H)rdrology of Two Small 

River Basins in Pennsylvania 

Before Urbanization 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 701-A 

Hydrology of Two Small 

River Basins in Pennsylvania 

Before Urbanization 

By R. ADAM MILLER, JOHN TROXELL, and LUNA B. LEOPOLD 

With a section on OBSERVATIONS OF STREAM FAUNA 

By RUTH PATRICK and ROBERT R. GRANT, JR. 

URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCES 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 701-A 

Data on various hydrologic parameters 

are given to facilitate discerning 

the effects of future urbanization 

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1971 
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

W. A. Radlinski, Acting Director 

Library of Congress catalog-card No. 72-179675 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402- Price 75 cents (paper cover) 

Stock Number 2401-1145 
CONTENTS 

Abstract __________________________________________ _ 

Introduction ______________________________________ _ 

The basins and urbanization ________________________ _ 

The basins _________________________________ _ 

The state of urbanization _______________________ _ 

The studY-----------------------------------------

Origin of the investigation ______________________ _ 

Plan of the hydrologic study ____________________ _ 

Organization of the report ______________________ _ 

Surface-water hydrology ____________________________ _ 

Drainage area--discharge relationships ____________ _ 

At-a-station hydraulic geometry _________________ _ 

The downstream hydraulic geometry _____________ _ 

Suspended-sediment data _______________________ _ 

Flood plains and terraces _______________________ _ 

Page 

A1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

5 

5 

5 

7 

8 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

Chemical quality of the streamflow __________________ _ 

Plan for data collection _________________________ _ 

Chemical quality at a given location _____________ _ 

Some observations on the ground-water hydrology _____ _ Ground-water discharge ________________________ _ 

Chemical quality of ground water ________________ _ 

General discussion of the hydrology __________________ _ 

Observations of stream fauna, by Ruth Patrick and 

Robert R. Grant, Jr __________________________ _ 

~ethods---------------------------------------

Results (~ay through September) _______________ _ 

Discussion of results _______________________ _ 

Results (October and November) ________________ _ 

Discussion of results _______________________ _ 

Summary ________________ -· ____________________ _ 

References ___________________ -· ____________________ _ 

ILLUSTRATIONS 

Page 

A17 

18 

18 

20 

20 

21 

23 

24 

28 

29 

35 

35 

38 

39 

39 

FIGURES 1-3. ~aps showing- Page 

1. Location of East Branch Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins in relation to areas of high population density _____________________________________________ -·_____________________ A2 

2. Density of houses __________________________________________________ -·_____________________ 4 

3. Location of hydrologic-data sites _____________________________________ .. _____________________ 6 

4-10. Graphs showing4. Discharge as a function of drainage area ______________________________ .. _____________________ 9 

5. At-a-station hydraulic geometry, Indian Run at Glenmoore____________________________________ 10 

6. Downstream hydraulic geometry for the Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins___________ 11 

7. Relation of channel slope to discharge---------------------------------·---------------------- 11 

8. Transport curve for suspended-sediment load at Pickering Creek near Phoenixville_______________ 12 

9. Transport curve for suspended sediment load at hydrologic-data sites ___________________ ---_---_- 13 

10. Sediment load at each station ________________________________________ .. _____ - ______ --_______ 13 

11. Photographs of typical reaches of streams in upper East Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins_- - _ - _ 15 

12. Cross section of channel and valley fiat, Indian Run at Germany Hollow Road, and graph of discharge values 

computed for levels of the high and low berms at locations where berm heights were measured in the 

field------------------------------------------------------------------·--------------------- 16 

13. Graphs of water-quality factors as functions of river discharge, Indian Run at Glenmoore__________________ 19 

14-20. ~aps showing14. Outlines of subbasins _________________________________________________________ ----- __ ------ 22 

15. Low-flow stream discharge __________________________________________ .. ____ -- ___ ---_-------- 25 

16. Dissolved-solids loads of streams at low flow during nonstorm period, August-September, 1967_____ 26 

17. Generalized geology of the upper East Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins_---- ___ --_- 28 

18. Sulfate concentrations of streams at low flow during nonstorm period, August-September, 1967- __ - 30 

19. Chloride concentrations of streams at low flow during nonstorm period, August-September, 1967___ 31 

20. Location of sampling points for stream fauna and gaging stations_______________________________ 32 

m 
IV CONTENTS 

TABLES 

Page 

TABLE 1. Measuring points in Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins and the associated average annual flow 

and estimated bankfull characteristics_________________________________________________________ A8 

2. At-a-station data for the Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins_______________________________ 10 

3. Slope of the sediment transport curve for various stations____________________________________________ 12 

4. Physical properties of channel cross sections in and near Brandywine Creek____________________________ 17 

5. Dissolved load at measurement stations for two discharge values, mean annual discharge and bankfull discharge------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20 

6. Low-flow discharge measurements and chemical analyses, upper East Branch Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24 

7. Data on use of farmland, Pickering Creek basin____________________________________________________ 42 

8. Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data____________________________ 42 

9. Station locations for faunal observations___________________________________________________________ 27 

10. Chemistry data, 196 7, upper Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 56 

11. Frequency of faunal forms at sampling points------------------------------------------------------ 57 
URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCES 

HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN 

PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION 

By R. ADAM MILLER, JoHN TRoXELL, and LuNA B. LEOPOLD 

ABSTRACT 

Basic data on water quantity, chemical quality, and suspended sediment are tabulated to record the conditions existing 

in two basins near Philadelphia, each about 32 square miles in 

area. The basins in 1970 are agricultural land for the most part, 

but urban and industrial development is imminent as the 

Philadelphia metropolitan area expands. Hopefully, as changes 

caused by urbanization occur in future years, data published 

herein will be useful as a base for comparison. 

Pickering Creek basin has a higher population than the upper 

East Branch Brandywine Creek basin. The two are comparable 

in dis charge characteristics and in shapes and sizes of channels, 

but the Pickering Creek basin is producing a considerably 

larger suspended-sediment load. Also the effects of urbanization 

are discernible in some chemical parameters. 

During the study, a small subbasin, one-half square mile in 

area, was converted from agricultural use to an industrial park. 

This change resulted in a marked increase in sulfates, nitrates, 

chlorides, and dissolved solids in the streamflow. 

INTRODUCTION 

Urbanization is known to change certain hydrologic 

characteristics of a river basin. Owing to construction, 

protective vegetative cover is destroyed, soil is exposed, 

and some parts of the surface are rendered impermeable. 

Considering the availability of relevant theory and the 

massive alterations of basins now underway as population increases, it is surprising how little quantitative 

data on the details of hydrologic changes now occurring 

exist. A summary of data showing the dearth of material 

available at this time was recently published (Leopold, 

1968). Particularly inadequate is the description of the 

relevant factors before the effects of roads, buildings, 

and other land alterations became appreciable. 

This report is a basic-data compilation to record, in 

far more detail than is generally available, the hydrologic characteristics of a presently agricultural area, on 

the fringe of a rapidly expanding suburban and commercial zone. Urbanization is even now, in 1970, 

beginning in a few spots in the area discussed, and 

population studies related to land planning forecast a 

threefold increase by 1990 and a ninefold increase 

by 2020 (Chester County Water Resources Authority, 

1968). 

Hopefully, the data in this report will be used by 

planners and hydrologists in the coming decades to 

compare future conditions with present conditions and 

thus help spur the evolution of sound planning procedures, which will minimize the adverse effects of development. The report has a further purpose-to describe 

some morphological and streamflow characteristics of 

small basins in the Eastern United States. Basins of a 

few tens of square miles in area are too large to be 

intensively studied as controlled experimental watersheds but are smaller than the majority of those monitored by the Federal-State network of stream-gaging 

and water-quality-measuring stations. 

THE BASINS AND URBANIZATION 

THE BASINS 

Two basins are discussed here, East Branch Brandywine Creek above Dorian, Pa. (drainage area, 33 sq 

mi), and Pickering Creek above Phoenixville, Pa. 

(drainage area, 31 sq mi). The two are nearly adjacent 

but drain into different main stems; the East Branch 

Brandywine Creek basin empties into the Delaware 

River estuary and the Pickering Creek basin into the 

Schuylkill River, itself a tributary to the Delaware. As 

can be seen in figure 1, the basins are on the immediate 

western fringe of the expanding metropolitan area of 

Philadelphia. 

At this time the area, predominantly agricultural, 

serves as a residence area for persons who work in towns 

and small cities in or near the basins. Few of the residents commute to jobs in Philadelphia. 

The area, a rolling land in which many of the hillsides 

are covered with a mixed second growth of Appalachian 

hardwoods, consists of generally open flood plains used 

for pasture and, near the hea:iwaters, some relatively 

flat uplands which have been under cultivation for 

Al 
A2 URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCES 

no 76° 75° 74° 73 ° 72° 

,--------------~ --------------~----.-----------.-------.--

L ll.· 

41" -

P E N N S Y L lv A, 

•'' 

40° 

39° 

\ 

I 

EXPLANATION 

l1

1

11 1lllllllilllililil 

Generalized areas of high 

population density 

.. 8 

Basins 

A, East Branch B-randyw·ine Creek (t'fUi 

B, Picke:ri'll.,g Creek basins 

0 10 20 30 40 50 MILES 

L --------

1 

FIGURE 1.-Location of East Branch Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins in relation to areas of high population 

density. 

several generations. In the subbasins within the watersheds, forested land ranges from 7 to 40 percent, the 

median value being about 25 percent. Land in slopes 

equal to or greater than 10-percent gradient ranges from 

8 to 48 percent, the median being about 25 percent. 

Drainage density, in miles per square mile, ranges from 

0.96 to 2.82 and averages about 1.5. 

The area is unglaciated, and the streams trend across 

a number of different rock types, mostly metamorphic 

and intrusive rocks but including Ordovician limestone 

and dolomite. These rocks tend to be weathered to 

some depth, but the regolith is nonuniform, and there 

is considerable variability in the depth of the wells 

serving individual homes. Because much of the land 

has been settled since colonial days, many of the wells 

are hand dug, although drilled wells having centrifugal 

pumps are becoming more common. There are no welldefined aquifers in the area; therefore, most of the wells 

tap the fissured bedrock or the local water table in the 

regolith and in the alluvium. The basins have an average 

annual precipitation of about 45 inches, and water 

surplus occurs throughout the period from November 

through May. Computations (Remson and others, 

1968) by the Thornthwaite method show an average 

annual water surplus of about 16.7 inches. Under these 

conditions, typical of the humid eastern _part of the 

United States, agriculture consists of raising beef and 

dairy cattle, corn grown primarily for feed, and wheat 

and barley for cash crops. In some places feed for fattening yearlings is imported from the West and is supplemented by the purchase of locally grown corn and 

silage. 

THE STATE OF URBANIZATION 

If the hydrologic data presented here are to be of use 

in defining hydrologic effects brought on by progressive 

urbanization, it is necessary t o have as good a description as possible of the state of urbanization at the present 

time. This task is made difficult by the fact that, in the 

few studies of hydrologic effects of urbanization, no 

uniform method of defining the degree of urbanization 

has yet been evolved. Probably the best is that developed by D. Earl Jones and his associates of the Federal 

Housing Administration (FHA Land Planning Bull. 7) 

Unfortunately, their scale of land-use intensity is better 

adapted to describing degree of urbanization in city 

areas than in rural areas. On the basis of the average number of dwellings per acre, the preponder-
HYDROT~OGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BAsSINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A3 

ance of land in the East Branch Brandywine Creek and 

Pickering Creek basins has a land-use-intensity rating 

varying from 0.03 to 0.13, or, as given in the conversion 

table in figure 2, five to 20 house.s per one-quarter 

square mile. 

It is highly desirable to achieve a standard measure 

of land-use intensity as soon as possible so that different 

investigators can express such data on a common scale. 

Because the Federal Housing Administration's scale 

seems the most useful developed for urban areas at 

this time, we are expressing our data in the same terms, 

the translation being made through data on the number 

of houses per unit area. For the present report a picture 

of the areal distribution of population intensity, 

rather tl:.an a census, was needed and was obtained by 

counting the number of houses (the solid black squares) 

on topographic maps (U.S. Geological Survey, 1952, 

1955a, b, 1956a, b, c). The density of houses counted 

from these topographic maps is given in figure 2. The 

figure, which was based on the scale of the Federal 

Housing Administration, also shows the geographic 

distribution of land-use intensity. This translation from 

number of houses per unit of area to the land-useintensity scale is shown in tabular form as an insert in 

that figt1re. The general correspondence of the density 

of house::; to the location of named villages can be seen 

in figure 2. 

To obtain a generalized but quantitative characterization of the housing density and its variation, a grid 

system of lines between which the spaces represented 

one-quarter mile, was superimposed on the available 

topographic maps of the basins. The aerial photography 

for the maps used represents 1956 conditions. The 

number of houses (residences) was counted in each 

square a quarter square mile in area. The count showed 

725 houses in the 33-square-mile upper East Branch 

Brandywine Creek basin, an average of five houses per 

quarter square mile and a standard deviation of 5. 

This density, one house per 32 acres, is equivalent to 

0.03 on the FHA land-use-intensity scale. Interpreting 

the standard deviation, two-thirds of all the quartersquare-mile areas contained 5± 5, or zero to 10, houses. 

The 1956 maps of the nearby Pickering Creek basin 

show about 1,300 houses, an average of 8.8 per quarter 

square mile and a standard deviation of about 10. 

This density, one house per 18 acres, is equivalent to 

0.05 on the FHA land-use-intensity scale. Two-thirds of 

all the quarter-square-mile areas contained 8.8 ± 10, or 

zero to 19, houses. 

These density values mean that the Pickering Creek 

basin has an average density of houses 1.75 times that 

of the Brandywine, but the variation in density is 

larger by a factor of two. In other words, the Brandywine has a more uniform population distribution. The 

greater variance in the Pickering Creek basin is due, in 

part, to the fact that the basin includes a small part of 

the city of Phoenixville. The Pickering Creek basin 

appears to be feeling more pressure of urbanization at 

this time than the upper East Branch Brandywine 

Creek basin. 

Although the number of small towns in each basin 

is about the same, comparison of the maps in figure 2 

indicates that, generally, the Pickering Creek basin 

has a slightly higher density of houses. For example, 

excluding the areas immediately adjacent to Phoenixville, there were 1,000 residences counted in the 

Pickering Creek basin compared with 730 in the upper 

East Branch Brandywine Creek basin. 

In a population study it was estimated that the upper 

East Branch Brandywine basin had 4,200 persons. The 

above data suggest then that the ratio of number of 

mappable houses in 1956 to the 1967 population was 

1:5.8. 

Some general data were obtained from landowners 

on the nature of agriculture. The sample, which was 

confined to the Pickering Creek basin, included about 

5,000 of the 20,000 acres in the basin. It was, in other 

words, a 25-percent sample. The details are shown in 

table 7, near the end of the text. 

The breakdown into uses of total land area in the 

Pickering Creek basin is approximately a1:, follows: 

Farms, active _________ - _-------------

Estates, 5 acres or more ______________ _ Industries ___________________________ _ 

Homes, roads, villages, and other uses_--

TotaL ____ -------- -------------

Acres 

8, 000 

6, 000 

300 

5, 700 

20, 000 

Percentage of total 

40 

30 

1.5 

28. 5 

100. 0 

Of the 5,000 acres in the sample, the area used for 

woods, pasture, and cultivation accounted for 79 

percent of the land area. These three uses accounted for 

28 percent, 22 percent, and 50 percent, respectively. 

Thus, about 40 percent of the total land is used for 

cultivation and about 40 percent is woods and pasture. 

In 1968 on the 5,000 acres were kept 1,555 cattle and 

horses-more cattle than horses-or an average of one 

animal per 3.3 acres in the area sampled. 

The agricultural land is mostly fertilized with 

commercial fertilizers, varying in application from 

250 to 400 pounds per acre. The incomplete tabulation 

shows that in 1968 a known 280 tons of fertilizer was 

applied. It is estimated that a total of at least 450 tons 

is used yearly in the Pickering Creek basin. The usual 

formula seems to be a 10-10-10 fertilizer. Manure is 

generally spread on the fields, in addition to the widespread use of commercial fertilizers. 

The principal crops grown are corn, hay, and, to a 

lesser extent, wheat, barley, and oats. The limited data 
A4 

EXPLANATION 

Conversion table for FHA 

(Federal Housing Administration) 

Scale of land-use intensity 

Houses per 

one-quarter 

square mile 

5 

10 

20 

40 

80 

Value on FHA 

scale of 

lanrl-use intensity 

0.03 

.06 

.13 

.25 

.50 

--20--

Line of equal house density 

per one-quarter square mile 

Basin boundary 

URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCES 

0 

B 

Marsh Cr 

75°42' 30" 

I"-. 

'y 

5 

2 MILES 

FIGURE 2.-Density of houses. A, Upper East Branch Brandywine Creek basin; B, Pickering Creek Basin. Number of houses 

counted per one-quarter-square-mile grid on topographic maps (U.S. Geological Survey, 1952, 1955a, b, 1956a, b, c). 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A5 

suggest that 43 percent of the cultivated acreage is in 

corn, 49 percent in hay, and 8 percent in other crops. 

Much of the crops is used on the farm as food for 

stock. 

THE STUDY 

ORIGIN OF THE INVESTIGATION 

The basic data in this report were collected as part of 

a project in urban planning, conceived and directed by 

the Institute for Environmental Studies of the University of Pennsylvania under the leadership of Ann Louise 

Strong. The planning project involved the development 

of a land-use plan for the upper East Branch of Brandywine Creek, subsequently published by the Chester 

County Water Resources Authority (1968). The plan 

was premised on the delineation of areas within the 

basin which would be protected from further development, though these protected areas would remain in 

private ownership and present land uses and occupancy 

would continue as in 1968. The lands visualize::! as 

needing protection from further housing or commercial 

development are of three types: (a) flood plains, (b) a 

buffer strip extending 300 feet on either side of all 

major and minor stream channels, and (c) areas of 

steep slopes and woods. These three types of land 

would constitute a Water Resources Protection District, 

comprising a total of 46 percent of the basin area. On 

the remaining 54 percent of the area, development 

would be permitted but only under the zoning regulations established by local government bodies. 

To preserve the esthetic character of the countryside, 

the plan envisioned that the protected area would form 

a network of green space or open space fingering 

through the basin along the stream network. It was 

reasoned that concentration of development in the area 

outside the Water Resources Protection District would 

bring higher land values, owing to the existence of 

nearby undeveloped and protected land. It was hoped 

that the result would be no net loss but perhaps a net 

gain in property values and income in the county. 

The principal legal means of achieving the planned 

protection was the purchase of easements from landowners, based on a realistic appraisal of the effects of 

the restrictions on land values. The sale of such easements by landowners was to be voluntary, but the 

easements were to be permanent and attached to the 

property deed. 

The establishment of theW ater Resources Protection 

District, premised on scientific principles insofar as 

they are presently known, was aimed at maintaining 

the quality of the water resources, the natural hydrologic functioning of the watershed, and the esthetic 

amenities. 

427-475 0- 71 - 2 

Meetings, lectures, field trips, conferences, and 

personal visits attempted not only to acquaint the 

landowners with the proposals but to expLl.in the 

details of the easements and the principles on which 

the plan was constructed. The final plan wa!3 printed 

and distributed. However, the majority of landowner~ 

declined, and the project was therefore abandoned. 

The hydrologic studies instituted at the beginning of 

the planning effort were designed to establish the 

principal hydrologic characteristics of the basin in its 

present condition and to furnish basic data against 

which changes with time could be compared. Because 

the land-use plan was to apply only to the upper 

East Branch of Brandywine Creek, the nearby Pickering Creek basin was studied as a control .The present 

report presents the basic data and, in addition, provides 

an opportunity to discuss certain morphological 

fea.tures of the stream channels and the water resources. 

The program of hydrologic-data col1ection was 

financed jointly by the Ford Foundation and the U.S. 

Geological Survey. The Ford Foundation and the 

Pennsylvania Department of Forest and Waters 

supported the other parts of the planning effort. 

PLAN OF THE HYDROLOGIC STUDY 

At each of several stream points representing a 

range of drainage area in both the upper East Branch 

Brandywine and Pickering Creeks, observations were 

made of discharge orwaterstage and suspended sediment, 

and samples of water were taken periodically for quality 

analysis. At two of the points in each basin, a waterstage recorder was installed. At the other points, a 

staff gage was installed. Each station having either a 

recorder or a staff gage installed was rated by currentmeter measurements made at a variety of discharges. 

The location of all measuring points is shown in figure 

3, and their names and drainage areas appear in table 1. 

The water samples for chemical-quality analysis 

were taken at each station periodically to obtain a 

picture of seasonal variation. Several samples were 

obtained during one storm to indicate short-term 

changes with discharge. The same methods governed 

the sampling of suspended sediment. 

Two channel cross sections were surveyed in the 

Pickering Creek basin, and 14 were surveyed in the 

Brandywine Creek basin. No resurveys were made. 

Copies of these data will be filed in the International 

Repositories for Vigil Network Data in Washington, 

D.C., and Uppsala, Sweden. These repositories preserve 

original survey data, so that many years hence different 

investigators can find the original bench marks and 

resurvey the sections. 
A6 URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCES 

•o·o5'~ ··~oc~ville 

~·· 

EXPLANATION 

~ .. 

• 20 

Hydrologic-data site and number 

(see tables) · :-

Basin boundary 

~ Icedale • Brandywine 

~or 

. . 

.~ ··~ /• Bactog 

B 

. . 

~ 

75°30' 

Phoenixvil~e Wilmer 0 

~ •• ~ 

o .. . r-.. • \_ / Picken:ng r;:reek 

~ • • Reservmr 

·~ 

j 

. 

? 

.f'-/". r .. ...--• ,-J •• .-/ •• f ·~ault 

0 2 MILES 

FIGURE 3.-Location of hydrologic-data sites. A, Upper East Branch Brandywine Creek basin; B, Pickering Creek basin; C (facing 

page), Brandywine Creek basin. 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A7 

. 

l 

• . 

·'-··"' 

~ . 

·--. .. "\. ·~ \ 

. . 

) 

r-· 

. 

• ) 

. 

\ . 

. 

\ 

··:, 

·~ ~ 

• 

EXPLANATION ··""'""· 

-··- \ -

\ . 

• 

..,,10 

Hydrologic-data site and number 

discussed by Wolman 

(see tables) 

Miscellaneous hydrologic-data 

site and number 

(see tables) 

5 0 

The approach to the ground-water problem was 

dictated by the short period of investigation, 2 years. 

In such a short timespan, observation of water level 

in wells would have little interpretive value. Therefore, 

we chose a nonstorm period of low flow, when the 

streamflow consisted entirely of ground water feeding 

the channel, and obtained discharge measurements and 

water-quality samples for each unit area of about 1 

square mile. These data indicate the areal variation of 

quantity of the overflow of the ground-water reservoir 

and the associated water quality. 

PENNS.!~ ~!A) 

DELAWARE7""-- Basin boundary :.....--

-••-,-1 / 

Basin boundary of ("" 

upper East Branch •) •. 

Brandywine Creek ( ) 

• 

5 MILES .\ 35 ( •• 

.6.wilmington 

The stream biota was sampled at several places, not 

necessarily at each gaging location. A discussion of the 

results is near the end of the text, and the data are 

tabulated in table 11. 

ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT 

The discussion of each hydrologic parameter includes 

not only the data from individual measuring points 

but also the interrelation within the basins. For example, 

the flow characteristics are discussed first for individual 

stations and then for the basins as a whole. A later 
A8 URBANIZATION AND WATER REISOURCES 

TABLE 1.-Measuring points in Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins and the associated average annual flow and estimated 

bankfull characteristics 

[Average annual discharge: Estimated from fig. 4 except for stations having a continuous-stage recorder] 

No. in 

fig.3 Station Drainage 

area 

(sq mi) 

Estimated Hydraulic values at 1.5-yr recurrence Average bankfull Q interval 

annual 1.5-yr recur- -------------- discharge renee interval Width Depth Velocity Slope (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (fps) (ft per ft) 

Upper East Branch Brandywine Creek basin (fig. 3A) 

1 North Branch at Glenmoore ___________________________________________________ _ 

2 Indian Run at Germany Hollow Road ________________________________________ _ 3 Perkins Run at Rose Cottage _________________________________________________ _ 

4 Culbertson Run at Lyndell_---------------------------------------------------

5 East Branch Brandywine at Cupola~------------------------------------------

6 Indian Run at Glenmoore ____ ------------------------------------------------ 7 East Branch Brandywine at Glenmoore _______ -------------------------------- 8 East Branch Brandywine at LyndelL_----------------------------------------

9 East Branch Brandywine at Dorian 1 ______ ------------------------------------

1.6 

2.0 

3. 7 

3. 9 6. 2 

6.3 

16.5 

27.1 

33.4 

1.4 

1.8 

3.4 

3. 8 5. 8 

5. 8 17.0 

28.0 

35.0 

78 -------------------------------- 92 22 1. 5 2. 6 156 19 2. 5 3. 3 

163 39 2. 8 2. 5 

230 43 2.5 2.1 

230 31 2. 1 4. 0 

510 -------------------------------- 740 52 3. 2 4. 0 

890 61 2. 7 5. 6 

0. 0176 

. 0095 

. 020 

. 0148 

. 00625 

. 0143 

. 004 

. 00456 

. 00267 

Brandywine Creek basin (fig. 3C), Wolman's data (1955) 

10 East Branch Brandywine at Cornog __________________________________________ _ 

11 West Branch Brandywine at Coatesville I_------------------------------------ 12 East Branch Brandywine at Seven Springs __ ---------------------------------- 13 East Branch Brandywine at South Downingtown ____________________________ _ 14 West Branch Brandywine at Embreeville _____________________________________ _ 15 East Branch Brandywine at Georgia __________________________________________ _ 16 West Branch Brandywine at Wawaset_ _______________________________________ _ 

17 Brandywine at Lengpe __ ------------------------------------------------------ 18 Brandywine at Chadds Ford 1_ ------------------------------------------------

25. 7 -------------- 45. 8 -------------- 54,2 -------------- 86.0 -------------- 117.0 -------------- 118. 0 -------------- 134. 0 -------------- 259. 0 -------------- 287.0 375.0 

720 

1,150 

1,300 

2,000 

2,500 

2,500 

2, 900 

5,100 

5,600 

50 

120 

80 

60 

85 

90 

70 

130 

170 

2. 6 

2. 2 3.8 

4.4 

4.4 

4. 8 

4. 8 

7. 0 

5. 5 

6. 0 4. 0 

4.6 

7. 5 

6. 2 

4.8 

7. 5 6.0 

6. 0 

0. 0034 

.0018 

.0026 

. 0008 

.0005 

.0006 

. 001 

. 00075 

. 00066 

Pickering Creek basin (fig. 3B ) 

19 Pine Creek at Sharp Farm ____________________________________________________ _ 

20 Pine Creek near Lionville _____________________________________________________ _ 

21 Tributary Pickering at Art School Road ______________________________________ _ 

22 Rock Run at Charlestown_----------------------------------------------------

23 Pigeon Run at Merlin __ ------------------------------------------------------- 24 Tributary Pickering near Kimberton __________________________________________ _ 

25 Pickering near Eagle __________ ------------------------------------------------- 26 Tributary Pickering at Chester Springs ________________________________________ _ 

30 ~i Pickering ii~i~~~i~i~~:~i~i~~?~~~~~~!~~~-=-=_=~~~-=~~~-=~~-=~============================== at Charlestown ______________________________________________________ _ 

31 Pickering near Phoenixville ~----------------------------------------------------

0. 5 

1. 1 

1.9 

2.6 

2. 8 3.1 

3.1 

4.3 

5.1 

6. 0 

17.7 

26.0 

31.4 

0.4 

1.0 

1. 7 2.4 

2. 7 

2. 8 

2.8 

4.0 

4.8 

5. 7 18.0 

28.0 

34.0 

35 13 1. 5 1. 5 

63 5. 7 . 6 1. 8 

93 12 2.2 3.4 

120 26 1.6 2.8 

130 24 2.0 2.9 

140 -------------------------------- 140 -------------------------------- 180 -------------------------------- 210 19 2. 2 4. 6 260 17 3.8 4.2 

550 -------------------------------- 730 -------------------------------- 840 90 1.7 5.4 

0. 0143 

. 0167 

• 0100 

. 0235 

. 0050 

. 0118 

.005 

.0077 

.0182 

.0038 

. 0021 

. 0037 

. 0033 

Other locations 

3

3

3

2 Marsh Creek near Lyndellt ___________________________________________________ _ 

East Branch Brandywine Creek at Downingtown t_ --------------------------- 34 West Branch Brandywine Creek near Honey Brook! ________________________ _ 

35 Brandywine Creek at Wilmington t_ ------------------------------------------

t Site of continuous-stage recorder. 

section (p. All) contains a discussion of sediment 

characteristics at individual stations and for the basins 

as a whole. However, the basic data in tables 7, 8, and 11 

are grouped by individual stations-all observations of 

flow, sediment, chemical quality, and others compiled 

for each station location. In the interpretive sections 

near the end of the report, some generalizations are 

made and our impressions are summarized. 

SURFACE-WATER HYDROLOGY 

DRAINAGE AREA-DISCHARGE RELATIONSHIPS 

17.8 

81.6 

18.7 

314.0 

19. 6 ---------------------------------------------------------- 85. 0 ------------------------------------------------- -------- 19. 4 --------------------------------------------------------- 435. 0 ---------------------------------------------------------

basins, this plot is linear on log-log paper and has a 

slope of approximately 1.0; in the plot of figure 4, the 

graph is linear and has a slope of 1.1, an agreement 

which is satisfactory considering the fact that only five 

long-term gaging stations are available for constructing 

the relationship. Two stations, 5 and 32, each having 

about 9 mon'ths of record, have been added to the plot 

to demonstrate the relationship even at small drainage 

areas. 

Generally in the Middle Atlantic States the mean 

annual flow is on the order of 1 cfs (cubic foot per 

Gaging stations at Wilmington and upstream locations in the Brandywine Creek basin have varying 

lengths of records; one record covers nearly 50 years. 

The mean annual discharge computed from the longterm records is plotted against the respective drainage 

areas in figure 4 (solid line). Generally, for natural 

' second) per square mile of basin area in basins of the 

magnitude of 100 square miles. Reading off the curve 

in figure 4, one notes a discharge of 1.2 cfs per square 

mile for basins of 100-square-mile area. 

The upper dashed curve of figure 4 represents flow 

having a recurrence interval of 1.5 years as a function 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A9 

Discharge of 1.5-year recurrence interval, / 

an approximation of bankfull flow / >/ 

/ 

/ 

~lOOOk-----------~------/~-----+-------------

8 ~~ ~ /e.~\:)· 

5 / e:,'o~ 

a.. / 

~ / ~ / 

u lOOk---~------~------------~----------~ iii / ::::) 

u 

~ 9 

u..i 

<!l 

0::: 

<( 

I 

u 

CJ) 

EXPLANATION 

_.5 

Station 

0 10~----------~~----------~ 5, Cupola 

9, Dorian 

18, Chadds Ford 

32, Marsh Creek 

33, Downingtown 

34, Honey Brook 

35, Wilmington 

llL ________ L_ __ L_ ______ _L __ ~~----~--~1000 

10 100 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES 

FIGURE 4.-Discharge as a function of drainage area, for 

mean annual flow and for flow having a recurrence interval 

of 1.5 years. 

of drainage area. Flow of this frequency of occurrence 

is considered an approximation of bankfull condition. 

