, in Costa, J.E., and Wieczomk,
G.F., eds., Debris Flows/Avalanches: Process, Recognition, and Mitigation: Geological So-
ciety of America Reviews in Engineering Geology, v. 7, p. 139-156.
K ~ m , R.C., 1990, Humid fans ofthe Appalachian Mountains, in Rachocki, A.H., and Church,
M., eds., Alluvial Fans-A Field Approach: New York, Wiley, 0. 109-130.
KOCHEL,R.C., ~N~,Jonson, R.A., 1984, Geomorphology and sedimantology of humid-temperate
alluvial fans, central Virginia, in Koster, E.H., and Steel, R.J., eds., Sedimentulogy of Gravels
and Conglomerates: Canadian Society of Petrnleum Geololvsts Memoir 10, p. 10%122.
KoJAS,E., ANnHuTcmnso~,J.M., 1984, Mayanmarca rcckslides and debris flow, Peru, in Bruns-
den, D., and Prior, D.B., eds., Slope instability: New York, Wiley, p. 315-361.
KOMAR,PD, 1988, Sediment lransport by floods, in Baker, V.R., KocheL R.C, and Patton,
P.C., eds., Flood Geomorphology: New York, Wiley, p. 97-112.
Kco~, n.J., 1952, A megabreccia formed hy sliding in southern France: American Journal of
Science, v. 250, p. 822-828.
KOSTASC~U~,R.A.. MAcDonaLD, G.M., AnD PwnAm, P.E., 1986, Depositional processes and
alluvial fan drainage basin morphomelfic relationships near Banff, Alberta, Canada: Earth
Surface Prueesses and Landforms, v. 1 [, p. 471..-484.
KorEa, E.H., ] 978, Transverse ribs: their characteristics, origin, and hydraulic sigmficance, in
Mialk A.D., ed., Huvial Sedimeatology: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Memoir
5, p. 161-[86.
K~us, Mj., 1984, Sedimentology and teetoalc setting of Early Tertiary quartzite conglomerates,
northwest Wyoming in Koster, E.H., and Steel, R.J., eds., Sedimentology of Gravels and
Conglomerates: Canadian Sodety of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 10, p. 203..-216.
K~AtrS, M.J., ~SD MtDOL~On, LT., 1987, Contrasting architecture of two alluvial suites in
different structural seltings, in Ethridge, EG., Flores, R.M, and Harvey, M.D., eds., Recent
Developments in Fluvial Sediraentology: SEPM Special Publication 39, p. 253-262.
K~te~, M.H, 1977, Large landslides composed of megabreccia interbedded in Miocene basin
deposits, southeastern Arizona: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 1008,
25 p.
K~r~STSOm,A., 1962, Geomorphological studies of sandar plains and their braided rivers in
Iceland: Gengrafiska Anualer, v. 44, p. 328--346.
LAu~nf, D.J.C., 1966, Imbrication, lmleocurrents, and other sedimentary features in the lower
New Red Sandstone, Devonshire, England: Journal of Sedimantary Petrology, v. 36, p. 940-
959.
LArsen, MC., ann St~oN, A., 1993, A rainfall intensity-duration threshold for landslides in a
humid-tropical ertviironment, Puerto Rico: Geografiska Annaler, v. 75A, p. 13-23.
LARSSOn,S., 1982, Geomorphological effects on the slopes of Longyear Valley, Spitsbergen, after
a heavy rainstorm in July, 1972: Gengrafiska Annulet, v. 64 A, p. 105-125.
LAwson, A.C., 1913, The petrographic designation of alluvial fan formations: University of
California Publications in Geological Sciences, v. 7, p. 325-334.
LEC~Err, R.F., BROW, R.J.E., ANDJon~sos, G.H., 1966, .Alluvial fan formation near Aklavik,
Northwest Territories, Canada: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 77, p. 15-30.
LEMI'~,R.W., 1966, Effects of the earthquake of March 27, 1964, at Seward, Alaska: United
States Geological Survey Professional Paper 542-E, 43 p.
LEOrOLD,L.B., ANDMAOtXXX,T., 1953, The hydraulic geometry of stream channels and some
physiographic implications: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 252, 57 p.
L~,J., ANDLuo, D, 1981, The formation and characteristics ofmudflow and flood in the mountain
area of the Dachau River and its prevention: 7Zeitschriftflir Geomorphologie, v. 25, p. 470-
484.
Li, J., ANDWASO,J., 1986, The mudflo~s in Xianjiang Basin: Zeitschrift nir Geomorphologie
Suppleraentband 58, p. 155.-164.
El, J., YUAn,J., BI, C., ANDLuo, D., 1983, The main features of the mudflow in Jiaog-Jia Ravine:
Zeitsohrift ~ir Geomorpholngie, v. 27, p. 325-341.
LlUERfnOS,J.T., 1970, Determination of the Manning coeflidenl from measured bed roughness
in natural channels: United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1898-B, 47 p.
LINK,M.H., 1984, Fluvial facies ofthe Miocene Ridge Route Formation, Ridge Basin, California:
Sedimentary Geology, v. 38, p. 263-285.
LinK, M.H., ROBERTS,M.T., ant~NEwron. M.S., 1985, Walker Lake Basin, Nevada: an example
of hte Tertiary(?) to reeent sedimentation in a basin adjacent to an active strike-slip fault,
in Biddle, K.T., and Chmtie-Blick, N., eds., Strike-Slip Deformation, Basin Formation, and
Sedimentation: SEPM Spexial Publieation 37, p. 105-125.
LOnGWELL,C.R., 1930, Faulted fans west of Sheep Range, southern Nevada: American Journal
of Seience, v. 20, p. 1-13.
I,~r~GWeLL,C.R., 1951, Megabreecia developed dowaslope from large faults: American Journal
of Science, v. 249, p. 343.-355.
LUO:d,,IAN,B.H., 1992, Debris flows and snow avalanche lundforms in the Lairig Ghru, Cairngorm
Mountains, Scotland: CGengraflskaAnnalcr, v. 74A, p. 109-121.
LvsTl~, L.K., 1965, Elastic sedimentation in Deep Springs Valley, California: United States
Geological Survey Professional Paper 352-F, 192 p.
MANS~XZER,W., 1985, The Dead Sea rift impact of dimate and tectonism on Pleistocene and
Holoeene sedimentation, in Biddle, K.T., and Christie-Blick, N, eds., Strike-slip Deforma-
tion, Basin Formation, and Sedimentation: SEPM Special Publication 37, p. 143-158.
