Scur and Fill

In a Stream Channel.

East Fork River,

Western Wyoming
Scour and Fill 

In a Stream Channel, 

East Fork River, 

Western Wyoming

By EDMUND D. ANDREWS

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1117

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1979
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

CECIL D. ANDRUS, Secretary

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

H. William Menard, Director

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Andrews, Edmund D.

Scour and fill in a stream channel, East Fork River, Western Wyoming.

(U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1117)

Bibliography: 22 p.

1. Scour and fill (Geomorphology) Wyoming East Fork River.

I. Title. II. Series: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 1117.

GB565.W8A52 551.4'4 78-31671

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

Washington, D.C. 20402 

Stock Number 024-001-03203-1
CONTENTS

Page

Metric conversions ................................................................... IV

Abstract ............................................................................ 1

Introduction ........................................................................ 1

Previous observations of scour and fill ................................................ 2

Study approach .................................................................. 2

Observations of scour and fill ........................................................... 4

Scouring cross sections ............................................................ 4

Filling cross sections .............................................................. 6

Hydraulic geometry of scouring and filling cross sections .................................... 11

Riffles and pools ..................................................................... 15

Bedload-transport rate versus discharge relations of scouring and filling cross sections ............ 18

Cross sections in an altered reach of channel .............................................. 19

Summary and conclusions ............................................................. 22

References .......................................................................... 22

ILLUSTRATIONS

Page

FIGURE 1. Map showing location of study area .............................................................................. 3

2. Snowmelt hydrograph at the bedload trap gage, May-June 1974 ...................................................... 4

3. Sketch map showing location of cross sections in the study reach ....................................................... 5

4. Diagram of scouring cross section 9S ............................................................................. 6

5-7. Graphs showing variation in mean bed elevation of the scouring cross sections during the 1974 spring flood:

5. Cross sections 8Sand9S ................................................................................. 7

6. Cross sections lOSandllS ............................................................................... 8

7. Cross sections 2S and3S ............................................................. ... 9

8. Diagram offilling cross section 6F ................................................................................ 10

9-11. Graphs showing variation in mean bed elevation of the filling cross sections during the 1974 spring flood:

9. Cross sections IF and4F ................................................................................ 11

10. Cross sections 5F and6F ................................................................................ 12

11. Cross section 7F ....................................................................................... 13

12-15 Graphs showing;

12. Comparison of the hydraulic geometries of cross sections 6F and 10S ............................................ 14

13. Water surface and bed profiles of the study reach ............................................................ 17

14. Unit bedload-transport rate versus mean velocity relation for the bedload trap .................................... 18

15. Whole channel bedload-transport rate versus discharge relations for self-formed cross sections ....................... 20

TABLES

[Tables 4-6 follow "References"]

Page

TABLE 1. Hydraulic exponents of selected East Fork River cross sections ........................................................ 16

2. Bankfull hydraulic characteristics of selected East Fork River cross sections .............................................. 16

3. Estimated bedload-sediment budget between cross sections IF and 4F, May 26-29, 1974 .................................. 21

4. Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974 ....................................... 24

5. Summary data of total energy slopes, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974 ............................... 44

6. Summary data of hydraulic characteristics of cross sections in the Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974 ........ 47

III
IV CONTENTS

METRIC CONVERSIONS

U.S. customary units used in this report may be expressed as metric units by use of the following conversion factors:

To convert U.S. customary units Multiply by

inch (in.) 25.40

foot (ft) 0.3048

mile (mi) 1.609

square mile (mi2 ) 2.590

cubic foot per second (ftVs) 0.02832

pound per second (Ib/s) 0.45 

pound per foot per second ((lb/ft)/s) 1.49

Top obtain metric units

millimeter (mm)

meter

kilometer

square kilometer

cubic meter per second

kilogram per second

kilogram per meter per second
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, 

EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

By EDMUND D. ANDREWS

ABSTRACT

Frequent soundings of 11 cross sections located on the East Fork River, 

western Wyoming, during a spring flood revealed two sequences of channel 

scour and fill. All sections either scoured or filled at the flood crests relative 

to their low flow condition. The sections which scoured at high flow (called 

scouring sections) generally tended to fill at low flow. Conversely, the sections which filled at high flow (called filling sections) generally tended to 

scour at low flow. The critical discharge at which the character of a section 

changed from scouring to filling or vice-versa was approximately the 

bankfull discharge. Therefore, at any discharge except bankfull, some sections were accumulating bed material (fill), while others were being 

depleted of bed material (scour).

The mean at-a-station hydraulic geometry of the East Fork River agrees 

with the theoretical minimum-variance hydraulic geometry. Thus, on the 

average, the East Fork River accommodates a change in discharge by 

mutually minimizing the adjustment of velocity, width, and depth. The 

hydraulic geometry of every cross section, however, deviated from the 

mean of the reach, and the associated sequence of scour and fill was a consequence of the deviation. The scouring sections had larger velocity and 

smaller width and roughness hydraulic exponents than the mean of the 

reach. Consequently, the sediment-transport rate varied more rapidly with 

discharge in the scouring sections than the mean of the reach. Hence, these 

sections had relatively large sediment-transport rates and scoured when 

discharge exceeded bankfull, and relatively small sediment-transport rates 

and filled when discharge was less than bankfull. Conversely, the filling sections had smaller velocity and larger width and roughness hydraulic exponents than the mean of the reach. Consequently, the sediment-transport 

rate varied with discharge in the filling sections less rapidly than the mean 

of the reach. These sections had relatively small sediment-transport rates 

and filled when discharge exceeded bankfull, and relatively large sedimenttransport rates and scoured when discharge was less than bankfull.

INTRODUCTION

The hydraulic characteristics of a self-formed alluvial 

channel are not uniquely determined by its water and sediment discharge. That is, there are more dependent 

variables velocity, width, depth, roughness, and 

slope than there are independent variables and relations 

linking them. Langbein (1964) contended, however, that an 

alluvial channel tends toward a hydraulic condition in which 

a change in the independent variables is distributed among 

the dependent variables in such a way as to minimize the 

change required by any one variable. This hydraulic condition was shown to be the most probable and agrees well with 

the empirical mean hydraulic condition.

An alluvial stream is constantly remaking its channel as it 

meanders across its flood plain. Periodic channel features, 

such as bends, straight reaches, riffles, and pools, as well as 

chance encounters with random features, such as differences 

in bank material, vegetation, or an outcrop of resistant 

bedrock, may constrain the free adjustment of one or more 

hydraulic variables and thus prevent the hydraulic 

characteristics of a particular reach from adjusting to the 

most probable condition. Consequently, through any appreciable length of channel, significant variation in channel 

width, depth, roughness, slope, and velocity is found. Each 

section of channel, however, appears to be in quasiequilibrium with the imposed water and sediment discharge.

As a result of the variation in hydraulic characteristics, the 

transport rate of bedload sediment may not be the same for 

all cross sections at a given discharge. When there is a difference between the inflow and outflow of the bed material in 

a reach, bed material either will be stored or will be depleted, 

and the mean bed elevation will change accordingly. Such 

changes in bed elevation during the passage of a flood are 

commonly termed scour and fill. Scour and fill are not solely 

a redistribution of bed material along the channel affected by 

longitudinal differences in the bedload-transport rate. They 

are also important short-term hydraulic adjustments that 

tend to smooth out irregularities and thereby maintain the 

channel in quasi-equilibrium.

Scour and fill are frequently observed at streamflow gaging stations and bridge crossings; however, little is known 

about the process or the hydraulics controlling it. Because 

the measurement of channel hydraulic characteristics is normally limited to a cross section rather than an extensive 

length of channel, it is not known whether scour and fill are 

localized phenomena or are more or less continuous along 

the stream. Similarly, the hydraulic characteristics 

associated with scour and fill are poorly understood. This 

paper reports on an investigation of scour and fill as a 

hydraulic adjustment to the variation in discharge and sediment load.

Appreciation is expressed to Luna B. Leopold for many 

thoughtful discussions and for providing the unique 

measurements of bedload transport which made this investigation possible. I wish to thank W. W. Emmett and C.
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

F. Nordin of the U.S. Geological Survey, who provided 

most of the field equipment, as well as some data, and 

Thomas Lisle who assisted with most of the fieldwork, and 

offered many helpful suggestions.

PREVIOUS OBSERVATIONS OF 

SCOUR AND FILL

Substantial channel scour is observed at some streamflow 

gaging stations as flood discharge increases. In a few instances, 60 percent or more of the increase in depth is due to 

scouring of the river bed. Perhaps the best known examples 

of channel scour are those documented for the gaging stations on the Colorado River near Grand Canyon, Ariz., and 

on the Rio Grande at Bernalillo, N. Mex. Leopold and 

Maddock (1953a) discussed in considerable detail the at-astation hydraulic geometries and the associated patterns of 

channel scour and fill at these gaging stations. An important 

feature of the phenomena at the Grand Canyon gaging station is that the cross section filled as the discharge increased 

from low flow, to approximately 12,000 ftVs, and then 

scoured continuously as the discharge increased to the flood 

crest of approximately 120,000 ftVs. After the flood crest, the 

section continued to scour slowly, so that the mean bed 

elevation at a given discharge after the flood crest was 

significantly below the mean bed elevation at the same 

discharge before the flood crest. When the flood had subsided, the cross section began to fill, and by the following 

spring, the bed elevation had returned to the preflood level.

A slightly different sequence of scour and fill was observed 

at the Bernalillo gaging station. No fill was observed prior to 

the flood crest. Instead, the section scoured progressively as 

discharge increased and the maximum depth of scour occurred at the flood crest. As discharge decreased, the section filled, so that by the time the flood had subsided, the mean bed 

elevation had returned to nearly the preflood level.

In considering river-bed scour in a reach of the middle Rio 

Grande, including the Bernalillo gaging station, Lane and 

Borland (1954) contended that the depth of scour typically 

observed at gaging-station cross sections could not be 

representative of any significant length of channel. They 

noted that the average annual volume of material entering 

the Elephant Butte Reservoir downstream from the gaging 

stations corresponded to less than 0.1 foot of material removed from the channel upstream, whereas the average depth of 

scour at the gaging stations was nearly 5 feet. Therefore, the 

material scoured from one cross section must be deposited as 

fill in a cross section some short distance downstream. In 

particular, they believed that channel scour was limited to 

contracted reaches, and inferred that the scoured material 

would be deposited where the channel widened. Channel 

scour appears to more common than it really is, they 

asserted, because gaging stations are usually located in contracted reaches.

Previously, Leopold and Maddock (19536) had shown that 

the suspended-sediment load of the middle Rio Grande increased downstream between tributaries. Furthermore, they 

showed that the river bed was generally at a lower elevation 

after the spring flood. Therefore, they concluded that some 

scour, though not necessarily as much as observed at the 

gaging stations, occurred throughout long reaches of the 

channel.