Data for this graph are from published curves for the 

State of Pennsylvania (Busch and Shaw, 1960). Generally such lines representing the relation of flow of a 

given recurrence interval to drainage area are linear on 

log-log paper and have a slope between 0.7 and 0.8. In 

figure 4 the dashed line has a slope of 0.80 as expected. 

The discharges represented by this dashed line are those 

equaled or exceeded on the average of once every 1.5 

years or 2 out of 3 years in the annual maximum series. 

From these curves can be read estiinates of the mean 

annual flow and the bankfall discharge for the project 

locations; these estimates are in table 1. That the flood 

which fills the channel to bankfull stage has a recurrence 

interval of 1 to 2 years, or an average of 1.5 years, has 

been demonstrated by previous analyses (Leopold and 

others, 1964, p. 320-321). 

For the record, data are tabulated below from which 

the curves relating mean annual flood, drainage area, 

and recurrence interval may be r, produced. These data 

were obtained by extrapolation from the published 

curves of Busch and Shaw (1960), which differ slightly 

from the regional flood-frequency curves for Pennsylvania of Tice (1968). 

Ratio to mean annual flood 

0.45 

.71 

.91 

1. 00 1. 45 1. 89 

Recurrence 

interval (yr) 

1.1 

1. 5 

2.0 

2.3 

5.0 

10.0 

Drainage area (sqmi) 

0.5 

1.0 

10.0 

100.0 

Mean annual 

flood (cfs) 

44 

75 

480 

2,900 

AT-A-STATION HYDRAULIC GEOMETRY 

What has proven to be a useful way to organize a 

mass of hydraulic data from a drainage system is to plot 

channel and flow parameters against different discharges 

to observe how the channel at one location accommodates the rise and fall of flow during a storm. This 

relationship is called the hydraulic geometry of the 

stream at a station, or at a given cross section. In 

simplified form the geometry is described by the relation 

of width, depth, and mean velocity to various discharges. 

These relations are developed from individual currentmeter measurements at the location (Leopold and 

others, 1964, p. 215-219). A single station, Indian Run 

at Glenmoore, is presented in figure 5 as an example. 

The curves show the expected power-function relation 

of discharge to the three variables--that is, a straig~tline relation on log-log paper. As flow at the statiOn 

increases from the mean annual value, 5.8 cfs, to the 

bankfull condition, 230 cfs, the width of the flowing 

water increases from 16 to 31 feet. Simultaneously the 

depth goes from 0.7 to 2.1 feet, and the velocity from 

0.53 to 3.9 fps (feet per second). 

To satisfy continuity, the product of width, depth, 

and velocity must equal the discharge. Thus, the su1ns 

of the slopes of the three graph lines must equal unity. 

The respective slopes are 0.19, 0.29, and 0.54, the ~urn 

of which is 1.02, having 2-percent error for the hnes 

drawn through the points by eye. Experience has shown 

this to be satisfactory agreement. 

To compare these relations with others, we. can turn 

to the previous detailed study of the Brandywine Creek 

basin (Wolman, 1955) and compare the slope values of 

the at-a-station curves. Values from this study, values 

derived from theory, and average values for basins 

studied in the United States (Leopold and Maddock, 

1953) are shown below. It can be seen that the values 

found in the present project are of the expected order 

of magnitude. 

Source of data 

This study 15 stations from groups A and C, table 2_ 

Main stem' of Brandywine Creek, Wolman (1955) 

data seven stations (revi~ed) ____ -- __ ------------- Average values for the United States (Leopold and 

Maddock, 1953) __________ --- ___ ------------------- Values from theory (Langbein, 1966) __ - --------- -

At-a-station curve exponents 

Width, Depth, Velocity, b (ft) f (ft) m (fps) 

0. 23 0. 34 0.43 

.04 . 41 . 55 

. 26 .40 .34 

.23 .42 .35 
AlO URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCES 

100 

1-

LI.J 50 LI.J 

u.. 40 

~ 30 

I 

1-

0 20 

~ 

10 

4 

1-

LI.J 

LI.J 

u.. 

~ 

I 

1-

CL 

LI.J 

0 0.8 

0.5 

0 

z 

0 

() 

LI.J 

(f) 

a:: 

LI.J 

CL 

1-

LI.J 

LI.J 

u.. 

~ 

> 1-

u 

0 

...J 

LI.J 

> 5 10 50 100 500 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND 

FIGURE 5.-At-a-station hydraulic geometry, Indian Run at 

Glenmoore. 

The slopes of the regression lines in the plots of width, 

depth, and velocity as functions of discharge at the 

individual stations are shown in table 2. 

THE DOWNSTREAM HYDRAULIC GEOMETRY 

Of special interest to the student of river channels is 

the change downstream along a river system, because 

there are so few basins in the world within which a 

series of measurements have been n1ade along the 

channel system. The present project data added to the 

observations made in the Wolman study of 1955 make 

the Brandywine an especially well-documented small 

basin in the number of comparable hydraulic measurements along the channel network. 

The downstream analysis can be made for flows of any 

chosen recurrence interval (frequency). One of the 

flow-frequency values of interest is that corresponding to 

bankfull condition, approximated in this study by the 

recurrence-interval value of 1.5 years. The values of 

discharge at this frequency were read from figure 4 

and are tabulated in table 1. 

In a manner similar to the at-a-station relations, 

the downstrean1 changes of width, depth, and velocity 

as discharge increases owing to the addition of tribuTABLE 2.-At-a-station data for the Brandywine Creek and 

Pickering Creek basins 

At-a-station curve exponents 

No. Station 

Width, Depth, Velocity, b (ft) f (ft) m (fps) 

A. Upper East Branch Brandywine Creek basin 

1 North Branch at Glenmoore _________________________________________________ _ 

2 Indian Run at Germany Hollow Road_________ 0.16 0. 30 0. 52 

3 Perkins Run at Rose Cottage___________________ .18 . 34 . 46 4 Culbertson Run at LyndelL___________________ . 38 . 44 . 20 

5 East Branch Brandywine at Cupola 1 ___ ------- • 24 . 34 . 41 6 Indian Run at Glenmoore______________________ . 19 . 29 . 54 7 East Branch Brandywine at Glenmoore _____________________________________ _ 

8 East Branch Brandywine at Lyndell___________ .12 . 36 . 52 

9 East Branch Brandywine at Dorian 1___________ . 15 . 32 . 52 

Average, group A---------------------------- . 20 . 34 .45 

B. Brandywine Creek basin, Wolman (1955) data 

10 East Branch Brandywine at Cornog____________ 0. 04 0. 40 0. 52 11 West Branch Brandywine at Coatesville I______ . 22 . 30 . 48 12 East Branch Brandywine at Seven Springs_____ . 05 . 45 . 48 

13 East Branch Brandywine at South Downing- town_________________________________________ . 04 . 36 • 61 

14 West Branch Brandywine at Embreeville______ . 02 . 39 . 59 

15 East Branch Brandywine at Georgia___________ .02 .29 .69 

16 West Branch Brandywine at Wawaset_________ . 05 . 42 . 53 

17 Brandywine at Lenape_ ------------------------ . 08 . 46 . 46 

18 Brandywine at Chadds Ford ~------------------ . 16 . 45 • 42 

------------------- Average, group B---------------------------- . 08 . 39 . 53 

C. Pickering Creek basin 

19 Pine Creek at Sharp Farm_____________________ 0. 55 0. 38 0. 08 

20 Pine Creek near Lionville __ -------------------- . 36 . 48 . 16 21 Tributary Pickering at Art School Road________ . 18 . 45 . 37 22 Rock Run at Charlestown______________________ . 13 • 22 . 66 23 Pigeon Run at Merlin__________________________ . 36 . 35 . 30 24 Tributary Pickering near Kimberton ________________________________________ _ 25 Pickering near Eagle __________________________________ ---- ___ --- ______ -------

26 Tributary Pickering at Chester Springs _______________ ------- __________ ------ 27 Pine Creek at Chester Springs__________________ .11 . 30 . 60 

28 Piekering near Chester Springs I________________ • 09 . 44 . 47 

29 Pickering at Pikeland ____ ---------------------------------------------------- 30 Pickering at Charlestown ____ ------------------------------------------------- 31 Pickering near Phoenixville~------------------- . 22 . 09 . 69 

Average, group C ____________________________ ===· 25 =-~4 _ ____:__:: 

Average, groups A, B, and C _______________ _ Average, groups A and C ___________________ _ 

1 Site of continuous-stage recorder. 

. 17 

. 23 . 36 . 34 . 47 

.43 

taries can be plotted from the data in table 1 and are 

presented in figure 6. The same relation of slopes of 

the lines is required for the downstream as for the 

at-a-station relations, which is that the sum must 

equal unity. The respective slopes of the lines are 

0.47, 0.27, and 0.26. 

The average channel slope as measured on 

topographic maps was determined for each station and 

tabulated in table 1. These slope values were plotted 

against bankfull discharge (fig. 7). The resulting plot 

has a slope of -0.87. 

The following table enables the comparison of the 

values of the Brandywine downstream hydraulic 

geon1etry with values of other river systems and with 

theoretical values. 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION All 

River systems 

Average value, Midwestern United States 1 ______________________________ _ 

Brandywine Creek, Pa., Wolman's re- port 1 ________________________________ _ 

Ephemeral streams in semiarid United States 1 ______________________________ _ 

Appalachian streams 1 _________________ _ 

Downstream hydraulic-geometry exponents 

Width, Depth, Velocity, Slope, z b (ft) f (ft) m (fps) (ft per ft) 

0. 5 

.42 

.5 

0.1 -0.49 

. 05 -1.07 

.2 -.95 

.09 ------------ Theoretical value 2 _____________________ _ 

• 55 

.50 

.47 

.48 

0.4 

.45 

.3 

.36 

.38 

• 27 

.36 

.12 -.55 Present Brandywine study ____________ _ 18 Illinois basins, mean 3 _______________ _ 

I Leopold, Wolman, and Miller (1964). 2 Langbein (1966). 3 Stall and Fok (1968). 

.26 -.87 

.16 ------------

The width exponent for the present study is fairly 

close both to the width exponents derived from other 

studies and to the theoretical value of 0.50. The depth 

exponent is smaller and the velocity exponent is 

significantly larger than in most of the other river 

systems. 

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT DATA 

There are few basins where the density of stations 

for collecting suspended-sediment samples is greater 

than in the project area. The individual samples 

must be organized in some uniform manner which 

200,--,----~----------,----,----------,--~ 

10 

10 

Iw 

w 

I..L. 

~ 

I 

Ia.. 

w 

Cl 

Cl 

z 

0 10 () 

w 

(f) 

a::: l w 

a.. 

Iw 

w 

I I..L. 

~ ~0 es 

-;.: J .19 I0 

0 

_J 30 50 100 

m =slope=0.26 

500 1000 5000 10,000 

I 

w 

> DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND 

FIGURE 6.-Downstream hydraulic geometry for the Brandywine 

Creek and Pickering Creek basins. Recurrence interval of 

1.5 years, approximate bankfull discharge. 

I0 

0 

I..L. 

a::: 

w 

a.. 

Iw 

w 

I..L. 

~ 

w 

a.. 

0 

_J 

(f) 

• • 

0.01 

• 

• 

i 

--i 

uj~~ 0.001 ~--------------j--------------!----~---------1~· z=slope= -0.87 •. 

• • 

"O.OOO!IL---~I 50 100 ---"--------'--~11 500 1000 5000 10,000 10 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND 

FIGURE 7.-Relation of channel slope to discharge of 1.5-year 

recurrence interval for upper East Branch Brandywine 

Creek and Pickering Creek basins. 

generally takes the form of a relation of sediment load 

to discharge at a given station. The instantaneous 

sediment concentration represented in the watersample bottle is ordinarily expressed as a rate per day 

though the EJample was a momentary condition. The 

concentration in the bottle, in milligrams per liter by 

weight, is multiplied by the discharge, in cubic feet per 

second, and by a constant to yield sediment flow rate, 

in tons per day. The constant used here is for deposited 

sediment of 80 pounds per cubic foot, and thus 1,000 

mg/1 (milligrams per liter) in a discharge of 1.0 cfs 

yields 3.46 tons per day. In equation form, L= KOQ, 

where Lis sediment flow rate, in tons per day, K is a 

constant equal to 0.00346, 0 is sediment concentration, 

in milligrams per liter, and Q is water discharge, In 

cubic feet per second. 

A typical sediment transport curve is presented in 

figure 8 for Pickering Creek near Phoenixville. Each 

point on the graph represents a single sample, and the 

suspended-sediment discharge, in tons per day, is 

plotted against the instantaneous discharge of water. 

The slope of this line is an element in the hydraulic 

gemnetry of strean1 channels. The slope of the line in 

figure 8, represented by the exponent j in the relation 

L 1".1 Qi, 

where Lis load, in tons per day, ""' is a proportionality 

constant, and Q is discharge, has a value of 2.7 and is 

recorded in table 3. The usual range of values for this 
A12 URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCES 

0 

z 

0 1000,-----------,-----------~------------~----------~------------, 

u 

l.LJ 

(J) 

0::: 

l.LJ 

a... 

1-

l.LJ 

l.LJ 

u. 

u 

iii 

::::l 

u 

~ 

w 

0 

0::: 

<( 

I 

u 

(J) 

0 10~1 ----------~------------+-------------+------------~--------~ 

(J) 

::::l 

0 

l.LJ 

z 

<( 

1-

z 

<( 

1-

(J) 

~ 1k-----------~----------~------------~-----------L----------~ 

0.01 0.1 10 100 1000 

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT DISCHARGE, IN TONS PER DAY 

FIGURE 8.-Transport curve for suspended-sediment load at Pickering Creek near 

Phoenixville. 

exponent (slope) is 1.5-3.0. The graph shown is therefore typical of many river data. 

TABLE 3.-Slope of the sediment transport curve for various stations 

No. Station 

2 Indian Run at Germany Hollow Road _________________________ _ 

! ~cl~e~s~1~R~~1 ~~ ~y~~!~:~= = = = = == == == == == = = = = = = = = == == = = == == = ~ = 5 East Branch Brandywine Creek at Cupola _____________________ _ 6 Indian Run t Glenmoore ______________________________________ :_ 

9 East Branch Brandywine Creek at Dorlan_ -------------------- _ 19 Pine Creek at Sharp Farm-------------------------------------=- 21 Tributary Pickering Creek at Art School Road _________________ _ 

: ~i~~~nRn~:~f~~~~~t~~~ ~=== = == = = ==: = = = = = = = = = = = == =: = = = = == = = = = =~ = 24 Tributary Pickering Creek near Kimberton _____________________ _ 26 Tributary Pickering Creek at Chester Springs ___________________ _ 27 Pme Creek at Chester Springs __________________________________ _ 

28 Pickering Creek near Chester Springs--------------------------=- 31 Pickering Creek near Phoenixville _______________________________ _ 

Slope of sediment 

transport 

curve, j 

1.8 

2.0 

3.1 

2.3 

1.8 

2.4 

2. 7 

2.8 

2.8 

3.0 

2.0 

3.1 

2. 7 

2. 7 2. 7 

The several sediment transport curves for locations 

in the project area are shown in figure 9, including the 

curve for the long-term record at Wilmington. 

The slopes of respective sediment transport curves 

are very similar. Only stations 2 and 6 have a low slope--

that is, a less than usual rise of suspended load to increased discharge. As shown in figure 9, the quantitative 

comparison among stations is difficult with superimposed sediment transport curves because as drainage 

area increases, so does the expected discharge for any 

given frequency. Thus, if one reads the sediment load 

at a given discharge, the large drainage areas show a 

lower value than the small areas because the given 

discharge may be a low flow for the large areas and a 

floodflow for the small areas. 

A valid mode of comparison is to read the sediment 

load from each transport curve at a discharge of a 

given frequency or recurrence interval. This has been 

done for discharges approximating bankfull (1.5-year 

recurrence interval) listed in table 1. Figure 10 is a 

plot of sediment load for each station at bankfull. 

If the points alined along a 45° slope, the sediment concentration would remain the same as you travel downstream in the basin. Instead the points scatter 

considerably. However, it can be seen that points 

showing high sediment loads include stations 19, 22, and 

23 of the Pickering Creek basin and only station 4 of 

the Brandywine. Points showing less than average 

sediment loads include stations 2, 3, 5, 6, and 9, all in the 

East Branch Brandywine and none in the Pickering. 

The area on Pine Creek at Sharp Farm which, in 1968, 

was changed from agricultural use to industrial use, 

is shown by station 19, an especially high sediment load 

for its discharge. Culbertson Rtin at Lyndell (station 4) 

is also high, probably because of housing construction 

near Little Washington. Generally, it appears that 

Pickering Creek is producing more suspended sediment 

than comparable places 1n upper East Branch 

Brandywine. 

FLOOD PLAINS AND TERRACES 

As previously mentioned, several cross sections were 

established and surveyed in hopes of determining at a 

later date what effect urbanization would have on the 

geometry of the channel. As a further step we wished 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BAS,INS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A13 

10,000~----------~------------~------------,------------~-----------,------------,------------, 

o1000 

z 

0 

(.) 

1.1..1 

(f) 

0:: 

1.1..1 

a.. 

1-

1.1..1 

1.1..1 

LL.. 

(.) 100 iii 

:::::> 

(.) 

~ 

w 

(!) 

0:: 

<( 

I 

(.) 

(f) 

0 10 

1L_3 __________ _L ____________ ~----------~------------~----------~------------~----------~ 

0.01 0.1 10 100 1000 10,000 100,000 

SEDIMENT LOAD, IN TONS PER DAY 

FrGURE 9.-Transport curves for suspended-sediment load at hydrologic-data sites in upper East Branch Brandywine Creek and 

Pickering Creek basins. 

to determine the meaning of the several berms at 

. various places along the channels. 

A valley cross section includes two principal elements--the valley flat and the channel. The valley flat 

often consists of more than one level, the level presently 

being built by the river, which is called the flood 

plain, and levels constructed during former stream 

regimens. The latter, called berms, are a.bandoned 

flood plains or terraces. They may be broad and 

conspicuous level areas, or merely small and obscure 

fea.tures. 

The flood plain, a product of the riverflow and 

sediment load, is considered to be intimately related to 

bankfull discharge, which is believed to be the discharge effective in channel formation. Basica11y, the 

flood plain is constructed by two processes-deposition 

on the inside of the river curves and, to a lesser degree, 

overbank deposition (Wolman and Leopold, 1957). 

Thus, as a stream migrates across a valley floor, it 

leaves behind a flat bench; the flood plain. 

A change in stream regimen and channel-forming 

discharge can result from several causes, including 

tectonic, climatic, and man-induced changes. Among 

the man-induced changes is alteration of the basin by 

urbanization. When the dominant (channel-forming) 

427-745 0- 71 - 3 

discharge is increased, entrenchment or incision of the 

river may occur. Once again, as the stream migrates 

across the valley floor, a new valley flat is formed. 

Since the new valley flat is related to the new dominant 

discharge and new channel, it is at a lower level than 

the previous valley flat. Meanwhile, the old valley flat 

10,000 ~---------,----- ------,-------------,----------

0 

z 

0 

(.) 

1.1..1 

(f) 

0:: 

1.1..1 

a.. 1000~------~--------~--. 

1-

1.1..1 

1.1..1 

LL.. 

(.) 

iii Station :::::> number (.) "-2 ~ 100~---1r-~----

w 

(!) 

0:: 

<( 

I 

(.) 

(f) 

0 

19 

~ 

35 

~ 

10L_------~--------~--------~---------~ 

10 100 1000 10,000 100,000 

SEDIMENT LOAD, IN TONS PER DAY 

FIGuRE 10.-Sediment load at each station for a discharge of 

1.5-year recurrence interval. 
A14 URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCES 

ma.y or may not be left as a terrace or a berm, depending 

on the limits of the lateral migration of the stream 

during its latest regimen. 

Close inspection of the immediate area of the small 

channels in the Brandywine area shows that berms or 

level zones appear fairly close to the channel. Depending 

on location, these berms may be difficult to recognize, 

or they ma.y not appear at all. If the berms are a part 

of the present channel, then the width and depth of 

water whose surface is coincident with the berm level 

should be correlative with other channel chara.cteristics, 

such as dominant discharge and downstream hydraulic 

geometry. The problem discussed here is the identification of the true flood plain and its relation to abandoned 

flood plains or terraces. 

Photographs in figure 11 show the berms or local flat 

levels near the channel in the study area. These berms 

are subtle rather than pronounced, but many of them 

can be traced rather consistently along considerable 

distances. 

The berms also show up on some of the cross sections 

which were surveyed and documented. The upper graph 

in figure 12 shows the channel and val1ey cross section 

for Indian Run at Germany Hollow Road. In the cross 

section, the berm that appears at an elevation of 98 

feet and a distance of 60 feet is the low berm. The high 

berm appears at elevation 98.7 feet and distance 35 

feet. 

At each field location inspected, the extant levels or 

berms were identified, and some simple measurements 

were made. At most locations two leveJs were usually 

apparent, a valley floor reaching to adjoining colluvial 

slopes and an inner level confined to narrow commonly 

discontinuous segments near the stream channel. For 

present purposes, these two are called the high and low 

berms. It is believed that one of these two is the flood 

plain being constructed by the present stream regimen. 

The narrowness of the low berm suggests that it may be 

a tra.nsient a.nd perhaps unimportant feature, in which 

case the main valley flat (high berm) is the flood plain. 

On the other hand, the valley flat could be a terrace 

and the present flood plain could still have formed to 

only a slight degree below the abandoned level and is 

therefore just a narrow band along the channel. As an 

FIGURE 11.-Typical reaches of streams in upper East Branch 

Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins; the subtle 

character of two berms or levels of the valley floor is seen in 

some photographs. A, East Branch Brandywine Creek at 

Downingtown, downstream from the main study area; near 

the far streambank a narrow flat area can be seen that is a 

few feet lower than the more extensive valley flat on which 

are the houses in the background. The narrow bench near the 

stream is the low berm, and the higher more extensive flat 

is the high berm. B and C, East Branch Brandywine Creek at 

approach to the identification of the present flood plain, 

cross-sectional data are used below to estimate discharge 

at the level of each berm, and the recurrence interval 

of the discharges is estimated. The objective is that the 

level of the flood plain should be such that the recurrence interval of discharge would approximate 1.5 years. 

Table 4 shows channel width and depth for the 

water level even with the surfaces of the high and low 

berms. From these basic data, cross-sectional area is 

estimated for each berm level. The velocity was a

1

scertained by combining two previously presented relationships: (1) the velocity-discharge correlation, shown in 

the downstream hydraulic geometry, and (2) the 

discharge-drainage-area relationship. The resulting 

velocity-drainage-area relationship was then. used to 

determine the velocity at each station. Multiplying the 

cross-sectional areas times the velocity gave an estimate 

of the discharge at each of the two berm levels. 

The results of the computations are plotted on the 

lower graph in figure 12. The low berm is denoted by 

an "x", and the high berm is denoted by a circ1e. 

Superimposed are the regional curves for floods of 

recurrence intervals of 1.5, 2.33, a.nd 10 years. It is 

easily seen that the calculated discharges of most of the 

low berms have regional recurrence interv9ls varying 

between 1.5 and 2.33 years. The high berm has a variable recurrence interval, from a bout 10 years at 1 sq mi 

to 2.33 years somewhere between 100 and 300 sq mi. 

Although the estimates are only rough, the recurrenceinterval data suggest that in the upper East Branch 

Brandywine Creek basin the channels have abandoned 

the level of the main valley flat, leaving it as a terrace, 

and are constructing a new flood plain at the level of 

the low berm. 

As the drainage area increases in size, the two berms 

converge hydraulically-that is, the discharges calculated for the berms converge in the downstream 

direction. As was observed in the field and as can be 

seen in table 4, there is no obvious converging of the 

berms in terms of either depth or width. The hydraulic 

convergence must be due to either channel slope or 

roughness. 

The above estimates are derived from basic data on 

the channel cross section at the levels of observed 

Dorian; the high berm is the more extensive wooded valley 

flat, and near the stream is a lower narrow flat area, the low 

berm. D, Pigeon Run near Merlin; typical land use in the 

agricultural areas of the Pickering Creek basin. In the right 

foreground, at the most visible downstream part of the 

channel, is the low berm. E, Pickering Creek near Phoenixville; 

non urban use; pasture near the stream and crop-producing 

field on the far right. F, East Branch Brandywine Creek at 

Glenmoore; non producing land on the upper East Branch 

Brandywine. Near by flat lands are used for farming. 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A15 

A D 

B E 

c F 
A16 

w 

> 0 

(0 

..: 

rw 

w 

u... 

z 

z 

0 

f= 

..: 

> 

w 

...J 

w 

0 

z 

0 

u 

w 

(f) 

a:: 

w 

(l_ 

rw 

w 

u... 

u 

[ii 

:J 

u 

z 

LLi 

'-' a:: 

..: 

I 

u 

(f) 

i5 

URBANIZATION AND WATER REISOURCES 

102 ,----,-----,-----,-----,-----,----,-----,-----,----,-----,-----,-----,----,-----,-----

10J 

97 -

96 

95 -

1000 

100 

LEFT VALLEY FLATHeavy growth of weeds 

and small trees 

X 

LEFT SIDE 

X 

RIGHT SIDE 

CHANNEL-Sand and gravel bottom, 

some leaves and silt 

DISTANCE, IN FEET 

X 

• 

EXPLANATION 

x Low berm I • High berm 

• Gaging station , high berm~ 

• G"""' ""'""· •~ "••m 

1 

10 L_------------------ ------------------~------------------_L------------------~ 

10 100 1000 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES 

FIGURE 12.-Upper, Cross section of channel and valley flat, Indian Run at Germany Hollow Road; Lower, Discharge 

values computed for levels of the high and low berms at locations where berm heights were measured in the field. 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION AI7 

TABLE 4.-Physical properties of channel cross sections in and near Brandywine Creek 

[cross-sectional. area at bfrm level, hi~h ber:r~, computed as _chan~el area below low berm plus the product of channel width at high berm and depth. Velocity of 1.5-year recurrenc~-mterval. flow from veloClty-dramage-area relatiOnship. Re.marks: C, from cross sections; S, from survey of berms; T, more than two berms noted, but the two recorded m table gtve best agreement (areas computed on basis of three berms); W, from Wolman (1955)] 

Low berm High berm Cross-sec- Velocity Estimated 

Station 

No. (listed in order of increasing drainage area) 

19 Pine Creek at Sharp Farm------------------------------ ----- East Branch Brandywine Creek at Cretchmer Farms, State Route 82 _______________________________________ _ 

_____ Culbertson Run at U.S. Routp, 322 _____________________ _ 

----- East Branch Brandywine Creek at McConnel Farm, 

Drainage 

area (sq mi) 

Channel 

Height width at above berm 

bed (ft) level (ft) 

1.1 9 

1. 5 10 

Height 

above 

bed (ft) 

2.2 

3. 5 

3. 2 

tiona! area at Channel berm level 

width at (sq ft) 

berm ----- level (ft) Low High berm berm 

14 9.9 

22 15 

25 

59 

20 -------- 64 

of 1.5- dischargeyear-re- water at berm currence- level (cfs) Remarks 

interval ----- flow (fps) Low High 

berm berm 

1.9 19 48 c 

2. 0 30 118 c 2.2 -------- 141 c 

Legislative Route 15146 ___ --------------------------- "'1 2.0 10 ---------------------- 20 2. 2 44 -------- c 

1 North Branch at Glenmoore_--------------------------- 1.6 2.3 11 4.3 32 25 89 

77 2.4 60 214 c 2 Indian Run at Germany Hollow Road _________________ _ 2. 0 2. 1 24 3. 0 30 50 2. 5 150 192 c ----- Culbertson Run at Special School Road ________________ _ "-'2. 4 3. 0 20 ---------------------- 60 2. 6 156 -------- c 3 Perkins Run at Rose Cottage __________________________ _ 3. 7 3. 0 19 4. 0 25 57 82 

185 

163 

140 

230 

2. 8 160 230 c 4 Culbertson Run at LyndelL ___________________________ _ 3. 9 ---------------------- 4. 2 44 -------- 2.8 -------- 518 c ----- East Branch Brandywine Creek upstream of Cupola ___ _ 5. 8 3. 7 26 5. 4 39 96 3. 2 307 521 s ___ -- East Branch Brandywine Creek on Cupola Road. _____ _ "-'5. 8 3. 0 29 4. 0 b3 87 3. 2 278 448 c ----- East Branch Brandywine Creek downstream of Cupola_ _____ East Branch Brandywine Crsek downstream of 8. 3 3. 7 46 5. 1 71 130 3. 3 430 760 S,T 

Barneston Bridge ____________________________________ _ 12.6 4.1 32 5. 2 ----- East Branch Brandywine Creek upstream of Glenmoore_ 15.5 4.6 39 6. 0 -----East Branch Brandywine Creek upstream of Indian Run _________________________________________________ _ 18.0 3.6 44 6. 6 ----- East Branch Brandywine Creek at Cornog _____________ _ 25.9 4.3 40 6. 3 10 East Branch Brandywim Creek at Cornog _____________ _ "'26 3. 0 40 4. 6 8 East Bran(·h Brandywine Creek at LyndelL ___________ _ 27.1 3. 5 48 5. 5 ----- East Branch Brandywine Creek at LyndelL ___________ _ 27.1 4. 5 50 5. 4 9 East Branch Brandywine Creek at Dorian _____________ _ 33.4 4. 8 60 7. 6 13 East Branch Brandywine Creek at South Downingtown_ 86.0 5. 0 59 7. 0 

52 131 63 180 

69 158 80 172 70 120 70 168 56 222 83 288 

188 

268 

365 

332 

232 

308 

272 

232 

446 

3. 6 

3.8 

3.9 

4. 2 

4.2 

4.3 

4.3 

4.4 

5.4 

472 677 s 685 1,020 s 

616 1,420 s 722 1,390 S,T 

504 976 c 723 1,320 c 605 1,170 s 

1, 267 2,300 c 

1,600 2,410 w 18 Brandywine Creek at Chadds Ford ____________________ _ 287 ----------------·----- 9. 0 75 296 

130 -------- 1,170 

1, 000 7. 0 -------- 8,190 w ----- Brandywine Creek at Chadds Ford ____________________ _ s 287 ---------------------- 7. 7 130 -------- 7. 0 -------- 7, 000 

berms. Data on mean annual flood, on recurrence 

interval, and on discharge at berm height came from 

generalizations drawn from regional analyses. There 

are, however, three gaging stations in and near the 

study area from which measurements can be used for 

obtaining recurrence interval of flow at berm level. 

Such a situation eliminates the necessity of extrapolation from regional relations. The berm levels at the 

three stations were identified in the field in the manner 

described in connection with table 4. The discharges 

applicable to berm elevations and the resulting recurrence intervals are summarized below. 

No. 

34 

33 

18 

Quantities at level of each berm 

Station 

Record Drainage Discharge Recurrence 

period area (cfs) interval (yr) (yr) (sqmi) 

West Branch Brandywine Creek near Honey Brook_ 1961-67 

East Branch Brandywine Creek at Downingtown __ 1959-67 

Brandywine Creek at Chadds Ford ____________ 1914-57 

18.7 

81.6 

Lc w High Low High berm berm berm berm 

150 300 1.1 1.5 

1500 3000 1. 2 1. 2 

287.0 -------- 3800 -------- 1.12 

These results can be shown another way, by superimposing them in figure 12. The three station values are 

very similar to the calculated discharge of the berms, 

varying in recurrence interval from slightly under 1.5 

years to slightly above 2.33 years on the regional 

analysis. 

