Laboratory Manual for Introductory

Geology 3rd Edition Ludman Solutions

Manual
Visit to Download in Full: https://testbankdeal.com/download/laboratory-manual-for-int
roductory-geology-3rd-edition-ludman-solutions-manual/
CHAPTER 10
Landscapes Formed by Streams

GOALS
 Understand how streams use their kinetic energy to do the geologic work of erosion and
deposition.
 Learn what factors control stream erosional and depositional behavior.
 Become familiar with constructional (depositional) and destructional (erosional) fluvial
landforms.
 Understand how streams and fluvial landscapes change over time.
 Estimate potential damage from flooding.

BACKGROUND
Chapter 10 begins the study of the agents of erosion and the distinctive landforms and landscapes
they produce. It also sets the tone for the coverage of landscapes produced by glaciers (Chapter 11),
groundwater (Chapter 12), waves (Chapter 13), and how these agents work differently in arid regions
(Chapter 14). These five chapters focus on understanding the similarities and differences in the
processes by which these agents operate, rather than on simply memorizing landforms. A major
theme throughout these chapters is how each agent uses its kinetic (and/or chemical) energy to erode
and deposit Earth materials. Their different behaviors lead to distinctive landforms, which in turn
help us understand what agents produced particular landscapes.
A single laboratory session cannot possibly cover all fluvial processes and resulting
landforms. Therefore, Chapter 10 uses our inquiry-based approach to focus on a few basic
concepts that students deduce for themselves from carefully scaffolded exercises:
 Water flowing downhill gives streams kinetic energy with which they do geologic work.
 A decrease in a stream’s energy causes deposition.
 A stream’s gradient and elevation above its base level control whether a stream is using
its energy to cut downward or laterally; whether its valley is broad and flat or V-shaped
and steep; and whether it has a broad-straight course or meanders.
The pedagogy here is the same as that used in studying rocks in Chapters 4 to 7: “reading
the rocks” is replaced by “reading the landforms.” Students are still required to recognize
characteristic fluvial features, but in the context of what they tell us about the evolution of the area.

CHAPTERS 10 TO 14 IN THE CLASSROOM

All maps and figures in Chapters 10 to 14 are available at Norton’s Instructors’ Resource
website. This makes some exercises easier because elevations can be estimated much more
readily from an enlarged version—especially in rugged topography where contour lines are
spaced closely. It also permits an entire class to work on an exercise together, a practice that
engages students in conversation and, if you wish, debate.

10.1
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only
 As with the study of minerals, rocks, and contour lines, students learn basic principles
through discovery rather than memorization. For example, building on two basic concepts—a
stream’s downhill flow gives it kinetic energy, and its base level controls how deeply it can
erode—students measure gradient and sinuosity (on paper, online, or onscreen) to deduce how a
stream’s gradient controls its erosional activities and sinuosity. By comparing these features for
different streams, they learn to understand how a stream is “working.” Building on the basic
principle that streams deposit sediment when they lose kinetic energy, students explore the
origins of alluvial fans, deltas, natural levees, and floodplains.
With practice that begins in this chapter, students should become progressively more
adept at visualizing slope changes and shapes of landforms. Constructing topographic profiles
will still be needed at this stage, reinforcing exercises from previous chapters.

SUGGESTIONS
Our treatment of streams is a template for how the other landscape-forming agents will be
presented in the following chapters and sets a norm against which the other agents will be
compared. Thus, the theme of how a geomorphic agent uses energy underlies Chapters 11 to 14
as well. Recognizing their similarities and differences promotes deeper understanding of how
each agent operates and why their landscapes are so distinctively different. Our students report
that the following study guide has been helpful in summarizing the course unit on
geomorphology—we hope it also helps your students.

10.2
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only
 Many of the exercises in this chapter can be done digitally by using Google EarthTM,
Google MapsTM, or free GIS software such as NASA’s World Wind.
We have found National Geographic’s TOPO!4 digital library of topographic maps
extremely helpful because it provides instant access to classic geomorphological features
anywhere in the United States at any scale. Loaded onto a single classroom computer, it is
superb for demonstrations and group discussions because its functions include profiling,
determining elevations and latitude-longitude elevations, and measuring distances. In a computer
laboratory, it allows an entire class to do exercises digitally.
Use your unique campus setting to continue our practice of demonstrating the relevance
of the material in students’ lives. Is there a stream or river nearby that can bring the concepts
alive? Is there a history of flooding in the area? Are local rivers used for transportation or
generating energy?