Uncertainty over channel behavior arises because most of 

our information regarding rivers is collected at isolated cross 

sections. Only limited data are normally collected about the 

hydraulic geometry of the immediate reach near a gaging 

station. Even fewer data are collected concerning the channel 

more than a few channel widths upstream or downstream 

from the gaging station. Emmett and Leopold (1965) 

discussed three streams one ephemeral and two perennial for which channel scour and fill had been studied at 

several cross sections. All three studies indicate that scour 

was more or less continuous through the study reaches at 

floodflows and therefore was independent of channel configuration, riffles and pools, straight reaches, and bends.

The Arroyo de los Frijoles is an ephemeral sand-bedded 

channel near Santa Fe, N. Mex. (Leopold and others, 1966). 

Scour chains installed at 51 cross sections showed that scour 

occurred throughout a reach of 6 miles during a flood. Scour 

chains are a simple and efficient method to record the maximum depth of scour through a reach of channel; however, 

they have a particular drawback. As the authors noted, 

"The observations are deficient in not showing what was 

happening in the reach at any one instance of time. 

Therefore, one cannot be sure that scour at some cross sections was not accompanied by fill at others and then the process reversed at a different discharge." Some investigators, 

notably Colby (19646), believed that the maximum depth of 

scour recorded by scour chains is not always indicative of a 

change in the mean bed elevation of the cross section. 

Lateral migration of sand bars and antidunes (Foley, 1975) 

have been suggested as possible explanations for the observed depth and longitudinal continuity of the channel scour.

Emmett and Leopold (1965) also discussed data from two 

perennial streams, the Popo Agie River near Hudson, 

Wyo., and the Rio Grande del Ranches near Talpa, N. 

Mex. Their data were obtained at cross sections surveyed 

once at Jiigh flow in the spring, and again during low flow 

later in the summer. A comparison of the two surveys showed that the mean bed elevation through the reach was 

generally lower at high flow than at low flow. As they had 

observed previously on the Arroyo de los Frijoles, the depth 

and continuity of scour did not appear to be associated with 

channel configuration or with width of the cross sections.

STUDY APPROACH

The purpose of this study was to describe the sequence of 

scour and fill during a flood at several cross sections, located 

every few channel widths along a reach of stream. Data also 

were collected on the hydraulic characteristics of each section
INTRODUCTION

in an attempt to relate scour and fill to specific flow conditions.

A bedload trap was constructed on the East Fork River 

near Boulder, Wyo., in the spring of 1973. A description of 

its main features and 4 years of data have been published by 

Leopold and Emmett (1976, 1977). In order to utilize these 

unique measurements, a study reach was selected for this investigation in the vicinity of the bedload trap. Because scour 

and fill are a local depletion and accumulation of bed 

material, knowledge of the bedload-sediment discharge and 

its variation along the channel is essential to an understanding of the process.

The East Fork River is a major tributary of the Green 

River, and drains approximately 194 square miles along the 

southwest flank of the Wind River Mountains. The study 

area lies close to the mountain front within a belt of 

Pleistocene outwash terraces (fig. 1). The East Fork River 

has a typical snowmelt runoff, with strong diurnal fluctuations and multiple seasonal peaks (fig. 2). The 1974 peak 

discharge of nearly 1,600 ftVs has a recurrence interval of 

approximately 5 years.

The East Fork River has a sinuous channel with prominent sandy point bars. Medium to coarse sand is the 

predominant bed material, although gravel bars are important channel features. The streambanks are typically 

stratified with a basal member of gravel (median 

diameter=21-45 mm), overlain by sand, silt, and a thick

111-00' 

43°30' I 

110°00'

grass sod. The gravel layer is poorly consolidated and 

therefore easily eroded where streamflow impinges upon the 

bank, especially along the outside of a bend. Although gravel 

constitutes approximately 25 percent of the channel bed, as 

will be discussed in detail later, medium to coarse gravelsized material constitutes less than 8 percent of the bedload 

discharge of the East Fork River (W. W. Emmett, written 

commun., 1977).

Eleven cross sections were established in a study reach of 

approximately 1,400 feet (fig. 3). The cross sections were 

monumented and surveyed with rod and level on May 8, 

1974, before the spring flood. At floodflow, it was impossible 

to wade the stream; therefore, cableways were installed at 

each section. The sections were sounded at stations spaced 

every 2 feet across the channel by measuring the depth of 

flow with a wading rod from a light aluminum boat attached 

to the cableway. The mean bed elevation of a cross section 

on a given day was computed by subtracting the flow depth 

from the water-surface elevation at each station, summing 

across the channel bed, and dividing by the number of stations. The accumulation of bed material in a section, as 

shown by an increase in the mean bed elevation with respect 

to the initial survey on May 8, 1974, was classified as fill. 

The depletion of bed material in a section, as shown by a 

decrease in the bed elevation with respect to the initial 

survey, was classified as scour. Most sections were sounded 

daily during periods when the daily peak discharges were

109-00'

n

43°00'

42°00'

Boulder

A—-- —••' }/ f East Fork River Basin

10 20 30 KILOMETERS !

SOUTH 

DAKOTA

NEBRASKA

COLORADO

FIGURE 1. Location of study area.
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

1800

1600

1400

1200

15 20 25_________

1 I I I I I I I I | [

DAY AFTER INITIAL SURVEY 

30 _________35 ~1 IIIT~ 40

T I I I I T

45

"1 I I T

50

1000 

o

CO

D 

O

z

800

600

400

200

I I T

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

22 25 30 31 1

MAY

10 15 

JUNE

20 25 26

FIGURE 2. Snowmelt hydrograph at the bedload trap gage, May-June, 1974.

changing rapidly, and every second or third day when the 

daily peaks were about equal. The cross-section survey data 

are summarized in table 4 at the end of the report.

A cantilever-type gage plate was installed at each cross section to determine water-surface elevation. The channel area 

was determined for each survey by planimetering a plot of 

the cross section. A stage-discharge relation was determined 

for each cross section by correlating the stage at each section 

with discharge measured at the road bridge. Because the 

cross-sectional area, width, discharge, and slope were 

known, it was possible to compute the hydraulic geometry of 

each cross section.

An approximation regarding overbank flow was made so 

that the hydraulic characteristics of the sections could be 

determined for discharges exceeding the bankfull stage of 

820 ft3/s. At the flood crest, the flood plain was covered to a 

depth of a foot or more. By and large, however, this was 

standing water, with nearly the entire discharge flowing between the tops of the channel banks. Hence, the hydraulic 

geometry for each cross section has been calculated from the 

cross-sectional area and width of flowing water, using the entire discharge as measured at the road bridge where the flow 

was confined. In general, the interface between flowing and

standing water was within the projection of the banks above 

the surface of the flood plain.

The water-surface slope through the study reach was 

surveyed on 17 occasions, covering the entire range of flood 

discharges from 40 to 1,600 ftVs. Total-energy slopes between adjacent cross sections were computed for each survey 

and are summarized in table 5 at the end of the report. The 

mean energy slope (Se) through the entire study reach was 

computed for each survey by a least-squares method. 

Although the mean energy slope of the study reach varied 

from survey to survey, no systematic variation with 

discharge was apparent. The average mean energy slope 

through 1,360 feet of the study reach was 0.00084.

OBSERVATIONS OF SCOUR AND FILL 

SCOURING CROSS SECTIONS

Significant scour was measured in 6 of the 11 cross sections at the major flood crests. These will be referred to as 

scouring sections and are indicated by an "S" added to the 

section number. Two slightly .different sequences of scour 

and fill were measured in the scouring sections during the
OBSERVATIONS OF SCOUR AND FILL

Bedload trap

SAND 

GRAVEL

——7F CROSS SECTION 

F FILLING 

S SCOURING

—*- DIRECTION OF FLOW

FIGURE 3.—Location of cross sections in the study reach.

1974 flood. Sections 8S, 9S, 10S, and US responded to the 

flood discharge in a manner similar to that of the Colorado 

River near Grand Canyon. Initially, these four sections filled as the discharge increased from 200 to approximately 800 

ftVs. As soon as the discharge exceeded the bankfull stage, 

these sections proceeded to scour. Data were not collected at 

section &S during the first flood crest. However, because section 8S filled as the discharge increased to 800 ftVs, and 

subsequently scoured during the second major flood crest, it 

has been associated with sections 9S, 10S, and US. Sections 

2S and 3S responded to the flood discharge in a similar manner to that measured in the Rio Grande at Bernalillo, N. 

Mex. No fill was observed at any time in either section 2S or 

3S during the 1974 flood. Both of these sections scoured progressively as discharge increased and then filled as discharge 

decreased.

The sequence of scour and fill measured at section 9S during the initial rise in stage on May 26-29 is illustrated in 

figure 4. The initial survey was made on May 8 at a 

discharge of 200 ftVs, and the mean bed elevation on that 

day was chosen as the datum to which resurveys were compared. The discharge remained fairly constant until May 26, 

when a rapid rise in stage began (fig. 2). On May 27, the 

discharge had increased to 822 fWs, and section 9S had filled 

with sand. The increase in mean bed elevation was +0.16 

foot. By the next day, May 28, the discharge had increased 

to 1,150 ftVs, and section 9S had scoured to a gravel bed.

The mean bed elevation on May 28 was 0.41 foot, relative 

to the May 8 survey. Cross sections 10S and US responded 

to the rapidly increasing discharge between May 26-29 in 

the same way as did section 9S.

The changes in mean bed elevation at sections 8S, 9S, 10S, 

and US during the entire 1974 flood are shown in figures 5, 

6, and 7 which are based on data in table 6 at the end of the 

report. Each resurvey of a section has been numbered by the 

consecutive days since the initial survey of May 8 (day 1). 

Two major flood crests occurred on May 29 (day 22), and 

June 14 (day 38). A smaller crest passed through the study 

reach on June 3 (day 27). The section records are complicated by varying degrees of hysteresis similar to that 

observed in the Colorado River near Grand Canyon. The 

depth of scour or fill at a given discharge was frequently different during the increasing stage than it was during the 

decreasing stage. In spite of some obvious discrepancies, the 

sequence of scour and fill was generally similar in sections 

8S, 9S, 10S, and US. After a slight net fill had accumulated 

as the initial increase in stage began, sections 8S, 9S, 10S, 

and US scoured as flood crests passed through the study 

reach. With the exception of section 8S, these sections then 

filled as discharge decreased. Three distinct hysteresis loops 

(days 1-24, 24-31, and 34-46) associated with the two major 

and one minor flood crests are shown in figures 55 (sec. 9S), 

6A (sec. 10S), and 65 (sec. US). Each loop depicts scour as 

discharge increased and fill as discharge decreased.
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

96

95

94

O

K 93

oc

CD oc

z

O

92

91

90

89

MAY 28. 1974. DISCHARGE= 1150 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MAY 27, 1974. DISCHARGE = 822 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MAY 8. 1974, DISCHARGE=200 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

^SSpiS^f-^

CHANGE OF 

MEAN BED ELEVATION

Datum

——— +0.16 foot

-—-— -0.41 foot

10 20 30 40 50 60

DISTANCE FROM LEFT BENCH MARK. IN FEET

FIGURE 4. Scouring cross section 9S. Data from tables 4 and 6.