To summarize, the valley flat that borders the 

Brandywine Creek is the flood plain of streams draining 

at least 100 sq mi of area. However, it appears that 

changes in the relations between rainfall, runoff, and 

sediment load occurred in postglacial and recent times. 

These changes were probably associated with the advent 

of agriculture in colonial days and, no doubt, complicated by the well-known climatic change of the last 

century. Whatever the exact cause, the data suggest 

that for small basins, the flood plain was abandoned 

and became a terrace and, after downcutting, the 

streams began anew to form a flood plain at a lower 

level. 

In the smaller drainage areas, housing or other development could take place on the valley fla.t, which is 

flooded about 1 out of every 10 yea.rs. But for a drainage 

area of at least 100 sq mi, development on the valley 

flat would be flooded an average of every 2 or 3 years. 

CHEMICAL QUALITY OF THE STREAMFLOW 

It is generally thought that urbanization tends to 

degrade water quality, not merely in terms of a changing 

sediment load, but also in amounts of dissolved load. 

Surprisingly, data available to document this logical 

postulate are meager and commonly apply only to 

large rivers where a great variety of influences other 

than urbanization have been operative. In the present 

investigation many chemical analyses have been made 

within the confines of two small river basins. In the 

33-sq mi basin of the upper East Branch Brandywine 

Creek, 89 chemical analyses of water samples were 

made during the 2-year investigation. In the 31-sq-mi 
A18 URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCE8 

basin of Pickering Creek, 62 chemical analyses were 

made. 

PLAN FOR DATA COLLECTION 

The water samples for chemical analysis were taken 

principally at the sites where discharge and sediment 

measurements were made. The observation network 

was designed to sample a variety of subbasins varying 

in size from about 1 to 30 sq mi. Because flexibility is 

necessary in a program whose aim is to measure the 

progressive changes in water quality resulting from land 

development, the locations of measuring points were 

subject to cha.nge, except for the places where waterstage recorders were instalJed. It was also planned that 

water-quality samples from each location be obtained 

under a variety of flow conditions, from low flow to 

stormflow. In addition special chemical determinations 

were made at particular sites. 

CHEMICAL QUALITY AT A GIVEN LOCATION 

In a study of urbanization there is no assurance at 

the present time that the chemical parameters which 

we measure are the important ones. Although the fact 

that the amount of nitrate and phosphate dissolved in 

water exercises an important control over the stream 

biota is well known, the situation may, in fact, be much 

more complicated, for there may be trace elements 

which have a subtle and, at present, unknown effect 

of even greater importance. The decision that the water 

samples taken during the present investigation would 

be analyzed in the manner generally considered standard 

was made with the understanding that, as more is 

learned about the effects of urbanization, it may be 

necessary to discard some of the currently analyzed 

chemical factors and substitute other factors. 

Two principal kinds of chemical variations should be 

considered-variance in time and in space. In a stream 

sy~tem the changes of flow with respect to time are 

marked and can vary through n-early two orders of 

magnitude in small drainage basins. This flow variance 

progressively decreases as the size of the contributing 

basin increases. It may be expected that, as streamflow 

increases during storm runoff, concentrations of some 

chemical parameters would tend to decrease as a result 

of dilution by rainwater. The second type of va.riation 

which can be expected is a variation in geographic 

space that would reflect the local occurrence of different 

rock types and their associated soil materials. 

In making comparisons in space and in time, certain 

standards must be adopted to form the basis for comparison. For example, at what particular flow or 

discharge rate should one compare different locations 

within a given river basin, knowing that, at any one 

time, there is more flow at the downstream location 

than at the upstream one? Also, during stormfiow, 

two points that are geographically close can actually 

be simultaneously experiencing very different degrees 

of discharge. To avoid confusion, then, it is mandatory 

that certain rules be established for making these 

comparisons. 

In figure 13 several chemical factors are presented 

as functions of stream discharge at a particular location. The example chosen is Indian Run at Glenmoore, 

which has a drainage area of 6.3 sq mi. There are 

separate graphs for the concentrations of dissolved 

solids, chlorides, sulfates; phosphates, and nitrates as 

functions of discharge. Along the discharge scale for 

this location, two points, representing the mean annual 

discharge and the approximation of bankfull discharge, 

have been chosen as standard for the present discussion. As discussed earlier, the discharge having a 

1.5-year recurrence interval is used in this report as 

an approximation of the bankfull discharge. 

The dissolved-solids concentration does not change 

significantly from low flow to high. At the station the 

solids vary generally from 60 to 70 mgfl. There seems 

to be a slight increase in chloride concentration, 

from 4 to about 8 mg/1, as flow increases from low to 

high values. The sulfate concentration also tends to 

increase somewhat, changing from about 10 to 17 mg/1 

from low to high flow. The nitrate level remains fairly 

constant at 4 mg/1 throughout the range of flows. The 

phosphate concentration, a somewhat unique parameter, shows a large increase as discharge increases, 

although the actual phosphate concentration is small; 

as the graph shows, phosphate concentration at this 

station changes from about 0.01 to 0.15 mgfl as discharge increases from mean annual to bankfull stage. 

In addition, there is a much larger scatter of points 

about the main regression line for phosphate than for 

the other parameters. 

Based on the same types of graphs as those in figure 

13 a listing is presented in table 5 for each stream 

lo~ation where chemical-quality.samples were obtained 

in both the upper East Branch Brandywine Creek and 

the Pickering Creek basins. For each of the five chemical 

parameters, the concentration is shown for two standard 

discharges, mean annual flow, or mean Q, and approximate bankfull flow, that flow having a 1.5-year 

recurrence interval. Many of the blanks in the table 

exist because of an insufficient number of observations. 

There is considerable similarity among the locations 

studied. With the exception of station 19, Pine Creek 

at Sharp Farm, the concentrations of each of the five 

factors remain in the same order of magnitude regardless of location. For example, with the exception noted 

above the total dissolved solids at mean annual flow vary ' 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION 

a::: 

w 

..... 

::::i 

a::: 

w 

a.. 

en 

::;E 

<( 

a::: 

(.!) 

::::i 

_J 

~ 

~ 

z 

0 

f= 

<( 

a::: 

..... 

z 

w 

() 

z 

0 

() 

0.5 

0.1 

0.05 

0.04 

0.03 

0.02 

0.01 

10 

5 

4 

3 

2 

100 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

10 

5 

4 

3 

2 

20 

10 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1-

f 

I--~ 

1-

1-

1-

+-

-

-

1-

1-

1-

f1-

1 

0.1 

T I 

0.5 

I I II I I I II Ill I I I I I II I I TTTT 

I I I I I ~ I /. I 

I 

I 

I 

I v / I 

I 

I qiV PHOS HATE P04 

~ I 

I ~-

I I 

I I 

I I 

• .: . • • I I 

I I 

I • I 

• I I 

I NI~RATE N03 I 

I : I 

- I I ... • -

.-r- • a -I 

~ -

I ~ .. - -

I I 

I I -

I I -

I I 

I I -

I 

10TAL IDISSOL~ED S?LIDS I 

I 

I 

i I ~--

. 

----~-1--- ~ I • r. • I 

__.---:-;- I -

. _... ........ • : 

T 

I -

I I -

I I 

I I -

I 

I 

I ! I I q-ILORIDE Cl I 

I I I I 

I 

~ !------ a r • I• 

l-L--- I 

~ I 

I I 

I I 

I I -

• Mean lnnual 

I 

I 

I ·r,·· SULFATE so4 _ 

t Bankfull 

: I 

discha rg~ I Ill 

1 5 10 50 100 500 1000 

RIVER DISCHARGE IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND 

FIGURE 13.-Water-quality factors as functions of river discharge, Indian Run at Glenmoore. 

A19 
A20 URBANIZATION AND WATER RE1SOURCES 

TABLE 5.-Dissolved load at measurement stations, in m~:lligrams per liter, for two discharge values, mean annual discharge (mean Q) and 

bankfull discharge 

[Dissolved-load quantities interpolated on graphs showing load-discharge relation] 

No. Station Drainage Dissolved solids Phosphate (P04) Nitrate (N03) Sulfate (S04) Chloride (Cl) area at- at- at- at- at- (sq mi) --------- --------- ------- ------ --------- Mean Q Bankfull Mean Q Bankfull Mean Q Bankfull Mean Q Bankfull Mean Q Bankfull 

Upper East Branch Brandywine Creek 

basin: 

2 Indian Run at Germany Hollow Road __ 3 Perkins Run at Rose Cottage __________ _ 4 Culbertson Run at LyndelL ___________ _ 

5 East Branch Brandywine at Cupola ___ _ 6 Indian Run at Gleunloore _____________ _ 

2. 0 

3. 7 

3. 9 6. 2 

6.3 

84 

78 

95 

90 

70 

60 0. 02 0.17 70 .06 . 35 60 . 05 ------------ 75 . 07 ------------ 60 .01 . 15 

8 4. 2 ---------------------- 6. 6 4.4 

6 6 12 21 7 8. 5 

9 4 24 22 9. 5 6. 5 

5. 5 4.1 17 18 9 6 

3.1 3.1 11 17 6 8 8 East Branch Brandywine at LyndelL __ 27.1 

33.4 82 80 ---------- .19 3 8 11 ------------ 7 9 9 East Branch Brandywine at Dorlan ____ _ 88 70 . 06 . 31 6 5 18 18 9 9 Pickering Creek basin: 19 Pine Creek at Sharp Farm _____________ _ . 5 

l.!l 

2. 6 

2. 8 

3.1 

4.3 

5.1 

6. 0 

160 160 . 03 . 30 24 5 40 17 22 40 21 Tributary Pickering at Art SchooL ____ _ 80 80 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22 Rock Run at Charlestown _____________ _ 130 90 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23 Pigeon Run at Merlin _________________ _ 96 ---------------------------------- 3. 5 ------------ 20 ------------ 14 ------------ 24 Tributary Pickering near Kimberton __ _ 100 ---------------------------------- 5 ------------ 23 ------------ 7 ------------ 26 Tributary Pickering at Chester Springs_ 72 ---------------------------------- 2. 6 ------------ 15 ------------ 6 ------------ 27 Pine Creek at Chester Springs _________ _ 100 ---------------------------------- 4 ------------ 20 ------------ 15 ------------ 28 Pickering near Chester Springs ________ _ 95 95 . 01 . 40 6 9 16 20 9 14 31 Pickering near Phoenixville ____________ _ 31.4 100 80 . 06 .40 3. 5 5. 3 22 24 9. 5 8. 2 

from 70 to 130 mg/l. The geographic organization of 

the variances is discussed separately. 

The second generalization which can be drawn from 

table 5 is that, as discharge increases from mean annual 

to bankfull, four of the five parameters keep a fairly 

constant concentration instead of showing a tendency 

for dilution. The fifth part:meter, phosphate, has a 

marked concentration increase, varying fron1 tenfold to 

fortyfold, as discharge increases. All the phosphate 

data tend to be scattered about the regression line, as 

mentioned previously. Experience elsewhere indicates 

that the amount of phosphate available as solute is 

sensitive to the redox potential. Perhaps slight changes 

in acidity of the water when diluted by rain make the 

phosphate available for solution. 

Station 19, Pine Creek at Sharp Farm, is an exception. It had been hoped at the beginning of the investigation that, during the life of the project, at least several 

and hopefully many, small areas would actually undergo 

the transition from agricultural to industrial or housing 

use. The plan was to establish one or more observation 

sites downstream from any new construction project 

as soon as it started. The half-square-mile area above 

Sharp Farm was the only one in which such a change 

took place in the 2 years of the project. In this small 

headwater area, what had formerly been agricultural 

land is being c~:mverted into an industrial park. In 1968 

two large one-story buildings were completed. Up to 

the time of this writing (early 1969), sewage was disposed of in septic systems, though the industrial conlplex will probably have to install a disposal plant before 

any further expansion is allowed under existing local 

governmental regulations. 

The data show that this area is unique because of 

the high dissolved-solids, nitrate, and sulfate values at 

luw flow and high chloride values at all flows. As shown 

in table 5, station 19 had 160 mg/1 dissolved solids 

compared with a median value of less than 100 mg/1 for 

all other sites. Both the level and rate of phosphate 

increase were approximately the same as those at 

other sites. The nitrate value at low flow was more than 

double that of any other area, but apparently this 

concentration was diluted as discharge increased. At 

low flow, the sulfate value was almost double that at 

any other site; at high flows, there was a tendency for 

dilution. Chloride concentration at low flow, also nearly 

twice the value at any other site, increased with discharge to a value of 40 mg/1 at bankfull flow, approximately four times that of any other measuring station. 

SOME OBSERVATIONS ON THE GROUND-WATER 

HYDROLOGY 

GROUND-WATER DISCHARGE 

Measurements of the quantity of streamflow during 

nonstorm or low-flow periods were made to determine 

the characteristics of the local ground water. 

Simultaneously, water samples were analyzed to show 

the geographic distribution of dissolved material in this 

same ground water. 

The location of measuring points during the low-flow 

period of late summer 1967 is shown in figure 14A and 

B. The basins were divided into subbasins of approximately 1-sq mi area and, along main streams, at 

increments of about 1-sq mi drainage area. The actual 

discharge-n1easurement data and the chemical analyses 

appfar in table 6. 

The total ground-water contribution is surprisingly 

varied geographically over the two basins, as can be 

seen in figure 15A and B. The maps present lines of 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A21 

equal low-flow stream discharge. Inspection of the maps 

shows that the overflow of the ground-water reservoirs 

varies geographically through the two basins by a factor 

of about 5. The lowest values, approximating 0.25 cfs 

per square mile, occur in three zones; namely, the headwaters of Indian Run near Icedale, the tributary to 

Pickering Creek near Kimberton, and the head of Pine 

Creek near Lionville. Relatively high values of groundwater discharge occur in the Pickering Creek basin at 

the headwaters of Pigeon Run and Rock Run, in the 

vicinity of West Pikeland, in the downstream part of the 

upper East Branch Brandywine Creek basin, especially 

near Dowlin Industrial School and Cain and in the 

upstream part of the basin near Suplee. 

CHEMICAL QUALITY OF GROUND WATER 

In regard to the quality of the ground-water discharge, dissolved solids are especially high in the headwaters of Rock Run in the Pickering Creek basin and 

near Suplee in the upper East Branch Brandywine 

Creek basin. With the exception of these two areas, the 

two basins are more or less uniform. Maps of dissolved 

solids at low flow are shown in figure 16A and B. The 

dissolved-solids concentration was computed as 65 

percent of the conductance (micromhos). 

The sulfate concentrations and chloride concentrations can best be shown by taking into consideration 

the geology and physical development of the basins. 

Figures 17A and Bare generalized geologic maps of the 

Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins, respectively (Bascom and Stose, 1938). Of the features 

which have been generalized, the most conspicuous one 

is in the southeastern part of the Brandywine Creek 

basin near Dorian where the Pickering Gneiss and 

granodiorite are shown as gneiss. In the Pickering 

Creek basin this differentiation was made. Numerous 

small intrusions and dikes in both basins are not shown. 

Superimposed on the geologic maps are all the 

subbasins which drain an area wholly, or almost 

wholly, within one rock type. If geology is an important 

factor in the ground-water quality, there should be 

only a small range of concentration values within each 

rock type. 

In addition to the 1967 measurements and samples, 

an initial quality sampling had been carried out during 

September 1966. The data for this survey appear at the 

end of the report, generally as the first chemical sample 

for each station. The 1966 data are included in the 

pertinent illustrations as point values. The 1967 data 

are plotted at the center of the subbasin even though 

they were collected at the point of outflow from the 

basin. 

427-745 0-71-4 

The sulfate concentrations for the two basins are 

shown in figure 18A and B. The average concentrations 

are as follows: 

Basin 

Brandywine Creek: 

Average 

sulfate 

concentration 

(mg fl) 

Gneiss, northwest corner of basin_________________ 15 

Gneiss, southeast corner of basin_________________ 22 

Anorthosite __________________________________ - _ 5. 9 

Pickering Creek: 

Pickering Gneiss________________________________ 11 

Granodiorite (excluding subbasin 29)______________ 18 

As seen from the table, the sulfate concentrations 

within the anorthosite are much lower than the concentrations in the gneiss-granodiorite family. The 

larger values within the gneiss in the Brandywine 

Creek basin could be due to longer residence time 

because of a smaller relief. Deep circulation patterns or 

nonhomogeneous rock types underlying the subbasins 

could also be credible explanations. 

There was no apparent correlation between the 

dissolved-load values from low-flow stream water and 

from well analyses. 

The chloride concentrations for the two basins are 

shown in figure 19A and B. The averages are as follows: 

Basin 

Brandywine Creek: 

Average 

chloride 

concentration 

(mgfl) 

Gneiss, northwest corner of basin _________ -------- 9. 4 

Gneiss, southeast corner of basin ____ ------------- 9. 2 

Anorthosite ______________________ -------------- 5. 9 

Pickering Creek: 

Pickering Gneiss ____ ---------------------------- 5. 3 

Granodiorite___________________________________ 13. 9 

For the chloride, correlation is successful between the 

anorthosite of the Brandywine Creek basin and the 

Pickering Gneiss of the Pickering Creek basin, but the 

remaining three groups show outliers and probably 

indicate sources of contamination. The source of the 

high values of the outliers cannot be pinpointed except 

in the southern section of the Pickering Creek basin, 

which is traversed by the Pennsylvania Turnpike. 

These subbasins show much higher chloride concentrations than those subbasins which are not traversed 

by the turnpike. In all probability, this high chloride 

concentration is due to highway salt treatment to 

combat snow and ice conditions. 

There does not seen1 to be any particular correlation 

between the amount of streamflow produced by groundwater runoff and the chemical characteristics of the 

same water. Variability of all parameters seems to be 

somewhat greater geographically in the Pickering 

Creek basin than in the Brandywine. The only area 

which seems to deviate consistently from the average is 
A22 URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCE'S 

EXPLANATION 

Basin boundary 

0 2 MILES 

B 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A23 

the headwaters of Rock Run near Devault, where total 

discharge, sulfate, and solids are high, but chloride is 

average. 

GENERAL DISCUSSION OF THE HYDROLOGY 

The present report, a basic-data document, is intended to find its maximum usefulness some years hence 

when a similar investigation might provide new data to 

compare with those presented here. Though it was 

hoped that even during the 2-year data-collection 

effort there would be several areas which would change 

from agricultural to urban, this did not, in fact, occur 

except in one half-square-mile headwater tributary, 

Pine C1eek in the southwestern part of the Pickering 

Creek basin. 

The data show that the quantities of streamflow are 

very consistent geographically, being primarily a 

function of drainage area. Though the streamflow 

characteristics are quite uniform, there is considerable 

variability in the shape and size of channels, even among 

sites of the same drainage area. Because preurbanization 

conditions are so inherently variable, only fairly large 

changes in channel shape and size which occur as a 

result of urbanization will be recognized and attributed 

to urbanization. 

For basins not larger than 10 sq mi, the channel data 

show that the most obvious valley flat is not a feature 

constructed by the stream in its present regimen but is 

attributable to previous streamflow conditions. The 

obvious valley flats for small drainage basins are terraces 

rather than presently forming flood plains. Abandonment of the former flood plain and initiation of a new 

flood plain, still very narrow and often difficult to 

recognize in the field, might be attributed to the effect 

of bnd clearing incident to early 19th century agricultural development. Though a reasonable conjecture, 

this attribution is, as yet, unproven. 

The effects of changes in stream regimen which 

caused the incision of small headwater tributaries and 

the consequent initiation of a new flood-plain system 

are restricted to small headwater tributaries. This has 

a particular significance in prognosticating that which 

mi~ht be observed in the future as urbanization becomes 

more complete. The larger channels-that is, channels 

draining basins of 10 sq mi or more-will probably 

show little, if any, alteration in channel shape and 

size as a result of urbanization. It can be expected that 

any change in channels which is caused by urbanization 

will be restricted to relatively small headwater areas. 

The basic data show a surprising variability in the 

production of nonstorm streamflow attributable to 

overflow of the ground-water reservoirs. Also the 

chemical-quality characteristics of this ground water 

tend to have considerable geographic homogeneity in 

some chemical parameters, but rather large inhomogeneities in other chemical parameters. In this respect, 

one of the purposes of the present report has been 

achieved-that is, to ascertain, at least in a reconnaissance manner, the natural or preurbanization variability 

of chemical factors. 

The one small area which was actually undergoing 

change from agricultural to industrial use during the 

life of the project showed marked changes in chemical 

content of the water, a fact which indicates that 

urbanization does indeed cause significant alterations in 

water quality. But the data suggest that such alterations 

FIGURE 14.-0utlines of subbasins. Discharge measurements that are given in this report were made at downstream end of subbasins. 

A, Upper East Branch Brandywine Creek basin: 

1 Barneston 9 Reeds Road 17 Industrial School 25 Nantmeal 

2 Baron 10 Dow lin 18 Isabella 26 North Branch 

3 Brandywine Manor 11 Fontaine 19 Lewis Mills 27 Rockville 

4 Cain 12 Glenmoore 20 Lincoln 28 Springton 

5 Conestoga 13 Goodwill 21 Little Washington 29 Suplee 

6 Gu thriesville 14 Corner Ketch 22 Loag 30 Wallace 

7 Culbertson 15 Honey Brook 23 Lyndell 31 White School 

8 Cupola 16 Icedale 24 Milford Mills 

B, Pickering Creek basin: 

1 Tank Farm 10 Oppermans Corner 19 Birchrunville 28 Hollow 

2 St. Matthews 11 West Pikeland 20 Kimberton 29 Devault 

3 Vincent Church 12 Trail 21 Hallman 30 Pickering 

4 Birch 13 Lionville 22 Merlin 31 Wilmer 

5 Chester Springs 14 Pine 23 Pigeon 32 Meadowbrook 

6 Eagle 15 St. Pauls 24 Rapps Corner 33 Diamond Rock 

7 Interchange 16 Bacton 25 Yell ow Springs 34 Williams Corner 

8 Missing Road 17 Horseshoe 26 Charlestown 35 Britons Corner 

9 Anselma 18 Pikeland 27 Aldham 36 Bull Tavern 
A24 URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCES 

TABLE 6.-Low-jlow discharge measurements and chemical analyses, upper East Branch Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins 

Subbasin 

Measured 

discharge (cfs) 

Drainage area of subbasin 

(sqmi) 

Incremental 

discharge (cfs) 

Incremental 

unit discharge (cfs per sq mi) 

S04 

(mgfl) 

Cl 

(mg/1) 

Conductance 

(micromhos) 

Upper East Branch Brandywine Creek basin, Aug. 29-Sept. 7, 1967 

Fontaine •. _________________________________________________________ _ 

White SchooL ________________ ---- __ ------------------ ______________ _ Suplee .. ___________________________________________________________ _ Rockville __________________________________________________________ _ Honey Brook. ______________________________________________________ _ 

Cupola _________ -___ --- ___ ------------------------------_- __________ _ Lewis Mills _________________________________________________________ _ Loag, Conestoga, and Isabella ______________________________________ _ GoodwilL __________________________________________________________ _ Barneston __________________________________________________________ _ 

Lincoln. __ --- ---- ------ ---- -- ---- ---- ------ -- -- -- ---- -- ---- --------- NantmeaL. ________________________________________________________ _ 

Icedale ____ -__ -------------------------------------------------- ____ _ Baron ____________________________ -____ ---- _________________________ _ Brandywine Manor ________________________________________________ _ North Branch ______________________________________________________ _ Springton __________________________________________________________ _ Glenmoore _________________________________________________________ _ Wallace _______________________________ ---- __________________________ _ Little Washington __________________________________________________ _ Guthriesville _______________________________________________________ _ Culbertson _________________________________________________________ _ LyndelL ___________________________________________________________ _ Milford Mills _______________________________________________________ _ Corner Ketch. _____________________________________________________ _ Reeds Road ______ ---------- ________________________________________ _ Industrial SchooL __________________________________________________ _ Dowlin _____________________________________________________________ _ 

0.46 

.49 

.71 

. 60 3. 08 3.18 

2. 76 1. 80 

.44 

6.18 

.63 

b. 29 

.14 

.49 

1. 61 

.54 

3. 70 

7. 30 

9. 22 

. 62 

1.23 

. 56 

2. 73 11.30 

. 72 18.0 

. 96 27.0 

0. 995 

1.183 

.903 

1.165 

1. 500 

1.100 

1. 340 

3. 760 

1. 030} 1.180 

. 93 

1.15 

. 96 

1.01 

1. 65 

1. 57 1.15 

1. 70 

1.54 

. 95 

1. 42 

. 96 

1.13 

1.45 

.87 

1.09 

1.18 

1. 02 

0.46 0.46 14 6. 7 132 

.489 . 41 17 14 142 

. 710 . 79 15 7. 5 209 

.600 . 52 8.4 4. 2 123 

. 821 .55 15 12 159 

.100 .09 13 9. 5 153 

-.42 -.31 14 9. 5 151 

1.80 .48 9. 6 9. 6 126 

1.62 • 73 {10 8.6 121 

11 8. 6 138 

.63 .68 10 4.6 89 

-.89 -.77 10 8. 0 135 

.14 . 15 6.1 6. 2 137 

.35 .35 5.3 7.1 146 

1.12 .68 6. 5 5.1 107 

.54 .34 6. 9 5.9 102 

1. 55 1.35 ---------------------------------------- 1.38 . 81 9. 6 9. 0 132 

-1.78 -1.16 8. 8 7. 7 123 

. 62 .65 24 7. 7 142 

. 61 .43 23 12 168 

. 56 . 58 21 7. 7 136 

.94 .83 24 9. 9 149 

-.65 -.45 12 7. 5 131 

.72 . 83 25 10 128 

-----------:96-------------·:si--------is----------·s:i ______ --------i33 

Pickering Creek basin, Sept. 26-28 and Oct. 1-6, 1967 

Tank Farm_-------------------------------------------------------- o. 35 St. Matthews_------------------------------------------------------ . 83 Vincent Church_____________________________________________________ 1. 23 Birch ______ -- ____ --_________________________________________________ . 35 

Chester Springs_---------------------------------------------------- 9. 82 Eagle_ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ ___ ___ ___ ___ ____ __ _ __ __ _ ___ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ . 43 

Interchange_________________________________________________________ 1. 43 Missing Road_______________________________________________________ . 30 

Anselma __ ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. 53 

Oppermans Corner __ ----------------------------------------------- 3. 07 West Pikeland______________________________________________________ . 93 TraiL.______________________________________________________________ 3. 80 Lionville____________________________________________________________ . 63 Pine- __ --- ___ ---____________________________________________________ 2. 78 

St. Pauls____________________________________________________________ . 71 Bacton____ _ __ ___ ___ ___ ___ _ __ ___ _ __ __ _ _ __ ___ _ ___ __ _ _ _ ___ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ ___ _ . 60 

Horseshoe___________________________________________________________ 3. 45 Pikeland _______ --- ___ ___ __ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ ___ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ 10. 6 

Birchrunville ________ ------------------------------------___________ . 34 Kimberton__________________________________________________________ . 07 Hallman ____________________ -··-_____________________________________ 9 .. 71 

Merlin______________________________________________________________ 12. 9 Pigeon _________ --_------____________________________________________ . 75 

Rapps Corner ___ ---------------------------------------------------- 1. 55 Yellow Springs_---------------------------------------------------- . 45 

xr:~~own} ------------------------------------------------------- 14. 5 

Hollow __ ----------------------------------------------------------- . 66 

Devault __ ---------------------------------------------------------- . 82 Pickering_---------------------------------------------------------- 14.7 Wilmer ______ : ______________________________ ------------------------ . 47 Meadowbrook _____________________________________________________________________ _ 

Diamond Rock ___ -------------------------------------------------- . 50 Williams Corner __ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Britons Bull Tavern Corner------------------------------------------------------ . 76 _______________________________________________________________________ _ 

are more observable at low flow than at high. Also the 

effect of industrialization on this one tributary was a 

marked increase in sediment movement, measurable in 

terms of both suspended-sediment concentration and 

sediment deposited in stream channels. 

All the significant data obtained during the investigation appear in tabular form at the end of the report as 

well as in generalized form in the text. A similar datacollection program will be needed at an appropriate 

time to establish quantitatively the effect of urbanization on various hydrologic parameters. 

1. 21 

.80 

1. 33 

. 85 

. 97 

. 86 

1. 26 

. 95 

1. 06 

. 78 

. 80 

.72 

1. 10 

. 96 

1.18 

1.19 

1.10 

1.33 

1. 57 1.00 

.87 

. 90 

. 96 1.46 

. 87 

{1. 52} 1.13 

1. 27 

. 85 1. 09 

1. 03 

1.34 

1. 03 1.17 

1.34 

. 97 

0.35 

.48 

.40 

. 35 

. 99 

.43 

1. 00 

. 30 

.10 

.71 

. 93 

. 73 

.63 

. 84 

.71 

. 60 

. 07 

.37 

.34 

. 07 -.89 

1. 64 

. 75 

. 35 

. 45 

.12 

.66 

. 82 -.27 

. 47 

0. 29 

.60 

. 30 

.41 

1. 02 

. 50 

. 79 

.32 

.09 

. 91 

1.16 

1. 01 

. 57 

.88 

. 60 

. 50 

. 06 

. 28 

. 22 

. 07 -1.02 

1.82 

. 78 

. 24 

. 52 

. 05 

. 52 

. 96 -.25 

.46 

11 

11 

10 

11 

15 

10 

13 

13 

14 

13.1 

9. 2 

13 

25 

18 

14 

15 

16 

15 

13 

8. 8 16 

14 

16 

18 

22 

17 

13 

49 

IT 

24 

5. 6 

5. 6 

b. 7 4.4 

10 

7. 5 9. 5 

4. 7 

9.0 

8.0 

5.6 

8. 5 25 

16 

7. 5 16 

14 

10 

7.1 

3.8 

8. 5 

8. 5 

23 

13.0 

8. 5 

8. 5 

9. 5 8. 5 10 

7. 5 

128 

120 

120 

95 

149 

169 

144 

102 

146 

149 

140 

154 

219 

152 

108 

129 

147 

146 

148 

152 

146 

146 

160 

147 

147 

148 

131 

304 

157 

183 

-----------:5o·-------------:49 ________ ao·----------6:o·-------------i55 

-----------:76·-------------.-57 ________ 18 ___________ 6 __ 2 ______________ 139 

-----------------------------------------------~------------------------

OBSERVATIONS OF STREAM FAUNA 

By RuTH PATRICK and RoBERT R. GRANT, JR. 

On May 23 and 24, June 15 and 16, July 5 and 6, 

and September 16 ancl17, 1967, the Limnology Department of the Academy of Nat ural Sciences of Philadelphia carried out four cursory surveys of six areas, 

each on Brandywine and Pickering Creeks and their 

tributaries. On. October 12 and 13 and November 14 

and 15, 1967, two additional surveys were carried out 

on 11 other areas in the two watersheds. The fieldwork 

was done by Ruth Patrick and Robert Grant of the 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A25 

50~----~...1.. 