MARTIN,D.C., PrrEau, D.R., PEaRcL R.A., ANDHAWLEY,P.M., I984, Remedial measures for
debris flows at the Agassiz Mountain Institution, British Columbia: Canadian Geoteehnical
Journal, v. 21, p. 505-517.
MASON,A.C, Ann FOSTER,H.L., 1956, Extruded modflow hills of Nirasaki, Japan: Journal of
Geology, v. 64, p. 74-83.
MmHEWSOr~,C.C., Kexlor~, J.R., AnD SANII,P.M., 1990, Role of bedlock ground water in the
initiation of debris flowsand sustained post-flow stream discharge: Association of Enginecfing
Geologists Bulletin, v. 27, p. 73-83.
McCARtHY,T.S., ELtERV,W.N., ANnSla~iSrREer,I.G., 1992, Avulsion mechanisms on the Oka-
vangn Fan, Botswana: the control of a fluvial system by vegetation: Sedimentology, v. 39, p.
779-795.
McCARtHY,T.S., STANmr[er,I.G., ANDCAJRnCg~, B., 1991, The sedimentary dynamics of active
fluvial channels on the Okavango fan, Botswana: Sedimentology, v. 38, p. 471.-487.
McCAarHv, T.S., STarnsrrwr, I.G., CmRNCROSS,B., ELteRY,W.N., ELLERY,K., OtLo~se, R., Ann
GRUMPY,T.S.A., 1988, Incremental aggradatiun on the Okavango delta-fan, Botswana: Geo-
morphology, v. 1, p. 267-278.
MCDOr~aLD,B.C., ANDBANt~Ee,I., 1971, Sediments and bedforms no a braided outwash plain:
Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 8, p. 1282-130 I.
MCDONALD,B.C., ANnDAY,T.J., 1978, An experimental flume study on the formation of trans-
verse ribs: Geological Survey of Canada Paper 78-1A, p. 441...-451.
McGEg, W.J., 1897, Sheetflood erosion: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 8, p. 87-
112.
McGowEN,J.H., 1971, Gum Hollow fan delta, Nueces Bay, Texas: Texas Bureau of Ecunomic
Geology Report of Investigations 69, 91 p.
McGowEn, J.H., 1979, Alluvial fan systems, in Galloway, W.E., Kreitler, C.W., and McGowen,
J.H., eds., Depositional and Groundwater Flow Systems in the Exploration for Uranium:
Texas Bureau of Economic Geology Research Culloqium, p. 43-79.
McGowEn,J.H., ANDGARNER,L.E., 1970, Physiographic features and stratification types of coarse-
grained point bars: modern and ancient examples: Sedimerttology, v. 17, p. 77-111.
McGowEn,J.H., ANnGROAI,C.G., 1971, Van Horn Sandstone, west Texas: an alluvial fan model
for mineral exploration: Bureau of Economic Geology Report of Investigations 72, 57 p.
McKeE, E.D, CRosav,E.J., AnnBeRRVmLt,H.L., JR., 1967, Flood deposits, Bijou Creek, Colorado,
June 1965: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 37, p. 829.-851.
McPHERSON,J.G., SHANMUGAM,G., mn MoIO~, RJ., 1986, Fan-deltas and braid deltas: conceptual
problems (abstract): American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 70, p. 619.
McPHERSO~,J.G., Snar~UUGAU,G., ANDMO~OL~,RJ., 1987, Fan-deltas and braid deltas: varieties
of coarse-grained deltas: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 99, p. 331-340.
McPHERSOn,J.G., SHmUU~M, G., ANn MoIotA, R.J., 1988a, Fun deltas and braid deltas." con.
ceptual problems, in Nemec, W., and Steel, R.J., eds., Fan Deltas: Sedimentolngy and Tectonic
Settings: Glasgow, Blackie, p. 14--22.
McPHErSO~,J.G., SUANMOGAM,G., AnDMoJo~, R.J., 1988b, Fan-deltas and braid deltas: varieties
of coarse-graiNed deltas, Reply to Discussion by L A. Duune: Geological Society of America
Bulletin, v. 100, p. 130%1310.
MELOSH,H.J., 1987, The mechanics of large avalanches, in Costa, J.E., and Wieczorek, G.F.,
eds., Debris Flows/Avalanches: Process, Recognition, and Mitigation: Geological Society of
America Reviews in Engineering Geology, v. 7, p. 41-50.
MIA~L,A.D., 1978a, Fluvial sedimentology: a historical review, in Miall, A.D., ed., Fluvial
Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 5, p. 1--48.
MIALL,A.D., 1978b, Lithofacies types and vertical profile models in braided fiver deposits: a
summary, in Miall, A.D., ed., Fluvial Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petroleum Ge-
ologists Memoir 5, p. 597.-.604.
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS 487

M tALL,A.D., 1981, Analysis of fluvial depositional systems: American Association of Petroleum fluvial system, Eocene Castisent Sandstone Formation, South Pyrenean Basin, in Miall, A.D.,
Geologists .Educational Course Note Series 20, 75 p. ed., Fluvial Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologials Memoir 5, p. 487-
MIAtt, A.D., 1984, Principles of Sedimenlary Basin Analysis: New York, Springer-Verlag, 490 p. 510.
M~LL A.D., 1985, Architeclural-ulement analysis: a new method of facies analysis applied to N~tSEN,T.H., 1982, Alluvial fan deposits, in Saholle, P.A., and Spearing, D., eds., Sandstone
fluvial deposits, in Recognition of Fluvial Depositional Systems and Their Resource Potential: Depositional Environments: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 31, p.
SEPM Short Course Notes 19, p. 33-81. 49-86.
Mt~tL, A.D., 1990, Principles of Sedimentary Basin Analysis, 2rid Edition: New York, Springer- N~tSEN,T.H., 1985, Introduction and editor's comments, in Nilsen, T.H., ed., Modern and
Verlng, 668 p. Ancient Alluvial Fan Deposits: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 372 p.
M~ALL,A.D., 1992, Alluvial deposits, in Walker, R.G, and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models: NItSEN, T.H., 1993, What is an alluvial fan?: International Working Group on Fan Deltas
Response to saa-Level Change: Toronto, Geological Association of Canada, p. 119-142. Newsletter no. 1, p. 3-4.
MIO~,LFrON,G.V., 1965, Antidane cross-bedding in a large flume: Journal of Sedimentary Pe- NORniN,C.F., JR., ANDBEVERAGE,J.P., 1965, Sediment transport in the Rio Grnnde, New Mexico:
trnlogy, v. 35, p. 922-927. United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 462-F, 35 p.