70 80 90

Section 2S was located on the downstream side of the road 

bridge, and section 3S was located 25 feet farther 

downstream in a reach of the channel modified by the construction of the bridge and by a berm along the left bank. 

These sections had a slightly different sequence of scour and 

fill than that measured in the four self-formed scouring sections. The variation in mean bed elevation during the 1974 

flood at section 2S is shown in figure 7A and at section 3S in 

figure IB. Neither section ever accumulated a net fill relative 

to the initial survey of May 8 (day 1). Both sections scoured 

progressively as discharge increased and then filled as 

discharge decreased.

FILLING CROSS SECTIONS

Significant fill was measured in 5 of the 11 sections at the 

major flood crests. These will be referred to as filling sections

and are indicated by an "F" added to the section number. 

The sequence of scour and fill in the filling sections was the 

inverse of that measured in the scouring sections. Sections 

5F, 6F, and 7F scoured slightly as the discharge increased to 

the bankfull stage and then filled as the flood crests passed 

through the study reach. Sections IF and 4F filled progressively as discharge increased from low flow to the flood 

crests. In general, the filling sections scoured as discharge 

decreased.

The sequence of scour and fill measured at section 6F during the initial rise in stage is illustrated in figure 8. The section was first surveyed on May 8 at a discharge of 200 ft3/s 

and the mean bed elevation on this day was chosen as the 

datum. On May 27, section 6Fwas sounded as the discharge 

crested at 820 ftVs. The channel bed had scoured slightly, 

and the mean bed elevation was 0.07 foot below the May 8 

survey. The predominance of gravel-size bed material in sec-
OBSERVATIONS OF SCOUR AND FILL

0.5

A.— CROSS SECTION 8S

0.5

o.o

-0.5

-1.0

I T T I I T

FILL

64

38

SCOUR

B.— CROSS SECTION 9S

I I I I

100 500 1000 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

1500 2000

FIGURE 5. Variation in mean bed elevation of scouring cross sections 8S(A) and 9S(B) during the 1974 spring flood. 

Each resurvey is identified by the number of consecutive days since the initial survey on May 8. Data from table 6.

tion 6F probably limited the depth of scour. The following 

day, May 28, section 6F was sounded again during a 

discharge of 1,140 ftVs, as shown in figure 8. This survey 

showed that an extensive fill of sand had accumulated 

against the right bank and the mean bed elevation was +0.27 

foot above that observed on May 8.

The variations of mean bed elevation measured at sections 

IF, 4F, 5F, 6F, and 7F during the entire spring flood are 

shown in figures 9, 10, and 11. The common characteristic 

of these sections was a net fill at discharges greater than 820 

ftVs. The records, however, differ in other details. Sections 

5F, 6F, and 7F scoured initially as discharge increased from
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

0.5

A.—CROSS SECTION 10S

I I

B.— CROSS SECTION 11S

100 500 1000 

DISCHARGE. IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

1500 2000

FIGURE 6. Variation in mean bed elevation of scouring cross sections 10S(A) and 11S(B) during the 1974 spring flood. 

Each resurvey is identified by the number of consecutive days since the initial survey on May 8. Data from table 6.

200 to 800 fWs, and then filled as the flood crest passed 

through the study reach. In contract, no net scour was 

observed at any discharge in either sections IF or 4F.

The tendency to scour as discharge decreased also varied 

among the filling sections. Sections 4F, 5F, and 6F scoured 

whenever the discharge decreased, with few exceptions. The

effects of the three flood peaks on days 22, 27, and 38 were 

particularly apparent at section 4F (fig. 9B). As each peak 

approached, section 4F filled; it then scoured as discharge 

decreased after the peak. Although the data are not as complete for sections 5F and 6F, the sequence of scour at flows 

less than 820 ft3 /s and of fill at flows greater than 820 ft3 /s is
OBSERVATIONS OF SCOUR AND FILL

2.0,

0.0

-2.0-

-4.0

A.—CROSS SECTION 2S

o

1.0

o.o

-1.0

-2.0

FILL

B.— CROSS SECTION 3S

100 500 1000 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

1500 2000

FIGURE 7. Variation in mean bed elevation of scouring cross sections 2S(A) and 3S(B) during the 1974 spring flood. 

Each resurvey is identified by the number of consecutive days since the initial survey on May 8. Data from table 6.

shown in figures 1(X4 and 105. In contrast, sections IF and 

7F had only a slight tendency to scour as discharge decreased.

All cross sections were surveyed for the last time on July 

10, 1974 (day 64), when the discharge was 40 fWs. Figures 

5-7 and 9-11 indicate that the mean bed elevation of every 

scouring and filling section was tending to return to its

preflood (May 8) level. Only sections 4F and 10S, however, 

had completely returned to their preflood conditions. The 

mean bed elevation of every other section, except IF, was 

scoured from 0.10 to 0.40 foot below its preflood level. 

Thus, it appears that immediately after the spring flood, the 

East Fork River study reach was generally scoured and thus 

depleted in bed material relative to its preflood condition.
10 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

97 r

96

95

94

93

< 

O

<

CC

K

CO 

CC

<

O

5 92

91

90

89

MAY 28. 1974. DISCHARGED 140 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MAY 27, 1974, DISCHARGE = 920 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

CHANGE OP MEAN BED ELEVATION 

Datum

-—— -0.07 foot

- — —— +0.27 foot

10 20 30 40 50 60

DISTANCE FROM LEFT BENCH MARK. IN FEET

FIGURE 8. Filling cross section 6F. Data from tables 4 and 6.

70 80 90

The supply of sand to the East Fork River was discussed 

by Andrews (1977). It was shown that the East Fork River 

channel is relatively depleted in sediment at the end of the 

snowmelt flood. During the summer months, Muddy Creek, 

a small tributary upstream of the bedload trap, supplies a 

quantity of sediment to the East Fork River channel equal to 

approximately one-half of its annual sediment load. The addition of this material is probably responsible for the 

replenishment of sand-sized bed material within the study 

reach. When several of the sections were resurveyed during 

May 1975, the mean bed elevation of every section had 

returned to within a few hundredths of a foot of its preflood 

elevation of the preceding year.

The measurements of scour and fill made by several 

previous investigators have already been summarized. Data 

from the East Fork River are in good agreement with most of 

their measurements. Although some of the previous data appear to be contradictory, this is due largely to differences in 

the type, frequency, and areal extent of the measurements. 

For example, scour-chain data commonly have shown that 

most cross sections scour below their preflood level at some 

time or another during a flood regardless of channel configuration. Had scour chains been installed at the cross sections along the East Fork River, similar results would have 

been recorded. Net scour, in fact, was observed in all except 

two of the sections along the East Fork River. However, the
HYDRAULIC GEOMETRY OF SCOURING AND FILLING CROSS SECTIONS 11

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.5

FILL

38

SCOUR

A.— CROSS SECTION 1F

I___ I till

z

UJ

z

X

o

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.5

1 I I T

FILL

O22

SCOUR

B— CROSS SECTION 4F

100 500 1000 

DISCHARGE. IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

1500 2000

FIGURE 9. Variation in mean bed elevation of filling cross sections 1F(A) and 4F(B) during the 1974 spring flood. 

Each resurvey is identified by the number of consecutive days since the initial survey on May 8, Data from table 6.

sections did not scour at the same discharge. Sections 5F, 6F, 

and 7F initially scoured below their preflood level and then 

accumulated a net fill when the discharge exceeded 820 ft3/s. 

Conversely, sections 8S, 9S, 10S, and 11S initially filled and 

then scoured below their preflood level when the discharge 

exceeded 820 ft3 /s. Thus, whereas most of the sections along 

the East Fork River scoured below their preflood bed elevation, scour did not occur simulataneously in all sections.

HYDRAULIC GEOMETRY OF

SCOURING AND FILLING

CROSS SECTIONS

Two general sequences of scour and fill have been described. It has been shown that at any discharge during the flood, 

some sections were filling while others were scouring. Then 

later, at a larger or smaller discharge, Tthe sections which had
12 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

1.0

A.—CROSS SECTION 5F

LLJ 

O

O 0.5

0.0

-0.5

B— CROSS SECTION 6F

____________I_______I I I I I I

100 500 1000 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

FILL

SCOUR

1500 2000

FIGURE 10. Variation in mean bed elevation of filling cross sections 5F(A) and 6F(B) during the 1974 spring flood. 

Each resurvey is identified by the number of consecutive days since the initial survey on May 8. Data from table 6.

filled, scoured; and the sections which had scoured, filled. It 

is logical, therefore, to examine the relation between the sequence of scour and fill at a section and the local hydraulic 

characteristics of the channel. This may be done using 

hydraulic geometry.

Leopold and Maddock (1953a) found that the variation of 

the hydraulic factors, mean velocity (17), width (w), mean

depth (d), and friction factor (ff) with increasing discharge at 

a section could be described broadly by a set of simple power 

equations: _

and

d =#,

ff -«£•
HYDRAULIC GEOMETRY OF SCOURING AND FILLING CROSS SECTIONS 13

These relations are called the "hydraulic geometry" of the 

cross section. The hydraulic exponents, m, b, f, and y, 

describe the rate of change of the hydraulic variables, H, w, (I, 

andjf, in order to accommodate changes of water discharge,

a

The hydraulic geometries of sections 6F and 1 OS are compared in figure 12. Several important differences between 

the hydraulic characteristics of the two sections are shown. 

First, the width of the filling section increased more rapidly 

with discharge (£=0.21) than the scouring section (£=0.06). 

Hydraulic roughness expressed by the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor decreased rapidly with increasing discharge in the 

scouring section (>>= 0.62). In contrast, roughness decreased only slightly with increasing discharge in the filling section (^= 0.05). Mean depth varied with discharge at approximately the same rate in both sections 6F(/=0.51) and 

10S (/=0.42). Probably the most striking difference between 

the hydraulic characteristics of sections 6F and 1 OS is shown 

by the mean velocity versus discharge relations. Sections 6F 

and 10S had the same mean velocity at a discharge of approximately 500 ftVs. Mean velocity increased slowly with 

discharge in filling section 6F(m=0.2B), relative to scouring 

section 10S (m=0.52). Thus, at discharges less than approximately 500 ftVs, section 6Fhad a greater mean velocity than 

did section 10S. At discharges greater than approximately 

500 ftVs, the relation was reversed, and the mean velocity 

through section 10S exceeded that of section 6F. This

discharge-related reversal of mean velocity is significant 

because empirically, velocity is the single hydraulic variable 

most closely related to the sediment-transport rate.