15 

EXPLANATION 

--25--

Line of equal low-flow stream discharge 

Interval z5 cubic feet per second 

per square mile X 100 

Basin boundary 

0 

l{) 

Marsh C1· 

:J5 °42' 30" 

l'z 

> ; 

FIGURE 15.-Low-:fl.ow stream discharge. A, Upper East Branch Brandywine Creek basin, September 1967; B, Pickering Creek 

basin, September-October 1967. 
A26 

40° 

05' 

EXPLANATION 

--75--

Line of equal dissolved-solids load 

Interval 25 milligram.s per liter 

Basin boundary 

Subbasin boundary 

URBANIZATION AND WATER RE1SOURCE·S 

0 0 

··v·· B 

Marsh Cr 

5°42' 30" 

0 

0 

2 MILES 

I"-

> ; 

FIGURE 16.-Dissolved-solids loads of streams at low flow during nonstorm period, August-September 1967. A, Upper East Branch 

Brandywine Creek basin; B, Pickering Creek basin. 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A27 

Academy of Natural Sciences and William Dawson of 

the U.S. Geological Survey. 

The purpose of these surveys was to ascertain the 

basic forms of aquatic life at the stations and to note 

any condition in the aquatic life that reflected a change 

in water quality. The major groups of macroscopic 

aquatic organisms were studied at each station, as well 

as any obvious concentrations of microscopic life. 

Station locations are shown in figure 20A and B and 

described in table 9; tables 10 and 11 (at end of 

report) give chemical data and frequency of faunal 

forms. 

In this type of study the condition or health of the 

river is indicated by the relative population sizes of the 

three major groups of organisms: namely, algae, invertebrates, and insects. In natural, healthy streams a 

large number of species is present. Typically, there are 

a great many more species of diatoms than species of 

invertebrates, other than insects. In large part our conclusions are drawn from the kinds and numbers of 

species which form the majority of the biota. 

Under healthy conditions where nutrient levels are 

low, there is generally a large number of diatom species, 

a fine assortment of insect species, and several invertebrate species such as snails, crustacea, and often worms, 

though their populations are very small. Under healthy 

conditions where low-level streams flow through farmlands, a large variety of diatoms, insects and lower 

invertebrates occur in fairly large populations. The 

large insect populations consist mainly of mayflies and 

caddisflies, and the algae populations, of diatoms. 

Among the first signs of overenrichment are patches 

of blue-green algae and Spirogyra and common occurrences of rooted aquatics, such as Anacharis or Potamogeton, and of the alga Oedogonium. However, the 

growth of Oedogonium, Spirogyra, and blue-green algae, 

as well as the rooted aquatics, should be moderate. 

Under such conditions there are generally fairly large 

populations of crayfish, and Physa snails and Planaria 

become more common. 

When the healthy condition of the river has been 

definitely damaged by organic poilu tion, diatoms 

become somewhat less common, or, if common, are 

largely composed of species such as Nitzschia palea 

and Gomphonema parvulum. Also common under such 

conditions are Oedogonium, which often becomes an 

established part of the flora, and certain species of the 

genus Synedra. Spirogyra occur in shallow pools in 

fairly large quantities, snd patches of blue-greens are 

frequently seen over the surface of the mud. Under 

organically polluted conditions flatworms sometimes 

become very common as do Physa snails, and crayfish 

often increase in abundance. 

Mildly toxic conditions cause the total num her of 

species to decrease. When this occurs, mayflies are 

TABLE 9.-Station locations for faunal observations 

[Stations do not correspond to those in tables 1-8] 

Location 

Station Description Latitude Longitude North West 

B-L _____ 40°06'07" 

B-2 ______ 40°05'48" 

B-3_ _____ 40°04'38" 

B-4_ _ _ _ _ _ 40°03'04" 

B-7 _ _ ____ 40°04'41" 

B-9 _ _ _ _ _ _ 40°03'32" 

P-2 _______ 40°05'46" 

P-3 _______ 40°06'23" 

P-4 _______ 40°06'03" 

P-5 _______ 40°06'32" 

P-6 _______ 40°06'53" 

P-7 _______ 40°05'36" 

May-September, 1967 

75°35'29" 

75°32'54" 

East Branch Brandywine Creek near Lewis Mills, 

approximately 1,100 ft downstream from junc- tion of State Routes 15149 and 15148. 

East Branch Brandywine Creek near Glen- moore, just upstream from Route 282 bridge. 

East Branch Brandywine Creek near Cornog, just upstream from Devereux School Road 

bridge. 

East Branch Brandywine Creek near Dorlan, 

approximately 2,000 ft upstream from Dorian 

Road bridge. Indian Run near Sprin~ton, both sides of Route 

282 bridge. Culbertson Run near Lyndell, just upstream from Route 282 bridge. Pickering Creek near Chester Springs, approxi- mately 150 ft downstream from Route 15216 

bridge (jm;t below rock dam). 

Pickering Creek near Merlin, approximately 4,000 ft downstream from Route 113 bridge. Pickering Creek below Charlestown, off Route 

15034 approximately 2,700 ft upstream from 

Route 29 bridge. Pickering Creek near Williams Corner, approximately 3,300 ft downstream from Route 29 

bridge. 

Tributary to Pickering Creek near Kimberton, 

approximately 1,300 ft upstream from Route 

15192 bridge. 

Pigeon Run near Merlin, just downstream from 

Route 15050 bridge. 

October-November, 1967 

L________ 40°04'33" 75°46'55" Indian Run near Springton, just downstream 

from the Route 15154 bridge. 

2_ ________ 40°05'55" 75°50'44" East Branch Brandywine Creek near Cupola, 

both sides of Route 15145 bridge. 

3 _________ 40°05'41" 75°51'18" Tributary to East Branch Brandywine Creek near Cupola, entering East Branch Brandywine Creek at lower limit of station 4. 

4 _________ 40°05'43" 75°51'18" East Branch Brandywine Creek near Cupola, 

approximately 300 ft upstream from Route 

15148 bridge. 

5--------- 40°06'16" 75°52'01" East Branch Brandywine Creek near Cupola, along Route 15146 approximately 2,500 ft 

upstream of the junction of Suplee and Forrest 

Roads. 

6_________ 40°06'22" 75°49'31" Perkins Run near Cupola, just upstream from 

confluence of Perkins Run and East Branch 

Brandywine Creek. 

7 _________ 40°06'20" 75°49'36" East Branch Brandywine Creek near Cupola, 

just upstream from Wyebrook Road bridge. 

8_________ 40°42'46" 75°47'03" Culbertson Run near Little Wa'>hington, up- stream from the most downstream of the two bridges on U.S. Route 322. 

9 _________ 40°04'42" 75°40'22" Pickering Creek near Byers, off Route 15142, 

10 ________ 40°05'48" 

11 ________ 40°05'46" 

12 ________ 4C0 04'23" 

13 ________ 40°06'09" 

14 ________ 40°06'10" 

approximately 4,000 ft down Route 15142 from 

Route 100. 

November-December, 1966 

75°37'10" 

75°37'12" 

75°48'47" 

75°34'44" 

75°34'38" 

Tributary to Pickering Creek near Chester 

Spring>, just up<;tream from confluence of 

tributary and Pickering Creek which is at lower limit of station 11. 

Pickering Creek near Chester Springs, both sides 

of Route 15216 bridge. 

Indian Run near Brandywine Manor, just down- stream from bridge on Route 82. 

Pickering Creek near Oppermans Corner, at Nantmeal Road. 

Pigeon Run at Merlin, at bridge on Pickering 

Road. 
A.28 URBANIZATION AND WATER REISOURCE·S 

absent, the number of damselflies may increase, and 

the kinds of caddisfly species sometimes shift. Under 

severely toxic conditions there is a reduction in the 

number of diatoms, and Stigeoclonium often becomes 

very common. The total number of species is greatly 

reduced in all groups. Physa snails, tubificids, and 

flatworms, which are tolerant of organic loads, are 

very sensitive to toxic conditions. 

METHODS 

In order to obtain the maximum amount of data in 

the limited time and with a limited number of personnel 

available, survey work is concentrated in areas containing the greatest proportion of species. Rocks, logs, 

and debris from shallow water habitats are examined 

for algae, insects, and other invertebrates. Mud and 

sand from shallow water are sifted to obtain worms, 

mollusks, and insect larvae. Mud flats are examined for 

algal mats and snails. Rocks are removed from riffles 

and systematically searched for fast-water species such 

40° 

07' 

30" 

EXPLANATION 

Quartzite 

[[]] 

and phyllite Anorthosite 

~ 

D I - Gabbro Quartz 

r++l 

~ 

monzonite 

--··--

Contact 

Subbasin boundary and number 

Subbasins shown only where area drained is 

wliolly 01· almost wholly within one rock unit 

Basin boundary 

0 2 MILES 

as mayflies, caddisflies, stoneflies and hellgrammites. 

Beds of aquatic plants and root tangles are worked with 

a dip net to obtain the species, like beetles and damselflies, that favor such habitats. Accumulations of leaves 

and trash in backwaters are collected and placed in a 

light pan, so that the dragonflies, midge larvae, leeches, 

and other specimens may be picked .out. Any fish 

observed are tabulated, but actual fish collections are 

not made. Finally, notes are made on the presence and 

relative abundance of the various species. 

For this report, the following procedures were followed. Shallow water areas were waded. For a wadable 

stream less than 75 feet wide, at least half an hour was 

spent examining rocks and vegetation in riffles and 

pools. One hour was required for a wadable stream from 

75 to 150 feet wide, and, for any stream broader than 

150 feet, half an hour was spent on each bank, the 

stream being waded as far out to the center as possible. 

In nonwadable streams, a boat was used to collect 

floating debris, particularly deadwood, for examination. 

A Geology from Bascom Jnd Stose (1938) 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A29 

RESULTS (MAY THRU SEPTEMBER) 

These studies, carried out between May and September 1967, were made once each month, except 

August. 

STATION B-1 

Diatoms, the most common algae found, were very 

abundant during May and July and common during 

June and September. Of the green algae, Oedogonium 

was present all4 months and was common in September, 

Spirogyra was present each month except July, Cladophora was present in July, and Hydrodictyon was present 

in September. Blue-green algae were also present all 4 

months. Rooted aquatic plants were seen in July and 

September. 

Mayflies were abundant and damselflies, stoneflies, 

and caddisflies were present all 4 months. Stoneflies and 

caddisflies were common in May and September. 

Because stoneflies are typically cool-water forms, they 

would be expected to be more common in the spring 

and fall months. Hellgrammites were observed in June 

and September; midge larvae, blackfly larvae, and 

gilled snails were found in September. Crayfish were 

present in each month, and Physa snails were found in 

July and September. Fish seen during each survey 

included miiUlows, darters, and sunfish. 

Station B-1 seemed to be healthy; however, in addition to the large diatom and mayfly populations, 

sporadic increases in Oedogonium and caddisfly populations indicated the presence of some enrichment. This 

station did not show any significant change in water 

condition during the months of May, June, July, and 

September. (See table 10.) 

STATION B-2 

Diatoms, very abundant in May and July, were 

the dominant algae all 4 months. Cladophora and 

Oedogonium were present in each survey, as were the 

blue-green algae; Vaucheria, a yellow-green algae, was 

present in May, July, and September. Rooted aquatics 

were common all4 months. 

Mayflies were common each month. Stoneflies and 

caddisflies were present each month and were common 

in May. In September, caddisflies were common, and 

some midge larvae were found. Fingernail clams were 

EXPLANATION 

~ Gneiss 

Lll ~ ~ 

Contact 

B 

Granodiorite 

Quartzite 

~ 

~ 

Pegmatite dike 

Quartz 

1++1 

~ 

monzonite 

Subbasin boundary and number 

Sl!bba..sin.s shown only where area drained is 

u•liolly or almost wholly within one rock unit 

Wilmer 0 

Stockton Formation 

[Z] 

Metadiabase 

Basin boundary 

Geology from Bascom and Stose (1938) 

0 2 MILES 

FIGURE 17.-Generalized geologic maps. A (facing page), Upper East Branch Brandywine Creek basin; B, Pickering Creek basin. 
A30 

40° 

07' 

30" 

G 

Quartzite and 

phyllite 

8 

Gneiss 

B 

Quartz 

monzonite 

8 

Anorthosite 

E 

Gabbro 

8 

Granodiorite 

8 

Quartzite 

8 

Pegmatite 

dike 

3 

Stockton 

Formation 

8 

Metadiabase 

URBANIZATION AND WATER REiSOURCE,S 

5.3-1966 survey 

6.5-1967 survey 

Sulfate concentration, 

in milligrams per liter Marsh Cr 

75°42'30" 

Contact 

,, 

1\- --··--

Basin boundary -;e 

--··--

Subbasin boundary ) 

75°30' 

FIGURE 18.-Sulfate (804) concentrations of streams at low flow during nonstorm period, August-September 1967. A, Upper East 

Branch Brandywine Creek basin; B, Pickering Creek basin. 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION 

4.1 -1966 survey 

7. 7 -1967 syrvey 

Chloride concentration, 

in milligrams per liter 

Geologic contact 

Basin boundary 

Subbasin boundary 

B 

TURNPIKE 

0 

Marsh Cr 

?5°42'30" 

I"-)-

) 

2 MILES 

A31 

FIGURE 19.-Chloride (Cl) concentrations of steams at low flow during nonstorm period, August-September 1967. A, Upper east 

Branch Brandywine Creek basin; B, Pickering Creek basin. 
A32 URBANIZATION AND WATER REISOURCE·S 

,r·· 

75°52'30" • • \__ •• '-

1 

/ Perkins 1( . • • 

• lll'l L 

40° •• ~· 07':-\ 

30" "' 

40"05' ~ ··~oc~vi~le 

~·· ~ .. 

EXPLANATION 

.12 

Stream-fauna sampling point 

and number 

.,20 

Stream-gaging station and number 

Basin boundary 

~ Icedale • Brandywine 

~or 

. . 

B 

. . 

( 

75 ° 30' 

Phoenixvil~e Wilmer 0 0 

~··---........ .. . r-.. • \__ / Pickering r;'reek 

~ • • Reservou· 

-~ .. 

) 

. 

f 

0 2 MILES 

FIGURE 20.-Location of sampling points for stream fauna and gaging stations. A, Upper East Branch Brandywine Creek basin 

B, Pickering Creek basin. 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A33 

present each month; Physa snails were present in 

June July, and September. Crayfish were found in 

June and July. Tub,ifex worms and flatworms were 

found in September. Fish seen each of the 4 months 

included minnows, sunfish, darters, and suckers. 

Station B-2 seemed to be healthy but was more 

enriched than station B-1, as evidenced by the large 

numbers of rooted aquatics, by the occurrence of 

fingernail clams (sphaerids) and Physa snails through 

most of the study, and by the presence of tubificids 

and flatworms in September. This station showed no 

significant change in water quality during the 4 months 

it was surveyed. 

STATION B-3 

Diatoms, the dominant algae were very abundant 

in May, July, and September and were common in 

June. Spirogyra and Cladophora were found in each 

survey, Spirogyra being common in May and July. 

Stigeoclonium was present in May and July. Bluegreen algae were collected each survey; Vaucheria 

was observed in July. Rooted aquatics were abundant 

each month. 

Although the population fluctuated somewhat, mayflies were very common in June, common in May and 

September, and less common in July. Stoneflies, 

caddisflies, and midge larvae were observed each 

month. The stoneflies were common in May; the 

caddisflies were abundant in May and September. 

Dragonflies were found in June, July, and September; 

damselflies were collected in July and September. 

Gilled snails were common in May and observed 

during other months. Physa snails were found in each 

month. Tubijex worms were observed in June, July, 

and September; flatworms were collected in May and 

September. Fish observed each month of the survey 

included minnows, sunfish, suckers, and catfish. 

Station B-3 seemed to be healthy, but enriched, as 

evidenced by the numbers of diatoms, rooted aquatics, 

Physa snails, tubificids, and flatworms. This station 

showed no significant change in water quality during 

the 4 months it was surveyed. 

STATION B-4 

Diatoms were very common in May and July and 

common in June and September at station B-4. 

Spirogyra and Oedogonium were present each month 

of the survey, Oedogonium being common in June 

and September. Cladophora was observed in May, 

July, and September and was common in September. 

Blue-green algae were present all 4 months. Rooted 

aquatics, which shared the dominant role among the 

plants with diatoms, were very common in July and 

abundant the other 3 months. 

Mayflies were very common in June and common the 

other 3 months; caddisflies were common in May, July, 

and September and less common in June. Dragonflies, 

damselflies, and stoneflies were found all 4 months. 

Stoneflies were abundant in May; damselflies were 

common in September. Hellgrammites were found in 

May and September; midge larvae were collected in 

July and September. Physa snails were observed for 

each of the 4 months; crayfish were collected each month 

except May. Tubijex worms were present in June and 

September, gilled snails in June and July. Flatworms 

were observed in September. Fish were found all 4 

months. Those observed included sunfish, suckers, 

darters, and minnows. 

Station B-4 seemed to be healthy, but enriched, as 

evidenced by the abundance of rooted aquatic plants 

and the persistent occurence of Spirogyra, Oedognoium, 

and Cladophora. There was no significant change 111 

water quality during the course of the four surveys. 

STATION B-7 

Diatoms were the prevalent algae and were abundant 

in June, very common in May and July, and less 

common in September. Oedogonium was present in each 

of the 4 months; Spirogyra was present the first 3 

months, and Cladophora the last month. Blue-green 

algae were present in each of the 4 months. 

Mayflies were abundant each month of the survey. 

Caddisflies were common in May and less common the 

other 3 months. Hellgrammites were collected in June, 

July, and September, damselflies in July and September, 

and midge larvae in September. Both Physa snails and 

gilled snails were present during each of the surveys. 

Crayfish were collected in May, June, and September. 

Leeches were found in September. Fish, including minnows, darters, sunfish, and suckers, were observed all 

4 months. 

This station appeared to be healthy, but enriched, as 

evidenced by the persistent occurrence of Oedognium 

and blue-green algae and the presence of many organisms commonly found in enriched healthy rivers. There 

was no significant change in water quality at this 

station during the 4 months. 

STATION B-9 

Diatoms, the dominant algae at station B-9 were 

very common during May, June, and July and common 

during September. Cladophora and Oedogonium were 

observed during each of the 4 months; Oedogonium 

was common. Spirogyra was fairly common in September. Blue-green algae, collected in each month of the 

survey, ranged from less common to common. 

Mayflies were the dominant fauna and were very 

common in June and abundant during the remaining 3 
A34 URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCE'S 

months. Stoneflies, caddisflies, and damselflies were 

present during each month. Damselflies were common in 

each month except July, when they were less common; 

caddisflies were abundant during May and September 

and less common the other 2 months; stoneflies were 

common in May and less common the other 3 months. 

Midge larvae were collected in June, July, and September. Both Physa snails and gilled snails were collected 

each month; crayfish were collected in the first 3 

months. Leeches and Tubifex worms were observed in 

July. Fish were common during each month and included 

sunfish, suckers, minnows, and trout. 

Station B-9 seemed to be healthy, as evidenced by the 

large numbers of diatoms, mayflies, caddisflies, damselflies, and fish but was heavily enriched and showing 

definite signs of deterioration, owing to organic enrichment from farms. Among these signs are the common 

occurence of Oedogonium, the less common fairly large 

colonies of Spirogyra, and the continual occurrence of 

blue-green algae patches. The population sizes of Physa 

snails, leeches, and Tubifex worms also support these 

conclusions. There was no significant change in water 

quality at this station during the four surveys. 

STATION P-2 

Diatoms, the most abundant algae observed, were 

very abundant in May and July and common in June 

and September. Spirogyra was found in May and July, 

Cladophora in July, and Oedogonium in June, July, 

and September. Stigeoclonium was also present in 

July. Vaucheria was present in June, July, and September. Blue-green algae were present each month. 

Mayflies were abundant each month of the surveys. 

Caddisflies, common in June and September, were 

less common in May and July. Stoneflies were collected 

each month. Midge larvae were present in May and 

July, and damselflies were found in June, July, and 

September. Crayfish were found each month; Physa 

snails were found in the latter 3 months. In September 

leeches and flatworms were also collected. Fish present 

for each survey included minnows and darters. 

Station P-2 should be classified as healthy, but 

enriched, as evidenced by the persistence of blue-green 

algae and by the sporadic dominance of Oedogonium and 

Vaucheria. The occurrence of leeches and flatworms in 

September and the sustained occurrence of crayfish 

also indicate this condition. There was no significant 

change in water quality at this station during the four 

surveys. 

STATION P-3 

Diatoms, the prevalent algae, were very common in 

May and July and abundant in June and September. 

Cladophora was collected in the latter 3 months, and 

Spirogyra in September. Stigeoclonium was found in 

May and July. Blue-green algae were collected each 

month of the surveys; rooted aquatics were present for 

the latter 3 months. 

Mayflies were common each month and caddisfl.ies 

were abundant each month, except July when they were 

less common. Stoneflies, common ·in May and June, 

were less common in July and September. Midge 

larvae and dragonflies were collected each month. 

Amphipods were found in May, July, and September. 

Tubijex worms were present each month, and Physa 

snails were collected in June, July, and September. 

Crayfish were seen in September. A fresh-water clam 

was collected in May, and flatworms were seen in 

September. The fish which were seen each month of 

the survey included minnows, darters, and sunfish. 

Station P-3 should be classified as healthy, but 

enriched, as evidenced by the numbers of diatoms, 

mayflies, caddisflies, and rooted aquatics. There was no 

significant change in water quality for the four surveys. 

STATION P-4 

Diatoms, the common plants collected, were very 

abundant in May and June and abundant in July 

and September. Cladophora was less common in the 

first 3 months of the survey and common in September. 

Blue-green algae were abundant in May and June and 

less common in July and September. Rooted aquatics 

were present the last 3 months. 

Mayflies were common each month; caddisflies were 

abundant each month, except July when they were 

less common. Stoneflies, common in May and June, 

were less common in July and September. Damselflies and dragonflies were found all 4 months; midge 

larvae were collected in June and September. Both 

Physa snails and gilled snails were collected each 

month. Crayfish were observed each month except 

July, and mussels were present each month except 

September. Amphipods were present each month, and 

flatworms were seen in September. Fish present each 

month included sunfish, suckers, bass, and minnows. 

Station P-4 should be classified as healthy, but 

enriched, as evidenced by the abundance of blue-green 

algae and the less common occurrence of Cladophora, 

damselflies, Physa, and crayfish. There was no significant change in water quality at this station during the 

course of the four surveys. 

STATION P-5 

Diatoms, very abundant in May and June and 

common in July and September, were the dominant 

algae. Cladophora was common each month except 

July when it was frequent. Oedogonium was present each 

month of the survey, but Spirogyra was found only in 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A35 

September. Blue-green algae were abundant the first 

3 months of the surveys and less common in September. 

Rooted aquatics were common in June and July and 

less common in May and September. 

Mayflies were common each month, and caddisflies 

were abundant each month, with the exception of July 

when they were less common. Stoneflies, found each 

month of the survey, were common in May and June 

and less common in July and September. Damselflies 

were present in all months surveyed; hellgrammites, 

midge larvae, and dragonflies were found only in 

September. Physa snails and gilled snails were found 

each month, gilled snails being common in June. 

Crayfish were found in May, and Tubijex worms and 

flatworms in September. Fish, which were seen all 4 

months included minnows, darters, suckers, and sunfish. 

Station P-5 should be classified as healthy and more 

enriched than the previous stations, owing to the large 

populations of Cladophora, blue-green algae, and rooted 

aquatics. There was no significant change in water 

quality at this station during these surveys. 

STATION P-6 

Common all 4 months, diatoms were the dominant 

algae. Oedogonium was present each month and common 

in September. Stigeoclonium was collected in July. 

Spirogyra, Cladophora, and Vaucheria were present in 

September. Blue-green algae were present each month, 

and rooted aquatics were found in September. The 

increase in the diversity of the flora in September 

seemed to be correlated with some land clearing that 

took place between July and September and altered the 

character of the station by creating a number of 

shallow sunny pools. 

Mayflies were abundant each month except September when they were less common. Caddisflies were 

common in June and September and frequent in May 

and July. Stoneflies larvae were collected in July and 

September, midge larvae in June, and blackfly larvae 

in September. Physa snails and amphipods were frequently found during all of the surveys. Fish collected 

during each survey included minnows and darters. 

Station P-6 should be classified as healthy, but 

slightly enriched, as evidenced by the large diatom 

populations, the abundance of caddisflies and mayflies, 

and the frequent occurrence of amphipods and Physa 

snails. There was no significant change in water quality 

at this station during the course of the four surveys. 

STATION P-7 

Diatoms were the abundant algae and were very 

common in May and July and common in June and 

September. Spirogyra, Oedogonium, and Vaucheria 

were collected each month of the survey. Blue-green 

algae were also present each month, and rooted aquatics 

were present the latter 3 months. 

Mayflies were abundant in May and June but were 

less common in July and September. Midge larvae, 

dragonflies, and damselflies were collected each month, 

the latter being common in May. Gilled snails were 

present each month and Physa snails were collected 

each month except June. Mussels were found in July, 

and Tubijex worms in May, July, and September. Fish 

were present each month, were common in May, and 

included minnows, darters, and suckers. 

Station P-7 should be considered in a healthy condition, as evidence by the large diatom populations, 

mayflies, caddisflies, and damselflies (in May). There 

was no significant change in water quality at this 

station during the course of the four surveys. 

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 

These twelve stations were healthy and indicated the 

nutrient levels that one would expect for these streams. 

At times, there were indications of greater than normal 

enrichment for these stream types, but the enrichment 

was not excessive. Because this is largely a farming 

community, one would expect the streams to be somewhat enriched. 

In the Brandywine Creek, the upstream station 

showed the least enrichment; the next three stations 

all showed roughly equivalent amounts of enrichment. 

Indian Run (station B-7) showed similar enrichment 

and Culbertson Run (station B-9) showed evidence of 

increased enrichment somewhat heavier than that found 

at the lower stations on Brandywine Creek. This change 

seemed to be primarily because of the presence of cattle. 

The three upper stations of Pickering Creek showed 

evidence of enrichment which was roughly of the same 

magnitude. The lower station showed evidence of 

slightly more enrichment than did the upper three. 

The two tributaries, one of which was small, showed 

evidence of some enrichment; however, there was less 

enrichment than was present in the Pickering Creek 

itself. There were no significant variations in the 

chemical data at these stations. 

RESULTS (OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER) 

This study was carried out in October and November 

1967. Studies were made once each month. 

STATION I 

Station 1 was downstream from a wooded area that 

enveloped about a half dozen homes. There were some 

cornfields on the left side of the stream above the 

station. Discharge-measurement notes for September 2, 

1967, showed a width of 5.0 feet, an area of 1.0 square 

foot, a velocity of 0.49 foot per second, a gage height 

of 3.74 feet, and a discharge of 0.49 cfs. 
A36 URBANIZATION AND WATER RE1SOURCE.S 

Diatoms were common in November but less common 

in October. Cladophora was less common both months, 

Vaucheria was rare in November. 

During both surveys, mayflies, caddisflies, and water 

pennies were abundant and stoneflies were less common. 

Midge larvae were common in October and less common 

in November. Blackfly larvae were rare in October; 

beetles were rare both months. Crayfish were less 

common both months; Physa snails and flatworms were 

observed during both months. Minnows were abundant 

in October and less common in November. 

This station should be classified as healthy. There 

was no significant change in water quality at this 

station for October and November. 

STATION 2 

Station 2 was downstream from a wood-bordered 

marsh beyond which were a few homes and one cornfield. Discharge-measurement notes for August 29, 1967, 

at an area upstream from the station showed a width 

of 13.8 feet, an area of 9.11 square feet, a velocity of 

0.34 foot per second, a gage height of 1.40 feet and a 

discharge of 3.08 cfs. 

At this station the algae showed a similar pattern 

each month, diatoms being abundant, blue-green algae 

less common, and Spirogyra rare. During the October 

survey, rooted aquatics were rare; in November, they 

were less common. 

Mayflies, caddisflies, and midge larvae were common 

in October and less common in November. Stoneflies, 

damselflies, and water pennies were less common both 

months; black:By la.rvae and beetles were less common 

in October and present inN ovember. Gilled snails and 

amphipodswere less common during both surveys; Physa 

snails were rare. Isopods and flatworms, less common 

in October, were rare in November. Minnows were 

less common both months. 

This station should be classified as healthy, but 

slightly enriched. B.R evidenced bv the numerous 

diatoms, blue-green algae, rooted aquatics, mayflies, 

caddisflies, midge larvae, and damselflies. There was 

no significant change in water quality for the October 

and November surveys. 

STATION 3 

Station 3 was downstream from a stretch of woodland 

through which the stream coursed. This woodland 

was about 100 yards wide, and at its edge were cornfields 

and a few scattered houses. There was a trailer camp 

of ten units just upstream from the station, at the 

outer edge of the fields. Discharge-measurement notes 

for August 29, 1967, at this station showed a width of 

4.1 feet, an area of 1.65 square feet, a velocity of 0.36 

foot per second, a gage height of 3.65 feet, and a discharge of 0.60 cfs. 

Diatoms were abundant during both surveys, 

Oedogonium was less common during both surveys, 

and Spirogyra was rare in October. Blue-green algae 

were rare both months. 

Mayflies and caddisflies were common during both 

surveys; stoneflies and midge larvae were less common. 

Damselflies were observed both months. Water pennies 

were less common in October and rare in November. 

Dragonflies and beetles were found in November, 

and crayfish were found in both October and November. 

Physa snails were rare in November; flatworms were 

less common in October and observed in November. 

Minnows were common in both months. 

This station could be classified as healthy, but 

slightly enriched, as evidenced by the numerous diatoms, mayflies, and caddisflies. There was no significant change in water quality during the two surveys. 

STATION 4 

Station 4 was downstream from a dairy farm and 

some cornfields. Discharge-measurement notes for 

August 29, 1967, at this station showed a width of 

13.81 feet, an area of 9.11 square feet, a velocity of 

0.34 foot per second, a gage height of 1.40 feet, and a 

discharge of 3.08 cfs. 

Diatoms were less common during both surveys. 

Oedogonium was present in the November survey; 

blue-green algae were very common at this station 

during both surveys. Rooted aquatics were rare during 

the two surveys. 

Mayflies, caddisflies, and midge larvae were very 

abundant during both surveys; beetles were rare. 

Blackfly larvae were rare in October, damselflies were 

present in November, and dragonflies were present in 

October. Water pennies were less common in October 

and present in November. Flatworms, Tubifex worms, 

and Physa snails were rare during both surveys. 

This station should be classified as healthy, but 

enriched, approaching semihealthy, as evidenced by 

the exceedingly large populations of blue-green 

algae and midge larvae. There was no significant change 

in water quality during the two surveys. 

STATION 5 

Station 5 was downstream from a farm. No cattle 

were in evidence, but five horses were seen. Farther 

upstream were more farms and a number of cornfields. 

Discharge-measurement notes for August 29, 1967, 

at this station showed a width of 6.4 feet, an area of 

4.94 square feet, a velocity of 0.14 foot per second, a 

gage height of 6.90 feet, and a discharge of 0.71 cfs. 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A37 

Diatoms were very abundant during both surveys; 

blue-green algae were rare in October and less common 

in November. Rooted aquatics were very common 

during both surveys. Damselflies, very abundant in 

October, were abundant in November. Mayflies and 

dragonflies were rare both months, midge larve were 

observed in November, and beetles were less common 

in both October and November. Isopods were very 

common in October and common in November, but 

am phi pods were rare both months. No fish were seen 

at this station. 

This station should be classified as healthy, but 

enriched, as evidenced by the very large populations 

of rooted aquatics, damselflies, and isopods. It appeared 

to verge on the border of being semihealthy. There 

was no significant change in water quality during the 

two surveys. 

