Laserfiche WebLink
<br />_I.' <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />1 ,,,,,... <br /> <br /> <br />o 15 10 15 10 <br /> <br />Figure 1. Map of the Colorado River through Grand <br />Canyon National Park with location of the study sites. <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />15-40 percent compared with 40-80 percent for hypercon- <br />centrated flow and 80-100 percent for streamflows <br />(Beverage and Culbertson 1964). Debris-flow deposits <br />were identified in tributary canyons on the basis of <br />poor sorting of particle sizes, lack of sedimentary <br />structures, and matrix support of cobbles and boulders. <br /> <br />During this study, debris-flow deposits were observed <br />in 36 tributaries of the Colorado River. Of these, 21 <br />showed evidence of recent activity. On the basis of <br />previous reports of debris flows, we selected three of <br />these tributaries for more detailed study: Lava-Chuar <br />Creek drainage at River Mile (RM) 65.5, Monument Creek <br />drainage at RM 93.5, and Crystal Creek drainage at RM <br />98.2. The fieldwork for this project was completed in <br />March and April 1986. <br /> <br />The frequency of past debris flows was determined from <br />analysis of preserved stratigraphy in the tributaries. <br />Sediments from discrete debris flows were traced <br />longitudinally using their characteristic color, <br />lithology, and particle sizes. Radiocarbon dating, <br />