The hydraulic exponents of velocity, depth, width, and 

friction factor for the 11 cross sections are listed in table 1. 

The mean hydraulic exponents for the entire study reach are 

also shown. The distinctions drawn between the hydraulic 

exponents of sections 6Fand 1 OS are true for all scouring and 

filling sections. The velocity exponent (m) of every filling section was less than the mean value for the study reach, 

whereas the velocity exponent of every scouring section was 

greater than the mean value of the study reach. Likewise, 

every filling section had a width exponent (b) greater than 

the reach mean with one exception, section IF and the 

scouring sections had width exponents less than the mean of 

the study reach, with the exception of sections 2S and 3S. 

The filling sections had friction factor exponents larger than 

the mean; whereas scouring sections had friction factor exponents smaller than the mean. The depth exponent (/) 

varied from section to section, but, as noted previously, did 

not appear to be significantly different in scouring as compared to filling sections.

In summary, 

mfilling mmean ^ ^scouring

'filling ~/mean ~Jscouring >

^filling ^''mean ^ ^scouring .

1.0

0.5

Z

<

0.0

X

o

-0.5

FILL

SCOUR

CROSS SECTION 7F

______L I I l I

100 500 1000 

DISCHARGE. IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

1500 2000

FIGURE 11. Variation in mean bed elevation of filling cross section 7F during the 1974 spring flood. Each resurvey is 

identified by the number of consecutive days since the initial survey on May 8. Data from table 6.
14 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

100 I I

50

•

I

H

o

30

0.5

O

0.05

0.02

I I I I T T

20 50 100 500 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

1000 2000

FIGURE 12. (above and facing page). Comparison of the hydraulic geometries of cross sections 6Fand 10S. Data from

table 6.

and

-^filling "O'mean -^scouringThus, the filling and scouring sections had distinctly different hydraulic geometries.

The discussion thus far has focused on the hydraulic 

geometries of the cross sections, because the purpose was to 

relate changes in the hydraulic factors with discharge to 

changes in bed elevation with discharge. It is also worthwhile 

to compare the relative values of width, depth, velocity, and 

friction factor in scouring and filling sections. Section 10S 

was deeper and narrower than section 6F during the entire

range of flood discharge (fig. 12). Section 10S was relatively 

rough during small flows but became significantly smoother 

as discharge increased; whereas section 6F was relatively 

smooth at all discharges. There was a reversal in the relative 

magnitudes of mean velocity through the two sections as 

discharge increased. Mean velocity increased with discharge 

in both sections, but at significantly different rates. Hence, 

during smaller discharges, section 6F had a greater mean 

velocity than did section 10S. At larger discharges, however, 

section 1 OS had a greater mean velocity than did section 6F.

The hydraulic characteristics of the 11 cross sections at a
RIFFLES AND POOLS 15

0.5

I I I I II

I I

I I I I I I I 1 I I II

m=0.28

10S ,s

= 0.52

0.6 I I I I

20 50 100 500

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

1000 2000

discharge of 820 ftVs the mean bankfull discharge of the 

study reach are compared in table 2. The scouring sections 

were narrower and deeper than the mean condition of the 

reach, with the exception of section 351. Conversely, the filling sections were wider and shallower than the mean condition of the reach. Broadly, this distinction between scouring 

and filling sections was true for the range of flood discharges. 

Mean velocity at bankfull discharge varies from section to 

section, although there is no apparent difference in the 

bankfull mean velocity between scouring and filling sections. 

Owing to the difference in velocity exponents as previously

discussed, the filling sections had a greater mean velocity at 

smaller discharges, and scouring sections had a greater mean 

velocity at larger discharges.

RIFFLES AND POOLS

Previous investigators have reported significantly different 

hydraulic geometries for adjacent riffles and pools. Keller 

(1971) measured the variation in velocity 0.05 foot above the 

bed of a riffle and a pool over a range of discharges. At the 

smallest discharge, the bottom velocity of the riffle was much
16 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

TABLE 1. Hydraulic exponents of selected East Fork River cross sections

Crosssection 

number

IF

2S

3S

4F

5F

6F

?F

8S

9S

I OS

US

Mean exponents

Mean exponents of 

streams in midwestern United States 3

Minimum variance 

exponents'*

Hydraulic exponents 1

m

0.30

.45

.44

.24

.33

.28

.32

.40

.48

.52

.43

0.38

0.34

0.35

/

0.60

.35

.41

.61

.45

.51

.45

.57

.48

.42

.49

0.48

0.40

0.42

b

0.10

.20

.15

.16

.23

.21

.23

.08

.04

.06

.08

0.14

0.26

0.25

y 2

0.00

-.55

-.47

.13

-.21

-.05

-.19

-.23

-.48

-.62

-.37

-0.28

-0.24

-0.28

^« <F, a« (?, a *(f, ff-&.

2 Computed by assuming a constant energy slope. 

3 Leopold and Maddock (1953). 

"Langbein (1964, p. 308).

TABLE 2. Bankfull hydraulic characteristics of selected East Fork River cross sections1

Cross-Section

number

e\ a

7 c

C E>

a a

Mean values....

Velocity 

(ft/s)

3.15

3.93

3.65

3.95

3.85

3.71

Depth 

(ft)

4.82

3.30

3.25

3.95

4.73

3.86

Width 

(ft)

86

54

65

68

63

52

50

52

60

Roughness

0.067

.11

.11

.051

.055

.061

Velocity* depth* width* and roughness were calculated from 

the respective hydraulic geometry relations* using the meanbankfull discharge (820 ft /s) of the study reach.

greater than that of the pool. The bottom velocity of the 

pool, however, increased more rapidly with discharge, so 

that at the largest discharge observed, the bottom velocities 

through the riffle and the pool were equal.

Richards (1976a) compared the hydraulic geometries of 

two pairs of adjacent riffles and pools. The velocity exponents (m) of the pools were larger than those of the riffles. 

These observations, however, were limited to a relatively 

small range of discharges, and hence the mean velocity 

through the riffles was always greater than it was through the 

pools. No consistent relation between either the depth or the 

width exponents of riffles and pools was shown. Richards 

(19766) compared the width and depth of six riffles and 

pools. The riffles tended to be wider and shallower than the 

pools at all discharges.

The cross sections along the East Fork River were selected 

to be representative of the full range of channel 

characteristics between riffles and pools within the study 

reach. The water-surface and bed profiles of the study reach 

at a discharge of 85 ftVs are shown in figure 13. Section 6F 

was identified as a riffle on the basis of a steep water-surface 

slope, a topographic high in the bed, and coarse bed material. 

Section 10S was identified as a pool on the basis of a flat 

water-surface slope, a topographic low in the bed, and fine 

bed material. The distinctive hydraulic geometries of sections 6Fand 10S (fig. 12) are in agreement with the observations of previous investigations. Section 6F—a riffle was 

wider and shallower at all flood discharges than was section 

10S—a pool. Section 6F had a smaller velocity and larger 

width and roughness exponents than did section 10S. The 

depth exponents of the sections were similar. The data are 

particularly significant in that they include a large range of 

discharges and show that the mean velocity of the pool, in 

fact, exceeded that of the riffle at approximately the bankfull 

discharge.

Most of the cross sections were neither riffle nor pool. 

Their water-surface slope, bed topography, and bedmaterial size were intermediate between those of sections 6F 

and 10S. However, the hydraulic geometries of all filling sections deviated from the mean hydraulic geometry of the 

study reach in the same way as did section 6F. Whereas the 

hydraulic geometries of all scouring sections deviated from 

the mean hydraulic geometry of the study reach in the same 

way as did section 10S. Thus, the filling sections had rifflelike hydraulic geometries, and the scouring sections had 

poollike hydraulic geometries (table 1). It must be stressed 

that most of the filling and scouring sections were .not riffles 

and pools by conventional definitions. Their hydraulic 

geometries did, however, deviate from the mean hydraulic 

geometry of the reach in the same manner as did riffles and 

pools.

The factors which cause the difference in the hydraulic 

geometries of the scouring and filling cross sections are not
RIFFLES AND POOLS 17

well understood; and hence a complete explanation cannot 

be given at this time. It is possible, however, to outline some 

of the important factors. The pool-and-riffle sequence is probably the most common channel feature of streams whose 

sediment load includes some gravel. Langbein and Leopold 

(1968) have shown that coarse particles in transport will be 

concentrated into waves. The crests of these waves are riffles 

and the troughs are pools. Because these gravel waves will 

form whenever a limited supply of gravel is being 

transported, the pool-and-riffle sequence may be regarded as 

a primary channel feature.

The data for the East Fork River show that there is a 

systematic longitudinal variation in channel morphology and 

bed material associated with the pool-and-riffle sequence. 

These differences in channel characteristics are probably 

responsible in large measure for the different hydraulic 

geometries of the scouring and filling cross sections. At small 

discharges, the scouring (poollike) sections were relatively 

deep and rough, and had small velocities. Because the rate of 

change of velocity with increasing discharge was large compared to the rate of change of depth, there must have been a 

concomitant increase in slope and (or) decrease in roughness 

with increasing discharge. On the basis of the data collected 

for this investigation, it was concluded that slope did not 

change with discharge in the cross sections studied.

Therefore, the scouring sections must have become 

significantly smoother as discharge increased. Consequently, 

the relatively rapid rate of change of velocity with discharge 

in the scouring sections was due to both increasing depth and 

decreasing roughness.

In contrast, the filling sections were relatively shallow and 

smooth, and had large velocities at small discharges. With 

increasing discharge, the rate of change of velocity was approximately proportional to the square root of the rate of 

change of depth. Because slope did not change with 

discharge, the channel roughness of the filling sections remained nearly constant as discharge increased.

Because the physical configuraton of the streambed was 

not measured in the present investigation, changes in the 

streambed associated with changes in the computed values of 

roughness must be inferred. The filling sections had a gravel 

or mixed sand-and-gravel bed at small discharges; whereas 

the scouring sections had a predominantly sand bed, as 

shown in figure 3. Throughout the study reach, the areas of 

sand bed were formed into dunes. In the scouring sections, 

these dunes were 0.6 to 1.0 foot high, whereas in the filling 

sections, they were 0.2 to 0.4 foot high. The smaller dunes in 

the filling sections were probably due to the shallower, faster 

flow and the thinner deposit of sand-size bed material compared to that of the scouring sections. Because of the larger

96

95

- 94

5 

D IQ 93

oc

£ 92

O

90

89

88

/1F

ROAD BRIDGE BEDLQAD TRAP

II II

2S3S

5F

8S 9S 10S US

•—————.—— 

WATER SURFACE

DISCHARGE ~ 85 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

I ___I___________I___________I

200 400 600 800

DISTANCE. IN FEET

1000 1200 1400

FIGURE 13. Water-surface and bed profiles of the study reach.
18 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

dunes and greater part of the streambed covered by dunes, 

the scouring sections were significantly rougher at small 

discharges than were the filling sections. As discharge increased, the dunes in the scouring sections probably flattened and were definitely eliminated at the time of flood crests, 

because these sections scoured to a gravel bed. Thus, the 

relative bed roughness of the scouring sections decreased 

significantly with increasing discharge, as indicated by the 

computed values of roughness. In contrast, the height of 

dunes in the filling sections probably increased as sand accumulated on the bed. Mean depth, however, also increased 

with discharge so that the relative bed roughness of the filling 

sections remained about constant, as indicated by the computed values of roughness.