STATION 6 

Station 6 was downstream from a wooded area with 

one or two houses. Farther along, the stream flowed 

through a wood-bordered marsh. About three-quarters 

of a mile from the station there was a cornfield along 

the edge of the woods, and roughly 1% miles from the 

station there were some farms and pastures having a 

few more cornfields. The only animals seen grazing 

were two horses. Discharge-measurement notes for 

August 30, 1967, at this station showed a width of 5.4 

feet, an area of _1.68 square feet, a velocity of 1.07 feet 

per second, a gage height of 3.05 feet, and a discharge 

of 1.80 cfs. 

Diatoms and Cladophora were present in October 

and less common in November. Blue-green algae were 

rare both months. 

Stoneflies and water pennies were less common 

during both surveys; caddisflies, midge larvae, dragonflies, and beetles were rare during both surveys. Mayflies 

were observed in October and were less common in 

November. Crayfish were collected in November, 

amphipods and flatworms in October. Minnows were 

less common during both surveys. 

The condition of the water at this station appeared 

to be healthy. There was no apparent change in water 

quality during the two surveys. 

STATION 7 

Station 7 was downstream from a wooded valley 

where there were a few houses. About three-quarters 

of a mile away there were some distant cornfields and 

a small farm on which were seen 18 sheep and three 

horses. About 1 mile from the station there was a 

cluster of several dozen houses in a thinly wooded area. 

Discharge-measurement notes for August 30, 1967, at 

this station showed a width of 8.5 feet, an area of 4.47 

square feet, a velocity of 0.62 foot per second, a gage 

height of 3.40 feet, and a discharge of 2. 76 cfs. 

Diatoms, less common in October, were abundant in 

November. Cladophora was rare in October and less 

common in November; Oedogonium was rare in October; 

Vaucheria was less common in October and present in 

November. Blue-green algae were rare in October and 

less common in November. Rooted aquatics were rare 

both months. Caddisflies were abundant both months, 

and mayflies, less common in October, were abundant in 

November. Stoneflies were less common in both months. 

Water pennies and midge larvae were less common in 

October and rare in November; beetles were rare both 

months. Ferrissia snails were less common both months; 

Physa snails were present both months and amphipods 

in October. Fish which were less common during both 

surveys included minnows, darters, and sunfish. 

This station appeared to be healthy. There was no 

apparent change in water quality at this station during 

the two surveys. 

STATION 8 

Station 8 was downstream from a pasture in which 

were three horses. Farther along there was a group of 18 

new houses, then a farm with pastures on which no 

no cattle or horses were seen, a dairy with 24 head of 

cattle, 24 new homes, and finally a trailer camp with 

18 trailers. All this land use was within 1% miles of the 

station. Discharge-measurement notes for September 5, 

1967, at this station showed a width of 1.9 feet, an area 

of 0.485 square foot, a velocity of 1.28 feet per second, a 

gage height of 6.71 feet, and a discharge of 0.62 cfs. 

Diatoms a~d Oedogonium were less common during 

both surveys. Spirogyra was rare in October. Hydrodictyon, the dominant algae here, was abundant during 

both surveys, and blue-green algae were collected 

during both surveys. Damselflies were less common in 

October and rare in November; dragonflies were found 

in October, and beetles, both months. Physa snails were 

collected in November. Fish, less common both months, 

included minnows, darters, and dace. Large numbers of 

tadpoles and salamander larvae were seen among the 

Hydrodicyton at this station. 

This station should be classified as healthy, but 

enriched owing to the quantities of rooted acquatics, 

Hydrodictyon, and Oedogonium. There was no significant 

change in water quality at this station during the two 

surveys. 

STATION 9 

Station 9 was downstream from an area of alternating 

pasture and cultivated fields. There were 48 head of 

cattle in the pasture adjoining the station. At the 

headwaters of the stream is the small town of Byers. 

Diatoms were abundant, Spirogyra was less common, 

and blue-green algae were rare during the two surveys. 
A38 URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCES 

Rooted aquatic plants were very common during both 

surveys. 

Caddisflies and damselflies were less common in 

October and rare in November. Beetles were observed 

both months, and isopods, abundant in October, were 

less common in November. Crayfish were rare in October. Physa snails were collected in October and were less 

common in November. Fish were less common in 

October and rare in November. Suckers and other 

minnows were seen. 

This station appeared to be healthy, but enriched, as 

evidenced by the large quantity of rooted aquatics and 

the common isopods. However, the lack of mayflies and 

the scarcity of caddisflies in November indicates the 

possibility that toxic material had sporadically entered 

the stream or that a prolonged dissolved-oxygen deficit 

occurred. There was no apparent change in water 

quality for the two surveys. 

STATION 10 

Station 10 was downstream from an area of alternating farmland and woodland. 

Diatoms were abundant, Oedogonium was rare, and 

Gaucheria was less common during the two surveys. 

Rooted aquatics were observed both months. 

Midge larvae, mayflies, damselflies, and water pennies 

were less common during both surveys. Stoneflies 

were less common in October but rare in November; 

caddisflies were less common in October and common 

in November. Beetles were observed during both surveys. Ferrissia snails were less common, and isopods 

and flatworms were rare during the two surveys. Fish, 

including minnows, darters, and dace, were less common 

for both October and November. 

This station appeared to be healthy, but slightly 

enriched, as evidenced by the common diatoms and the 

numbers of Ferrissia snails, mayflies, caddisflies, midge 

larvae, and damselflies. There was no apparent change 

in water quality for the two surveys. 

STATION 11 

Station 11 was downstream from several farms having 

a few wooded areas. Some domestic ducks were seen 

in a pool upstream from the station. 

Diatoms were prevalent in October and less common 

in November. Spirogyra was less common, and Oedogonium was rare during the two surveys. Gaucheria and 

blue-green algae were less common during the two 

surveys. 

Mayflies, caddisflies, midge larvae, and Ferrissia 

snails were less common during both surveys; stoneflies 

were less common in October and observed in N ovember. Damselflies, beetles, and fla.tworms were present in 

October; Physa snails were rare during both surveys. 

Fish which were less common during both surveys 

were minnows and darters. 

This station appeared to be healthy, but slightly 

enriched, as ·evidenced by the common occurrence of 

diatoms, Spirogyra, Ferrissia snails, mayflies, caddisflies, and midge larvae. There was no significant change 

in water qua.lity for the two surveys. 

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 

Although the stations studied in October and N ovember were all fairly near the headwaters of the streams, 

most of them showed evidence of a little enrichment. 

The station on Perkins Run (station 6) was healthy 

and showed no evidence of enrichment. The stations on 

Indian Run (station 1) and on the tributary to East 

Branch Brandywine Creek near Cupola (station 3) 

were hea1thy, and there was evidence of slight enrichment at the latter. The areas of greatest enrichment 

appeared to be the upstream stations (stations 4 and 5) 

on the East Branch Brandywine Creek, both of which 

were close to the semihealthy category. The water 

quality had improved at the two lower stations on the 

East Branch Brandywine Creek (stations 2 and 7) 

which were healthy. Station 2 showed evidence of 

slight enrichment. Apparently the stream had utilized 

some of the enrichment at stations 4 and 5 by the time 

it reached station 2. Culbertson Run (station 8) and 

two of the stations in the Pickering Creek basin (stations 

10 and 11) showed healthy, but slightly enriched, 

conditions. The station on Pickering Creek (station 9) 

also showed evidence of enrichment; however, the 

absence of mayflies and the fact that caddisflies were 

scarce in November suggest the possibility tha.t there 

had been sporadic discha.rges of toxic rna terials or 

instances of low dissolved oxygen. There were no significant variations in the chemical data at these stations. 

When the land use is plotted against the water condition at each station, certain correlations can be seen. 

The station on Perkins Run which showed no evidence 

of enrichment (station 6) had woods and marshes immediately upstream, the first habitations being more 

than 1 mile away. Station 2 on the upper East Brandywine had similar upstream land use. However, this 

land use served merely to neutralize some of the effects 

of the enrichment at station 4; and station 2 also 

showefd enrichment, although the water condition was 

an improvement over that of station 4. The two stations 

that showed the least evidence of enrichment (station 1 

on Indian Run and station 3 on a tributary near 

Cupola) drained a wooded area, broken by a few homes 

and some cornfields, which were generally separated 

from the stream by the woods. The two stations which 

showed the most pronounced enrichment (stations 4 

and 5) were the uppermost East Branch Brandywine 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A39 

Creek stations; both had farms and cornfields upstream. 

Station 9 (Pickering Creek near Byers), which also 

showed evidence of significant alteration of the flora 

and fauna, was actually in a pasture, and more pastured and cultivated farms were upstream. The rest of 

the stations (stations 7, 8, 10, and 11; see table 9 for 

locations) showed moderate enrichment and they all 

had farms upstream. Stations 7 and 8 had some homes 

as well. 

SUMMARY 

In the Brandywine Creek basin, the areas showing 

the most enrichment were stations 4 and 5, at the upper 

end of the East Branch, and station B-9, on Culbertson 

Run just upstream from its confluence with the East 

Branch. The water quality in the East Branch Brandywine Creek which, at station 2, was an improvement 

over that at stations 4 and 5, had improved still more at 

station B-1. Station 7 showed results similar to those of 

station 2. Downstream, the stations on the East Branch 

Brandywine Creek (stations B-2, B-3, and B-4) 

showed similar results, having healthy, but more 

enriched, conditions than those of station 2. The 

stations on the tributary to Brandywine Creek near 

Cupola (station 3), on Perkins Run (station 6), and on 

Indian Run (station 1) all showed only slight evidence 

of enrichment. Station B-7 on lower Indian Run 

showed evidence of more enrichment than did the 

preceding three stations. The upstream station on 

Culbertson Run (station 8) showed evidence of enrichment, but not as much as station B-9 at the mouth 

of Culbertson Run. 

In the Pickering Creek basin, most stations along the 

main branch of the Creek (stations 11, P-2, P-3, and 

P-4) showed evidence of healthy, but enriched, conditions. The downstream station on Pickering Creek 

(station P-5) showed evidence of slightly more enrichment than did the stations just discussed. The 

upstream station on Pickering Creek (station 9), near 

Byers, also showed evidence of healthy, but enriched, 

conditions. There was, however, evidence of the presence of toxic material or a dissolved-oxygen deficit at 

this station. All three tributaries to Pickering Creek 

which were studied showed evidence of enrichment, 

although there was less enrichment than in Pickering 

Creek itself. Station P-7 on Pigeon Run showed the 

least evidence of enrichment. The tributaries near 

Chester Springs (station 10) and Kimberton (station 

P-6) showed evidence of slightly more enrichment, but 

less than that which was noted in Pickering Creek. 

REFERENCES 

Bascom, F., and Stose, G. W., 1938, Geology and mineral 

resources of the Honeybrook and Phoenixville quadrangles, 

Pennsylvania: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 891, 145 p. 

Busch, W. F., and Shaw, L. C., 1960, Floods in Pennsylvania, 

frequency and magnitude: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file 

report, 231 p. 

Chester County Water Resources Authority, 1968, The Brandywine Plan: West Chester, Pa., 28 p. 

Federal Housing Administration, 1966, Land Planning Bulletin 

7, 10 p. 

Langbein, W. B., 1966, in Scheidegger, A. E., and Langbein, 

W. B., Probability concepts in geomorphology: U.S. Geol. 

Survey Prof. Paper 50o-C, p. C6-Cll. 

Leopold, L. B., 1968, Hydrology for urban land planning-A 

guidebook on the hydrologic effects of urban land use: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Circ. 554, 18 p. 

Leopold, L. B., and Maddock, Thomas, Jr., 1953, The hydraulic 

geometry of stream channels and some physiographic 

implications: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 252, 57 p. 

Leopold, L. B., and Wolman, M. G., 1957, River channel 

patterns: braided, meandering, and straight: U.S. Geol. 

Survey Prof. Paper 282-B, p. 39-85. 

Leopold, L. B., Wolman, M. G., and Miller, J. P., 19()4, Fluvial 

processes in geomorphology: San Francisco, Calif., W. H. 

Freeman & Co., 522 p. 

Remson, Irwin, Fungaroli, A. A., and Schoenberger, R. J., 

1968, Preliminary plan for water-supply and sewagedisposal systems for the Upper East Branch of the Brandywine Creek: Philadelphia, Pa., Drexel lnst. Technology, 

27 p. 

Stall, John B., and Fok, Yu-Si, 1968, Hydraulic geometry of 

Illinois streams: Urbana, Ill., Illinois Univ. Water Resources 

Center, Research Rept. 15, 47 p. 

Tice, Richard H., Magnitude and frequency of ~oods in the 

United States-Part 1-B, North Atlantic slope basins, 

New York to York River: U.S. Geol. Survey WaterSupply Paper 1672, 585 p. 

U.S. Geological Survey, 1952, Valley Forge, Pennsylvania: 

U.S. Geol. Survey 7~~-minute-quadrangle topographic 

map. 

--- 1955a, Malvern, Pennsylvania: U.S. Geol. Survey 

7%-minute-quadrangle topographic map. 

--- 1955b, Phoenixville, Pennsylvania: U.S. Geol. Survey 

7~~-minute-quadrangle topographic map. 

--- 1956a, Dowingtown, Pennsylvania: U.S. Geol. Survey 

7~~-minute-quadrangle topographic map. 

--- 1956b, Elverson, Pennsylvania: U.S. Geol. Survey 

7%-minute-quadrangle topographic map. 

--- 1956c, Wagontown, Pennsylvania: U.S. Geol. Survey 

7%-minute-quadrangle topographic map. 

Wolman, M. G., 1955, The natural channel of Brandywine 

Creek, Pennsylvania: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 271, 

56 p. 

TABLES 7, 8, 10, 11 
A42 

Subbasin location 

Vincent Church (estate)_ Hallman _______________ _ 

St. Matthews __________ _ 

Vincent Church ________ _ Vincent Church ________ _ 

Oppermans Comer ____ _ Interchange ____________ _ TraiL _________________ _ 

Pine and Bacton _______ _ Interchange ____________ _ 

Birch and Kimberton __ _ Yellow Springs and Hollow. 

Pikeland and Chester Springs. 

Eagle ____ ---------------

Charlestown ___________ _ Anselma _______________ _ 

Pikeland _______________ _ 

URBANIZATION AND WATER RE1SOURCgS 

TABLE 7 .-Data on use of farmland, Pickering Creek basin 

[Sample obtained from interviews of individual landowners] 

Total Acres in- Wells or springs land -------------Number---------- Fertilizer used Acres inarea Culti- of cattle Depth 

(acres) Woods Pasture vation or horses Water source (ft) 

Total 

(tons 

per yr) 

269 

92 

250 

37 

85 

260 

116 

200 

250 

140 1,100 

140 

650 

656 

400 

135 

320 

Not known 2 

15 

0 

6 

40 

4 

50 

25 

10 

500 

15 

250 

200 

75 

25 

110 

Not known 30 

30 

37 

49 

45 

10 

110 

60 

40 

200 

40 

100 

50 

35 

50 

321 

0 

60 

185 0 

30 

170 

100 

40 

85 

90 

400 

85 

300 

110 

75 

160 

Type 

0 Three springs___________________________ 0 50 One well________ 81\ Not known __________ _ 140 _____ do___________ 70 10-10-10 42 

4 _____ do___________ 30 -------------- 0 18 _____ do___________ 60 Not known 20 47 Springs___________________ 5-10-10 15 

260 Two wells_ _ _ _ _ _ 79, 321 16- 8- 8 100 0 Not known _______________ Not known ---------- 9 Springs ___________________ Notknown _________ _ 

75 _____ do_____________________ 5-10-10 18 

1 700 Two wells_ _ _ _ _ _ 200, 390 10-10-10 50 70 Not known_______________ 10-20-20 12 

Com 

0 

10 

110 Not known Not known Not known Not known 40 Not known 20 

150 Not known 

Hay 

0 

30 

75 Not known Not known Not known Not known Not known 60 

60 

150 Not known 

80 Two wells______ 120,135 5-10-10 12 Not known Not known 

77 {----_do___________ 29• 220 } Not known __________ Not known Not known Sprmgs ________________ ---

0 Two wells______ 45,75 5-10-10 4 Not known Not known 25 _____ do___________ 30,100 20-10-10 7 Not known Not known 

o {----.do___________ 90•210 }Notknown ---------- Not known Notknown Sprmgs __________ ---------

TotaL ____________ 5,056 1,120 886 1,986 1,555 

1 All dairy cattle. 

TABLE 8.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data 

Wheat, 

barley 

and oats 

0 

20 Not known Not known Not known Not known Not known Not known 24 

10 Not known Not known 

Not known 

Not known 

Not known Not known 

Not known 

[Sediment coefficient=0.00346 (assuming unit weight of water and sediment=80 lb per cu ft). Chemical concentrations in milligrams per liter. TDS, total dissolved solids] 

STATION 1 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4806.57 

N arne: North Branch at Glenmoore 

Latitude: 40°04'37" Longitude: 75°46'53" 

Drainage area: 1. 6 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 1.4 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 105 cfs 

Gages: crest stage, staff 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Date 

1967 

Stage 

(ft) 

Jan. 14 _____ ------ ____ ------------- Sept. 2 ___________________________ _ 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

2.08 

.54 

Width 

(ft) 

9.3 

6.4 

Chemical data 

Mean 

depth 

(ft) 

0.81 

.42 

Mean 

velocity 

(fps) 

0. 28 

. 20 

Area 

(sq ft) 

7.56 

2.68 

Sam- Stage Dispie Date {ft) char.q;e S04 Ca Mg Sl02 Fe Mn Na K HC03 F P04 NOa Cl 

Conduct-

(cfs) ance TDS (micromhos) 

1967 

Caand Non- Tem- Mg carbon- perahard- ate pH Color ture 

ness hard- (OC) 

ness 

39243 Sept. 2_ _ _ ___ ____ __ __ __ _ _ __ _ 6. 9 _ _ _ __ _ ___ __ _ _ __ _ ___ __ _ _ __ __ __ __ __ ___ _ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ ___ ___ _ _ __ _ __ __ __ _ 5. 9 

1968 102 ------------------------------------------ 16 

40006 Feb.25 _____________________ 8.6 9.5 2.8 ------------------ 4.6 _____ 28 _____ 0.04 6.3 5.7 98 --------

STATION 2 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: Drainage area: 2.0 sq mi 

1-4806.56. Mean annual discharge: 1.8 cfs 

Name: Indian Run at Germany Hollow Road Mean annual flood: 125 cfs 

Latitude: 40°04'25" Longitude: 75°49'01" Gages: staff 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Stage Dis- Width Mean Mean Area Stage Dis- Date (ft) charge (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft) charge (cfs) (ft) (fps) (cfs) 

1967 1967 -Continued Sept. 2 __ -------------- 10.36 0.49 5 0. 20 0.49 1.00 Dec. 12 ________________ 11. 45, 1. 45 46.0 

g:~: !=================: t ~:: ~: ~~ 64.7 21 1. 58 1. 95 33.2 1968 37.3 18 . 91 2.29 16.3 Mar. 18 ________________ 11.60, 1.57 43.0 Dec.ll ________________ 3.47 13 . 57 .47 7.45 May 28_ --------------- 1 2. 35, 2. 38 132 1. 74 8. 57 15 . 76 . 75 11.4 June 19 ________________ 1.45, . 68 1. 78 

1 Gage height at bridge. 

35 12 7.0 5 

Width Mean Mean Area 

(ft) d3pth 

(ft) 

velocity (sq ft) 

(fps) 

20 1.26 1.83 25.2 

20 1.33 1.62 26.6 

20 2. 32 2.84 46.4 

14.8 .59 .20 8. 70 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A43 

TABLE B.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued 

STATION 2-Continued 

Sediment data 

Sediment Sediment Date Stage 

(ft) Discharge concentra- Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per Date Stage 

(ft) 

Discharge concentra- (cfs) tion 

Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per 

1967 Dec. 3----------------------- 21.88 Dec. 3 _______________________ 22,40 Dec. 12 ______________________ 2 2. 60 Dec. 12 ______________________ 2 2. 70 

Dec. 28---------------------- 1,93 Dec. 28 ______________________ 11,08 

Sam- Stage Dis- ple Date (ft) charge so, Ca (cfs) 

1967 

(cfs) tion 

105 168 54 44 42 123 37 74 15.5 116 22.5 76 

day) 

1968 61 Mar. 13 ______________________ 

8.2 Mar.l8 ______________________ 

17.9 Mar. 18 ______________________ 

9.4 Mar. 18 ______________________ 

6.2 May 28_ --------------------- 5. 9 June 19 ______________________ 

Chemical data 

Conduct11.22 

11.32 

11,09 

11.64 

3 2.42 

3 2.68 

M!! Si02 Fe Mn Na K HCOa F PO, NOa Cl ance TDS (micromh'lS) 

Caand 

Mg 

hardness 

26 

33 

17.5 

60 

137 1. 78 

Noncarbon34 

25 

68 

69 

156 

3 

ate pH Color hardness 

day) 

3.1 

2.9 

4.1 

14.3 

74 .018 

Temperature 

(OC) 

39242 Sept. 2_ _ _ 1 o. 36 0. 48 5. 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 7.1 146 ------------------------------------------ 14 

1968 40001 Feb. 5____ 1. 47 40403 Mar. 18 ___ 11.69 40404 Mar. 18 ___ a 1. 09 

40405 Mar. 18___ a 1. 32 40491 May 28___ a 2. 42 40648 Apr. 14 __________ _ 

1.8 15 14 

60 ------ 7. 9 17.5 ------ 8. 7 33 ------ 8.3 137 14 6. 0 

1.4 ------ 16 

3.8 ------------------ 4.8 ----- 34 -~--- 0.04 9.1 2. 2 ------------------------------------------ • 10 5. 2 2. 5 ------------------------------------------ . 02 5. 5 2. 5 ------------------------------------------ .13 5. 9 1.6 5.2----------------------- 12----- .20 2.5 

4.5 - -· ------------------------------------ .00 11 

STATION 3 

7. 0 135 -------- 4.5 95 81 5.0 103 82 5.0 99 80 

2.2 ---------- 68 6.8 143 107 

51 23 7.1 7 5 

29 -------------------------------- 32 -------------------------------- 31 -------------------------------- 22 12 6. 3 ·--------------- 59 --------------------------------

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4806.52 

Drainage area: 3. 7 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 3.4 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 205 cfs 

Gages: crest stage, wire weight 

Date 

1967 Jan 12 ______________ _ Feb. 15 _____________ _ Mar. 6 ______________ _ Mar. 29 _____________ _ 

Apr. 27 _____________ _ 

N arne: Perkins Run at Rose Cottage 

Latitude: 40°06'30" Longitude: 75°49'33" 

Stage 

(ft) 

4.60 

4.68 

5.68 

5.02 

5.34 

Discharge Width 

(cfs) (ft) 

2.65 

3.53 

34.0 

8.68 

17.8 

12 

15 

14.5 

11.5 

12.7 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Mean 

depth 

(ft) 

0.362 

.525 

1.34 

.992 

1.28 

Mean 

velocity 

(fps) 

0.61 

.447 

1. 75 

. 761 1.09 

Sediment 

Area 

(sq ft) Date 

1967-Continued 4.35 May 12 _____________ _ 7. 89 June 9 ______________ _ 19.4 July 26 _____________ _ 11.4 Oct.l2 _____________ _ 

16.3 Nov. 30-------------

Sediment data 

Stage 

(ft) 

4.85 

4.52 

4.46 

4.46 

4. 50 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

5.82 

1.81 

1.13 

.93 

1.20 

Width 

(ft) 

10.0 

8.6 

5.1 

4. 7 8.6 

Mean 

depth 

(ft) 

0.999 

.894 

. 787 

.326 

.228 

Mean 

velocity 

(fps) 

0.583 

.24 

.28 

.61 

.61 

Sediment 

Area 

(sq ft) 

9.99 

7.68 

4.01 

1.53 

1.96 

Date Stage 

(ft) Discharge concentra- Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per Date Stage 

(ft) 

Discharge concentra- Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per 

1967 Jan. 27 _____ ----------------- Jan. 27 _____________________ _ 

Feb. 15---------------------- Mar. 6----------------------- Mar. 7 ______________ ---------

Mar. 7 ____ ------------- _____ _ 

Mar. 8----------------------- Mar. Mar. 29---------------------- 15 _____________________ _ Mar. 22 _____________________ _ Mar. 29 _____________________ _ 

Apr. 5----------------------- Apr. 12 _____________________ _ 

Apr. 17---"------------------ Apr. 19_ ------------ ________ _ 

Apr. Apr. 27---------------------- 27 _____________________ _ May3 ______________________ _ 

May May 7 _ ---------------------- ll _____________________ _ 

May 17 _ --------------------- May 24_ --------------------- May 29 ___ ---------- ________ _ 

May 29---------------------- June 8----------------------- June 15 _____________________ _ 

1 Gage height at bridge. 2 From bridge to water surface. a Gage height at staff. 

6.34 

6.40 

4. 70 5. 75 6.10 

5.58 

5.11 

5.04 

4.95 

4. 76 4.86 

4. 62 

4.60 

4.84 

4.64 

5. 41 5.35 

4. 78 4.92 

5. 21 4.65 

4.57 

4.65 

4. 72 4.50 

4.51 

(cfs) tion 

87 

94 

3.8 

38 

64 

29 

12.5 

9.5 

7.6 

4.53 

6.0 

2. 9 

2. 7 5.6 

3.1 

21 

18.8 

4.8 

7.0 

14 

3.2 

2.35 

3.2 

4.0 

1.6 

1.7 

1,970 

656 7 279 

141 

63 

28 

19 

14 

3 

7 

3 

2 

32 

5 

49 

29 

11 

33 

47 

7 

6 

26 

61 

8 

10 

day) 

593 

213 .09 36.7 

31.3 

6.3 

1. 22 

.62 

.37 

.047 

.14 

. 030 

. 019 

.62 

.054 

3. 56 1.88 

.18 

.80 

2. 28 

.077 

.049 

. 29 

.84 

.044 

.059 

(cfs) tion 

1961-Continued June 21._____________________ 4.48 1.37 June 29 ___________ ----------- 4. 65 3. 2 

July 6.---------------------- 4. 45 1.1 July 13_ --------------------- 4. 47 1. 25 July 19______________________ 4. 46 1.15 

May 11_ --------------------- 5. 29 16.6 May 15---------------------- 4.94 7.4 Aug. 3----------------------- 4. 98 8. 2 Aug. 4----------------------- 4. 89 6. 5 Aug. 2----------------------- 4. 70 3. 8 Aug. 10______________________ 4. 75 4.4 Aug. 23______________________ 4. 69 3. 7 

Aug. 25______________________ 5.90 48 Aug. 25______________________ 4. 90 6. 7 Aug. 25______________________ 4.95 7.6 Aug. 31._____________________ 4. 54 2. 05 

~:gt ~7 ~~~================== !: :i lJO Oct. 6. _ ------------------------------------------------- Oct. 10- ___ ---------------------------------------------- Oct. 11_ _ ___ ______ _____ _____ _ 4. 60 2. 25 

Oct.l9______________________ 4.57 1.92 

Nov. 30. _ ------------------- 4. 50 1. 26 

1968 Jan. 10. __ ------------------- 4.59 2.5 

day) 

7 .033 82 0. 91 9 .034 31 .134 7 • 028 88 5. 05 37 .95 

226 6.40 21 .47 12 .16 16 .24 14 .18 61 10.1 25 .58 29 • 76 7 .050 6 .031 8 .022 

5 -------------· 50 -------------- 16 .124 10 . 066 3 .013 

3 .026 
A44 URBANIZATION AND WATER RE1SOURCES 

TABLE B.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued STATION 3-Continued 

Chemical data 

Sam- Stage Dis- pie Date (ft) charge so4 Ca Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na K HCOa F P04 NOa Cl (cfs) 

1966 37352 Sept. 2--------------·------ 8. 6 14 4.6 18 0. 0 0.0 6.8 2.1 60 0.1 0.00 2.6 8.8 

1967 

37748 Jan. 27 ___ 6. 40 94 ------------------------------------------------------------ . 30 5. 1 8. 5 37690 Feb. 14_ _ 4. 61 2. 8 ___ __ __ _ ___ __ __ __ __ ____ _ __ _ ____ __ _ ___ ____ ____ ____ ____ ______ _ . 06 8. 3 10 

38741 Mar.7_ __ 6.10 64 15 7.1 3.1 5.1 .06 .00 3.2 3.8 15 .2 ______ 7.0 6.5 38735 Mar.29 __ 4.98 8.2 20 11 4.0 11 .00 .00 5.8 2.8 25 ,1 ______ 5.3 8.0 38998 May9 ____ 4.79 5.0 14 9.5 4.1 12 .00 .00 5.1 1.6 28 .1 ______ 4.6 7.4 39231 June 30___ 4. 47 1. 25 10 _ ____ _ ___ __ __ ____ __ __ ____ __ _ ___ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ___ ___ _ ___ __ __ _ 6. 0 

39217 July 31___ 4. 46 1.15 10 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 6. 3 39085 Aug. 3 _ _ ____ _______ ___ _ ___ _ 9. 2 _______________________________ . ___ __ _ ___ 17 ______________________ _ 

39087 Aug. 3 _____________________ 18 ----------------------------------------- 63 ----------------------- 39666 Aug.3 ___ 4.98 8.2 9.7 8.8 3.5 11 ____________ 6.2 1.8 36 .2 ______ 3.8 7.7 39086 Aug. 3 _____________________ 12 _ _ ___ ____ ____ ____ ___ _____ _______ ___ ____ __ 20 ______________________ _ 

4002S Nov.9 ___ 4.48 1.3 11 10 4.1------------------ 6.0 _____ 37 _____ .08 6.4 5.5 39412 July13 ___ 4.48 1.3 9.4 9.8 4.0 20 .00 .01 6.2 1.5 43 ,1 ______ 6.1 5.5 

1968 40021 Feb. 5 _ _ _ 4. 69 40644 Apr. 14_ _ 4. 59 3. 7 16 10 

2. 5 ------ 11 4. 2 ------------------ 5. 8 ----- 26 ----- . 06 8. 3 7. 5 4. 8 ------------------------------------------ . 00 5. 6 6. 5 

STATION 4 

Con- Caand Non- Tem- duct- Mg carbon- pera- ance TDS hard- ate pH Color ture (micro- ness hard- (OC) 

mhos) ness 

144 97 54 6 7. 0 3 24 

131 97 -------------------- 6. 7 ---------------- 117 95 -------------------- 7.1 ---------------- 94 66 31 18 7. 1 13 1 127 92 44 24 6. 9 10 8 109 85 42 18 6. 9 10 13 

110 ------------------------------------------ 19 116 ------------------------------------------ 22 

63 -------------------------------------------------- 146 ------------------------------------------ 17 110 81 37 7 6. 9 10 23 

75 ---------------------------- 7.2 -------- 22 117 -------- 42 12 7. 5 3 5 117 94 41 6 7. 3 7 20 

122 -------- 43 21 7. 0 5 5 117 79 47 --------------------------------

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: Drainage area: 3.9 sq mi 

1-4806. 62 Mean annual discharge: 3.8 cfs 

Name: Culbertson Run at Lyndell Mean annual flood: 215 cfs 

Latitude: 40°03'29" Longitude: 75°45'07" Gages: crest stage, wire weight 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Stage Discharge Width Mean Mean Area Stage Discharge Width Mean Mean Area Date (ft) (cfs) (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft) (cfs) (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) 