M~rot~os, G.V., ~ H~vro~, M.A., 1976, Subaqueoos sediment transport and deposition by Nov,~K, I.D., 1973, Predicting coarse sediment transport: the HjulstrBm curve revisited, in
sediment gravity flows, in Stanley, D.J., and Swift, D.J.P., eds., Marine Sediment Transport Morisawa, M., ted., Fluvial Geomorphology: State University of New York at Binghamton,
and Environmental Management: New York, Wiley, p. 197-218. Publications in Geomorphology, p. 13-25.
M~ODtErON,G.V., ~ o SOtrTH^~O,J.B., 1984, Mechanics of sadiment Movement: SEPM Eastern Nt~MMED^t.,D., AnD BO~I,ROYO,J.C., 1976, Morphology and hydrodynamic characteristics of
Section, Short Course 3, variously pngmated. terrestrial fan environments: Colombia, University of South Carolina Coastal Research Di-
MtLts, H.H., 1982, Long-term episndic deposition on mountain foot slo0es in the Blue Ridge vision Technical Report 10-CRD, 61 p.
province of North Carolina: evidence from relative age-dating: Southeastern Geology, v. 23, OHMOR[,H., ~,o Hilton, M., 1988, Magnitude, frequency and geomorphological significance of
p. 123-128. rocky modflows, landcreep and the collapse of steep slopes: Zeitschrill tilt Geomorpholngie
MILL, H.H., 1987, Variation in sedimentary properties ofcolluvium as a function of topographic Supplemenlband 67, p. 55--65.
setting, Valley and Ridge province, Virginia: Zeitschrift fur C.rcomorphnlngie, v. 31, p. 277- OKUDA,S., SUw~, H., OKUNJSnl,K., YOKOWM^,K., aNDNAY,ArgO,M., 1980, Observations on the
292. motion of debris flow and its geomorphic effect, in Slaymaker, O., Dnnn, T., and Rapp, A.,
MOHINDRA,R., PAR~ASn,B., Ann PSnSAD,J.. 1992, Historical geomorphology and pedology of the eds., Zeitschrift flit Genmnrphologie Supplementband 35, p. 142-163.
Gandak megafan, middle Gang¢tie Plains, India: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. Oso, Y., 1990, Alluvial fans in Japan and South Korea, in Rachocki, A.H., and Church, M.,
17, p. 643--662. eds., Alluvial fans-A Field Approach: New York, Wiley, p. 91-108.
MO~ASIESS~Y,R., 1992, When mountains fall: Science News, v. 142, p. 136-138. ORI,G.G., 1982, Braided to meandering channel patterns in humid-regina alluvial fan deposits,
Mo~tY~azR, B.C., 1939, Erosional effects of the Webb Mountain (Tennessee) cloudburst of River Reoo, PU Plain (northern Italy): Sedimentary Geology, v. 31, p. 231-248.
August 5, 1938: Tennessee Academy ofseiences Journal, v. 14, p. 190-196. OSTER~, W.R., ASp HtFP, C.R., 1987, Dating and interpretation of debris flows by geologic
MoR,sos, S.R.. ANDHEt~, F.J., 1987, Sedimentology of the White Channel gravels, Klondike and botanical methods at Whitney Creek Goge, Mount Shasta, California, in Costa, J.E.,
area, Yukon Territory: fluvial deposits of a confined valley, in Ethridge, F.G., Flores, R.M., and Wieczorek. G.F., eds., Debris Flows/Avalanches: Process, Recognition, and Mitigation:
and Harvey, M.D., eds., 1987, Recent Developments in Fluvial Sedimentology: SEPM Special Geological Society of America Reviews in Engineering Geology, v. 7, p. 15%164.
Publication 39, p. 205-216. PACK.F J., 1923. Torrential potential of desert waters: Pan-American Geologist, v. 40, p. 349-
MosTos, D.M., 1971, Seismically tri~gared landslides in the area above San Fernando Vulley: 356.
United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 733, p. 9%103. PAts, C.F., 1971, Rapid mass movement under forest and grass in the Hunua Ranges, New
MORTOS,D.M., A~nC~M~SE~L,R.H., 1974. Spring mudflowsat Wrightwood, southern California: Zealand: Australian Geographical Studies, v. 9, p. 77.-84.
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology, v. 7, p. 377-384. PAR~Sr~, B., Awe.sam],A.K., ~NDGoH~s, K., 1983, Lithofacies of the Markanda terminal fan,
MORTOS, D.M., KENNEDY,M.P., CA~'BELt, R.H., BARROWS,A.G., JR., KamL J.E., ANDYtR~a~s, Kurukshetra district, Haryana, India, in Collinson, J.D., and Lewin, J., eds., Modern and
R.F., 1979, Landsliding and mudflows at Wrightwood, San Bernardino County, California: Ancient Fluvial Systems: International Association of SedimentologJsls Special Publication
California I~vision of Mines and Geology Special Report 136, 21 p. 6, p. 337-344.
MOSES,M., ash HOHEr~S~SS,F., 1982, Geotechnical aspects of soil slips in alpine regions: Engi- PAttON, P.C., 1988, Drainage basin morphomet~ and floods, in Baker, V.R., Kochel, R.C.,
neering Genlngy, v. 19, p. [85--211. and Patton. P.C., eds., Flood Geomorphology: New York. Wiley, p. 51--64.
Mut~, MR., 1965, Rockfall-avalanehe and rockslide-avalanche deposits at Sawtooth Ridge, PArros, P.C., ANDBAKER,V.R., 1976, Morphometry and floods in small drainage basins subject
Montana: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 76, p. 1003-1014. to diverse hydrogeomorphic controls: Water Resnnrees Research, v. 12, p. 941-952.
M ~ J ~ , A.B., 1976, Terminal fans of inland streams in Sutlej-Yamana plain, India: Zeitsehtifl PEARCt.A.J., Asp O'LOUrHLIN,C.L., 1985, Landsliding during a M 7.7 earthquake: influence of
f'firGeomorphologie, v. 20, p. 190-204. geology and topography: Geology, v. 13, p. 855-858.
Mt~LLtSEAUX,D.R., ~O CRAr~D~tL,D.R., 1962, Recent lahars from Mount St. Helens, Washington: I~RK~NS,G.H., 1870, Notice of a recent land-slide on Mount Passaeonaway, New Hampshire:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 73, p. 855-870. American Journal of Science, p. 49, p. 158-161.