In summary, for the cross sections studied in this investigation, the redistribution of sand-size bed material from 

the scouring to the filling sections appears to be associated 

with significant changes in streambed configuration. These 

changes, in turn, affect channel roughness and probably account for the different rates of change of velocity with 

discharge in the scouring and filling sections.

BEDLOAD-TRANSPORT RATE

VERSUS DISCHARGE RELATIONS OF

SCOURING AND FILLING

CROSS SECTIONS

The process of scour and fill in an alluvial channel is due 

to a local depletion or accumulation of bed material. An increase in the mean bed elevation of a given reach can occur 

only when the volume of material transported into the reach 

exceeds the volume of material transported out of the reach. 

Conversely, a decrease in the mean bed elevation results 

when the volume of material transported out of the reach is 

greater than the supply. Whether a particular cross section

scours or fills depends on the transport rate of bed material 

through the cross section compared to the rest of the channel and especially the short reach immediately upstream. 

Several examples of cross sections that scour within one 

range of discharge and that fill within another have already 

been cited. Such occurrences must be the consequence of a 

relatively large bedload-transport rate compared to the rest 

of the channel for the discharges at which scour occurs. Conversely, the cross section must fill over the range of discharge 

when its bedload-tranport rate is small compared to that of 

the rest of the channel. In order to account for the pattern of 

scour and fill through the study reach, the rate of change of 

bedload transport with discharge (that is, the slope of the 

bedload-transport rate versus discharge relation) must vary 

from section to section. To confirm this hypothesis, a relation between discharge and bedload-transport rate was computed for each section by correlating flow conditons at the 

section with the flow conditions and bedload-transport rate 

measured at the bedload trap.

Empirically, fluid velocity has been found to correlate well 

with the bedload-transport rate. The transport rate of 

bedload material per foot of width is expressed as a function 

of mean velocity in figure 14. Plots of this type have been 

used before, notably by Colby (1964a) and Maddock (1969), 

and have proven to be a simple, effective way to represent 

bedload-transport data. For the range of mean velocities, 

depths, and bed-material sizes found in the study reach, the 

effect of depth on the bedload-transport rate is insignificant 

and may be ignored (Colby, 1964a).

The scatter of data in Figure 14 is due in part to variations 

in the grain size of transported material. During the initial 

increase in stage, when appreciable quantities of bedload 

began to move, the median grain size in transport was approximately 0.60 mm. As discharge increased, the size of 

bedload material also increased to a maximum of 1.5 mm at

10 I I I I

I I I I

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 

BEDLOAD TRANSPORT RATE PER FOOT OF CHANNEL WIDTH. IN POUNDS PER SECOND PER FOOT

0.5

FIGURE 14. Unit bedload-transport rate versus mean velocity relation from the bedload trap. Sediment loads are expressed as dry weight. Data from

Leopold and Emmett (1976, 1977).
CROSS SECTIONS IN AN ALTERED REACH OF CHANNEL 19

the flood crest. With decreasing discharge, grain size 

decreased, but slowly, as compared to the coarsening which 

occurred during the increasing discharge. Thus, after the initial increase in discharge, the median grain size at the 

smallest transport rate was 0.90 mm. Subsequent increases 

and decreases in discharge follow the relation traced by 

decreasing discharge after the initial increase.

A possible source for the comparatively finer material 

transported during the initial increase is indicated by the sequence of scour and fill already described. The last survey on 

July 10, 1974, showed that the mean bed elevation of all 

cross sections except IF and 10S was below their preflood 

level.

By the spring of 1975, however, the mean bed elevation of 

every cross section had returned to its preflood level of a year 

before. As much as 0.5 foot of material had been deposited in 

some sections by low flow during the year.

R. H. Meade (written commun., 1977) systematically 

measured the thickness of sand-size bed material in the East 

Fork River channel for a distance of nearly 2.5 miles 

upstream from the bedload trap. The streambed was normally stratified by sediment size. The surface layer, approximately 0.3 foot thick, was significantly finer median 

diameter=0.5 mm than the underlying material median 

diameter=l-2 mm.

Scour of this relatively finer surficial material during the 

initial increase in discharge probably accounts qualitatively 

for the smaller median diameter of material transported during the first few days of the spring flood.

A relation between discharge (0 and unit bedloadtransport rate (ib) may be derived for each cross section by 

combining the velocity versus discharge relation of the section with the relation between mean velocity and bedloadtransport rate per foot of channel width measured at the 

bedload trap (shown by the trend line in fig. 14). In order to 

compute the whole channel bedload-transport rate through a 

cross section for any given discharge, the transport rate per 

foot of width (ib) must be multiplied by the active bed width 

of the section. Choosing the active bed width is subject to 

some error. In all instances, the determination of active bed 

width was made by noting the break in slope between bed 

and bank, and the intersection between bed material and 

bank material. The width of bed is assumed to remain constant through the spring flood.

The relations between discharge and whole-channel 

bedload-transport rate, Ib , for the eight cross sections located 

in self-formed reaches of the channel are compared in figure 

15. This figure confirms the supposition that the cross sections have different bedload-transport rate versus discharge 

relations. The Ib versus Q, relations of the scouring cross sections are characterized by having steeper slopes than the filling cross sections. This is a direct result of the relatively large 

velocity exponents of the scouring sections. At discharges 

greater than 800 ft3 /s, the scouring cross sections have a

greater bedload-transport rate than the filling cross sections, 

as one would expect. Conversely, at discharges less than 800 

ftVs, the scouring cross sections have lesser bedloadtransport rates than the filling cross sections. This agrees 

with the observation that cross sections 8S, 9S, 10S, and US 

filled at discharges between 200 and 800 ftVs, while sections 

5F, 6F, and 7F scoured slightly. No scour was observed in 

section IF, and this is compatible with its relatively small 

bedload-transport rate at any discharge. Thus, the bedloadtransport rate versus discharge relations computed for the 

eight self-formed cross sections agree well with the observed 

sequence of scour and fill in the sections.

CROSS SECTIONS IN AN 

ALTERED REACH OF CHANNEL

The Ib versus Q relations computed for cross sections 2S, 

3S, and 4F are not consistent with the scour and fill recorded 

at these sections. These sections were located in a reach of 

channel modified by the construction of the road bridge and 

a berm along the left bank (fig. 3). The Ib versus (? relations 

for sections 2S and 3S do not agree with the large observed 

depth of scour. On the other hand, cross section 4F filled, in 

spite of a large computed Ib versus Q, relation.

The cross-channel velocity distribution provides at least a 

part of the explanation for the apparently small bedload 

transport through cross sections 2S and 3S. In most natural 

cross sections, the horizontal velocity distribution is relatively uniform. However, at section 2S, and to a lesser extent at 

section 3S, the horizontal velocity distribution was 

nonuniform. Flow was concentrated by the bridge piers so 

that the velocity was very large between the piers and small 

around and behind them. Discharge measurements were 

made from the road bridge, so that the velocity is known in 

2-foot-wide verticals. When the whole channel bedloadtransport rate is calculated from the velocity in each vertical 

and then summed across the channel, rather than using the 

mean velocity of the entire cross section, the bedloadtransport rate versus discharge relation for section 2S is more 

than doubled, and then agrees with its scouring character. 

This is true because the whole channel bedload-transport 

rate is proportional to the mean flow velocity to some power z,

In general,

even though H is defined by

where w^mean flow velocity in feet per second in the z'th vertical, and Af=number of verticals. Thus, bedload-transport
20 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

50

10

O

o

01ta

ec ui

Q. 

V)

O

Q.

2

ec OQ. 

V)

0.1

0.05

l I I I IT

—- — - SCOURING SECTION

PILLING SECTION

I I I I

100 500 1000 2000 3000 

DISCHARGE. IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

FIGURE 15. Whole channel bedload-transport rate versus discharge relations for self-formed cross

sections.
CROSS SECTIONS IN AN ALTERED REACH OF CHANNEL 21

relations based upon a correlation with mean velocity will 

tend to underestimate the transport rate where there is an 

appreciable cross-channel variation of velocity.

When the cross-channel velocity distribution is fairly 

uniform, the mean velocity can be used to calculate the 

bedload-transport rate without appreciable error. However, 

for cross sections which have widely variable velocity, the 

calculated transport rate is much too small. In the instance of 

section 2S, the bedload-transport rate at the flood crest, 

calculated by summing verticals, is approximately 13 Ib/s. 

This value is comparable to the maximum transport rates 

calculated for the other scouring cross sections (fig. 15).

Cross section 4F was located 140 feet downstream from 

the road bridge. The section filled during increasing 

discharge and scoured during decreasing discharge. Cross 

section ^Falso has the characteristics of the other filling cross 

sections, including small velocity and large width and 

roughness exponents.

Although the bedload-transport rate did not increase 

rapidly with discharge, the ordinate intercept was much 

larger than any of the other bedload-transport rate versus 

discharge relations. Therefore, the bedload-transport rate 

was greater through cross section 4F than the mean of the 

study reach for most discharges, and only approximated the 

bedload-transport rate through the scouring cross sections 

near the flood crest. In view of these very large transport 

rates, it appears inconsistent that section 4F would accumulate sediment (fill). However, owing to the large 

volume of material scoured from beneath the road bridge as 

discharge increased, the supply of bedload sediment to section 4F was much larger than was the average condition of 

the study reach. Thus, cross section 4F appears to be a filling 

section which has adjusted to the large volume of sediments 

scoured from beneath the road bridge.

A bedload-sediment budget between cross sections IF and 

4F from May 26 to May 29 supports this supposition (table 

3). The sediment loads transported past these two sections 

were calculated from the respective Ib versus Q relations and 

the flood hydrograph (fig. 2). Approximately 730 tons of 

bedload sediment were transported through cross section IF 

and 986 tons through cross section 4F during the initial three 

days of the first flood crest. In order to estimate the volume 

of bed material scoured and filled within the reach during 

this period, it was assumed that the depth of scour and fill 

and channel width varied linearly through the reach, that the 

depth of scour was symmetrical about the road bridge, from 

25 feet upstream to 25 feet downstream, and that the transition from fill to scour occurred halfway between section IF 

and the road bridge. Based on these assumptions and the 

computed changes in mean bed elevation at each section, a 

net estimated scour of 231 tons occurred between cross sections IF and 4Ffrom May 26 to May 29. The computed inflow of bedload sediment plus the volume of material derived 

from within the reach, approximately 961 tons, is comparable to the computed outflow, approximately 986 tons. 

