Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Table 6.1 Measured channel sinuosity: 1939, 1957, and 1996 <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />, <br />I <br />I <br />1 <br /> <br />In Subreach 2, sinuosity has remained relatively consistent since 1939 (Table 6.1; Figure <br />6.1), although the reach has been characterized by numerous cutoffs and rapid bendway <br />migration (Chapter 8). The sinuosity trend reflects a relative balance of channel <br />shortening through cutoff and lengthening through migration along the reach. The <br />percent split flow has decreased, which suggests that the historic predominance of <br />braided conditions has lessened since 1939 (Table 6.2). The aerial photographs support <br />these trends, as they display extensive braiding in 1939, followed by the progressive <br />development ofa single thread through 1998. <br /> <br />Subreach River Mile Sinuosity Sinuosity Sinuosity Description <br /> (1939)" (1957) (19961 <br />I 10.9-13.1 1.26 1.33 1.25 Increase followed by reduction; avulsion <br /> nrocess <br />2 9,2-10.9 1.18 1.19 1.21 SliQht increase: reduced braidinQ <br />3 7.0-9.2 1.31 1.23 1.29 Reduction followed by increase: natural <br /> bendwav chanQes <br />4 5.5-7.0 1.11 1.23 1.34 Increase: 'sol it flow caoture <br />5 3.3-5.5 1.25 1.19 1.18 Reduction: aQQradational <br />6 2.1-3.3 1.35 1.28 1.12 Reduction: channel relocation <br />7 0-2.1 1.09 1.06 1.14 SliQhl increase; solil flow sinuosity <br /> <br />Table 6.2 Historic split flow conditions: 1939, 1957, and 1996 <br /> <br />Subreach Station % Split Flow % Split % Split 1939-1957 1957-1996 1939- t996 <br /> (River (1939) Flow Flow % % % <br /> Mile) (1957) (1996) Chanpe Chanpe Change <br />I 10.9-13.1 75 75 75 0% 0% 0% <br />2 9.2-10.9 37 22 10 -15% -12% -27% <br />3 7.0-9.2 29 23 32 -6% 90/0 3% <br />4 5.5-7.0 64 70 89 6% 19% 25% <br />5 3.3-5.5 35 19 18 -16% -1% -17% <br />6 2.1-3.3 71 69 95 -2% 26% 24% <br />7 0,2.1 15 25 18 10% -7% 3% <br /> <br />Sinuosity has increased significantly in Subreach 4 since 1939 (Table 6.1; Figure 6.1). <br />This change reflects the relocation of the main channel from the east channel, which runs <br />directly against the railroad grade to the west channel, which has substantial planform <br />diversity. A second split flow channel segment developed between 1939 and 1957. That <br />lower split flow channel section, where 1M 4 is located, has become more sinuous <br />through time. The sinuosity within Subreach 5 has progressively dropped since 1939 <br />(Table 6.1; Figure 6.1). Sediment transport analyses and field observations indicate that <br />this reach is aggradational; the sinuosity reduction supports this interpretation. Split flow <br />lengths have decreased slightly since 1939 (Table 6.2); this reflects the abandonment of <br />secondary channels. <br /> <br />May 7. /999 <br /> <br />Fluvial Geomorphological Assessment <br />Upper Arkansas River <br /> <br />Page 38 <br />