10.3
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only
ANSWERS TO EXERCISES
In Exercise 10.1, students compare two streams in a totally unguided fashion, describing the
differences they observe in whatever terms they wish—geologic terms if they’ve learned them,
everyday terms otherwise. Exercise 10.2 guides them to aspects of stream behavior that will be
explored in detail (and with appropriate nomenclature) in the rest of the chapter.

EXERCISE 10.1: Differences between Streams

Differences between the two streams include:
i. Apparent velocity of flow: rapid in Yellowstone, slow in Cuckmere.
ii. Turbulence: turbulent in Yellowstone, calm in Cuckmere.
iii. Straightness: Yellowstone much straighter than Cuckmere.
iv. Valley: Yellowstone—narrow, steep-walled, V-shaped valley. Cuckmere—broad flat valley
with walls not clearly defined.

EXERCISE 10.2: Getting Familiar with Properties of Streams

(a) This is not an easy question because the width of the Yellowstone River channel varies and
there aren’t scale bars for reference. Using the trees visible in both photos, the River
Cuckmere channel is perhaps a little wider than that of the Yellowstone.
(b) The River Cuckmere valley is much wider—indeed, both valley walls cannot be seen in the
photograph.
(c) Yellowstone River.
(d) The Yellowstone River channel completely fills the base of the narrow valley in which it is
flowing. The channel of the River Cuckmere is much narrower than its valley.
(e) The Yellowstone River has a straight channel, whereas that of the River Cuckmere is more
sinuous (meanders broadly).
(f) The Yellowstone River appears to be flowing faster, based on the turbulent white water in its
rapids.
(g) The River Cuckmere appears to be nearly horizontal, with little vertical change over the
course of the photograph. The Yellowstone river appears to drop a greater distance,
particularly in the area between the two sets of rapids.

10.4
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only
EXERCISE 10.3: Why Some Streams Meander but Others Are
Straight
(a)
Bighorn River Unnamed tributary
Channel length (miles) 6.50 2.35
Straight-line length (miles) 3.98 2.24
Sinuosity (no units) 1.60 1.05
Highest elevation (feet) 3,870 4,150
(between 3,879 and 3,861) (between 4,159 and 4,141)

Lowest elevation (feet) 3,850 3,850

(3,859 to 3,841) (3,859 to 3,841)
Vertical drop (feet) 20 300
Gradient (feet per mile) 3.07 128
(b) It appears that the steeper the gradient, the straighter a stream will be; the gentler the
gradient, the more a stream will meander.
(c) Some data is provided in this exercise to aid its completion.
Casino Lakes area
Genesee River
Stream A–B Stream C–D
Broad, flat- Steep V-shaped
Valley shape V-shaped
bottomed valley with flat bottom
Gradient (ft/mi) 0.54* 393 936
Valley width (mi) 1.56 Channel essentially fills
Channel width (ft) 330 the valley floor
Valley width/channel width 25 ~1.0 ~1.0
Sinuosity 3.01 1.07 1.05
*No contour line crosses the Genesee River between points A and B, indicating a vertical drop less than 9 feet.

(d) The streams on these maps appear to confirm the hypothesis that high-gradient streams tend
to have straight courses, whereas low-gradient streams tend to meander more broadly.
(e) The straighter a stream, the lower the valley width/channel width ratio. The greater the
sinuosity, the greater the valley width/channel width ratio.
(f) The steeper the stream gradient, the more V-shaped its valley will be; the gentler the
gradient, the more likely it is that the valley will be broad and flat-bottomed.
(g) The River Cuckmere has a lower gradient than the Yellowstone River because, like the
Genesee River, it meanders broadly. The Yellowstone River is straight and, like the two
tributaries in the Casino Lakes area, has a steeper gradient.
(h) Using the same reasoning, the left-hand stream in Figure 10.3 has the steepest gradient, the
right-hand stream the gentlest gradient, and the stream in the middle a gradient intermediate
between those two.

10.5
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only
EXERCISE 10.4: Interpreting Stream Behavior
(a) By inspection, the Meadow River (Figure 10.9b) has the lowest valley width/channel width
ratio and therefore probably has the steepest gradient of the three. The St. Francis River
(Figure 10.9a) has the largest valley width/channel width ratio and therefore probably has
the gentlest gradient of the three.
(b) With the highest gradient and straightest channel, the Meadow River (Figure 10.9b) is using
more of its kinetic energy in eroding vertically than the other two streams. The St. Francis
River is using most of its energy in lateral erosion. The Arkansas River (Figure 10.9c) is
intermediate between the others in both valley width/channel width ratio and proportion of its
energy used in eroding vertically.
(c) Two of the three maps provide this information. Numerous oxbows and meander scars
outlined by former natural levees in the St. Francis River (Figure 10.9a) identify former
positions of the channel. For the Arkansas River (Figure 10.9c), the arcuate shapes of the
valley walls indicate where the meandering channel had cut into the walls. The Meadow
River (Figure 10.9b) lacks these features and has probably not occupied other positions
within its valley previously.
(d)

Meander scars

Point bar

Channel

Meanders

Oxbow lakes

Valley wall

10.6
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only
(e) The river is flowing slowest on the inside of the meander loop, fastest on the outside.