Although these calculations are only estimates, the good 

numerical agreement indicates that the relation between the 

bedload-transport rate and mean velocity shown in figure 14 

was the same for all sections, and that the hydraulic 

characteristics of section 4F have adjusted to provide the 

mean velocity necessary to transport the larger sediment load 

supplied to it.

TABLE 3. Estimated bedload-sediment1 budget between cross sections IF and 4F, 

May 26-29, 1974

Interval 2

May 26-27

May 27-28

May 28-29

Mean

daily

discharge

(ftVs)

516

808

1,290

Inflow of

bedloadsediment

through

section IF

(tons)

146

240

344

Bed

material

scoured

from

within

reach3 »

(tons)

112

81

38

Outflow of

bedloadsediment

through

section 4F5

(tons)

258

326

402

TOTAL 730 231 986

J Dry weight.

2 Noon to noon.

3The quantities of bedload-sediment transport through sections IF and 4F were calculated by combining the unit bedloadtransport rate versus mean velocity relation measured at the bedload trap on May 25-29 with the respective mean velocity versus 

discharge relations of the sections.

''The volume of bed material scoured and filled between sections IF and 4F was calculated by assuming that both the depth of 

scour and fill and channel width varied linearly through the 

reach, the depth of scour was symmetrical about the road bridge, 

from 25 feet upstream to 25 feet downstream, and the transition 

from fill to scour occurred halfway between section IF and the 

road bridge.

5 Specific density of bed material is 1.3.
22 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The mean at-a-station hydraulic geometry of the East 

Fork River agrees with the theoretical minimum variance 

hydraulic geometry. Thus, on the average, the East Fork 

River accommodates a change in discharge by mutually 

minimizing the adjustment of velocity, width, and depth. 

The hydraulic geometry of a given cross section, however, 

may deviate significantly from the mean reach and 

minimum variance condition. Periodic channel features, 

such as riffles and pools, plus chance encounters with differences in bank material, vegetation, or a bedrock outcrop, 

limit the free adjustment of one or more hydraulic variables. 

The effects of a constraint placed upon the adjustment of one 

variable are absorbed by all the other hydraulic variables, so 

as to minimize the adjustment made by any one. Thus, the 

hydraulic geometry of a section is deflected from the 

minimum variance condition. The hydraulic geometries of 

the 11 cross sections along the East Fork River, in fact, were 

distributed about the mean reach and minimum variance 

condition.

The cross sections occur in two distinctive groups, each 

with a characteristic hydraulic geometry and sequence of 

scour and fill. Significant scour was observed in six sections 

at the flood crests. These sections had larger velocity and 

smaller width and roughness exponents than the mean reach 

condition. The scouring sections also tended to be narrower 

and deeper than the mean reach condition for the entire 

range of flood discharges. Significant fill was measured in 

five cross sections at the flood crests. These sections had 

smaller velocity and larger width and roughness exponents 

than the mean reach condition. The filling sections tended to 

be wider and shallower than the mean reach condition. Filling and scouring sections had similar depth exponents.

The most significant hydraulic difference between the 

scouring and filling sections was an inversion in the relative 

magnitude of velocity through the respective sections as 

discharge increased. At discharges less than approximately 

500 ftVs, the filling sections had a larger velocity than did the 

scouring sections. As indicated by the respective velocity exponents, velocity increased more rapidly with discharge in 

the scouring sections than in the filling sections. Thus, at 

discharges greater than bankfull stage, 820 ftVs, the scouring 

sections had a larger velocity than the filling sections.

Sediment-transport rates measured at the bedload trap 

were well correlated with mean velocity. Therefore, a relation between discharge and whole-channel bedload-transport 

rate was computed for each section by combining the velocity versus discharge relation of the section with the velocity 

versus bedload-transport rate relation at the bedload trap. 

The sequence of scour and fill measured at a section and the 

computed relation between discharge and whole-channel 

bedload-transport rate are in good agreement. The wholechannel bedload-transport rate (1^) was similar in most cross

sections at discharges near bankfull stage, 820 ftVs. 

However, the slopes of the bedload-transport relations (Ib 

versus Q) of the scouring sections were steeper than those of 

the filling sections. Consequently, the scouring sections had 

relatively large sediment-transport rates and scoured when 

discharge exceeded bankfull stage and they had relatively 

small sediment-transport rates and filled when discharge was 

less than bankfull stage. Conversely, the filling sections had 

relatively small sediment-transport rates and filled when 

discharge exceeded bankfull stage, and they had relatively 

large sediment-transport rates and scoured when discharge 

was less than bankfull stage.

REFERENCES

Andrews, E. D., 1977, Hydraulic adjustment of an alluvial stream channel 

to the supply of sediment: Berkeley, California, University of California, unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, 152 p.

Colby, B. R., 1964a, Discharge of sands and mean velocity relationships in 

sand-bed streams: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 462-A, 

47 p.

____ 19646, Scour and fill in sand-bed streams: U.S. Geological Survey 

Professional Paper 462-D, 32 p.

Emmett, W. W., and Leopold, L. B., 1965, Downstream pattern of riverbed scour and fill: Federal Inter-Agency Conference on Sedimentation, Jackson, Mississippi, 1963, Proceedings, p. 399-409.

Foley, M. G., 1975, Scour and fill in ephemeral streams: Pasadena, California Institute of Technology, W. M. Keck Hydraulics and Water 

Resources Laboratory, report no. KH-R-33, 189 p.

Keller, E. A., 1971, Areal sorting of bed-load material: The hypothesis of 

velocity reversal: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 82, p. 

753-756.

Lane, E. W., and Borland, W. M., 1954, River bed scour during floods: 

American Society of Civil Engineers Transactions, v. 119, p. 

1069-1080.

Langbein, W. B., 1964, Geometry of river channels: American Society of 

Civil Engineers, Journal of the Hydraulic Division, Proceedings, v. 

90, HY2, p. 301-312.

Langbein, W. B., and Leopold, L. B., 1968, River channel bars and dunes 

Theory of kinematic waves: U.S. Geological Survey Professional 

Paper 422-L, 20 p.

Leopold, L. B., and Emmett, W. W., 1976, Bedload measurements, East 

Fork River, Wyoming: National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings, v. 

73, no. 4, p. 1000-1004.

____ 1977, 1976 bedload measurements, East Fork River, Wyoming: 

National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings, v. 74, no. 7, p. 

2644-2648.

Leopold, L. B., Emmett, W. W., and Myrick, R. M., 1966, Channel and 

hill-slope processes in a semiarid area, New Mexico: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 352-G, p. 193-253.

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

of stream channels and some physiographic implications: U.S. 

Geological Survey Professional Paper 252, 57 p.

____ 19536, Relation of suspended-sediment concentration to channel 

scour and fill: Institute of Hydraulic Research, Hydraulic Conference, 

5th, Ames, Iowa, Proceedings, p. 159-170.

Maddock, Thomas, Jr., 1969, The behavior of straight open channels with 

movable beds: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 622-A, 

70 p.

Richards, K. S., 1976a, The morphology of riffle-pool sequences: Earth 

Surface Processes, v. 1, p. 71-88.

____ 19766, Channel width and the riffle-pool sequence: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 87, p.883-890.
TABLES 4, 5, 6
24 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4. Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974

CROSS SECTION

Date

Water

surface 

elevat ion

(feet)

Discharge 

(ftVs)

May 8

93.43

200

May 28

96.63

1,150

May 30

96.27

1,080

May 31

95.66

814

June 2

96.05

975

June 5

96.08

975

ELEVATION, IN

Distance,

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

lit

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

394o

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

in feet

96.05

95.54

95.51

95.21

94.37

94.31

94.10

93.36

92.90

91.60

91.50

91.53

91.77

91.78

91.76

91.81

91.93

92.01

92.23

92.52

92.63

92.77

92.86

93.06

93-09

93.09

93.09

93.16

93.06

96.09

95.69

95.70

95.35

94.58

94.43

94.45

92.86

93.30

91.71

91.73

91.82

91.91

91.83

91.85

91-95

92.08

92.24

92.61

92.73

92.79

93-07

93.16

93.17

93.15

93.23

93.21

93.23

94.39

93.95

93.05

91.57

91.57

91.79

91.86

91.86

92.91

91.97

92.11

92.27

92.49

92.55

92.72

93.19

93.27

93.23

93.21

93.33

93-29

93.32

94.48

93.68

93.21

91.55

91.64

91.83

91.86

91.89

91.96

91.98

92.10

92.20

92.48

92.77

92.74

93.18

93-22

93.31

93-23

93.31

93.33

93.33

93.86

93-19

91.57

91.63

91.67

91.80

91.84

91.83

91.99

92.08

92.20

92.55

92.63

92.69

93-02

93.21

93.26

93-20

93.19

93.22

93-19

94.39

93.85

93.10

91.56

91.63

91.85

91.88

91.80

91.86

91.90

92.04

92.20

92.53

92.72

92.73

93. OS93. 24

93.28

93-23

93.26

93.23

93.21

NO. 1

June 7

94.46

480

FEET

93.86

93.39

91.54

91.58

91.70

91-92

91.84

91.92

91.98

92.07

92.17

92.48

92.70

92.68

92.99

93.14

93.36

93.18

93.24

93.22

93-21

June 10

94.25

303

93-83

93.45

91.58

91.63

91.78

91.89

91.82

91.88

91.92

91.99

92.21

92.47

92.66

92.67

93.03

93.13

93.25

93.18

93.23

93.23

93-20

June 14

96.88

1,300

93.90

93.46

91.60

91.72

91.80

91-91

91.88

91.93

91.92

92.10

92.26

92.58

92.72

92.73

93.10

93.20

93.28

93.28

93.33

93.21

93.33

June 22

94.90

560

93.86

93.18

91.57

91.62

91.68

91.80

91.85

91.90

92.00

91.98

92.10

92.32

92.57

92.62

93.02

93.11

93.29

93-17

93.14

93.21

93.06

July 10

92.38

40

96.06

95.51

94.63

94.44

93.72

93.18

91.63

91.60

91.60

91.71

91.70

91.74

91.83

91.94

92.02

92.14

92.37

92.67

92.69

92.93

93.13

93.23

93.17

93-22

93-26

93.26
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

25

CROSS SECTION NO. 1— Continued

Date

Water

surface 

elevat ion

(feet)

Di scharge 

(ftVs)