(ft) (fps) (ft) (fps) 

1967 1967-Continued Jan. 14 _______________ 2. 29 6.17 10.8 0. 50 1.14 5.42 June 6 _______________ Feb. 2. 07 2. 70 13.5 1.03 1. 94 13.9 16 ______________ Mar. 6 _______________ 2. 43 9. 68 17.5 . 40 1. 38 7. 03 July 26-------------- 1. 97 1. 37 3. 20 . 36 1.20 1.14 2. 75 Mar. 31_ _____________ 25.7 19.0 . 77 1. 75 14.7 Sept. 18 ______________ 2. 05 2.35 5. 0 .41 1.14 2.07 2. 23 4.99 12.2 .96 . 43 11.7 Oct. 12 ______________ Apr. 2.06 2.17 5. 2 .40 1. 05 2. 07 27 ______________ May 2. 59 11 _______________ 19.6 18.4 1.12 .95 20.6 Dec. L ______________ 2.09 2.61 8.1 .46 • 70 3. 75 2.46 

Date 

1967 Jan. 14 _______________________ Jan. 27 _______________________ 

Jan. 21----------------------- Jan. Feb.l6 ______________________ 

Mar.6 Mar. 6----------------------- _______________________ 

Mar. Mar.7 7 ____ ------------------- _______________________ Mar. 31 ______________________ Apr.l7. _____________________ 

Apr. 21----------------------

May 7 _ ----------------------

Sample Date StagtJ 

(ft) 

11.7 

Sta~e (ft 

2.3 

3. 21 3. 28 2.87 

2. 45 2.90 

2. 76 2.90 

2. 70 2. 23 2.39 

2. 56 2. 70 

14 1. 51 .55 21.1 

Sediment data 

Sediment Sediment Discharge concentra- discharge Date (cfs) tion (tons per 

day) 

1967-Continued 6.4 5 0.11 May 7 _ ---------------------- 72 1, 970 491 

~~ ft ~==================== 84 1,125 327 34.4 216 25.7 May 11 ______________________ 

10.5 18 .65 May 11_ --------------------- 36.0 255 31.8 Aug. 4 _______________________ 

25.7 74 6.59 Oct. 20. _ -------------------- 36.0 130 16.2 Dec. 1----------------------- 21.5 62 4.62 4.9 4 .068 1968 8. 6 38 1.13 Jan. 17 _______________________ 

14.5 28 1. 41 May 28.--------------------- 21.5 322 23.9 

Chemical data 

Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na K HCOa F P04 NOa Cl 

Stage 

Condurtance 

(ft) 

2. 72 2.37 

2.54 

2.47 

2.45 

2.42 

2.10 

2. 09 

2. 20 3.42 

TDS 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

22.5 

8.4 

13.5 

11.5 

10.5 

9.4 

2. 92 

2. 90 

4. 40 115 

Sediment 

concentra- tion 

71 

7 

73 

73 

45 

16 

2 

3 

2 268 

pH 

Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per 

day) 

5.5 

• 20 3.42 

2.91 

1. 64 

. 52 

.02 

.03 

.03 107 

Tempera- Color ture 

Discharge 

(cfs) (micromhos) 

Caand 

Mg 

hardness 

Noncarbon- ate 

hardness 

(oC) 

1967 37744 Jan. 27 ___ 3.28 37696 Feb. 14 __ 2.17 38687 Mar. 7 ___ 2. no 38734 Mar. 3L _ 2.23 39039 May5 ____ 2.16 39232 June 30 ___ 2.02 39209 July 26 ___ 1. fi7 39213 Sept. 5 ___ 2.10 40022 Nov.9 ___ 2.10 40023 Dec. 3 ___ 3. 23 1968 40024 Feb. 5 ___ 2. 22 40651 Apr. 14 __ 2. 09 

84 ----------------------------- ------------.----------------- 0. 02 4. 5 8. 5 3.9 --------------------------------·---------·----------------- .04 11 10 36 20 9. 2 2. 8 6. 5 0. 00 0. 00 . 5 . 2 13 0. 4 ------ 6. 0 6. 6 5. 0 27 13 4. 5 13 . 00 . 00 7. 0 2. 1 24 . 0 ------ 7. 8 10 3. 7 24 11 4. 7 13 . 01 . 00 6. 4 1. 9 26 . 0 ------ 7. 6 9. 0 

2. 0 23 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 11 1. 5 23 . -------------------------.--------------------------------------- 11 2. n 24 ______________________________________________________________ . ___ 8. 9 

2. !J 24 13 4. 8 ------------------ 7. 6 ----- 26 ----- . 11 9. 9 10 76 20 8. 5 3. 4 ------------------ 7. 8 ----- 13 ----- . 39 6. 2 11 

4. 8 25 13 

2. 9 -·---- 14 4. 9 ------------------ 6. g ----- 22 ----- .13 10 11 5. 2 ------------------------------------------ . 00 9. 9 11 

119 103 -------------------- 6. 6 ----------------

145 101 -------------------- 7.1 -------- 0.5 97 73 35 24 6. 8 15 2 150 118 51 32 6. 8 3 7 144 97 47 26 7. 3 4 16 

153 ------------------------------------------ 20 149 ------------------------------------------ 26 153 -----------.------------------------------- 20 158 -------- 52 31 7. 4 5 6 121 -------- 35 25 6. 7 20 2 

160 -------- 157 104 53 35 7.1 3 6 

57--------------------------------
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A45 

TABLE B.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued 

STATION 5 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: Drainage area: 6.2 sq mi 

1-4806.5 Mean annual discharge: 5.8 cfs 

Name: East Branch Brandywine Creek at Mean annual flood: 310 cfs 

Cupola Gages: continuous stage recorder, wire 

Latitude: 40°05'55" Longitude: 75°50'44" weight 

Date Stage 

(ft) Discharge 

(cfs) 

1967 Jan. ll ______________ 2. 71 6.29 Feb. 5 _______________ 2. 76 6.91 Mar. 6 _______________ Mar.6 4.13 79.3 _______________ Mar.7 4.38 81.1 _______________ 4.94 134 Mar. 29 ______________ 2.98 15.7 Apr. 13 ______________ 2.67 4. 76 Apr. 13 ______________ 2.67 5.66 Apr. 18 ______________ May 2. 75 7. 70 25 ______________ 2.65 4.34 July 26 ______________ 2. 54 2.22 

Date Stage (ft) 

1967 Jan. 27 ______________________ _ 

Jan. 27 ______________________ _ Feb.5 ______________________ _ Feb. 14 _____________________ _ Feb. 15 _____________________ _ Feb. 15 _____________________ _ Feb. 22 _____________________ _ Feb. 22 _____________________ _ Feb. 22 _____________________ _ Mar.!_ _____________________ _ Mar.!_ _____________________ _ Mar.!_ _____________________ _ 

Mar. 6 ______________________ _ Mar. 6 ______________________ _ Mar. 6 ______________________ _ Mar. 6 ______________________ _ Mar. 7 ______________________ _ Mar. 7 ______________________ _ Mar. 7 ______________________ _ Mar. 7 ______________________ _ Mar. 8 ______________________ _ Mar.8 ______________________ _ Mar. 15 _____________________ _ Mar. 15 _____________________ _ Mar. 15 _____________________ _ Mar. 22 _____________________ _ Mar. 22 _____________________ _ Mar. 22 _____________________ _ Mar. 29 _____________________ _ Mar. 29 _____________________ _ 

Mar. 29 _____________________ _ Apr. 5 ______________________ _ Mar. 29 _____________________ _ Apr. 5 ______________________ _ Apr. 5 ______________________ _ Apr. 12 _____________________ _ Apr.l2 _____________________ _ 

Apr. 12 _____________________ _ Apr.l7 _____________________ _ 

Apr. 19 _____________________ _ Apr.l9 _____________________ _ 

Apr. 19 _____________________ _ Apr. 26 _____________________ _ Apr. 26 _____________________ _ 

Apr. ~6---------------------- Apr. 27 _____________________ _ May 3 ______________________ _ 

May 3 ______________________ _ May 3 ______________________ _ May 11 _____________________ _ May 11 _____________________ _ May 11 _____________________ _ May 11 _____________________ _ 

May 15 _____________________ _ 

May May 17---------------------- 17 _____________________ _ May 17 _____________________ _ 

May May 17---------------------- 24 _____________________ _ May 24 _____________________ _ 

May 24 _____________________ _ May 29 _____________________ _ 

May 29 _____________________ _ June 8 ______________________ _ June 8 ______________________ _ June 8 ______________________ _ June 8 ______________________ _ June 15 _____________________ _ June 15 _____________________ _ 

June 15 _____________________ _ June 15 _____________________ _ 

4.96 

5.16 

2. 76 

2.67 

2. 71 3.12 

2. 73 

2. 73 

2. 76 2.64 

2.69 

2. 70 4.00 

4.15 

4.33 

4.44 

4.60 

4. 20 

3.80 

3.57 

3. 91 3.99 

3.5 

3.8 

3.99 

2.80 

3.86 

3.90 

3.05 

3.85 

3.95 

2.69 

3.11 

2. 70 2. 72 2.96 

2.68 

2.67 

2. 73 2. 70 

2. 70 2.67 

2.48 

2. 70 2. 75 2. 74 2. 78 3.87 

2. 73 3.23 

3.53 

3.36 

3.18 

2.81 

2. 71 2. 70 2.67 

2. 72 

2.64 

2.65 

2.68 

2. 70 

2.66 

2.61 

2.60 

2. 61 2.61 

2.61 

2.50 

2.49 

2.50 

Width 

(ft) 

16.6 

19 

32 

32 

41 

21 

18 

18.7 

19 

23 

14.5 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

135 

154 

7.9 

5.0 

6. 2 

20.8 

6.8 

6.8 

7. 9 

4.3 

5.5 

5. 8 

64 

73 

85 

93 

105 

76 

37 

44 

59 

63 

37 

52 

63 

9.3 

56 

58 

18.2 

55 

61 

5.5 

20.4 

5.8 

6.5 

15.0 

5.3 

5.0 

6.8 

5.8 

5.8 

5.0 

1.4 

5.8 

7.6 

7.2 

8.6 

56 

6.8 

25 

38 

30 

23 

9.6 

6.2 

5.8 

5.0 

6.5 

4. 3 4.5 

5.3 

5.8 

4.8 

3.6 

3.4 

3.6 

3. 6 3.6 

1.6 

1. 5 

1.6 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Mean Mean Area Stage 

depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft) 

(ft) (fps) 

1967-Continued 0. 74 0.53 12.2 Aug. 3L _____________ 2.46 .82 .44 15.6 Aug. 31__ ____________ 2.46 1.30 1. 91 41.6 Oct. 11 ______________ 2.60 1.90 1. 33 60.9 Dec.! _______________ 2.60 2. 26 1.44 92.8 .81 .92 17.0 1968 . 78 .34 14.0 Jan. 10 ______________ 2.61 . 73 .41 13.6 Feb. 22.------------- 2.50 .82 .49 15.6 Mar. 19 ______________ 2.95 1.19 .16 27.3 Apr. 2 _______________ 2.62 .46 .33 6.66 May 14_ _____________ 2.58 

Sediment data 

Sediment Sediment concen- discharge Date tration (tons per day) 

1967-Continued 

1,470 687 June 21_ ____________________ _ 

593 317 June 21_ ____________________ _ 

5 .14 June 21 _____________________ _ 

5 .09 June 21 _____________________ _ 

3 . 06 June 22 _____________________ _ 

16 1. 2 June 29 _____________________ _ 

5 .12 June 29 _____________________ _ 

5 .12 June 29 _____________________ _ 

5 .14 June 29 _____________________ _ 

5 .07 July 6_ ---------------------- 6 .11 July 6 ______________________ _ July 6 ______________________ _ July 6 ______________________ _ 4 .08 111 26.0 86 21.6 July 13 ___ -- ----------------- 343 101 July 13 _____________________ _ 

324 104 July 13 _____________________ _ 

169 61.4 July 13_ --------------------- 122 32.1 July 19 _____________________ _ 

July 19 _____________________ _ July 19 _____________________ _ Aug. 2 ______________________ _ Aug.2 ______________________ _ Aug.2 ______________________ _ 

60 10.8 49 7.5 19 3. 9 14 3.1 33 4. 2 Aug.3 ______________________ _ Aug.3 ______________________ _ 25 4.5 25 5.5 5 .16 Aug.4 ______________________ _ Aug. 4 ______________________ _ Aug. 4 ______________________ _ Aug.4 ______________________ _ Aug. 4 ______________________ _ Aug. 4 ______________________ _ 

4 • 77 

8 1. 6 17 1.1 12 2.3 13 2. 7 Aug. 4 ______________________ _ 

Aug. 4 ______________________ _ 4 .08 28 2.0 10 .2 Aug. 10 _____________________ _ 

2 .04 Aug. 10 _____________________ _ 

3 .13 Aug. 10 _____________________ _ 

4 .08 Aug. 10 _____________________ _ 

8 .14 Aug. 23 _____________________ _ 

8 .19 Aug. 23 _____________________ _ 

6 .12 Aug. 23 _____________________ _ 

4 .08 Aug. 23 _____________________ _ 

5 .09 Aug. 25 _____________________ _ 

4 .02 Aug. 25 _____________________ _ 

5 .10 Aug. 25 _____________________ _ 

9 .24 Aug. 31_ ____________________ _ 

42 1. 05 Aug. 31_ ____________________ _ 

12 .36 Aug. 31_ ____________________ _ 

15 2. 91 Aug. 31_ ____________________ _ 

11 .26 Sept. 6 ______________________ _ 

28 2.4 Sept. 6 ______________________ _ Sept. 6 ______________________ _ 

Sept. 6 ______________________ _ 55 7.2 58 6.0 Sept. 2L ___________________ _ Sept. 21_ ____________________ _ 50 4.0 10 .33 13 .28 Sept. 21_ ____________________ _ 

15 . 30 Sept. 27 _____________________ _ Sept. 27 _____________________ _ Sept. 27 _____________________ _ 16 .28 14 .32 Sept. 27 _____________________ _ 

Oct. 5_. ______________ ---- __ _ 11 .16 11 .17 11 .20 Oct. 5 ______________________ _ 

23 .46 Oct. 5------------------------ 23 .38 0ct. 6 ______________________ _ 

22 .27 Oct.lL ____________________ _ 

24 .28 Oct. ll _____________________ _ 

22 . 27 Oct. 11 _____________________ _ 

19 .24 Oct.19 _____________________ _ 

41 . 51 Oct. 20 _____________________ _ 

25 .14 Oct. 20 _____________________ _ 

159 -------------- 1968 

28 -------------- Jan. 10 ______________________ _ 

Discharge Width (cfs) (ft) 

2.59 6.9 3. 70 7.0 3.30 14.6 3.35 10.2 

3.53 9. 2 3.52 15 16.4 17.5 4.66 14.6 4.23 17 

Sta~e Discharge 

(ft (cfs) 

2.62 3.8 2.59 3.1 2.59 3.1 2. 57 2. 7 2.65 4.5 2. 70 5. 8 2. 73 6.8 2. 75 7. 6 2. 72 6. 5 2.58 2.9 2.58 2.9 2. 58 2. 9 2.58 2. 9 2.59 3.1 2.60 3.4 2. 60 3.4 2. 60 3.4 2. 57 2. 7 2. 57 2. 7 

2.57 2. 7 2.58 2.9 2.58 2. 9 2.58 2.9 2.65 4.5 2.77 8.2 3. 95 61 3. 90 58 3.88 57 2. 86 11.4 2. 84 10.7 2.82 10.0 2.82 10.0 2.82 10.0 2.77 8.2 2.72 6.5 2. 70 5.8 2.67 5.0 2. 56 2. 5 2.59 3.1 2.57 2. 7 2. 50 1. 6 2. 85 11.05 3. 91 59 3. 90 58 2.49 3. 8 2.49 3.8 2.53 4.8 2.52 4.5 2.47 3.4 2.45 2.9 2.46 3.1 2.44 2. 7 2.46 3.1 2.50 4.0 2.48 3.6 2.44 2. 7 2.45 2.9 2.45 2.9 2.43 2.5 

2. 42 -------------- 2.45 -------------- 2.44 -------------- 2.44 --------------

2.63 -------------- 2.65 -------------- 2.75 -------------- 2. 61 -------------- 2.58 -------------- 2.60 --------------

2.61 --------------

Mean Mean Area depth velocity (sq ft) 

(ft) (fps) 

0.51 o. 74 3.51 

.89 .59 6.22 

.49 .46 7.13 .40 . 82 4.10 

.51 . 75 4. 71 .42 .55 6.35 . 77 1. 21 13.5 .53 .60 7. 77 .42 .60 7.10 

Sediment Sediment concentra- discharge tion (tons per ~ay) 

23 -------------- 23 -------------- 27 -------------- 22 -------------- 49 -------------- 62 -------------- 64 -------------- 59 -------------- 48 -------------- 47 -------------- 43 -------------- 38 -------------- 37 -------------- 56 -------------· 57 -------------- 123 -------------- 50 -------------- 44 -------------- 39 -------------- 50 -------------- 49 -------------- 23 -------------- 29 -------------- 41 -------------- 108 -------------- 72 15.2 69 13.8 69 13.6 68 2.68 72 2.66 82 2.84 59 2. 04 60 2. 08 

51 -------------- 33 -------------- 32 -------------- 33 -------------- 30 -------------- 15 -------------- 14 -------------- 16 -------------- 47 1.80 53 10.8 41 8. 24 

18 -------------- 18 -------------- 15 -------------- 31 -------------- 24 -------------- 14 -------------- 16 -------------- 21 -------------- 25 -------------- 11 -------------- 11 -------------- 17 -------------- 12 -------------- 12 -------------- 12 -------------- 18 -------------- 16 -------------- 20 -------------- 39 -------------- 20 -------------- 21 -------------- 33 -------------- 30 -------------- 12 --------------

6 --------------

7 --------------
A46 URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCE'S 

TABLE B.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued 

STATION 5-Continued 

Sample Date 

1966 

Stage 

(ft) 

37353 Sept.!_ _________ _ 

1967 

37749 Jan.27 ___ 5.16 

36794 Feb. lL.. 2. 67 38744 Mar. 7___ 4. 60 

38737 Mar. 29... 2. 95 

39009 May !J. . . 2. 78 

39233 June 30... 2. 57 

39208 July 3L. 2. 57 

39277 Aug. 3L. 2. 46 

400H Nov. 9. _. 2. 62 

40015 Dec. 3___ 5. 95 

1968 

40016 Feb. 5____ 2. 73 

40649 Apr. 14___ 2. 66 

Chemical data 

Discharge so, Ca Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na (cfs) K HCOs F PO, NOs Cl 

0. 69 8. 2 14 4. 9 22 0. 0 0. 02 7. 5 2. 8 55 0. 2 0. 0 5. 3 12 

154 ------------------------------------------------------------ . 06 4. 4 7. 5 4. 9 ------------------------------------------------------------ . 08 14 10 

105 17 8.0 2.7 4.9 0 0 3.0 4.3 17 .2------ 4.2 4.9 

14.5 23 14 4.4 13 .02 0 7.0 3.1 32 0 ------ 4.9 11 8.5 19 15 4.7 16 0 0 6.3 1.6 37 .2------ 5.8 14 

2. 70 10 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 9. 0 

2. 7 13 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 10 3. 1 10 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 9. 5 3.7 13 13 4.3------------------ 8.0----- 44----- .04 7.7 8.5 

240 19 3.5 3.3 ------------------ 9.4 ----- 13 ----- .37 6.3 14 

6.8 18 13 

4. 7 ------ 14 4.6 ------------------ 7.6--- 34----- .14 9.6 10 

5.0 ------------------------------------------ 0 7. 7 8.0 

STATION 6 

Conductan<'e TDS 

(micromhos) 

155 104 

Caand 

Mg 

hardness 

55 

Noncarbonate pH 

hardness 

10 6.8 

Tempera- Color ture 

(OC) 

4 23 

120 101 -------------------- 6.8 ---------------- 139 120 ------------------------------------------ 96 71 31 17 6. 8 17 1 149 102 53 27 7. 2 2 8 141 111 57 27 7. 2 14 13 

136 ------------------------------------------ 22 142 ------------------------------------------ 25 

149 ------------------------------------------ 19 

143 -------- 50 14 7. 6 5 5 

127 -------- 35 24 6. 7 25 . 5 

155 -------- 52 24 7. 4 5 4 

145 97 56 --------------------------------

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: Drainage area: 6.3 sq mi 

1-4806.58 Mean annual discharge: 5.8 cfs 

Name: Indian Run at Glenmore Mean annual flood: 310 cfs 

Latitude:40°04'41" Longitude: 75°46'19" Gages: crest stage, wire weight 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Stage Discharge Width Mean Mean Area Stage Discharge Width Mean Mean Area Date (ft) (cfs) (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft) (cfs) (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) 

(ft) (fps) (ft) (fps) 

Mar 5 ________________ 1967 1967-Continued 

5.15 7.05 15 0.81 0. 58 12.2 June 5. -----------· __ 4.96 4.12 15.4 0.60 0.44 9.28 Mar. 7 ______ ·-------- 6.85 233 26 2.14 4. 76 55.7 July 26. _____________ Mar. 4.90 2.16 5. 7 • 70 .54 4.02 7 _______________ 6.03 66.2 31 1. 22 1. 76 37.7 Aug. 7 _______________ Mar. 5.00 3.54 7. 2 .97 . 70 5.07 29 ______________ 5.33 14.6 15.7 .90 1. 04 14.1 Oct. 12. ________ . ____ Apr. 4.96 2.38 8. 75 .45 .61 3.90 20 ______________ 5. 04 5. 52 18.4 .68 .44 12.4 Nov. 30 _____________ May 5.03 1. 87 5.4 . 77 .45 4.13 ll ______________ 5. 75 36.7 28 1.03 1.27 28.9 

Sediment data 

Sediment Sediment Sediment Sediment Date Stage Discharge con centra- discharge Date Stage Discharge concentra- discharge (ft) (cfs) tion (tons per (ft) (cfs) tion (ton!l per day) day) 

Mar. 6 _______________________ 1967 1967-Continued 

Mar. 5.15 7.5 2. 5 0.065 May 7----------------------- 6. 21 88 63 19.2 6 _______________________ 6. 26 96 101 33.5 May 11 ______________________ Mar. 5.62 27.5 55 5.23 7 _______________________ 7. 22 380 287 378 May 11_ _____________________ Mar. 5.80 41 63 8.94 7 _______________________ Mar. 6.50 140 137 66.3 Aug. 4----------------------- 5.37 14.5 25 1.25 7 _______________________ 6.31 105 84 30.5 Oct. 19_--------------------- 5.13 5.5 13 .25 Mar. Mar. 1----------------------- 5.98 59 37 7.6 Nov. 30---------------------- 5.03 1.87 1 .006 29 ______________________ Apr.17 5.60 26 22 2.0 ______________________ Apr. 27 ______________________ 5.24 10 13 .45 1968 

5.90 50 45 7.8 Jan. 20 ______ ----------------- 5.13 7 4 . 097 

May 7 ___ --------------- _____ 5.37 14.5 20 1.0 May 28·--------------------- 7.28 400 126 175 

Chemical data 

Noncarbon- Sample Date Stage 

(ft) 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

SO, Ca Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na K HCOs F PO• NOs Cl 

Conductance TDS Caand 

Mg 

hardness ate pH Color 

Temperature 

37349 

37746 

37698 

38692 

38693 

38997 

39230 

39413 

39207 

39994 

39997 

1966 Sept. 2 __________ _ 0.66 4.0 10 2.6 2.3 0.0 o. 0 5. 6 1. 0 47 0.1 0. 00 1.8 4.1 

1967 

~ae~. Mar.L. 2Zt_-~~ ~~ 6.50 ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ 142 ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ 16 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 6.0 ~ ~ ~~ ~~ 2.0 ~~ ~~~ 4.5 ~ ~~~~ ~~ .0 ~ ~ ~ ~=~ .0 = === == 3.8 = = == 2.1 ==== = == == == 8 = ==== .3 = 

______ : ~~ 2.4 ~: ~ Mar.2\l ___ 5.60 26 16 10 a.o 14 .o .o s.o 1.4 28 .2 ______ 4.4 

May9 ___ 5.25 10.2 15 11 2.7 18 .00 .00 5.0 .9 27 .2 ______ 2.5 

June 30___ 4. 94 3. 25 7.1 ------------------------------------------------------------------ July 13.. _ 4. 94 3. 25 6. 9 11 2. 8 25 . 00 . 00 6. 2 . 9 48 . 2 _ _ _ _ _ _ 3. 8 

July 1 __ 4. 91 2. 37 7. 6 _____________ ---------- ______ ----------- _________________________ _ 

Nov. !L 5. 06 4. 0 9. 2 12 3. 0 ------------------ 6. 0 _____ 43 _____ . 02 4. 2 Dec.3___ 6.!!3 260 18 9.0 2.4------------------ 5.1 _____ 10 _____ .27 5.2 

1968 

7.5 

5.5 

6.4 

11 

5.5 

4.8 

4.5 

5.3 

5.3 

9.3 

(micro- hard- (OC) 

mhos) n(\Ss 

97 78 36 0 6.8 4 18 

94 88 ------------------------------------------ 106 88 ---------------------------------- .5 79 59 23 17 6. 8 15 2 122 91 38 15 7. 6 2 7 

102 86 39 17 7. 2 9 13 

105 ------------------------------------------ 18 109 98 39 0 7. 4 8 19 

105 ------------------------------------------ 21 114 -------- 43 8 7.6 2 5 

102 -------- 33 25 6.4 30 1 

39996 Feb.5 ___ 5.15 

40642 Apr. 14 5. 05 

404H3 May 28___ 7. 28 

7. 4 14 12 

5. 3 ------ 11 3. 0 ------------------ 4. 6 ----- 29 --- - • 01 4. 4 7. 5 115 -------- 43 19 7. 0 2 5 

400 16 7.0 2.8 ------------------------------------------ . 02 4.1 5.1 109 82 

1. 6 6.4 ----------------------- 12 ----- .12 2. 9 ---------------- 68 39 -------------------------------- 24 14 6. 3 ----------------
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A47 

TABLE B.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued 

STATION 7 

Date 

1967 Jan. 1a __________________ Feb. a __________________ 

Date 

1967 

U.S. Geological Survey stat:on designation: 

1-4806.55 

N arne: East Branch Brandywine Creek at 

Glenrnore 

Latitude: 40°05'48" Longitude: 75°46'44" 

Drainage area: 16.5 sq rni 

Mean annual discharge: 17 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 700 cfs 

Gages: crest stage 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Stage 

(ft) 

4.85 

4.61 

Discharge (cfs) 

19.5 

414.6 

Stage 

(ft) 

Width Mean Mean Area 

(ft) depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft) (fps) 

1967-Continued 

21.7 0.885 1.02 19.2 May 8------------------ aa.o 1.26 .a5 41.5 

Sediment data 

Sediment 

Discharge concentra- (cfs) tion 

Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per day) 

Date 

1967-Continued 

Stage Discharge (ft) (cfs) 

5. oa q2,5 

Stage 

(ft) 

Width Mean Mean Area 

(ft) depth 

(ft) 

velocity (sq ft) 

(fps) 

33.2 1. 9a 0.66 64.0 

Sediment Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per Discharge concentra- (cfs) tion 

day) 

Jan. 16----------------------- Mar. 29----------------------

May 7----------------------- May 8-----------------------

4_ 79 5. 27 

5.20 

5. 00 

24 

70 

57 

40 

a8 

18 

51 

11 

a.16 Dec. a ______________________ _ 7.11 -------------- a46 -------------- 4.a6 

9. 2 1968 1. 52 May 28 _____________________ _ 8. 01 -------------- 280 --------------

Chemical data 

Con- Caand Non- Tern- Sam- Stage Dis- duct- Mg carbon- pera- ple Date (ft) charge S04 Ca Mg SiOz Fe Mn Na K HCOa F P04 NOa Cl am:e TDS hard- ate pH Color ture (cfs) (micro- ness hard· (OC) 

mhos) n~ss 

1966 ____ .. Sept. 5 ___________ 1.4a 8. 2 12 a. 7 15 0. 0 0.0 6.4 1.7 52 0.2 0.09 1.4 6.6 122 81 45 a 6. 9 -------- 20 

1967 ______ Feb. 14_________________________________________________________________________________ . oa 8. 6 10 1a5 112 -------------------- 7. 2 ---------------- a9995 Dec. a ____ 8.18 ---------- 15 9.0 a.o ------------------ 4.8 _____ 14 _____ .14 6.5 9.5 111 -------- a5 24 6. 7 10 --------

1968 

40492 May 28___ 8.01 ---------- 15 8. 5 2. 2 6. 5 ----------------------- 18 ----- .17 4. 1 5. 0 ---------- 82 

'Includes tributary. 

STATION 8 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4806.6. 