Naer, F., H,~ts~stt, W., ~D JAnus, M., 1989, Morphological changes in the Swiss Alps resulting PICKUP,G., HI~INS, R.J., ,~NoWARSZR,R.F., 1981, Erosion and sediment yield in Fly River
from the 1987 summer slnrms, in Starosoloszky, O., and Melder, O.M., eds., Hydrology of drainage basins, Papan New Guinea, in Davies, T.R.H., and Pearce, A.J., eds., Erosion and
Disasters: London, James & James, p. 36.-42. Sediment Transport in Pacific Rim Steeplands: International Association of Hydrological
NA~F,F., HOSAT,P., M~L~, A.G., ~,so Horns, E., 1990, Anomalous hydrological behavinur of Sciences Publication 132, p. 438-456.
an Alpine stream (Varuaa, Posehiavo, southern Switzerland) and its interpretation in terms P~EgSO~,T.C., 1980, Erosion and deposition by debris flows at Mr. Thomas, North Canterbury,
of the geology of the catchmenl: International Association of Hydrological Sciences Publi- New Zealand: Scdimentniogy, v. 5, p. 227-247.
cation 194, p. 347-354. P[EgSON,T.C., 1981, Dominant particle support mechanisms in debris flows at Mr. Thomas,
N ~ , D.G., ~ n S~vr, L.W., JR., 1987, Rainfall thresholds for mggering a debris avalanching New Zealand, and implications for flow mobility: Sedimeotology, v. 28, p. 49-60.
event in the southern Appalachian Mountains, in Costa, J.E., and WiecTorck, G.F., eds., PIERSON,T.C., 1985. How debris flows stop (abslracl): Geological Society of America Abstracts
Debris Flows/Avalanches: Process, Recognitiun, and Mitigation: Geolng~calSociety nfAmer- with Programs v. 17, p. 623.
ica Reviews in Engineering Geology, v. 7, p. 81-92. PL~A~, G., ANt~ER~C~SES,G.E., 1984, Nevados Huasearan avalanches, Peru, in Bronsdea, D.,
N~,~v, D.G., Swift. L.W., Js., MAsr~sc~,D.M., ~s~ Bo~s, R.G., 1986, Debris avalanching in and Prior, D.B., eds., Slope Instability: New York, Wiley, p. 277-314.
the southern Appalachians: an influence on forest soil formation: Soil Science Society of POM~ROV,J.S., 1980, Storm -induced debris avalanchingand related phenomena in the Johnstown
America Proceedings, v. 50, p. 465..-471. area, P~nsylvania, ruth references to other studies in the Appalachians: United States Geo-
NEt.Sos,A.R., 1992, Lithofacies analysis ofcolluvial sediments-an aid in interprelingthe recent logical Survey Professional Paper 1191, 24 p.
history of Quaternary normal faults in the Basin and Range Province, western United States: POM~ROV,J.S., ~No THOMAS,R.E., 1986, Geologic relationships of slope movement in northern
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. (62, p. 607--622. Alabama: United States Geological Survey Bulletin 1649, 13 p.
NEMEC,W., 1990, Deltas-remarks on terminology and classification, in Colella, A., and Prior, PORTES,S.C., ASDO~OUBELLI,G., 1980, Catastrophic rockfall of September 12, 1717 on the Italian
D.B., eds., Coarse-Grained Deltas: International Association of Sedimentnlogists Special flank of the Munt Blanc massif: Zeitschriff fir" Geomorphologie, v. 24, p. 200-218.
Publication I0, p. 3-10. P~ST~A,G., 1990, Depositional architecture and facies of rivec and fan deltas: a synthesis, in
Neue~, W., 1993, The concept and definition nfa fan delta: review and discussion: Pohang, Colella, A., and Prior, D.B., eds., Coan¢-Grained Deltas: International Association of Sed-
Korea, 3rd International Workshop on Fan Deltas, Abstracts with Program, p. 17-25. imentolol~sts Special Publication I 0, p. 13-28.
NtMEC,W., ~sa POSTUA,G., 1993, Quaternary alluvial fans in southwestern Crete: sedimentation P~'~, W.E., JR., 1974, Simulation of allovial fan deposition by a random walk model: Water
processes and geomorphic evolution, in Marzo, M., and Puigdefabrogas, C., eds., Alluvial Resources Research, v. 10, p. 263-274.
Sedimentation: International Association of Sedimeotologists Special Publication 17, p. 235- PR~C~,W.E., JR., 1976, A random-walk simulation model ofalluvial fan deposition, in Merriam,
276. D.F., ed., Random Processes in Geology: New York, Springer-Verlng, p. 55--62.
NEM~C,W., A~t~SX~tL, R.L, 1987. What is a fan-delta and how do we recngnize it?: Bergen, Ps~oR,D.B., ~NDSr~en~ss.N., 1972, Some movement patterns oftemperate mudfiows: examples
Norway, Fan Deltas, Sedimentulogy and Tectonic Settings, International Symposium Pro- from north-eastern Ireland: Genlogieal Society of America Bulletin, v. 83, p. 2533-2543.
ceodings, p. 11-17. P~o~, D.B., STE~ESS,N., ANDARCHER,D.R., 1968, Composite mudflows on the Antrim Coast
NEME(,W., aNDSTEEL,R.J., 1988, What is a fan-delta and how do we recognize it? in Nemec, ofnnrth-east Ireland: Gengrafiska Annaler, v. 50A, p. 65-78.
W., and Steel, R.J., eds., Fan Deltas: Sedimentology and Teclonic Settings: London, Blackie, Pgto~, D.B., Sra~a~Ns,N., ANDI~t G~S, G.R., 1970, Some examples of debris flows ia northern
p. 11-17. Ireland: Zeitschrifl fiJr Geomorphologie, v. 14, p. 275-288.
NwoLtXn, P.G., ~ n SO~R~sO-VAtvO,M., 1991, Geomorphic controls of tlie shape and mobility PRto~, D.B., ST~HESS,N., ASDDouglaS, G.R., 1971, Some examples of mudttow and rockfall
of rock avalanches: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 103, p. 1365-1373. activity in north-cast Ireland: Institute of British Geographers Special Publication 3, p. 12%
N~MaS, W., AUDPW~O~V~SREGAS,C., 1978, Coane-grained point bar structure in a molassc-type 140.