10.7
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only
EXERCISE 10.5: Drainage Basins and Stream Divides
(a, b, c)

(d) The patterned area north of the Missouri River will potentially be affected—essentially
along Hilliers Creek downstream of where the tributary closest to the toxins enters the
drainage basin.

EXERCISE 10.6: Recognizing Drainage Patterns

(a) A dendritic drainage pattern. That suggests that materials underlying its drainage basin in
the central United States are approximately equally erodible—probably horizontal strata.
(b) The drainage pattern in Figure 10.12 is dendritic, indicating equally erodible materials.
The pattern in Figure 10.17 is a trellis pattern, indicating parallel ridges and valleys
underlain by resistant and less resistant rock types, respectively. It is likely that the rocks

10.8
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only
 in the area shown by Figure 10.12 are horizontal but those in the area of Figure 10.17 are
either tilted or folded.

EXERCISE 10.7: Recognizing Stages of Landscape Erosion

In this exercise, you may want to coach students that terms can be used multiple times in a row and
that if three options are given as examples they may not all be used once. Some instructors may
want to provide suggested terms for approximate relief and estimated stream gradients rows.
(a)
Southeast Texas Colorado Plateau Appalachian Plateau
(Fig. 10.14) (Fig. 10.15) (Fig. 10.16)
Low in highlands,
Approximate relief:
Low moderate between Moderate
low, moderate, high
highlands and rivers
Number of streams: few; Many (one large,
Few Many
moderate; many many small)
Estimated amount of land
area that is valley slopes as a ≈ 15% ≈ 30% ≈ 95%
percentage
Estimated stream gradients Low High Intermediate
Stream divides—broadly
rounded, angular, can’t see Broadly rounded Broadly rounded Angular
divides
Stage of stream dissection
Stage 3 Stage 1 Stage 2
(Stage 1, 2, or 3)
(b) Figure 10.1a: narrow, steep-walled valley suggests high gradient = Stage 1.
Figure 10.6: almost entire area in slope plus numerous narrow V-shaped valleys = Stage 2.
Figure 10.9a: very gentle stream gradients plus low relief plus few master streams = Stage 3.

EXERCISE 10.8: Deducing the History of the Susquehanna River

(a) These two rivers seem to ignore a clear pattern of resistant and nonresistant rocks—cutting
across both valleys and ridges at nearly 90°. The smaller streams throughout the area define a
trellis pattern controlled by erodibility of the underlying rock: long streams in valleys (easily
eroded rock) and shorter streams from the ridges (resistant rock) into the valleys.
(b) The elongate valleys are underlain by rock that is easily eroded, forming lowlands.
(c) The two large rivers might have had enough energy to cut through the ridges, whereas the
smaller streams didn’t (reasonable hypothesis). Perhaps the rivers and smaller streams are of
different ages and the rivers flowed southward before the ridges formed (not entirely true but
a possible explanation based on observation).
(d) The classic explanation is that after folding produced the linear bands of resistant and less
resistant rock, erosion stripped off much of the overlying material and the area subsided, was
covered by water, and the linear bands were buried beneath horizontal sediment. The
Susquehanna and Juniata rivers started flowing southward in this sediment and established

10.9
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only
 their drainage systems. With time, these rivers carved downward through the sediment and
encountered the linear bands of rock with different erodibilities. At that time, it was more
energy-efficient for the two rivers to cut through the ridges than to rearrange the entire
drainage system. The trellis pattern produced in the valley-and-ridge topography formed
when the overlying horizontal sediment was stripped off and the smaller streams were
constrained to flow in the more easily erodible rock.

