1. Comparison of Geomorphic Change in Two Flood Events on the Umatilla River, Oregon Patricia McDowell, Michael L. Hughes, and W. Andrew Marcus Department of Geography, University of Oregon http://geography.uoregon.edu/mcdowell/umatilla http://geography.uoregon.edu/mcdowell/umatilla supported by NSF Geog & Reg Sci award BCS 0215291

4. Hypotheses and Goals Floods reshape channel and floodplain, create fish habitat Humans respond to floods with levees and bank protection Bank protection reduces the ability of the river to create and renew fish habitat Goals: Reconstruct geomorphic change in two flood events, 1950s-60s & 1990s Investigate effects of bank protection

5. Outline Flood events and study area Methods Overall changes Spatial patterns (by segments) Examples Future work and significance

7. 1 2 3 5 Pendleton Columbia River

8. Methods Pre- and post-flood aerial photos Scanned and georectified in Erdas Imagine ® RMSE <3 m Classification and digitizing of channel and floodplain features in ESRI ArcMap ® Analysis of change: amount, type and spatial distribution

9. Segment 1

10. Active channel area increases in both floods. Sinuosity decreases in both floods. Change in greater in 1965 than 1996; bank protection?

11. Scoured area and bar area increase in both floods. Vegetated area increases in 1965 by capture of vegetated islands

12. Overall Changes Bars and scoured areas increased in both flood events Sinuosity decreased slightly in both flood events 1965 flood produced more change than 1996 flood: bank protection following 1965 flood Active channel area increased in 1965 flood, but did not change in 1996 flood Vegetated surfaces in active channel zone increased in 1965: capture of new vegetated islands by avulsion

13. 1 2 3 5 Pendleton Columbia River

14. Segment Geomorphology Segments 1 and 2: narrow valley, confined meanders, less area in bars and scoured surface, moderate sinuosity Segment 3: wide valley, unconfined meanders, more area in bars and scoured surface, higher sinuosity Segment 4: urban, not analyzed Segment 5: narrow valley, confined meanders, very low sinuosity Upstream Downstream

15. All segments increase in 1965 flood. 1 and 2 have no increase in 1996 flood: bank protection? Change in Active Channel Area

16. Change is inconsistent across segments and flood events. Discontinuities in sediment transport and storage? Change in Bar Area

17. All segments decrease in 1965. Change is inconsistent in 1996. Change in Sinuosity

18. Changes by Segment Segment 3 (wide) is more active than 1 and 2 (narrower) –Seg 3: greatest increase in active channel area –Seg 3: greatest decrease in sinuosity Segment 5 (narrow, low sinuosity): – Increases active channel area – Change in bar area, sinuosity is small More change in 1965 flood than in 1996

19. Segment 3

21. Partly confined reach Lateral migration, meander cutoff, and decrease in sinuosity in both floods. Segment 1

22. Reach is confined at upstream and downstream ends. River tries to re-establish meander in 1996 flood. Segment 5

23. Most active reach of segment 5 Incised valley meander Lateral migration and avulsion in both events Segment 5

24. At upstream end of Horseshoe curve, looking downstream

25. Conclusions Enlargement of active channel zone, capture of islands Avulsion, lateral migration More change in 1965 than in 1996: increase in bank protection Decrease in sinuosity in floods, little recovery between floods: bank protection? Spatial differences at segment scale, reach scale –Need to examine at finer spatial scale

26. Next Steps What specific kinds of channel change produce features important for fish habitat? –For example, how are side channels created? –Help restoration projects mimic natural processes

27. Next Steps What controls where the channel is active vs. inactive? –Are there natural “hot spots” for channel change? –Avoid rip-rap, levees in key sites where habitat potential is highest –Understand the controls, so results can be applied to other rivers

28. Next Steps What happened in between the 1965 and 1996 floods? –Do moderate sized floods also produce channel change? –Types and magnitude of change? –Help understand how channel features evolve over several decades New rivers: Walla Walla, John Day

29. Next Steps What specific kinds of channel change produce features important for fish habitat? What controls where the channel is active vs. inactive? –Are there natural “hot spots” for channel change? What happened in between 1965 and 1996 floods? What is role of moderate- sized flood events? New rivers: Walla Walla, John Day

30. In Horseshoe curve, looking upstream