488 TERENCE C. BLAIR AND JOHN G. McPHERSON
R.acn~Kl, A.H., 195l, Alluvial Fans: Chichesler, Wiley, 161 p.
Ra¢~ocKz,A.H., 1990, The Leba River alluvial fan and its 0aleogeomorphological significance,
in Rachocki, A.H., and Church, M., eds., Alluvial Fans-A Field Approach: New York,
Wiley, p. 305-320,
RAa~. P,H., 1986, Engineering Geology: New York, Elscvicr, 578 p.
rs, uos` A., ANDSO,W,, A., 1983, Gravel bars in low-sinuosity streams (Permian and Triassic,
central Spain), in Collinson, J.D., and Lewin, J., eds., Modem and Ancient Fluvial Systems:
later'national Association of Seclimemolo~sts Special Publication 6, p. 301-313.
Rs,ss)e, W.F., 1990, The Portage la Prairie 'flondplain fan,' in Raehocki, A.H., and Church,
M., edls., Alluvial Fans-A Field Approach: New York, Wiley, p. 179-194.
gas~le, W.F., THORLB~n, L.H., and TELteR,J.T., 1989, Holocene evolution of the Assiniboine
River paleochannels and Pottage la Prairie alluvial fan: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences,
v. 27, p. 1834..-1841.
Rape, A., 1960, Recent development of mountain slopes in Karkcvagge and surroundings,
northern Scandinavia: Geografiska Annaler, v. 42, p. 73-200.
Ra~P, A., ann F~lrsr)~e, R.W., 196fl, Talus fan or cone; scree and cliff debris, tn Encyclopedia
of Geomorphology: New York, Reinhold, p. 1106--1109.
RaP~, A., Ant) NY~es~, R., 198t, Alpine debris [lows in northern Scandinavia: Gengrafiska
Annaler, v. 63A, p. 183-196.
RaPP, A., ~NOSTrOmOU)St,L, 1976, Slope erosion due to extreme rainfall in the Scandinavian
Mountains." Geografiska Annaler, v. 5flA, p. 193-200.
Ray, L.L., 1964, The Charleston, Missouri alluvial fan: United States Geological Survey Fro-
fessional Paper 5lllB, p. 130-134.
R~^D)N~,H.G., ANDOrToS, GJ., 199 I, Sediment calibre: a control on facies models with special
reference to deep-sea depositional systems, in Muller, D.W., McKenzie, J.A., and Weissert,
H., eds., Controversies in Modern Geology: Evolution of Geolngical Theories in Sedimen-
tolngy, Earth History, and Tectonics: London, Academic Press, Harcourt Bmee Jovanovich,
p. 85-111.
Re)m~)rz, E., 1966, Late Quaternary history and sedimentation of the Copper River delta and
vicinity, Alaska: Sen Diego lunpnblished Ph.D. thesis], University of California, San Diego,
160 p.
Rt)t~rEtOS,1., sso N~Hs~s,G., 1993, Formation of braided river floodplains, Waimakariri River,
New Zealand: Sedirnantology, v. 40, p. I I 13--1127.
REn~AU,S., ANDD)~ICH, W.E., 1987, The importance of hollows in debris flow studies; examples
from Maria County, California. in Costa, J.E., and Wieczorek, G.F., eds., Debris Flows/
Avalanches: Process, Recognition, and Mitigation: Geological S~iety of America Reviews
in Engineering Geology, 7, p. 165-.-180.
Rennin. S., D~ETrtCH,W.E., DOSAHOE,D.J., Jutt. A.J.T., ann Rua~, M., 1990, Late Quaternary
history of colluvial deposition and erosion in hollows, central California Coastal Ranges:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 102, p. 96%982.
RetiE^u, S., ant) D)rrRw8, W.E., W)tsoN, C.J., and RGO~s, J.D., 1984, Colluvial deposits and
associated landslides in the northern San Francisco Bay area, California, U.S.A.: Proceedings
of the 4th Imeroational Symposium on Landslides, International Society for Soil Mechanics
and Foundation Engineering, Toronto, p. 425-.430.
RENW,CK,W.H., 1977, Erosion caused by intense rainfall in a small catchment in New York
State: Geology, v. 5, p. 361-364.
RENWlCK,W.. B~UMSAUGH.R., ~ D LOEHER,L., 1982, Landslide morphology and processes on
Santa Crn~. Island, California: Geograhska Annaler, v. 64A, p. 149-159.
R~CH~, K., 1982, Rivers; Form and Process in Alluvial Channels: London, Methaeo, 361 p.
Rica^r~r~oN,P.D.. 1968, The generation of seour marks near obstacles: Journal of Sedimentary
Palrolotpj, v. 38, p. 965-970.
RIC~NUAnS,D., 1990, Debris flows 1987 in Switzerland: modelling and fluvial sedimeul trans-
port: International Association of Hydrological Sciences Publication 194, p. 371-378.
R~c~Mers, W.R., 1913, The Duab of Turkestan: Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
RODINE,J.D., ann JOHnSOn.A.M., 1976, The ability of debris heavily freighted with coarse clustic
materials to flow on gentle slopes: Sedimentolngy, v. 23, p. 213--234.
RoEsu, U., ~D SCmnDtER,C., 1990, Debris flows 1987 in Switzerland: geological and hydro-
geological aspects: International Assocmtion of Hydrological Sciences Publication 194, p.
37%386.
Rust, B.R., 1972, Structure and process in a braided river: Sedimentolngy, v. 18, p. 221-245.
Rust, B.R., 1979, Coarse alluvial deposits, in Walker, R.G., ed., Facies Models: Geoseience
Canada Reprint Series 1, p. 9-21.
RusT, B.R., 198 l, Alluvialdeposits and tectonic style: Devonian and Carboniferous successions
in eastern Gaspe, in Miall, A.D., ed., Sedimentation and Tectonics in Alluvial Basins: Geo-
logical Association of Canada Special Paper 23, p. 49-76.
Rust, B.R., ANnGOSTUn,V.A., 1981, Fossil transverse ribs ia Halocene alluvial fan deposits,
Depot Creek, South Australia: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 51, p. 441-444.
Rust, B.R., SSDKOSTE~,EH., ] 984, Coarse alluvialdeposits, in Walker, R.G., ed., Facies Models,
2nd Edition: Geoscienee Canada Reprint Series 1, p. 53--69.
R~OE~, J.M., 1971, The stratigraphy and morphology of para-glacial alluvial fans in south-
central British Columbia: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 8. p. 27%298.