EXERCISE 10.9: Origin of Incised Meanders

(a) The Green River meanders widely as it flows southward, but the meanders are cut deeply into the
surrounding plateau—unlike what would be expected normally as in Figures 10.9 or 10.14.
(b) Sinuosity is approximately 3.00.
(c) Based on the nearly identical sinuosity of the Genesee River in Exercise 10.3, the Green
River would be expected to be using most of its energy to cut laterally.
(d) At this time, there is little evidence that the Green River is eroding laterally. There is no evidence
of meander scars that would outline previous meander locations, and the valley walls are of
relatively constant width, unlike those of meandering streams seen in earlier maps.
(e) The near-vertical valley walls and very high relief between river channel and plateau argue
against significant lateral erosion and suggest that the river is cutting downward despite its
sinuosity.
(f) It is highly unlikely that the Green River will be able to cut off the Bowknot Bend meander
because of the enormous amount of solid rock that would have to be removed to do so—
unlike the St. Francis River in Figure 10.9a.
(g) The elevation of the Green River in this area is more than 4,000 feet above sea level and
therefore 4,000 feet above the river’s base level in the Gulf of Southern California. One
would normally expect a highly sinuous stream to be close to its base level so that it would
use its energy for mostly lateral erosion. That is not the case here.
(h) The Green River at one point had eroded much closer to its base level. At that time, it
developed the normal sinuous channel path. But the Colorado Plateau in which the river is
flowing subsequently experienced (and continues to experience) tectonic uplift, increasing
the gradient. Vertical erosion has kept pace with uplift so that the river continues to be high
above base level and is cutting downward. As a result, the early meandering path has been
maintained as the river cuts downward.

EXERCISE 10.10: Estimating Potential Flood Problems

(a) Figure 10.9a: The St. Francis and Mississippi rivers are only about 10 feet lower than the broad
floodplain. A 20-foot flood would inundate the entire floodplain with about 10 feet of water,
making the entire road network impassable—including Interstate 40 and U.S. Route 70.
Figure 10.9b: There would be very little effect on human infrastructure. The Meadow River
is flowing in a V-shaped valley in an area in which homes are more than 200 feet above normal
river levels. A 20-foot rise would be accommodated within the valley without affecting the local
roads. U.S. Route 19 crosses the river at the Ritchie Memorial Bridge, but it appears that bridge
is more than 20 feet above river level, so traffic would not be affected by a flood.

10.10
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only
 Figure 10.9c: A 20-foot flood of the Arkansas River would inundate much of its
floodplain in the map area with about 5 to 10 feet of water. This would flood a few local
roads, much of Turkey and Beaver islands, and several active oil wells. There do not appear
to be any homes or businesses in the floodplain, and the surrounding uplands are well above
the reach of a 20-foot flood.
(b)
In most cases, the river is less than 20
feet below the floodplain, so the entire
gray-shaded area would be covered by
water from a 20-foot flood. The three
ellipses highlight rails and roads that
might be affected.

(c) No. Although the airport is built on the floodplain of the Genesee River, it is more than 30
feet higher than the river and should be safe, as would its access roads.
(d) The contour lines on the map make it possible to estimate the effects of floods of different
magnitudes. The satellite image gives more details of features in the floodplain that might be
affected by flooding. For example, it shows that much of the area adjacent to the airport is
farmland. It also shows structures northwest of the cloverleaf that would be damaged.
(e) The highway network in the floodplain would become impassable, and the airport would be
flooded. Both would be unusable for relief efforts.

10.11
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only
EXERCISE 10.11: U.S.-Mexico Border Issue
(a) The presence of several oxbow lakes shows that the Rio Grande River has changed its course
several times in the past. The river has several tight meanders that will, eventually, be cut off
in the normal course of stream erosion.
(b) By treaty, the U.S.-Mexico border is in the center of the river. All land on the north side of the
river is in the United States (Texas), and land south of the river is in Mexico (Tamaulipas).
Shading on the map below shows areas where, if certain meanders are cut off, parts of
Tamaulipas could be added to Texas and parts of Texas could become part of Tamaulipas.

Mexico to U.S. U.S. to Mexico

The satellite image shows that this natural “land swap” would have very different effects on
the two countries. The area within the easternmost meander loop that would be transferred from the
United States to Mexico is unpopulated, largely woodland. In contrast, the two areas that would be
transferred from Mexico to the United States are heavily populated parts of the city of Matamoros.

What Do You Think?

It is clear that many people will be affected if the Rio Grande cuts off these three meander loops.
Student solutions might include:
 Prevent the problem by stabilizing the meanders with concrete lining the walls of the
channel.
 Recognizing that the cutoffs will occur, stabilize the border at its current position. If the
cutoffs do occur, neither nation will lose land or citizens.

10.12
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only
ANSWERS TO PRE-CLASS WORKSHEETS
1a; 2d; 3d; 4a; 5c; 6d; 7c; 8c; 9d; 10c; 11d; 12b; 13b; 14d; 15a.

10.13
Copyright 2016 W.W. Norton – For instructor and teaching assistant use only