N arne: East Branch Brandywine Creek at 

Lyndell 

Latitude: 40°03'34" Longitude: 75°44'40" 

Drainage area: 27.1 sq rni 

Mean annual discharge: 28 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 1,000 cfs 

Gages : crest stage 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Date 

1967 Jan. 1a .. _______________ _ 

Apr. 11----------------- Sept. 6 _________________ _ 

1968 Mar. 18 ________________ _ 

Date 

1968 

Stage 

(ft) 

0.53 

. 51 

.04 

2.65 

Mar. 18--------------------- Mar. 18.--------------------

Discharge Width 

(cfs) (ft) 

a1.8 a5 

23.9 a6 11.a a2 

461 49 

Sediment data 

Sta~e (ft Discharge 

(cfs) 

2.89 580 

2.a5 a 50 

Mean 

depth 

(ft) 

0. 577 

. 97 

.84 

2.66 

Mean 

velocity 

(fps) 

1. 57 

.69 

.42 

a. 54 

Area 

(sq ft) 

20.2 

a4. 8 

26.8 

1aO 

Sediment Sediment con centra- discharge 

tion (tons per day) 

381 765 2M ao8 

ao 15 6.1 ----------------
A48 

Sample Date 

1966 

Stage 

(ft) 

URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCES 

TABLE B.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued 

STATION 8-Continued 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

Ca Mg SiOz Fe Mn Na 

Chemical data 

K HCOa F P04 NOa Cl 

Conductance 

(micromhos) 

Caand 

Mg 

TDS hardness 

Noncarbon- ate 

hardness 

Tempera- pH Color ture 

(DC) 

------ Sept. L---------- 4.03 13 14 3.9 15 0.0 0.0 6.2 2.2 5.5 0.0 0.0 1.4 6.6 131 90 51 6 6. 9 -------- 21 

1967 ------ Jan. Zl __________________________________ -------- __________ ------ ______________ -------- _ • 02 3. 1 26. 0 159 93 -------------------- 6. 7 ---------------- ------ Feb. 14 ____________________________ ---------------- ____ --------------------------------- . 04 7. 0 9. 0 131 96 -------------------- 7.3 ---------------- 39220 Sept. 6___ 0.04 11.3 12 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 7.5 131 --------------------------------------------------

1968 40406 Mar. 18___ 2. 89 800 

40407 Mar. 18___ 2. il5 350 9.6 3.2 ------------------------------------------ .19 6.6 8.5 

9.3 3.3 ------------------------------------------ .19 7.5 9.0 

STATION 9 

122 

124 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4806.65 

Drainage area: 33.4 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 35 cf 

Mean annual flood: 1,200 cfs 

93 

87 37 -------------------------------- 37 --------------------------------

N arne: East Branch Brandywine Creek at 

Dorian Gages: continuous stage recorder, staff 

Latitude: 40°03'08" Longitude: 75°43'28" 

S?tfe Discharge Width Date (ft (cfs) (ft) 

1966 Dec. 19. _____________ 1.94 Zl.8 38 

1967 Jan.16 _______________ 1. 70 44.3 47 Feb. 17 ______________ Mar. 1. 63 39.0 38 6 _______________ 3.63 288 48 

Mar. Mar. 7-------------- _ 4.85 823 61 29 ______________ 2.57 87.4 38 Apr.1s ______________ 2. 25 44.7 37 Apr. 24 ______________ 2.15 37.3 36 Apr. 26 ______________ 2.04 27.7 37 Apr. 26 ______________ 2.04 30.0 55 

Apr. 27-------------- 3.31 217 41 

Apr. May 28-------------- 2. 45 66.4 37 ll ______________ 2.92 134 40 June 5 _______________ 1.94 20.9 37 June 13 ______________ 1.85 17.1 38 

Date Stage Discharge (ft) (cfs) 

1967 

Jan.16_ --------------------- 1. 75 10.5 Jan.16______________________ 1.68 8.5 

Feb.17______________________ 1.58 6.5 Mar. 7_______________________ 5. 85 1, 330 

Mar. 7----------------------- 5. 22 960 Mar. 7----------------------- 4. 96 810 Mar. 7-------------- __ ------- 4. 50 600 Mar. 8. _________________________________________________ _ Mar. 9 __________________________________________________ _ 

Mar. 29 •.. ------------------- 2.51 82 Mar. 29---------------------- 2. 55 80 Apr.17______________________ 2. 22 46 Apr. 26______________________ 2.16 41 

Apr. 27·--------------------- 3. 30 290 

Apr. 28---------------------- 2. 45 66.2 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Mean Mean Area Stage 

depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft) 

(ft) (fps) 

1967-·Continued 

0.83 0.88 31.5 June 16 ______________ 1.88 

July 28-------------- 1.80 

July 28.------------- 1. 95 • 72 1. 31 34.0 July 28-------------- 1. 91 

.87 1.18 33.1 July 30 ______________ 2. 34 

1. 97 3.05 94.5 

~~t~ :8:============= 

2.26 

2.58 5. 24 157 2.17 

1. 26 1.82 47.9 Aug. 4 _______________ 2. 74 

.99 1. 22 36.7 Oct. 12 ______________ 1. 94 

.98 1. 06 35.3 Nov. 30 ______________ 1.85 

.88 .86 32.3 

1.50 .36 82.8 1968 

1.80 2.94 73.7 Jan. 17 _______________ 2.36 

1. 20 1. 49 44.6 Feb. 23 ______________ 2.14 

1.48 2. 26 59.2 Apr. 5 _______________ 2. 22 .83 . 68 30.8 May 11-------------- 3.02 . 73 .62 27.6 

Sediment data 

Sediment Sediment concentra- discharge tion (tons per day) 

11 0.40 7 • 21 3 .06 1, 005 4, 640 461 1, 530 

360 1, 010 

296 615 

16 --------------

6 -------------- 9 2.55 

15 4.16 5 .80 3 .42 

103 103 7 1.60 

Date 

1967-Continued 

May 7 _ ---------------------- May 7 _ --------------- ______ _ 

May 8.----------------------

May 9. _ --------------------- May May 11.--------------------- 12 _____________________ _ 

June 22.--------------------- June 22 _____________________ _ 

Aug. 4----------------------- Aug. 4-----------------------

Aug. Aug. 4----------------------- 10 _____________________ _ 

Oct. 19_ --------------------- Dec. 1..---------------------

Discharge (cfs) 

19.2 

11.1 

19.4 

15.4 

45.8 

38.5 

14.6 

92.3 

16.2 

12.1 

42.7 

32.4 

40.9 

146 

StMe (ft 

2.61 

3.80 

2. 75 

2.45 

2.95 

2.60 

2. 75 2. 80 

2.90 

2. 75 

2.65 

2.95 

2.24 

2.14 

Width 

(ft) 

33 

30.4 

33.4 

32 

38.6 

37 

37 

39 

33 

40 

38 

34 

38 

40 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

95.0 

345 

115 

66.2 

147 

93 

115 

125 

137 

115 

103 

147 

50 

40 

Mean Mean Area 

depth velocity (sq ft) 

(ft) (fps) 

0.82 o. 71 Zl.O 

.81 .45 24.5 

.86 .68 28.5 

.86 .56 27.4 

1.03 1.15 39.7 

1. 01 1. 03 37.4 

.95 .42 35.1 

1.33 1. 78 51.8 

.85 .58 28.0 . 79 .38 31.5 

1. 30 .87 49.2 

.94 1.02 31.9 . 96 1.13 36.3 

1.55 2.35 62.1 

Sediment Sediment concentra- tion 

26 

354 

21 

6 

48 

38 

153 

276 

96 

64 

35 

52 

10 

1 

discharge 

(tons per day) 

8.55 424 8.37 

1.37 

24.4 

12.2 

61.0 

120 

46 

25.4 

12.5 

26.5 

1. 73 

.14 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A49 

TABLE B.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued 

STATION 9-Continued 

Sample Date 

1966 

Stage Dis· (ft) charge S04 Ca (cfs) 

37361 Sept. 2 •....••• 

1967 

5. 22 13 13 

Chemical data 

Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na K HCOa F P04 NOa Cl 

3. 7 15 0. 00 0. 00 5. 8 2. 0 50 0. 1 0. 01 o. 8 7. 0 

Con· 

ductance TDS (micromhos) 

127 85 

Caand 

Mg 

hardness 

48 

Noncarbonate pH Color hardness 

7 6.8 5 

Tem· 

pera· 

ture 

(OC) 

21 

37745 

37691 

38740 

38736 

38768 

39229 

39210 

39224 

40017 

40018 

40019 

Jan. 27. __ 4. 02 650 --------------------------------------------·--------------- • 00 ------ 12 124 116 -------------------- 6. 7 ---------------- Feb.l4__________ 24 ------------------------------------------------------------ . 06 7. 5 10 134 100 -------------------- 7. 1 ----------------

Mar. 7___ 5.22 1,030 15 6. 6 2. 2 4. 7 . 00 . 00 4. 0 3. 5 10 .1 ------ 4. 9 7.1 90 60 26 18 7. 0 7 1 

Mar. 29. _ 2. 55 79 19 12 3. 2 12 . 00 . 00 10 1. 8 26 . 2 ------ 3. 6 16 143 116 43 22 6. 7 5 10 

Apr. 27 _ _ 3. 28 210 22 10 2. 8 12 . 02 . 00 6. 8 2. 0 21 . 1 ----- - 4. 0 8. 5 119 90 37 20 7. 2 25 8 

June 30___ 2. 10 27 16 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 8. 5 14 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 7. 6 15 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 8. 5 

129 ------------------------------------------ 21 July 27 _ _ _ 1. 80 11. 2 125 ------------------------- ----------------- 27 Sept. 7 _ _ _ 1. 90 15. 5 131 ------------------------------------------ 21 

Nov.9. __ 1.98 25 16 13 4.0------------------ 7.4----- 39 .05 5.4 8.5 141 -------- 49 17 7.5 5 4 

Dec. 3 116 ----- --- 31 22 6. 6 20 2 .. _ 4. 47 580 Dec. 12_ _ 3. 75 330 18 8. 1 2. 6 ------------------ 9. 0 ----- 11 ----- . 26 6. 6 12 26 12 4. 0 ------------------ 6. 0 ----- 21 ----- • 22 5. 2 8. 0 135 -------- 47 30 6. 9 30 7 

1968 

40020 Feb. 5. __ 2.23 40398 Mar. 18.- 4.63 40652 Apr. 14 __ 2.10 49 20 12 4.1 ------------------ 7.8 ----- 27 ----- .06 6. 7 11 142 -------- 122 89 700 ------ 9. 2 2.9 ------------------------------------------ . 21 6.4 9.5 

36 126 87 ------ 12 3.9 ------------------------------------------ .00 5. 2 8.0 

STATION 19 

U.S.Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4721. 81 

N arne: Pine Creek at Sharp Farm 

Latitude: 40°03'40" Longitude: 75°38'28" 

Drainage area: 0.5 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 0.4 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 41 cfs 

Gages: Staff 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

47 25 7. 3 5 4 

35 -------------------------------- 46 --------------------------------

Stage Discharge Width Mean Mean Area Stage Discharge Width Mean Mean Area 

(ft) depth velocity (sq ft) (ft) (cfs) (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft) (cfs) 

(ft) (fps) (ft) (fps) Date 

1968-Continued 1. 55 2.10 19.7 9.0 1. 29 1. 70 11.6 Mar. 18 ______________ 0. 79 2.81 4.1 0.38 1. 81 

1.86 14.8 8. 4 1. 07 1.65 8.96 Apr. 2L _____________ .50 .36 1.1 .26 1.24 . 29 

1968 Mar. 17 _____________ _ Mar. 17 _____________ _ Mar. 18 ____________ __ . 91 3.65 4.0 .58 1.58 2.31 Jun. 12 ______________ 2. 22 37.4 14.8 1.06 2.38 15.7 

Date 

1968 Mar. 13 .. __________________ __ 

Mar. 17--------------- _____ __ 

Mar. 17---------------------- Mar. 17 ______ ----------------

Mar. Mar. 17 ___ ------------------- 17 ____________________ __ Mar. 18. ___________________ __ 

Mar. 18----------------------

Stage 

(ft) 

1. 06 2.04 

2.12 

1. 80 

1. 86 1.38 

2.12 

.97 

Sediment Discharge concentra- (cfs) tion 

5. 0 10.8 

19.5 

14.0 

15.0 

8.4 

19.5 

4.2 

128 3, 760 

1, 980 

918 

1,360 

571 

914 

202 

Sediment data 

Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per day) 

2. 25 140 

133 

44.5 

70.5 

16.6 

61.6 

2.94 

Date 

1968-Continued 

May 28.--------------------- May May 28.--------------------- 28 _____________________ _ May 28 ____________________ __ 

May May 28---------------------- 29 _____________________ _ 

June 12 _____________________ _ 

Chemical data 

ConductSediment Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per Stage 

(ft) 

Discharge concentra- (cfs) tion 

0.84 3.15 1.30 7.4 1. 68 12.4 1. 86 15.0 2. 04 18.2 1.30 7.4 

2. 80 --------------

Noncarbonday) 

683 7. 44 

2,441 62.5 2, 799 120 1, 407 73 1, 696 107 458 11.7 

6, 220 --------------

Sample Date Stage 

(ft) 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

S04 Ca Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na K HCOa F P04 NOa Cl ance TDS 

Caand 

Mg 

hardness 

ate pH Color 

hardTemperature 

(OC) 

1968 40009 Feb. 29 ... 40400 Mar. 17... 40655 Apr. 14... 40487 May 28. __ 40488 May 28. __ 

40489 May 29 ... 40803 June 12 ___ 

40753 June 26... 40734 Junt. 27 .. . 40755 June 27 .. . 40830 July 14 ... 40831 July 15.-- 40832 July 15... 

41083 July 22.- -

0. 56 0.8 35 

2.14 20. ------ -51 -41 ------ 1.68 12.3 19 2.04 18. 2 19 . 98 4.3 29 2. 80 16 

. 58 . 95 -- ---- .60 1.1 ------ . 70 2. 0 ------ .54 ,64 ____ __ 

.54 .64 ------ .54 • 64 ------ .52 . 5 ------

22 10 ------------------ 4.1 ----- 30 ----- 0. 02 18 14 5.4 ------------------------------------------ .16 7.6 22 10 ------------------------------------------ . 00 21 14 4. 8 ----------------------------- 40 ----- . 31 6. 0 13 4. 0 5. 3 ----------------------- 34 --- - . 24 5. 2 19 5. 8 8. 4 ----------------------- 43 ----- . 17 9. 2 10 3. 8 8. 6 ----------------------- 22 ----- . 42 5.1 19 10 15 ----------------------- 50----- .04 17 18 9. 8 15 ----------------------- 50 ----- . 00 19 20 10 14 ---------------------- 64 ----- . 01 14 19 9.0 17 ----------------------- 44 ----- .27 21 19 9. 6 17 ----------------------- 48 ----- .18 20 20 9. 5 16 ----------------------- 44 ----- . 10 21 21 9. 4 17 ----------------------- 44 ----- . 09 24 

(micromhos) 

21 253 -------- 38 252 176 23 248 166 

17 ---------- 182 17 ---------- 152 29 ---------- 169 14 ---------- 86 28 ---------- 193 24 ---------- 200 32 ---------- 247 25 258 183 24 259 180 26 257 184 25 2bb 185 

ness 

96 72 6.9 3 4 

57 -------------------------------- 96 -------------------------------- 55 22 6. 6 ---------------- 49 21 6. 6 ---------------- 72 37 6.8 ---------------- 41 23 6. 7 ---------------- 89 48 7.0 -------- 19 

86 45 6. 9 ---------------- 91 39 7. 0 -------- 17 85 49 7. 2 -------- 18 87 48 7. 0 -------- 17 89 53 7. 0 -------- 18 91 55 7. 3 -------- 15 
A 50 URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCES 

TABLE 8.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued 

STATION 20 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4721.82 

N arne: Pine Creek near Lionville 

Latitude: 40°03'50" Longitude: 75°37'55" 

Drainage area: 1.1 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 1.0 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 78 cfs 

Gages: crest stage 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Date 

1967 Jan. 19 _________________ _ Feb. 3 _________________ _ Mar. 22 ________________ _ 

Oct. 3------------------

Date 

1967 

Stage 

(ft) 

3. 20 3.21 

3. 37 3.11 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

1.08 

1. 39 3. 25 

. 628 

Width 

(ft) 

3.4 

7.0 

4.3 

2.4 

Sediment data 

Stage (ft) Discharge 

(cfs) 

Mar. 22.- ________ ------- ___________ ------- 3.25 Mar. 29_____________________ 3.43 4.0 

Chemical data 

Mean 

depth 

(ft) 

0.24 

.45 

.46 

. 21 

Mean 

velocity 

(fps) 

1. 32 

.44 

1.63 

1.15 

Area 

(sq ft) 

0.82 

3.13 

2. 00 

.50 

Sediment 

concentration 

Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per day) 

14 

21 0.16 . 29 

Sample Date Stage 

(ft) 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

Mn Na K HC03 F P04 NOa Cl 

Conductance TDS 

1968 

(micromhos) 

40007 Feb. 26----------~ o. 7 27 14 8.5 ------------------ 11 ----- 28 ----- 0.03 11 24 222 --------

STATION 21 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: Drainage area: 1.9 sq mi 

1-4721.75 Mean annual discharge: 1.7 cfs 

Name: Tributary to Pickering Creek at Art Mean annual flood: 118 cfs 

School Road Gages: crest stage, staff 

Latitude: 40°06'07" Longitude: 75°39'32" 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Stage Discharge Width Mean Mean Area Stage Discharge Date (ft) (cfs) (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft) (cfs) (ft) (fps) 

1967 1968 Sept. 28------------------------- _ 0.83 4. 3 0.52 0. 37 2. 22 Mar. 17 ______________ Dec. 7 ___________________________ 1. 70 43.5 2.99 7.1 .48 . 86 3.46 Mar. 18 ______________ Dec. 1.94 58.3 lL _________________________ 8.63 7. 2 .71 1. 69 5.12 Mar. 18 ______________ Dec. 12. _________________________ 1. 07 17.7 20.7 8.0 1.09 2.37 8. 75 Apr. 2L _____________ D£'C. 12 __________________________ .49 1. 67 36.8 12.4 1.43 2. 08 17.7 June 19 ______________ .60 3.47 

Sediment data 

Sediment Sediment Date Stage Discharge concentra- discharge Date Stage (ft) (cfs) tion (tons per (ft) day) 

1967 1968-Continued Dec. 12 ____________________________________ 29 118 11.8 Mar. 17---------------------- 1.80 Dec. 12 ____________________________________ 31 598 64.1 Mar. 17---------------------- 1. 66 Dec. 12 ____________________________________ 44 215 32.8 Mar. 18 ______________________ 2.00 Dec. 12 ____________________________________ 38 210 27.6 Mar. 18 ___ ------------------- 1.82 Dec. 12_ ----------------------------------- 10 53 1.8 Mar. 18 ______________________ 1.10 Dec. 28 ____________________________________ 21 343 24.9 May 28.--------------------- 1.00 Dec. 29 ____________________________________ 31 368 39.4 May 28 ______________________ 1.64 May 28. _____________________ 2.00 1968 

Mar. 13 ______________________ May 28---------------------- 1.98 

Mar. 17 ______________________ 1.12 25 229 19.8 May 29---------------------- 1. 20 1.80 53 652 120 June 19 ______________________ .60 

Caand 

Mg 

hardness 

70 

Width 

(ft) 

11.5 

11.5 

10 

6 

9. 2 

Discharge (cfs) 

53 

46 

62 

53 

24 

15 

42 

62 

61 

Noncarbon- a to hardness 

Tempera pH Color ture-

(OC) 

47 6. 9 4 5 

Mean Mean Area 

depth velocity (sq ft) 

(ft) (fps) 

1. 51 2.50 17.4 1. 79 2. 83 20.6 1. 04 1. 70 10.4 .39 .71 2.35 . 49 . 76 4.52 

Sediment 

Sediment discharge concen- (tons yer tration day 

606 Ill 320 50.8 1200 258 401 73.5 126 10.5 362 18.8 808 117 857 184 381 80.4 22.5 78 6.06 3.47 12 .144 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A51 

TABLE 8.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued STATION 21-Continued 

Sample Date 

1968 40000 Feb. 4 __ _ 40402 Mar. 17 __ _ 40643 Apr. 14 __ 

Date 

1967 

Stage 

(ft) 

0.60 

1.68 

. 51 

Jan. 25--------------- Feb. 19 _____________ _ 

Chemical data 

Discharge 

(cfs) S04 Ca Mg SiOz Fe Mn Na K HC03 F P04 N03 Cl 

4. 2 19 13 

44 ------ 7. 9 1. 9 ------ 12 

3.7------------------ 5.5----- 29-----0.04 4.9 8.0 2. 9 ------------------------------------------ . 16 4. 9 8. 5 2. 8 ------------------------------------------ . 00 4. 9 6. 5 

STATION 22 

Conductance 

(micromhos) 

TDS 

128 -------- 113 89 111 77 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4721.89 

N arne: Rock Run at Charlestown 

Latitude: 40°15'43" Longitude: 75°32'34" 

Drainage area: 2.6 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 2.4 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 160 cfs 

Gages: crest stage, wire weight 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Stage Dis- Width Mean Mean Area Stage Dis- (ft) char~e (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft) char~e (cfs (ft) (fps) (cfs 

1967 -Continued .99 4. 20 18.5 0.69 0.33 12.7 Aug. 27 ______________ 1.55 45.4 .95 3. 75 17.6 .80 . 26 14.0 1. 41 27.7 

Caand 

Mg 

hardness 

Noncarbonate pH Color hardness 

Temperature 

(OC) 

48 24 7. 0 5 4 

32 -------------------------------- 42 ---------------------------------

Width Mean Mean Area (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) 

(ft) (fps) 

22 1.44 1.43 31.7 22 1. 27 1.00 27.9 Mar. 16 _____________ _ . 75 5.53 14.0 1. 43 .28 20.0 

Aug. 27 ______________ Dec. 5 _______________ 1.04 2.80 8.1 .62 .56 5.04 Apr. 10 _____________ _ .62 2.82 17 .83 . 20 14.1 1. 20 23.7 22.5 .92 1.14 20.7 1968 .36 2.04 15 . 70 .19 10.5 Jan. 18--------------- .96 3.49 8.1 .65 .66 5. 28 May 7--------------- June 14 _____________ _ 

Sediment data 

Sediment Sediment 

Stage Discharge Sediment discharge Date Stage Discharge Sediment discharge 

(ft) (cfs) concen- (tons )er (ft) (cfs) concen- (tons per 

tration day tration day) 

Date 

1967 1967-Contiaued Jan. 25 ______________________ 0.99 4. 20 5 0.073 Aug. 27---------------------- 1. 45 36 1,890 236 

Jan. 25_ --------------------- .99 4. 20 5 .073 Aug. 27 ______________________ 1.46 37 5,980 766 Feb. 19 ______________________ .96 3. 75 7.5 .097 Aug. 27 ______________________ 1. 57 48 1, 720 286 

Mar. 16 ______________________ . 74 5.50 23 .44 Aug. 27 ______________________ 1. 45 36 578 72 Aug. 27 ______________________ Mar. 1.36 22.5 319 22.9 16 ______________________ . 75 5.53 13 . 25 Oct. 20 ______________________ .93 4.1 8 .11 Apr. 10 ______________________ .65 2.82 9 .088 Dec. 5 _______________________ 1. 04 2.8 6 .058 May7 _______________________ 1.34 33 828 94.6 Aug.3 _______________________ 1.38 31 616 66 1968 Aug. 27 ______________________ 1. 28 18.5 9,610 615 Jan. 18 _____________ -------- _ . 97 3.5 29 .35 

Chemical data 

Sample Stage Dis- Conductance 

Caand 

Mg Noncarbon- Temperature 

(OC) Date (ft) charge S04 Ca Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na K HC03 F P04 N03 Cl TDS hard- ate pH Color hard1967 38682 Feb. 2 __________ _ 

38996 May5 ____ 0.60 

39234 Aug. 27 _ _ 1. 52 

1968 40005 Feb. 4_ _ _ . 93 40654 Apr. 14_ _ . 93 

Date 

1967 Jan. 23 _____________ _ 

Feb. 20 _____________ _ Mar. 24 _____________ _ Apr. 27 _____________ _ May 12 _____________ _ 

(cfs) (micromhos) ness ness 

5.0 32 20 6.5 14 0.00 0.00 7.0 2.1 57 0.2------ 4.4 8.5 195 135 77 30 7. 6 2 -------- 4.6 28 19 6.1 15 .00 .00 6.3 2.2 54 .1 ------ 1.7 8.5 180 125 73 28 7. 2 4 17 

43 16 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 5. 8 156 ------------------------------------------ 21 

9.2 27 17 7.4 ------------------ 4.6 ----- 41 ----- 0.02 4.0 13 183 -------- 9. 2 ------ 20 7. 0 ------------------------------------------ . 00 3. 7 16 194 130 

STATION 23 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4721.86 

Name: Pigeon Run at Merlin 

Latitude: 40°05' 37" Longitude: 7 5°34' 54" 

Drainage area: 2.8 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 2. 7 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 170 cfs 

Gages: crest stage, wire weight 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Stage 

(ft) 

I. 62 

1. 41 1.64 

1.96 

1. 25 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

8.14 

3. 91 

9.08 

18.3 

2.24 

Width 

(ft) 

9.6 

7.0 

8.6 

12.0 

6.3 

Mean 

depth 

(ft) 

1. 02 

.61 

.71 

.71 

.50 

Mean 

velocity 

(fps) 

0.83 

. 91 1. 48 2.33 

.71 

Area 

(sq ft) 

9.81 

4.30 

6.12 

8.50 

3.17 

Date 

1967-Continued Oct. 13 ______________ 

Nov. 28_ ------------

1968 Jan. 19 ______________ 

Stage 

(ft) 

1.23 

1. 21 

1. 37 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

1. 76 1. 75 

3.96 

73 40 7.1 10 3 

79 --------------------------------

Width 

(ft) 

4.4 

4.4 

6.1 

Mean 

depth 

(ft) 

0.36 

.37 

.57 

Mean 

velocity 

(fps) 

1.12 

1. 06 

1.14 

Area 

(sq ft) 

1. 57 

1.65 

3.47 
A 52 URBANIZATION AND WATER RE!SOURCE•S 

TABLE 8.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued 

STATION 23-Continued 

Sediment data 

Date Stage 

(ft) 

Discharge 

(cfs) Sediment 

concentration 

Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per Date Stage 

(ft) 

day) 

1967 1967-Continued Jan. 23 ______________________ _ 1. 61 7.8 13 0.35 May 7 _ ---------------------- 2.34 Feb. 20 _____________________ _ 1. 41 4.0 1 .014 Oct. 19 ______________________ 1. 31 Mar. 24 _____________________ _ 1.64 9.1 7 .22 Nov. 28------------"--------- 1. 21 Mar. 28 _____________________ _ 1. 74 11.7 21 .85 Apr. 24 _____________________ _ Apr. 27 _____________________ _ 1. 53 6.8 7 .16 1968 1. 92 17 48 2.82 Jan. 19 _______________________ 1. 37 Apr. 27 _____________________ _ 1. 98 19 41 2. 70 

Chemical data 

Con- Sam- Stage Dis- duct- ple Date (ft) charge S04 Ca Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na K HCOa F P04 NO a Cl ance TDS 

(cfs) (micromhos) 

1967 38689 Feb. 20. _ 1. 41 4.6 24 12 5.2 13 0.00 0.00 7.5 1.6 26 0.1 ------ 4.4 14 152 107 

38773 May 5 ____ 1. 35 3.6 23 12 4.5 14 .00 .00 6.0 1.5 29 .1 ------ 3.1 10 138 95 

1968 40004 Feb.4 ___ 1. 45 5.3 24 14 6.0 ------------------ 6.2 ----- 26 ----- 0.04 4. 9 16 166 --------

1967 40266 Sept. 21.. 1. 21 1.8 17 13 5. 7 ------------------ 6.0 ----- 36 ----- .00 2.9 14 149 --------

1968 40647 Apr. 14. _ 1. 32 3. 2 ------ 13 5.2 ------------------------------------------ .00 4.1 11 142 98 

STATION 24 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4721.85 

Drainage area: 3.1 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 2.8 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 180 cfs 

Gages: crest stage, staff 

Date 

1976 Jan. 20 ___________________ Feb. 28 __________________ 

Mar. 16 __ ----------------

N arne: Tributary to Pickering Creek near Kimberton 

Latitude: 40°06'49" Longitude: 75°36'18" 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Stage Dis- Width Mean Mean Area (ft) charge (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) Date (cfs) (ft) (fps) 

1967-Continued 2.28 1.24 11.8 0. 61 0.17 7. 20 Nov. 28 __________________ 

2.34 1. 37 5.8 .45 . 52 2.60 2. 52 4.28 5.5 . 72 1.08 3. 96 1968 July 3L ___________________________ .65 1.9 .20 1.63 .39 Jan.18 ___________________ Oct.13 __________________ 

Date 

1967 

2.28 

Stage 

(ft) 

.60 2. 2 .24 

Discharge Sediment (cfs) concentration 

1.15 .52 

Sediment data 

Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per day) 

Date 

1967-Continued 

Stage Dis- (ft) charge 

(cfs) 

2.28 0. 58 

2.37 1. 76 

Stage 

(ft) 

Jan. 20_______________________ 2. 28 

Feb. 28_ --------------------- 2. 34 

1.23 

1. 37 

4.1 

8 

6 

8 

0. 034 Nov. 28. _ --------------------------------- .028 

Mar. 16_ ----------------------------------- May 7----------------------- 2. 90 Oct. 19_ _ _ ______ ____ ____ _____ 2. 34 

Sam- Stage Dis- ple Date (ft) charge S04 Ca 

1967 38733 May 5____ 2. 27 

1968 40029 Feb. 4 ___________ _ 40263 Sept. 20 _________ _ 4064b Apr. 14 _________ _ 

(cfs) 

0. 46 17 

2.1b 22 . 76 13 

1. 17 ------

16 

18 

20 

16 

.113 1968 14 73 

8 

3.53 Jan.18_______________________ 2.38 

1. 37 . 038 

Chemical data 

Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na K HCOa F P04 NOa Cl 

3. 8 14 0. 00 0. 00 3. 1 1. 1 47 0. 0 ------ 2. 4 

f. 0 ------------------ 2.1 ----- 41 ----- 0. 02 4.3 4.3------------------ 6.4----- 66----- .00 5.0 4.0------------------------------------------ .06 5.4 

5.1 

7. 0 7. 0 

6.1 

Conductance TDS (micromhos) 

134 106 

153 _____ .... __ 

157 

134 89 

Discharge 

(cfs) Sediment 

concentration 

Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per day) 

35 443 53.6 2.8 8 .078 1. 75 2 .012 

4.0 6 .083 

Caand Non- Tem- Mg carbon- pera- hard- ate pH Color ture 

ness bard- (DC) 

ness 

52 30 7. 2 2 -------- 49 25 7.4 5 19 

60 38 7.0 6 3 

56 27 7.3 6 18 

54 --------------------------------

Width Mean Mean Area (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) 

(ft) (fps) 

2. 2 

4.6 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

0. 78 

1.92 

0.28 

.36 

Sediment 

concentration 

45 

Caand 

Mg 

hardness 

Noncarbonate pH hardness 

56 17 7. 2 

66 32 7.4 68 14 7. 6 

0. 93 0.62 

1.05 1. 68 

Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per day) 

0.019 

. 30 

Tempera- Color ture 

(DC) 

2 18 

3 ------is 3 

f-.7 --------------------------------
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A 53 

TABLE 8.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued 

STATION 25 

Sample Date 

1966 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4721.7 

N arne: Pickering Creek near Eagle 

Latitude: 40°04'43" Longitude: 75°39'14" 

Drainage area: 3.1 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 2.8 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 180 cfs 

Gages: crest stage 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Date 

1967 

Jan. 18------------------

Stage DisStage 

(ft) 

10.09 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

2. 78 

Width 

(ft) 

8.6 

Chemical data 

Mean 

depth 

(ft) 

0.26 

Mean 

velocity 

(fps) 

1.22 

ConductArea 

(sq ft) 

2.28 

(ft) charg~ S04 Ca Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na K HCOa F P04 NOa Cl ance TDS 

(cfs) (micromhos) 

37345 Sept.!_ ____________________ 8.8 23 3.2 23 0.00 0.00 4.6 1.4 83 0.2 0.00 2.6 3.6 160 112 

Date 

1967 

STATION 26 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4721.76 

Name: Tributary to Pickering Creek at 

Chester Springs 

Latitude: 40'06'03" Longitude: 75°37'38" 

Drainage area: 4.3 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 4.0 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 230 cfs 

Gages: crest stage, staff 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Stage Dis- Width Mean Mean Area Stage Dis-

(ft) char~e (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft) cbar~e (cfs (ft) (fps) (cfs 

1967-Continued 

Caand 

Mg 

hardness 

71 

Width 

(ft) 

Noncarbonate pH Color 

hardness 

3 6.9 4 

Mean Mean depth velocity (ft) (fps) 

Temperaturo 

(OC) 

23 

Area 

(sq ft) 

Feb. 2 _______________ 4.32 7.50 22 0.99 0.35 21.7 Oct. 27 ______________ 4. 25 2.38 5.5 0.53 0.81 2.92 Feb. 28 _______________ 4. 28 5. 65 10 1. 01 .56 10.1 Nov. 28. ____________ 4. 20 1. 91 4.4 .56 . 77 2.48 

Apr. 6--------------- 4. 33 5.36 11.1 .97 .50 10.8 June 14 ______________ 4.17 2.35 5.2 .57 .80 2.94 1968 

July 3L ------------- 4.19 2.45 3. 8 .52 1. 23 1. 99 Jan. 19 ______________ 4. 28 4.24 10.8 .53 . 74 5. 76 

Sediment data 

Sediment Sediment Date Stage Discharge Sediment discharge Date Stage Discharge Sediment discharge (ft) (cfs) concan- (tons per (ft) (cfs) concan- (tons per 

tration day) tration day) 

1967 1967-Continued Feb. 2 _______________________ 4.32 7.5 6 0.16 Nov. 28.-------------------- 4. 20 2.1 2 0.014 Feb. 28 ______________________ 4. 29 5.9 3 .06 Apr. 5 _______________________ 4.33 5.4 7 .13 1968 Apr. 24 ______________________ 4. 36 6.1 15 . 21 Jan. 19 ______________________ 4. 28 4.2 7 10 

May 7 _ ---------------------- 4.89 31 284 30.5 

Chemical data 

Con- Caand Non- Tem- Sam- Stage Dis- duct- Mg carbon- pera- pie Date (ft) charge S04 Ca Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na K HCOa F P04 NO a Cl ance TDS hard- a to pH Color ture (cfs) (micro- ness hard- (OC) 

mhos) ness 

1966 

37343 Sept.!_ __________ 0.43 12 16 3.2 18 0.00 0.00 4.5 1. 8 56 0.2 0.00 0. 8 4. 9 129 92 53 7 6. 9 5 22 

1967 

38559 Feb.2 ___ 4.23 7.50 18 11 3.2 15 .01 .00 4.5 2.5 31 .2 ------ 4.4 5. 7 114 80 41 15 7.4 9 7 

38731 May 5 ____ 4.27 4.0 14 12 2.8 10 .00 .00 4.5 1.1 36 . 0 ~----- . 7 5.4 106 86 42 12 7.1 5 18 

1968 

40028 Feb.4 ___ 4.35 5. 9 19 11 3.3 ------------------ 6.0 ----- 26 ----- .08 2.8 7.0 119 -------- 41 20 7.2 5 3 

40641 Apr. 14 __ 4.23 3.2 12 3.0 ------------------------------------------ .00 2.3 5.6 106 71 43 --------------------------------
A 54 

Date 

1967 

Mar. Mar. 6--------------- 15 _____________ _ Mar. 24 _____________ _ Apr. 6 ______________ _ June 8 ______________ _ 

Aug. 1---------------

Date 

1967 

URBANIZATION AND WATER RESOURCBS 

TABLE B.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued 

STATION 27 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4721.83. 