R~oeR, J.M., Bovts, M.J., ant) CHURCH,M., 1990, Rock avalanches at Texas Creek, British
Columbia: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 27, p. 1316.-1329.
S~u~sur~, H.B. DE, 1779, Voyages duns Ins Alpes; pr~:c~desd'un essai sur rhistorie naturelle des
environs de Gen~ve: Ncochatel, Lous Fauche-Borel, part 1,540 p.
Sauss~rE, H.B. DE, 1784, Voyages clans Ins Alpes; pr~crdes d'un essai sur rhistorie naturelle des
environs de CGen~ve:Neuchatel, Lous Faache-Borel, part 2, 482 p.
SAussure, H.B. De, 1796a, Voyages clans Ins Alpes; precedes d'un essaz sur rhistorie naturelle
des environs de Gen~ve: Neuehatel, Lous Faoche-Borel, part 3, 456 p.
Saussu~e, H.B. DE, 1796b, Voyages duns Ins Alpes; pr(x:&~esd'un essai sur l'historie naturelle
des environs de Gen/~ve: Neucbatel, Loan Fauche-Bosel, part 4, 594 p.
SAntos, B.L, ANDHO~ES, K.V., 1991, The Titus Canyon Formation: evidence for early Oligoeene
extension in the Death Valley area, CA (abstract): Geological Sociely of America Abstracts
with Programs, v. 23, p. 82.
SOUL,ON, R.J., WRi~HT,R.H., anD MONTGOMERY,D.R., 1987, Anatomy of a debris flow, Padfca,
California, in Costa, J.E, and Wieczorek, G.F., eds., Debris Flows/Avalanches: Process,
Recognition, and Mitigation: Geological Society of America Reviews in Engineering Geology,
7, p. 181-200.
Scualrr, J.G., AnDBROW, C., 199 I, Megabreeoia deposits in an extensional basin: Horse Camp
Formation, east-central Nevada (abstract): American Association of Petroleum Geologists
Bulletin, v. 75, p. 1139.
SC,tSLTZ,A.P., Xr~DSOtSrHWORtH,C.S.. 1989, Large bedrock landslides of the Appalachian Valley
and Ridge province of eastern North America, in Sohultz, A.P., and Jibson, R.W., eds.,
Landslide Processes of 'the Eastern United States and Puerto Rico: Geological Society of
America Special Paper 236, p. 57-74.
SC,UMM,S.A., 1977, T'ae Fluvial System: New York, Wiley, 338 p.
ScHum~, S.A., MostEr, M.P., Ant)WEAVER,W.E., 1987, Experimental Fluvial Geomorplaolngy:
New York, Wiley, 413 p.
ScawAstz, D.E., 1978, Hydrology and current orientation analysis of a braided-to-meandering
transition: the Red River in Oklahoma and Texas, U.S.A., in Miall, A.D., ed., Fluvial
Sedimenlolngy: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 5, p. 231-255.
ScotT, K.M., ANDG~vLze, G.C., JR., 1968, Flood surge oft.he Rubicon River, California-
hydrology, hydraulics, and boulder transport: United States Geological Survey Professional
Paper 422-M, 40 p.
SeLBY,M.J., 1976, Slope erosion due to extreme rainfall: a case study from New Zealand:
Geografiska Annalcr, v. 58A, p. 131-138.
SHarp, R.P., 1942, Mndllow levees: Journal of Geomorphology, v. 5, p. 222-227.
SHarp, R.P., AnD NoBtts, L.H., 1953, Mud~ow of 1941 at Wrightwood, southern California:
Geological Soeiely of America Bulletin, v. 64, p. 547-560.
SHaR~ C.F.S., 1938, Landslides and Related Phenomena: New York, Columbia University
Press, 137 p.
SHieLDS,A., 1936, Anwendang des lthnlicbkcits-Mechanik and der Turbulenzfmscbung oaf die
Geschiebebewegung: Preussisch Versuchsanstalt fir" Wusserbau and Schiltbau, Mitteilungen,
Berlin, pt. 26.
SorEve, R.L., 1968, The Blaekhawk landslide: Geological Sod e~y of America Special Paper
108, 47 p.
S, ro~R, J.F., JR., 1976, Mass movement on Nyika Plateau, Malawi: ZeitschriR fir" Geomor-
pbolngie, v. 20, p. 56--77.
StMONS, D.B., Ant) Ric,arnson, E.V., 1962, The etfeet of bed roughness on depth.discharge
relations in alluvial channels: United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1498-E,
26 p.
SiMons,D.B., arJn RK~aaDso~, E.V., 1966, Resistance to flow in alluvial channels: United States
Geological Survey Professional Paper 4220, 61 p.
SmCH, H., PARO~SH,B., and GOHAI~,K., 1993, Facies analysis of Kosi megafan deposits: Sedi-
mentary Geology, v. 85, p. 87-113.
SLOSSOn,J.E, Yoa~uu, D.D., AnnS,UtRmAn,G., 1992, Thistle landslide: sos mitigation possible?,
in Slosson, J.E., Keene, A.G., and Johnson, J.A., eds., Landslides/landslide Mitigation:
Geological Society of America Reviews in Engineering Geology 9, p. 83-93.
SM^Rt, G.M., 1981, Volcanic debris control, Gunung Kclnd, east Java, in Davies, T.R.H., and
Pearce, A.J., eds., Erosion and Sediment Transport in the Pacific Rim Steeplands: Interna-
tional Assocaatiun of Hydrological Sciences Publication 132, p. 604--623.
SM,tH, G., 1754, Dreadful storm in Cumberland: Gentleman's Magazine, v. 24, p. 464--467.
SMITH,N.D., 1970, The braided stream deposilional environment comparison of the Platte
River with some Silurian clastin rocks, north-central Appalachians: Geological Society of
America Bulletin, v. 81, p. 2993-3014.
SMIr,, N.D., 1972, Some seclimentological aspects of planar cross-stratification in a sandy
braided river. Journal of Sedimenlary Petrology, v. 42, p. 624..-634.
SMir,, N.D., 1974, Sedimentolngy and bar formation iu the upper Kicking Horse River, a
braided outwash stream: Journal of.Geology, v. 82, p. 205--223.
SuEs, A., 1979, late Pleistocene fan-dalton along the Dead Sea rift: Journal of Sedimentary
Petrology, v. 49, p. 541-552.
So, C.L., 1971, Mass movements associated with the rainstorm of June 1966 in Hong Kong:
Institute of British Geographers Transactions, v. 53, p. 55-65.