May 8

93.*43

200

May 28

96.63

1,150

May 30

96.27

1,080

May 31

95.66

81*4

June 2

96.05

975

June 5

96.08

975

ELEVATION, IN

Di stance,

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

6k

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

7*4

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

8*4

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

3k

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

10*4

105

106

107

108

in feet

93.02

93.00

92.86

92.51

92.U

91.82

91.60

91.*49

91.*40

91.31

91.19

91.19

91.21

91.27

91-37

91.53

92.80

93-57

9*4.16

9*4.73

9*4.*4*4

9*4.70

95.89

93.15

93.10

93.03

92.73

92.*42

92.31

92.01

91. 9**

91.67

91.61

91.50

91-*47

91.50

9L*49

91.57

91-75

92.85

93.85

9*4.77

9*4.72

9*4.59

9*4.69

9*4.61

93-19

93.18

93-02

92.78

92.60

92.*4*4

91.91

91.72

91.60

91.65

91.*42

91. 'tO

91.39

91.30

91.35

91.57

92.39

9*4.19

9*4.79

93.*49

93.*47

93.*42

93.21

93.2*4

93.09

92.85

92.*46

91.6*4

91.*4*4

91.57

91.76

91.61

91.*43

91.*46

91.61

92.3*4

9*4.06

9*4.86

93.17

93-*42

93.*45

93.*49

92.87

92.81

93-01

92.98

92.75

92.62

92.*4*4

92.05

92.00

91-96

91-67

91.63

92.37

9*4.19

9*4.82

93.30

93.58

93-*47

93-*47

93.03

92.90

92.76

92.23

91.93

91.86

91.66

92.01

91.81

92.00

91.88

91-79

92.29

9*4.22

9*4.83

June 7

9*4. *46

*480

FEET

93.19

93.20

93.19

93-03

93.03

92.95

92.99

92.8*4

92.68

92.7*4

92.5*4

92.33

92.*46

92.15

92.11

92.10

92.28

9*4. *46

June 10

9*4.25

303

93.26

93.25

93.17

92.80

92.60

92.*43

92.*41

92.13

92.37

92.17

91.6*4

91.33

91.71

91.63

91.63

91.78

92.25

June 1*4

96.88

1,300

93-30

93-23

93.18

93.06

92.88

92.68

92.37

92.12

91-93

91.88

91.80

91.88

91-70

91.68

91.76

91.86

92.25

9*4.28

9*4.96

9*4.70

June 22

9*4.90

560

93.18

93-15

93.12

92.90

92.80

92.60

92.70

92.69

92.58

92.25

92.18

92.15

92.17

91.92

92.10

92.18

92.90

9*4.17

July 10

92.38

*40

93.31

93.28

93-20

92.8*4

92.*»2

92.10

91-93

91.79

91.69

91.6*4

91-39

91.25

91.25

91.22

91.28

91.53

91-89

93-*46

9*4.87

9*4.55

9*4.65

95.6*4
26 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Di scharge 

(ftVs)

Distance,

0

1

2

3

it

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2k

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

3^

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

May 26

94.11

398

in feet

93.10

91.80

91.10

91.10

90.30

90.00

90.10

89.80

89.60

89.80

90.10

89.90

89.50

89.50

89.40

89.20

90.30

90.50

91.40

91.60

May 27

95.50

759

95.00

94.70

94.30

94.40

94.60

94.50

94.20

92.30

91.60

90.70

90.30

88.70

88.50

88.30

88.40

88.50

88.70

89.00

88.70

88.50

88.00

87.70

88.20

90.30

91.20

91.70

91.60

May 28

96.33

1,120

95.30

95.30

94.80

94.80

94.50

95.30

94.40

94.80

94.40

94.40

93.50

91.60

91.10

90.00

88.50

87.80

87.80

87.70

87.10

87-10

87.40

86.70

86.30

86.20

87.00

87-90

89.50

91.10

91.90

91.90

CROSS SECTION

May 29

97.00

1,580

ELEVATION, IN

96.50

96.00

95.00

94.60

94.60

94.60

94.30

94.40

94.90

94.50

93-30

92.10

90.70

88.80

88.40

87.30

86.70

86.70

86.70

87.40

87.50

87.30

86.50

87-30

87.70

90.10

90.60

91.40

92.00

92.10

NO. 2

June 5

96.10

1,000

FEET

95.30

95.30

94.30

93.10

93.50

95.10

94.70

93.60

92.00

90.90

89.90

88.60

87.40

86.50

86.80

86.50

86.40

86.20

85.80

86.30

86.70

88.10

88.30

90.70

91.30

92.10

92.00

June 9

93-60

275

93-30

91-70

90.60

91-50

88.50

88.50

88.20

88.60

88.70

88.60

88.70

88.00

87.40

87.00

88.30

89.30

90.70

91.30

92.10

92.20

June 14

96.60

1,280

95.10

93.70

92.10

91.10

89-80

88.70

88.30

87.90

87-30

86.90

87.10

87.30

86.70

86.30

86.90

87.40

89.00

89-70

91.30

92.00

92.00

July 11

92.26

40

94.89

93.47

92.20

92.20

91.37

91.32

91.32

91.25

91-33

91.14

90.98

91.03

91.53

91.48

91.49

90.53

90.06

89.61

90.68

91.24

92.20
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

27

CROSS SECTION NO. 3

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Discharge 

(ft 3 /s)

May 8

93.26

200

May 2k May 27 May 29

92.67 95.59 96.85

10l( 810 1,560

July 10

92.26

ko

ELEVATION, IN FEET

Distance,

0

1

2

3

k

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

lit

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2k

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

3*

35

36

37

38

39

1(0

in feet

96.33

96.29

96.31

96.19

95.36

9^.19

9^.18

93.61

9*. 65

9*. 65

93.83

93.23

91.78

91.55

91.96

91.72

91.39

90.97

90.90

90.89

90.80

94.73

94.39

94.50

94.73

94.75

9*. 71

93-92 94.97

92.1(8 92.23 93-90

92.26 91.29 93.23

91.57 91.26 91.65

91.07 91.32 90.85

91.17 91.22 90.37

91.11 91-02 90.29

90.96 91.27 90.^5

90.96 90.94 90.1(5

96.31

96.25

95.33

9*. 13

9*. 99

93.88

92.15

92.15

90.38

90.05

90.05

90.1(8

90.87

90.99

91.11
28 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Di scharge 

(ft 3 /s)

Di stance,

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

May 8

93.26

200

in feet

90.89

90.81

90.79

90.96

90.94

90.54

90.63

90.91

91.07

91.05

90.88

90.97

90.97

90.86

90.72

90.94

92.65

93.29

94.04

93.83

96.69

97.11

97.73

98.05

98.02

CROSS SECTION NO,

May 24

92.67

104

ELEVATION,

90.74

90.72

90.71

90.64

90.64

90.60

90.62

90.65

90.66

90.57

90.25

88.82

89.37

89.87

90.92

92.67

, 3--Continued

May 27

95.59

810

IN FEET

90.94

90.47

90.32

90.37

89.93

89.51

89.71

89.52

88.78

88.44

88.23

88.57

88.79

89.79

90.76

92.54

94.13

95.59

May 29

96.85

1,560

90.07

89.99

89-55

89.35

89.65

89.45

89.15

89.01

88.65

88.41

88.61

88.55

88.35

88.45

88.41

July 10

92.26

40

91.35

91.47

91.55

91.57

91.59

91.48

90.96

90.96

90.70

89-97

89.00

88.12

87.67

88.09

90.83

91.23

92.24

94.81

96.37

97.65

97.99
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 29 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

CROSS SECTION NO. 4

Date May 8 May 27 May 28 May 29 May 30 May 31 June 2 June 5 June 7 June 10 June 14

Water

etevaUon 93 ' 12 95 ' 51 96 ' 25 96 ' 77 96 - 1/* 95 ' /'7 95 ' 88 95 ' 89 9/*- 3 ° 93 ' 97 96 ' 51

(feet)

(ff-3/ \ 200 814 1,150 1,480 1,100 822 985 980 448 371 1,220

June 22 July 10

94.70 92.08

560 40

ELEVATION, IN FEET

Distance, in feet

o 96.07

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 95.82

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24 94.04

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42.

43

44

45

46

47 96.59

48 96.15

49 95.51

50 94.54 94.83 95.07 94.51

51

52 94.36 94.44 94.36 94.30 94.84 94.31 94.30 94.36

53 93-97

54 93-80 93.33 93-91 93-84 93.55 93.85 93-66 93-94 93-84 93-56

55

56 93-17 93.45 92.18 93-22 93.29 93.22 93.47 93-45 93-58 93-68 93-53

57 92.36

58 91.82 92.20 92.16 93.21 92.29 91-95 92.18 92.05 92.17 92.21 92.51

59

60 91.80 92.07 92.12 92.87 92.62 92.29 92.06 92.13 92.00 91.88 93-04

96.10

95-43

94.64

92.44

92.96

94.97

94.26

94.01

93.85 93.80

93.60 93.43

92.21 92.08

91.9^ 91-94
30 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Discharge 

(ftVs)