Name: Pine Creek at Chester Springs 

Latitude: 40°05'14" Longitude: 75°36'45'' 

Drainage area: 5.1 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 4.8 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 270 cfs 

Gages: crest stage, staff 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Sta~e Dis- Width Mean Mean Area Sta~e Dis-

(ft char~e (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft char~e (cfs (ft) (fps) (cfs 

1967-Continued 

4.60 21.7 15 1.15 1. 26 17.2 Oct. 13 __ ------------ 4.28 3.35 

4. 30 10.2 14.5 .99 .71 14.3 Nov. 28_ ------------ 4. 32 3.24 

4. 44 16.5 14.5 1.07 1.06 15.5 

4. 22 7.14 15.5 .85 .54 13.2 1968 

4.10 3.63 12.2 .88 .33 10.7 Jau. 18 _______________ 4.30 5.66 

4. 23 4.12 10.3 1.05 .38 10.8 

Sediment data 

Sediment 

Stage Discharge Sediment discharge Date Stage 

(ft) (cfs) concen- (tons per (ft) 

tration day) 

1967-Continued 

Width Mean Mean Area 

(ft) depth velocity (sq ft) 

(ft) (fps) 

11.0 0.46 0.66 5.06 

10.4 .44 .71 4.57 

15.9 .58 . 61 9.23 

Sediment 

Discharge Sediment discharge 

(cfs) concen- (tons )er tration day 

Mar. 6------------------ _____ 4. 63 31 87.5 9.4 May 7 _ ---------------------- 5.10 90 433 135 Mar. 16 ______________________ 

Mar. 24 _____ -----------------

Mar. 29----------------------

Apr. Apr. 6----------------------- 24 ______________________ 

Apr. 21----------------------

Sample Date 

1967 

Stage 

(ft) 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

4.30 

4.45 

4.53 

4. 22 4.29 

4. 72 

S04 Ca 

10.2 2 17.5 22 23 25 

7.2 5 

9.8 10 

39 81 

Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na 

. 07 Oct. 19 __ -------------------- 1.33 Nov. 28 __ ------------------- 2.00 

.12 1968 . 34 Jan. 18-----------------------

10.9 

Chemiml data 

K HCOs F P04 NOs 

ConductCl ance 

(micromhos) 

4.31 

4. 32 

4.30 

TDS 

38769 May 5_ _ _ _ 4. 20 6. 6 21 13 4. 4 15 0. ()() 0. 00 7. 5 1. 5 32 0.1 ------ 2. 7 13 144 94 

1968 

40026 Feb. 4____ 4. 35 

40653 Apr. 14___ 4. 28 

40833 July 14 __ - 4. 19 

40834 July 15 __ - 4. 19 

40835 July 15_ -- 4.19 

7. 0 22 13 

5. 2 ------ 13 

3.3 ------ 12 3. 3 ------ 12 3.3 ------ 12 

5.5 ------------------ 12 ----- 27 ----- 0.03 

5.5 ------------------------------------------ • ()() 

5. 5 15 ----------------------- 36 ----- . 42 5. 4 15 ----------------------- 39 ----- . 41 5.5 15 ----------------------- 36----- .18 

STATION 28 

6.6 

3. 7 

4.2 

4.6 

3.6 

22 

10 

20 

18 

20 

182 -------- 151 107 

154 110 

154 111 154 114 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 1-4721.74 Drainage area: 6.0 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 5. 7 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 300 cfs 

Caand 

Mg 

hardness 

51 

3. 7 3. 2 

5. 7 

Noncarbon- at~ 

hardness 

7 

2 

5 

pH Color 

25 7.3 2 

.09 

.02 

.10 

Temperature 

(OC) 

18 

55 33 7.4 3 3 

55 -------------------------------- 63 23 7.4 -------- 19 

52 20 7.2 -------- 19 

52 23 7.3 -------- 20 

N arne: Pickering Creek near Chester Springs 

Latitude: 40°05'22" Longitude: 75°37'50" Gages: continuous stage recorder, wire 

weight 

Diseharge measurements by current meter 

Stage Dis- Width Mean Mean Area St~e Dis- Width Mean Mean Area Date (ft) char~e (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft charge (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) 

(cfs (ft) (fps) (cfs) (ft) (fps) 

1966 1967-Continued Dec. 20 ______________ 1.46 4.03 13.8 0. 62 0.47 8. 58 Oct. n ______________ 1.28 4. 21 11. 1 0.86 0.44 9.58 Dec. 5 _______________ 1. 42 7.00 10.8 .86 . 75 9.30 1967 Dec. 13 ______________ 1. 56 11.7 12.1 .84 1.15 10.2 Jan. 20 ______________ 1.35 6.34 10 . 55 1.16 5.48 Feb. 19 ______________ 1. 51 10.3 15.5 .82 . 81 12.7 1968 Mar. 24 ______________ 1.53 10.5 13 . 78 1.04 10.1 Jan. 15_ ------------- 1. 73 17.9 12.8 1. 21 1.15 15.5 Apr. 6 _______________ 1.42 7. 72 13.2 . 72 .82 9.47 Feb. 20 ______________ 1.33 5. 41 15.5 .52 .67 8.08 Apr. 27 ______________ 1.99 32.2 13.8 l. 28 1. 82 17.7 Mar. 17 ______________ 2.92 74.1 16 2.16 2.14 34.6 June 2 _______________ 1. 28 4.86 12.5 .66 .59 8. 20 Mar.l8 ______________ 3. 81 177 16 3.24 3.42 51.8 June 16 ______________ 1.23 3. 76 12.4 .58 .55 7.18 Apr. 4 _______________ 1. 41 7.16 11.2 . 74 .87 8. 24 July 27 ______________ 1.18 2.90 11.1 .58 .45 6.40 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A55 

TABLE B.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued 

STATION 28-Continued 

Date 

1967 Jan. 2Q _____________________ _ 

Feb. 19 _____________________ _ Mar. 24. ____________________ _ 

Apr. 6----------------------- Apr. 24 _____________________ _ Apr. 27. ____________________ _ 

Apr. May7 27 _ --------------------- ______________________ _ May7 ______________________ _ Aug. 10 _____________________ _ Aug. 10 _____________________ _ Oct. 20. ____________________ _ 

Sample Date 

1967 38754 Feb. 19 __ 38764 May 5 ___ _ 

39841 Sept. 20 __ 

1968 40027 Feb. 4 __ _ 40401 Mar. 17 __ 40646 Apr.14. __ 40490 May 28 __ _ 

Stage 

(ft) 

1. 51 1.40 

1. 20 

1. 51 3.43 

1. 32 3.32 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

10.3 

7.4 

3.05 

10.5 

118 5. 2 110 

Stage 

(ft) 

1. 34 

1. 51 1. 54 1. 42 1. 51 1. 93 

2.00 

2. 25 2. 22 2. 00 1. 86 

1. 30 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

6.00 

10.3 

11.3 

7.9 

10.3 

28.1 

32.7 

50.0 

48.0 

32.7 

24.5 

4.5 

Sediment 

concentration 

7 

38 

16 

10 

19 

275 

154 

786 

203 

113 

86 

3 

Sediment data 

Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per day) 

0.14 

1. 36 

.63 

. 27 

. 68 26.8 

17.4 

136 

33.8 

12.8 

7.3 

.05 

Date 

1968 Jan. 15 _______________________ Mar. 17 ______________________ Mar. 17. _____________________ 

Mar. 17 _______ --------------- Mar.17 ______________________ 

Mar. 17 _______ ------------- __ Mar. 18 _______ ---------------

May 28.--------------------- May 28_ --------------------- May 28---------------------- May 28.--------------------- May 29.--------------------- June 12 ______________________ 

Chemical data 

Stage 

(ft) 

1. 73 3. 52 3.43 

3.41 

2. 23 2.82 

3.89 

1. 66 2.66 

3.32 

3.62 

2. 50 4.00 

S04 Ca Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na K HCOa F P04 NOa Cl 

Conductance TDS 

19 

16 

13 

19 

18 

15 

15 

17 

4. 9 3. 2 4.5 

17 0.00 0.00 14 . 00 . 00 

19 ------------

7.6 1. 8 5. 5 1. 5 5.0 2.3 

39 0.0 ------ 7.8 12 42 .1------ 5.1 7.5 56 .1 ------ 5.1 7.1 

15 5. 0 ------------------ 6. 7 ----- 37 ----- 0. 02 10 3. 8 ------------------------------------------ - 18 15 4.5 ------------------------------------------ .00 12 3. 5 7. 6 ---------------------- 29 ----- .10 

6.4 12 8.0 12 6. 6 7.5 3.8 11 

(micromhos) 

159 

132 

146 

162 

105 

95 

103 

145 103 138 96 

97 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

Sediment 

concentration 

Sediment 

discharge 

(tons per day) 

17.9 

130 

120 

118 

36 

68 

195 

15.3 

60 

109 

147 

52 

207 

Noncarbon53 

754 

592 

737 

303 

356 1,080 

379 

986 

942 

380 

128 

·IJ5!J 

3.28 

338 

246 

300 

37.8 

83.8 

728 

20.1 

205 

356 

193 

23 

687 

Caand 

Mg 

hardness ate pH 

Tempera- Color ture 

(oC) 

58 

51 

61 

hardness 

26 

16 

15 

7.6 

7.5 

7.5 

1 ------ -- 2 19 2 19 

58 28 7. 4 3 3 

41 -------------------------------- 56 -------------------------------- 45 21 6. 5 ----------------

STATION 29 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4721.84 

N arne: Pickering Creek at Pikeland 

Latitude: 40°06'13" Longitude: 75°36'03" 

Drainage area: 17.7 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 18 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 720 cfs 

Gages: crest stage 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Date 

1967 Jan. 22 _________________ _ Apr. 10 ________________ _ 

Stage 

(ft) 

2.36 

2.45 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

17.7 

23.2 

Width 

(ft) 

34.5 

30 

STATION 30 

U.S. Geological Survey station designation: 

1-4721.87 

Name: Pickering Creek at Charlestown 

Latitude: 40°06'05" Longitude: 75°34'17" 

Mean 

depth 

(ft) 

1.18 

. 94 

Mean 

velocity 

(fps) 

0.43 

.82 

Area 

(sq ft) 

40.7 

28.1 

Drainage area: 26.0 sq mi 

Mean annual discharge: 28 cfs 

Mean annual flood: 1,000 cfs 

Gages: crest stage 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Date 

1967 Jan. 22 _________________ _ 

Mar. 22 ________________ _ 

Stage 

(ft) 

1. 74 

2.10 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

30.0 

43.9 

Width 

(ft) 

44 

68 

Mean 

depth 

(ft) 

1. 17 1.86 

Mean 

velocity 

(fps) 

0.58 

. 35 

Area 

(sq ft) 

51.4 

126.1 
A 56 URBANIZATION AND WATER REISOURCE·S 

TABLE 8.-Discharge measurements by current meter and sediment and chemical data-Continued 

STATION 31 

u.s. Geological Survey station designation: Mean annual discharge: 34 cfs 

1-4721.9 Mean annual flood: 1,150 cfs 

N arne: Pickering Creek near Phoenixville Gages: continuous stage recorder, wire 

Latitude: 40°06'33" Longitude: 75°31'42" weight 

Drainage area: 31.4 sq mi 

Discharge measurements by current meter 

Date Stage Dis- Width Mean Mean Area Stage Dis-

(ft) charge (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) Date (ft) charge 

(cfs) (ft) (fps) (cfs) 

1966 1967-Continued Dec. 20 _____________ _ 1.84 18.4 38 1. 03 0.47 39.0 Sept. 2L _____________ 1.38 15.1 

1967 Oct 11 _______________ 1. 53 22.8 Jan. 23 ______________ _ 1. 68 39.4 40 1. 68 .58 67.4 Dec. 5 _______________ 1. 67 35.2 Feb. 2 ______________ _ 1.71 43.5 40 .84 1. 30 33.4 1968 Mar.s ______________ _ 2.13 85.0 62 1.16 1. 20 71.9 Jan. 15 _______________ 2.55 135 Mar. 2L ____________ _ 1. 78 48.2 39 .90 1.44 35.2 Feb. 20 ______________ 1.63 29.6 

1. 95 74.6 62 1.11 1. 08 68.9 Mar. 17 ______________ 3.48 412 

1. 65 34.8 48 1. 28 .56 61.6 Mar. 18 ______________ 4.10 623 

1. 78 46.7 49 1. 37 .69 67.4 Apr. 3 _______________ 1.64 36.5 

2.57 159 64 1.50 1. 66 96.0 Apr. 4 _______________ 1. 65 36.4 

1. 53 26.0 39 1. 45 .46 56.5 May 15 ______________ 1. 55 31.4 

Apr. 7 ______________ _ Apr. 19 _____________ _ Apr. 24 _____________ _ Apr. 27 _____________ _ June 2 ______________ _ June 14 _____________ _ 1. 45 20.0 40 1. 56 . 31 62.2 June 19 ______________ 1. 77 51. s 

Sediment data 

Sediment Sediment Date Stage Discharge concen- discharge Date Stage 

(ft) (ft) 

1967 Jan. 23 _______________________ 1.64 Jan. 23 _______________________ 1. 66 Feb. 2 _______________________ 1.68 Mar.s _______________________ 2.12 Mar.s ____________________ : __ 2.12 

Mar. 8----------------------- 2.12 

Apr. 6----------------------- 1.92 

Apr. 24_ --------------------- 1.65 Apr. 27 ______________________ 2.53 May7 _______________________ 2.42 

May 7 _ ---------------------- 3.10 

Sample Date Stage 

(ft) Discharge 

(cfs) 

1967 38753 Feb. 2. __ 1. 71 38775 May 5____ 1. 58 39999 Dec. 12 _ _ 3. 60 

1968 39998 Feb. 4 __ _ 40399 Mar. 18 __ 40650 Apr. 14 __ 41064 June 12 __ 41081 July 18 __ _ 41080 July 19 __ _ 41079 Julv 22 __ _ 41082 July 22 __ _ 

1.80 

4. 21 

1.63 

5. 20 1. 48 

1.44 

1.38 

1. 41 

41 22 14 30 20 16 440 23 11 

49 24 15 

690 ---- - 9. 3 34 ------ 16 1, 230 ------ 9. 0 22 ------ 6 

19 ------ 15 15 ------ 15 17 ------ 15 

(cfs) tration (tons fer day 

1967-Continued 

34.2 1 0.12 May 7----------------------- 3.21 

36.1 1 .12 May g_ ---------------------- 2.16 

38 4 .49 Aug. 10 ______________________ 2.60 

84 24 7.0 Aug. 10 ______________________ 2.50 

84 24 7.0 Aug. 27 ______________________ 2.37 

84 38 11.0 Oct. 20 __ -------------------- 1.48 61 12 2. 5 1968 36 4 .49 Jan. 15 _______________________ 2.52 152 68 35.8 Mar. 17 ______________________ 365 131 349 158 Mar. 18 ______________________ 4. 21 

292 286 290 June 12 ______________________ 5.10 

Chemical data 

Mg Si02 Fe Mn Na K HCOa F P04 NOa Cl 

Conductance TDS 

4. 9 16 0. 14 0. 00 5. 8 1. 6 4. 0 13 . OJ • 00 6. 0 1. 6 

4. 3 ------------------ 5.1 -----

38 0. 0 --- --- 3. 6 9. 5 44 .0 2.5 8.0 

22-----0.13 4.6 7.4 

5.6 ------------------ 7.1 ----- 34 ----- .01 3. 6 ------------------------------------------ .11 5. 2 ------------------------------------------ .00 3. 0 ------------------------------------------ .81 4. 6 18 ----------------------- 53 ----- . 00 4.6 17----------------------- 52----- .11 4. 6 17 ----------------------- 51 ----- . 02 4. 6 17 -------- -· ------------- 5~ ----- . 18 

4.4 14 5.3 9.5 3.4 7. 5 4.3 5.0 3. 7 12 3.9 13 3. 9 12 3. 6 12 

(micromhos) 

149 104 146 100 128 

166 

129 91 149 103 102 

157 107 156 106 156 114 154 104 

Width Mean Mean Area (ft) depth velocity (sq ft) 

(ft) (fps) 

40 1.28 0.29 51.2 41 1.43 .39 58.5 42 1.15 . 73 48.1 

49 1. 86 1.48 91.1 36 .85 .97 30.6 49 3.61 2.33 177 49 4.23 3.01 207 46 1.11 .71 51.2 46 1.16 .68 53.4 36 1. 03 .85 37.0 48 1.17 .92 56.0 

Sediment Sediment Discharge concen- discharge 

(cis) tration (tons )er day 

325 258 291 90 31 9. 6 165 87 49.7 145 111 55.7 122 122 51.6 19. 1 5 .33 

131 57 25.8 460 339 540 690 892 2,130 

1,160 448 1,800 

Caand 

Mg 

hardness 

Noncarbon- ate 

hardness 

pH Color 

Temperature 

(OC) 

55 

57 

45 

24 7. 5 21 7.3 27 6.8 

2 -------- 2 17 30 7 

61 33 7.1 3 --------

38 -------------------------------- 62 -------------------------------- 35 ---------------- 35 -------- 57 13 7. 3 - --- --- - 25 57 14 7.4 -------- 24 57 15 7.4 -------- 21 57 14 7.4 -------- 22 

TABLE 10.-Chemistry data, 1967, upper Brandywine Creek and Pickering Creek basins 

[Total hardness as CaCOa, in milligrams per liter. Stations do not correspond to those in tables 1-8] 

May 23-24 June 15-16 July 5-6 Sept. 16-17 Nov. 14-15 Station ----- ---- ----- Station 

CaCOa pH CaCOa CaCOa pH CaCOa pH CaCOa pH 

B-L ____________ 57.6 8.4 40.0 54.0 7. 2 54.0 7.8 !_ ________________ 36.0 7. 2 B-2 _______________________ 8. 4 40.0 46.0 7.0 52.0 7.6 2 _________________ 49.0 7. 2 B-3 _____________ 42.4 8.4 42.2 43.0 7. 2 47.0 7.6 3----------------- 65.0 7. 2 B-4 _____________ 44.4 8. 4 45.2 46.8 6.8 7.6 4 _________________ 46.0 7. 4 B-7 _____________ 35.6 7.6 45.2 40.0 7. 0 42.0 7.6 5 _________________ 52.0 7.6 B-9 _____________ 55.6 7. 4 59.2 52.4 6. 9 55.0 7.4 6 _________________ 54.0 7. 2 P-2 _____________ 52.4 7.8 53.2 109.2 7.0 58.0 7.6 7 _________________ 56.0 7. 4 P-3 _____________ 56.0 8. 2 53.6 56.8 6. 9 56.0 7. 4 g _________________ 52.0 7. 5 P-4 _____________ 54.0 8. 2 56.0 54.4 6. 8 60.0 7. 7 g __ --------------- 64.0 7. 2 P-5 _____________ 56.4 8. 2 59.8 52.4 6. 8 8.1 P-6 _____________________________ 65.8 39.0 6. 9 68.0 7.3 P-7 _____________ 55.8 7. 7 58.0 49.0 7. 0 56.0 7. 5 
HYDROLOGY OF TWO SMALL RIVER BASINS IN PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE URBANIZATION A57 

TABLE 11.-Frequency of faunal forms at sampling points 

[V, very abundant. C, common; occurs on about one rock out of three, usually in colonies. L, less common; found occasionally. R, rare; found only once or twice in the 

sampled zone. Stations do not correspond to those in tables 1-8) 

Algae Insects InvPrtebratPs Fishes 

Station Date 

------------·------------------------------------1----·--------------·--------------------

Pickering Creek: 

9.--------------------------------------------------------------------

13.-------------------------------------------------------------------

11.-------------------------------------------------------------------

P-2-------------------------------------------------------------------

P-3-------------------------------------------------------------------

P-4------------------------------------------------------------------· 

P-5 (USGS sta. 31)---------------------------------------------------

Tributary to Pickering Creek: 

10.---------------------------·---------------------------------------

P-6 (USGS sta. 24) __ -- --------------- _ ----. _ -------------------------

Pigeon Run: P-7 (USGS sta. 23)_. ----- ___ -- _- --- _ ----- _______ ---------------------

14- --------------------------------------------------------.---------- East Branch Brandywine Creek: 

5 ____ ------------------------------------------------------------------

4.---------------------------------------------------------------------

2 ___ -------------------------------------------------------------------

B-L------------------------------------------------------------------

7----------------------------------------------------------------------

B-2 (USGS sta. 7)----------------------------------------------------

B-3-------------------------------------------------------------------

B-4 (USGS sta. 9).---------------------------------------------------

Tributary to East Branch Brandywine Creek: 

3 .. --------------------------------------------------------------------

Perkins Run: 

Oct. 

Nov. 

Nov. 

Nov. 

Oct. 

Nov. 

May 

June 

July 

Sept. 

May 

June 

July 

Sept. 

May 

June 

July 

Sept. 

Nov. 

May 

June 

July 

Sept. 

Oct. 

Nov. 

Nov. 

May 

June 

July 

Sept. 

May 

June 

July 

Sept. 

Nov. 

Oct. 

Nov. 

Oct. 

Nov. 

Nov. 

Oct. 

Nov. 

May 

June 

July 

Sept. 

Oct. 

Nov. 

May 

June 

July 

Sept. 

Nov. 

May 

June 

July 

Sept. 

Nov. 

May 

June 

July 

Sept. 

Oct. 

Nov. 

1967 

1967 

1966 

1966 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1966 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1966 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1966 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1966 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1966 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1966 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

1967 

C R L -- ______ V ____ L ____ R ______ L __ R __ C __ R _____________ L 

C R L -- ______ V -· __ R ____ R _" ____ R ______ L __ L _____________ R 

C -- __ -- ____ C -- -- R,L L __ -- -- -- -- -- -- __ -- ____ RR __ R L __ --- R C R __ -- ______ R __ C C L __ R R R __ R __ R -- -· __ RR ________ --- R 0 L L -- R __ L ____ L L L __ R __ L __ R ____ -- ____ RL __ R ____ --- L L L L -- R __ L ____ L L R ____ -- L ______________ R L ___________ L V R R -- __________ 0 L R ______ R __ -- __ R __________________ --- R 0 R __ -- R __ R ____ 0 0 R __ -- -- ____ R __ R ______ R __________ --- R 

v RIR RR R R -- -- 0 L R -- -- -- R -- R -- R -- -- -- R -- -- -- -- -- --- R C R __ -- Rl __ R __ -· C,C R __ -- -- -- __ R -- R -- ____ R __ R R ____ --- R V R __ -- __ R ______ 0 0 0 __ -- __ R ____ R __ R __ R ________ R __ R R 

~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~ 8:£ £ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ Ji ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ 0 R R R ______ R -- 0 0 L __ -- __ R -- -- R RR ____ Rt-- __ R R __ R R V 0 __ L __________ C C 0 __________ 'R R R i R __ R R r R __ _ _ __ _ _ R R V 0 __ L ______ R __ 0 C 0 ______ R __ R R R'R __ R RR ________ R R 0 L __ L ______ R __ 0 L L __ -- ______ R R __ R __ R RR ________ R R C L __ 0 ______ R __ C 0 L __ -- __ R __ R R R R ____ R 1

1

R __ R ____ R R 

C R __ 0 R ____ R -- CiC 0 __ R -- -- -- R R __ -- ____ 0 R ______ R R R 

0 ~ L R g ~~ 0 £ R i ~~ ____ ~~ L g --

~~ gl£ 010 £ L R ~= --== == 

__ == R __ 

~=! L R == ~ ________ == =~ == R'R i:~ == 

__ == R R == :: __ i R R i 

C ____ -- R __ L R __ L L L __ R L L __ L ______ R ____ L __ R ____ --- L 0 ____ -- R __ L R __ L 0 R __ R L L __ -- ______ R ____ L __ R ____ --- L ______ -- ________ -- RR R __ -- __ R __ -- ____ V R __ R __________ --- R C R __ -- R ______ -- 0 F ____ -- ____________ L ____ L __________ --- R 

0 R __ -- R ______ -- 0 0 ________ R ________ L ____ L _____________ R 

8 ~ Ji Ji ~~~ Ji Ji ~~ t ~ ~ =~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ =~ =~ t =~ ~~ t ~~ ~~ ~~ =~ ~~ ~~= ~ 

6 ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ Ji ~~ 818 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~= ~ V R R -- R __ R Ri __ LIC ____ -- ____ R R R ______ R R R __ R ____ --- R 

c R R -- R -- R R -- L c -- -- -- -- -- R __ IR -- -- -- -- R R -- R -- -- --- R 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- ----RIC R -- -- -- L -- v R -- -- -- -- L R -- R -- -- --- R 

V R __ -- ______ V __ R ______ L ______ 0 R __ R V ______________ --- --- V L __ -- ______ V __ R.-- ____ L __ R __ --,R __ R 0 ______________ ------

t ~ ~= =~ Ji ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ :: :: ~ k ~~~ ~~~~ == =~ ~= :: ~ :: :: ~ ~ :: ==~ =~~ ______ R ______ 01-- C c. 0 __ RjR1 

0 __ L ________ L C R __ C ____ R --- 0 L R -- ______ R 1 

.. 0 0 L __ L LC L L ____ L. L __ R L __ L _______ L 

c

1 

L R -- -- -- -- L~-- L L L __ R L L R R~-- __ L R __ R L __ R _______ L V R R -- R ________ 0 0

1

0 __________ R

1 

__ R __________________ R R 

C VIRIR R -R- .R -- -- -- -- 0 RiR R -- -- -- -- R -- R -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- RR RR __ R ____ R __ 0 RR __________ R __ R ______ R _________ _ 

c R,R -- c ____ RIR c lc'lc R ____ R R ____ R ______ R R ________ R R F R __ R R __ L R __ L 0 L __ R L L ______________ R L ________ L L 

0 L __ L ____ R!R -- 0 Ci L __ R R R ____ -- __ R ____ R L ________ L L 

~ c R i == __ i R R i == --~R ~121== c1-- g c ~:~ c;R == ______ == == == R == __ == R == __________ ~ == == == ~ R == ____ == == R R R R R ==!! i______ 0 __ C --~0

1 .. --!R!R __ R __ R ______ R ____ R L L ________ R R V R:C -- __ R __ C --0 jCIC ______________________ R 0 __ R ____ R 

~ ~·~ ~= ~~ Ji!ii,8 ~= r~~~~ ~= =~ ~~ ~~ =~ ~ ~ ~~ ~= ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ v RIR -- -- -- -- 0 -- 0, 0 R -- -- -- -- -- L R -- -- -- -- R R -- R R -- R R ______ -- __ R -· 0 -- L VIV __ R R R R Rj __ R ____ R C L ____ C __ R R V R 1

R RR 1R ____ 0 --CO 0 R ________ R:R ________ R __________ R RR 0 RR 0 ____ C __ V L R __________ R R R ______ R R ____ R __ R V RIR __ R ____ V __ 0 C,R ______ R __ C'R R ______ R R ________ R R 

C R R 0 0 ____ C __ CIC/R R ____ R __ R R R ______ R ____ R R __ R R 

0 R R __ L ________ 0 0 L ____ L L __ R __ R ____________ L ____ --- 0 

0 R __ -- L ______ -- C 0 L __ R R L __ R R ______ R ____ R ____ --- 0 

6 (USGS sta. 3) _ ----------------------------------------------------- Oct. 1967 R R __ R ________ -- R R L __ R L R -- -- R -- R -- -- -- -- -- R -- -- --- L Nov. 1967 L R __ L ________ -- L R L __ R L R __ R R ______ -- ______ -- __ --- L 

Indian Run: 

12_ ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1_ --------------------------------------------------------------------

Nov. 1966 ______ -- ________ -- R 0 R ____ R R __ ~~ -- -- ______ R __ R __ -- -- --- R Oct. 1967 L ____ L ________ -- 0 0 L __ R 0 0 R __ -- L -- ____ R ____ R __ -- --- 0 Nov. 1967 0 ____ L -- __ R __ -- 0 0 L __ R 0 L ____ -- L ______ R ____ R -- -- --- L 

B-7 (USGS sta. 6)---------------------------------------------------- Nov. 19661 __ R __ -- __ 0 ____ -- 0 C L ____ L 0 __ -- R -- -- -- -- R R -- -- -- -- --- R 

~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ g t ~~ Ji ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ Ji ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ July 1967 V R R -- R ______ -- 0 L __ R ________ R __________ R R ____ -- -- R R 

Culbertson Run: Sept. 1967 L R -- R R ______ -- C L __ R ______ R L __ R ______ R R R ______ R R 

8_ -------------------------------------------------------------------- Oct. 1967 L R R -- L ____ L C L L ____ R ______ R R ________________ -- -- --- L Nov. 1967 L R __ -- L ____ L 0 L L ____ R ______ 0 ________ -- R _- -- -- -- -- --- L 

B-9------------------------------------------------------------------- Nov. 1966 __ C __ -- __ 0 ______ R 0 0 ____ R 0 __ 0 ______ -- -- -- -- -- C -- ----- R 

~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 8 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ t t ~~ ~~ ~~ ii ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 8 8 ~~~. ~~~~ ~ t 0 ~ 8 ~~ == =~ == 8 ~ t == =~ =~ ~ ~- 0 -- ~ =: =~ ~= ~ ~ ~ == ~ ~~ g g 1 The bacteria Sphaerotilus was rare (R) at this station. 

U. S, GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1971 0- 427-475