SoRRIso-VALvO,R., 1988, Landslide-reiated fans in Calabria: Catana Supplement 13, p. 109.-
121.
SotJrnaRD,J.B., SU~T,,N.D., and KUHNLe,R.A., 1984, Chutes and lobes: newly identified elements
of braiding in shallow gravelly streams, in Koster, E.H., and Steel, R.J., eds., Scdimantology
of Gravels and Conglomerates: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 10, p. 51-
59.
S~eARInO,D.A., 1974, .Alluvial fan deposits: Geological Society of America Summasy Sheets of
Sedimentary Deposits, sheet 1.
STANISTREET,I.G., Ca)r~Ncvcosx,B., ann McCARTHY, T.S., 1993, Low sinuosity and meandering
bedlead rivers of the Okavango Fan: ebannel confinement by vegetative levees without fine
sediment: Scdimenlary Geology, v. 85, p. 135--156.
STaN)rrReEr, I.G., ~NDMcC^rtHV, T.S., 1993, The Okavango Fan and the classification of sub-
aerial fan systems: Sedimentary Geology, v. 85, p. 115-133.
SratHa~, I., 1976, Debris flows on vegetated screes in the Black Mountains, Carmartheoshire:
Earth Surface Processes, v. I, p. 173-180.
SraTrau, 1., Ant) F~Nm, S.C., 1986, Intluene¢ of scree accumulation and weathering on the
development of steep mountain slopes, in Abrahams, A.D., ed., Hiflslope Processes: London,
Alien & Unwin, p. 245-268.
StEeL, RJ., MAer~te,S., Nines, H.R., ROE,S.L., and S~n~Ar~R, A., 1977, Coarsening upward
cycles in the alluvium of the Horoelen Basin (Devonian, Norway)--spdimentary response 1o
tectonic events: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 88, p. 1124-1134.
SrRA,Ut~, A.N., 1957, Quantitative analysis of watershed genmorpholngy: American Geophys-
ical Union Transactions, v. 38, p. 913-920.
Srr~st~r, A.N., 1964, Quantitative geomospholngy of drainage basins and channel networks,
in Chen, V.T., ed., Handbook of Applied Hydrology: New York, McGraw-Hill, p. 40--74.
 ALLUVIAL FANS AND THEIR NATURAL DISTINCTION FROM RIVERS
SUNDBORG,A., 1956, The river Klar~lven: a study of fluvial processes: CGeo~fiskaAnnales, v.
38, p. 125-316.
SorreLs, A.. 184 I, Etude sur les torrents des Hautes-Alpes, I st Edition: Paris, lmlmmerie Cosset.
SUrREUt, A., 1870, Etude sur les torrents des Hautes-Alpes, 2nd Edition: Paris, Imprimarie
Cusset.
St~wa,H., ssn O~uoa, S., 1980, Dissection of valleys by debris flows, in Slaymaker, O., Dunne,
T., and Rapp, A., eds., Geomo~hic Experiments on Hillslopes: Zeitschrifl ~ Geomor-
phologie Supplcmenthand 35, p. 164-182.
Town^sol, T., 1991, Debris flows: Internatinnal Assoctation for Hydraulic Research Monograph
Series, 165 p.
T~r~ao, M., 1976, Rate of ernsinn in the Tanzawa Mountains, central Japan: Geogratiska
Annaler, v. 58A, p. 15.5--163.
T~sstr, L.H., ann Hwet, J., 1991, Basalt breceias and conglomerates in the Lower Jurassic
McCoy Formation, Fandy Basin, Nova Scotia: differentiation of talus and debris-flow de-
,sits: Journal of Sediraentary Petrology, v. 61, p. 15-27.
T~m~, P.H., ~st~ R~pp, A, 1972, Landslides in the Mgeta area, western Uhiguru Mountains,
Tanzania: Geogruliska Annaler, v. 54A, p. 157-193.
T,eJe, A.J., 1923, The red beds of the front range in Colorado: a study in sedimentation: Journal
of Geology, v. 31, p. 192-207.
TouM~s, C.F., 1909, Erosion and deposition in the southena Arizona bolson region: Journal of
Geology. v. 17, p. 136--163.
Towts~, D.J., 1993, Paleogeograaphicreconstruction of the Death Valley extended region: evi-
dence from Miocene large rock-avalanche deposits in the Amargosa Chaos Basin, California:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 105, p. 1190-1213.
Trowss m~e, A.C., 1911, The terrestrial deposits of Owens Valley, California: Journal of Geology,
v. 19, p. 736--740.
TSOXtLL,H.C, aNDPErESSOn,J.Q, 1937, Flood in La Caaaada Valley, Califonfia: United States
Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 796-C, p. 53-98.
Tu~r.scu, V., 1970, Mudflows in the Flysch Carpathians and Bend Sub-Carpathians of Romania:
Zeitschrit~ flit Georaorphologie Supplementhand 9, p. 146-156.
TunsSl~E, I.P., 1983, Alluvial fan sedimentation of the Horseshoe Park flood, Colorado, USA,
July 15, 1982: Sedimentary Geology, v. 36, p. 15-23.
Van De KAM~,P.C., 1973. Holoceoe continental sedimentation in the Salton Basin, California:
a reconnaissance: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 84, p. 827--848.
Van D~t~e,D.F., 1985, Debris [lows and debris torrents in the southern Canadian Cordillera:
Canadian Geoteehnical Journal, v. 22, p. 44.-.68.
VaRsr.s, D.J., 1978, Slope movement types and processes, in Schuster, R.L., and Kriz~k, R.J.,
eds., landslides, Analysis and Control: Washington D.C., Transportation Research Board,
National Academy of Sdences, Special Re~rt 176, p. 11-33.
W~toRos, H.H., 1967, Debris flow and erosion control la'oblems caused by ash eruptinns of
lrazu volcano, Costa Rico: United States Genlogical Survey Bulletin 1241-I, 37 p.
W~L~S, R.G., 1975a, Conglomerate: sedimentary structures and facies models, in De~sitional
Environments as Interpreted from Primary Sedimentary Structures and Stratification Se-
quences: SEPM Short Course 2, p. 13~161.
WaLKEr, R.G., 1975b, Generalized facies models for resedimented conglomerates oftarbidite
assodation: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 86, p. 737-748.
Waso, L.G., Stee,ar~, M.F., and Nu~ueoau, D., 1976, Hydraulics and morphology of glacial
outwash distribntaries, Skeidararsandur, Iceland: Journal of Sedimentary Petrulogy, v. 46,
p. 770-777.
Wmson, R.J., 1977, last-glacial alluvial fan sedimentation in the lower Derwent Valley, Tas-
mania: Scdimenlology, v. 24, p. 781-799.
W~ssor~, R.J., 1978a, A debris flow at Reshnn, Pakistan, Hindu Kash: Geografiska Annaler, v.
60A, p. 151-159.
W~SSON,R.J., 1978b, Alluvial funs, climate, and climatic change (abstract): Jerusalem, lntes-
national Association of Sedimentulogists Annual Meeting Abstracts, v. 2, p. 721-722.
W~sses, R.J., 1979, Sedimentation history of the Muudi Muudi alluvia] fans, western New
South Wales: Sedimentary Geology, v. 22, p. 21-51.
Wess, R.H., Pr,s~ue, P.T., ants RISK,G.R., 1987, Debris flows from tributaries of the Colorado
River, Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona: United States Geologcal Survey Open-File
Report 87-118, 64 p.
W~ss, R.H., Pr~SGLe,P.T., ReN~t,, S.L., ANnRISK, G.R., 1988, Monument Creek debris flow,
1984: implications for formation of rapids on the Colorado River. Geology, v. 16, p. 50-54.
,:189
WELL N.A., aNDDoff, J.A., Jr., 1987a, A reconnaissance nfsedimentation on the Kosi alluvial
fan of India, in Ethridge, E.G., Hores, R.M., and Harvey, M.D., eds., Recent Developments
in Fluvial Sedimeotology: SEPM Special Publication 39, p. 5 I--61.
WELL..,N.A., ann Dora, J.A., Jr., 1987b, Shitting of the Kosi River, northern India: Geology,
v. 15, p. 204--207.
WELLS,S.G., AnDDosre~eno, J.C., 1985, Relict shcetflood bedforrns on late Quaternary alluvial
fan surfaces in the southwestern United States: Geology, v. 13, p. 512-516.
WELLS,S.G., ann HaRvey, A.M., 1987, Sedimeotologic and geomorphic variations in storm-
generated alluvial fans, Howgill Fells, northwest England: Geological Society of America
Bulletin, v. 98, p. 182-198.
WentwortH, C.K, 1943, Soil avalanches on Oahu, Hawaii: Geological Society of America
Bulletin, v. 54, p. 53--64.
Wescorr, W.A., 1990, The Yalhhs fan delta: a coastal fan in a humid tropical climate, in
Rachocki, A.H., and Church, M., eds., Alluvial Fans-A Field Approach: New York, Wiley,
p. 213..-225.
WZSCOTr,W.A., urn ErarUDCE,F.G., 1980, Fan-delta sedimentology and tectonic setting- Yallaha
fan delta, southeast Jamaica: American Association of Petrulenm Geologsts Bulletin, v. 64,
p. 374-399.
WRITE,S.E., 1949, Processes of erosion on steep slopes of Oahn, Hawaii: American Journal of
Science, v. 247, p. 168-.-186.
WaltEHOUSE,I.E., and McSsves~, M.J., 1990, CGeomo~hic appraisal for development on two
steep, active alluvial fans, ML Cook, New Zealand, in Raehoeld, A.H., and Church, M., eds.,
Alluvial Fans-A Field Approach: New York, Wiley, p. 36%384.
WJECZOrEK,G.F., 1987, Effect of rainfall intensity and duration on debris flows in central Santa
Cruz Mountains, California, in Costa, J.E., and Wieezorek, G.F., eds., Debris Flows/Ava-
lanches: Process, Recognition, and Mitigation: Geological Society of America Reviews in
Engineering Geology, v. 7, p. 93--104.
W~LU^MS,G.E., 1973, late Quaternary piedmont sedimentation, soil formation and ~leodi-
mates in arid South Australia: Zeitschril~ fllr CGeomo~hologi~ v. 17, p. 102-125.
WiwaMs, G.P., ann Gutv, H.P., 1973, Erosional and depositional aspects of Hurricane Camille
in Virgtaia, 1969: United States Geological Survey Professional P a r r 804, 80 p.
WILHaMS,P.F., ANn Rust, B.R., 1969, The sedimeotology of a braided river: Journal of Sedi-
m~tary Petrology, v. 39, p. 649.-679.
WzLUaMS,V.S., 1982, Tectonic tilting of monntain-frnnt alluvial fans near the Supra Kosi gorge,
eastern Nepal, in Verrna, V.K., and Saklani, P.S., eds., Himalaya: Landforms and Processes:
New Delhi, Today and Tomorrow Printers and Publishers, p. 115-132.
WinDer, C.G., 1965, Alluvialcone construction by alpine mudflow in a humid temperate region:
Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 2, p. 270-277.
WOHL, E.E., and P,.AarHrEE,P.P., 1991, Debris flows as genmoohic agents in the Hnachuca
Mountains of southeastern Arizona: Geomorphnlogy, v. 4, p. 273-292.
WoeoForD, A.O., and Haarlss, T.F., 1928, Geology of Blackhawk Canyon, San Bernardino
Mo~tains, California: University of California Publications in Geological Sciences, v. 17,
p. 265-304.
WoeoRuw, J.F., 1971, Debris avalanches as an erosional agent in the Appalachian Mountains:
Joumul of Geography, v. 70, p. 399..-406.
WooLLEV,R.R., 1946, Cloudburst floods in Utah 1850-1938: United States Geological Survey
Water Supply Paper 994, 159 p.
YARnOLD,J.C., 1993, Rock-avalanche characteristics in dry climates and the effect of flow into
lakes: Insights from the mid-Tertiary sedimentary breccias near Artillery Peak, Arizona:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 105, p. 345--360.
YaR~OLD,J.C., and LomearD,J.P., 1989, Fades model for large block avalanche deposits formed
in dry climates, in Colbum, l.P., Abbott, P.L., and Minch, J., eds., Canginmemtes in Basin
Analysis: SEPM Pacific Section Symposium Book 62, p. %32.
Z~eunsKi,T., 1982, Cootem~mry high-energy flows, their de,sits and reference to the outwash
deposifional model: Praee Naukowe Uniwersytetu Slaskiego NR 519 Geologia, v. 6, p. 98-
110 (in Polish).
ZXMMErNA~,~,,M., 1990, Debris flows 1987 in Switzerland: geomo~hological and meteorological
aspects: lnternationul Association of Hydrological Sciences Publication 194, p. 387-393.
Received 30 August 1993; accepted 13 January 1994.