May 8

93-12

200

May 27

95.51

814

May 28

96.25

1,150

May 29

96.77

1,480

CROSS

May 30

96.14

1,100

SECTION

May 31

95.47

822

NO. 4--Continued

June 2

95.88

985

ELEVATION, IN

Distance,

61

62

63

6k

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

in feet

91.77

91.76

92.00

92.25

92.34

92.50

92.60

92.61

92.65

92.69

92.43

92.20

91.99

91.82

91.60

91.53

91.45

91.37

91.24

91.05

90.94

91.05

91.28

92.05

93-12

94.63

95.58

97.95

98.36

98.36

92.01

91.81

92.33

92.58

92.64

92.58

92.73

92.73

92.79

92.76

92.61

92.73

92.53

92.26

92.13

91.76

91.75

91.71

91.53

91.43

91.09

91.03

91.29

92.03

92.79

94.16

95.09

95.51

92.40

92.55

92.77

92.55

92.50

92.57

92.68

92.67

92.77

92.90

92.65

92.37

92. 17

91.95

91.87

92.07

91.80

91.88

91.50

91.25

91.05

91.00

91.31

92.13

92.84

93.85

95.00

96.25

92.58

92.66

92.75

92.34

92.47

92.63

92.74

92.69

92.80

93.22

92.95

93-09

92.36

91.68

91.66

91.20

91.27

91.24

91.06

91.04

90.94

90.89

91.38

92.11

92.91

92.59

92.56

92.49

92.36

92.33

92.60

92.72

92.79

92.68

92.84

92.67

92.42

92.20

91.86

91.72

91.64

91.42

91.31

91.24

91.24

91.02

91.04

91.42

92.12

92.85

93.89

94.94

95.40

92.32

92.35

92.27

92.34

92.28

92.41

92.62

92.69

92.57

92.64

92.55

92.47

92.08

91.86

91.63

91.55

91.47

91.27

91.25

91.19

91.04

90.95

91.35

92.15

92.83

94.27

95.47

92.17

92.16

92.08

92.39

92.27

92.50

92.66

92.73

92.70

92.76

92.59

92.38

92.12

91.88

91.72

91.58

91.44

91.29

91.26

91.20

91.06

91.00

91.38

92.18

92.83

94.15

94.98

June 5

95.89

980

FEET

91.77

91.91

92.10

92.31

92.23

92.52

92.74

92.74

92.69

92.79

92.57

92.38

92.13

91.89

91.71

91.58

91.51

91.28

91.31

91.17

91.00

91.01

91.39

92.24

92.84

94.16

95.64

June 7

94.30

448

91.80

91.88

92.05

92.25

92.25

92.67

92.73

92.80

92.73

92.75

92.68

92.36

92.17

91.95

91.72

91.57

91.52

91.28

91.28

91.15

91.05

91.02

91.48

92.22

93-04

94.30

June 10

93-97

371

91.74

91.81

91.97

92.29

92.24

92. 50

92.69

92.79

92.68

92.69

92.61

92.47

92.11

91.92

91.71

91.58

91.42

91.26

91.19

91.14

91.02

90.98

91.30

92.08

93.12

93.99

June 14

96.51

1,220

92.89

92.66

92.61

92.41

92.66

92.81

92.91

92.76

92.71

92.62

92.61

92.47

92.16

91.99

91.76

91.61

91.49

91.28

91.23

91.15

91.08

91.03

91.37

92.10

92.91

94.39

95.67

June 22

94.70

560

91.88

91.82

92.02

92.18

92.27

92.33

92.72

92.76

92.65

92.67

92.63

92.49

92.20

91.93

91.76

91.70

91.58

91.25

91.32

91.20

91.09

91.08

91-29

92.13

92.96

94.45

July 10

92.08

40

91.67

91.68

91.86

92.16

92.12

92.21

92.42

92.56

92.60

92.52

92.57

92.39

92.22

91.92

91.71

91.54

91.47

91.36

91.15

91.17

91.04

90.96

91.10

91.54

92.03

93.12

94.18

95.33

95.72

98.11

98.35

98.36
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

31

CROSS SECTION

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Di scharge 

(ft 3 /s)

May 8

92.87

200

May 27

95.37

822

May 28

96.10

1,140

May 30

95.86

1,070

May 31

95.43

834

June 2

95.65

985

ELEVATION, IN

Distance,

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2k

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

in feet

95.78

95.66

95.53

95.04

95-00

93-96

93.88

93.79

93.69

93. 59

93.49

93.36

93.27

93.11

92.96

92.65

92.18

91.95

91.47

95.37

95.21

94.37

94.03

93.59

93.59

93.53

93-33

92.80

92.29

92.72

92.15

92.29

92.20

91-90

91.67

95-74

95.68

95.50

95.24

95-02

94.46

94.63

94.29

94.24

93.63

93-69

93.69

93.33

93.02

92.11

91.81

91.58

91.70

95.65

95.15

94.97

95.08

94.91

94.60

94.37

94.44

94.38

94.33

93.79

93.26

93.12

92.97

92.63

92.00

95.45

94.89

94.95

94.79

94.43

94.24

94.11

94.31

94.25

94.07

93-99

93.84

93.48

93.01

92.19

95.58

95-28

94.64

94.73

94.46

94.16

94.14

94.13

94.10

93.90

93.44

93.29

92.90

92.93

92.96

92.36

NO. 5

June 5

95.80

990

FEET

95-65

95.39

94.30

94.23

94.52

93.68

93-78

93.70

93.38

93-26

93-19

92.99

92.63

92.44

91.86

91.41

June 7

94.25

450

94.25

93.83

93.74

93-50

93.50

93.53

93.45

93.30

93.07

92.67

92.87

92.83

92.22

91.64

June 10

93-94

371

93.94

93-78

93.63

93-42

93-38

93-15

92.92

92.86

92.76

92.60

92.36

92.35

91.96

91.67

June 14

96.44

1,330

95.56

95.38

94.42

94.18

93.80

93.44

94.06

94.03

93.86

93 .-61

93-19

92.74

92.19

92.26

92.14

92.04

June 22

94.65

555

94.50

93-60

93-36

93.51

93-44

93.47

93-45

93-13

92.67

93.01

92.90

92.85

92.40

91.90

July 10

91.86

40

95.77

95.62

95.61

95.19

93.28

93.04

92.96

93.02

92.86

92.70

92.60

92.39

92.16

92.04

91.80

91.68

91.62
32 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.— Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

CROSS SECTION NO. 5" Continued

Date

Water

surface 

elevat ion

(feet)

Discharge 

(ftVs)

May 8

92.87

200

May 27

95.37

822

May 28

96.10

1,140

May 30

95.86

1,070

May 31

95.43

834

June 2

95.65

985

ELEVATION, IN

Distance,

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

in feet

91.18

91.03

90.76

90.53

90.37

90.07

89.70

89.42

89.49

89.87

90.09

90.33

90.82

91.53

92.00

93.05

93-34

96.33

96.60

96.10

91.49

90.80

90.75

90.63

90.35

89.99

89.34

89.47

89.67

90.03

90.11

90.49

91.00

91.60

91.96

92.27

93.64

94.28

90.98

90.94

90.92

50.59

90.14

89.48

89.38

89.56

89.65

89-96

90.06

90.61

91.03

91.68

91.51

93.18

93.46

94.06

91.44

91.07

91.13

90.62

89.97

89.66

89.60

89.62

89.83

90.07

90.38

90.69

91.20

91.68

92.50

93-25

93.58

96.00

91.77

91.48

91.23

90.58

89.99

89.71

89.55

89.53

89.80

89.99

90.28

90.68

91.01

91.59

92.43

93.28

93.22

93.78

91.74

91.22

90.81

90.36

89.85

89.56

89.48

89.57

89.75

89-93

90.26

90.66

91.07

91.59

92.32

93.36

93.55

June 5

95.80

990

FEET

91.08

90.72

90.52

90.27

89.85

89.52

89.46

89.50

89.63

89.86

90.24

90.55

91.01

91.48

92.44

92.80

93.59

June 7

94.25

450

91.43

90.94

90.35

90.18

89.87

89.56

89.50

89.59

89.73

90.09

90.31

90.49

91.05

91.60

91.95

93-12

93.69

94.25

June 10

93.94

371

91.41

91.04

90.36

90.09

89-98

89.62

89.49

89.49

89.74

89.94

90.24

90.58

91.09

91.59

91.79

92.99

93-78

93.94

June 14

96.44

1,330

91.44

91.12

90.79

90.34

89.94

89.57

89.52

89.54

89.82

89.96

90.19

90.74

91.12

91.59

92.25

93.19

93-57

96.16

June 22

94.65

555

91.60

91.42

90.75

90.61

89.93

89.55

89.35

89.59

89.87

89.93

90.31

90.70

91.11

91.56

91.85

92.70

93.75

July 10

91.86

40

91.46

91.23

90.93

90.58

90.13

89.72

89.38

89.38

89.64

89.81

90.09

90.44

90.87

91.37

91.65

92.62

93-03

96.11

96.54

96.17
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.— Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

33

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Di scharge 

(ftVs)

May 8

92.68

200

May 27

95.20

822

May 28

95.90

1,140

CROSS

May 31

95.26

846

SECTION NO. 6

June 2

95.50

985

June 5

95.56

995

June 7

93.94

460

June 10

93.71

371

July 10

91.39

40

ELEVATION, IN FEET

Distance,

0

1

2

3

it

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

in feet

95.83

95.52

95.02

94.16

92.74

91.39

89-91

89.98

90.25

90.69

91.01

90.94

90.84

90.95

91.18

91.28

91.29

91.19

91.15

90.95

95.20

95.06

94.54

93-82

89.97

90.13

90.89

90.73

90.89

90.83

91.04

91.16

91.28

91.14

91.09

90.92

95.50

95.12

94.58

93.62

90.04

90.25

90.86

90.93

90.84

91.22

91-33

91.38

91.25

91.13

91.08

91.18

95.26

95.02

94.34

93.28

90.12

90.63

90.93

91.09

90.93

91.19

91.18

91.08

90.90

91.20

91.08

91.14

95.47

95.00

94.27

92.94

89.98

90.52

90.88

90.88

90.74

90.91

91.19

90.99

91.01

90.95

90.86

90.98

95.42

95.06

94.30

93.16

90.69

90.84

90.94

91.09

91.11

91.08

90.96

91.04

91.08

90.88

91.15

91.31

93.74

89.99

90.09

90.63

90.77

90.59

90.84

90.97

90.66

90.94

91.12

90.89

90.84

93-55

89-99

90.11

90.71

90.76

90.60

90.78

90.85

90.63

90.76

90.85

90.89

90.82

95.86

95.45

94.10

89.85

89.97

90.19

90.77

90.70

90.65

90.66

90.63

90.67

90.76

90.84

90.82

90.91
34 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

CROSS SECTION NO. 6 Continued

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Discharge 

(ftVs)

Distance,

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

May 8

92.68

200

in feet

90.87

90.99

91.00

91.03

91.03

91.15

91.31

91.78

92.14

92.51

92.56

92.67

92.47

92.35

92.13

92.18

92.71

94.20

94.92

95.01

May 27

95.20

822

91.03

90.92

90.88

90.92

90.90

90.95

91.28

91.78

92.09

92.47

92.53

92.62

92.53

92.33

92.07

92.10

92.92

94.28

94.88

94.92

May 28

95-90

1,140

91.22

91.01

91.58

91.93

92.06

92.38

92.25

92.15

92.23

92.52

92.65

92.73

92.56

92.32

92.30

92.21

93.25

94.25

94.97

95.09

May 31 June 2

95.26

846

ELEVATION

91.08

91.04

91.25

91.48

91.86

91.94

91.96

92.21

92.40

92.66

92.71

92.81

92.62

92.43

92.31

92.26

93-30

94.02

95.50

985

, IN FEET

90.98

90.95

91.31

91.08

91.17

91.60

91.68

91.77

92.15

92.50

92.63

92.65

92.51

92.30

92.18

92.12

93.29

94.58

94.88

June 5

95.56

995

91.30

91.26

91.29

91.19

91.26

91.42

91.48

91.86

92.24

92.46

92.61

92.66

92.46

92.38

92.26

92.14

93.18

94.28

June 7

93-94

460

90.86

90.85

90.99

91.07

91.08

91.09

91.26

91.63

92.08

92.41

92.47

92.62

92.49

92.38

92.26

92.09

93-19

93.94

June 10

93-71

371

90.93

90.85

90.91

91.10

91.11

91.18

91.36

91.73

92.19

92.55

92.61

92.66

92.51

92.44

92.34

92.08

92.71

93.71

July 10

91.39

40

90.94

90.92

90.97

90.98

91.03

91.06

91.32

91.74

92.07

92.44

92.52

92.10

92.45

92.27

92.11

92.02

92.21

94.07

94.88

94.95
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach. East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

35

Date

Water

surface 

elevat ion

(feet)

Di scharge 

(ftVs)

May 8

92.48

200

May 27

95.09

818

May 31

95.03

846

CROSS

June 2

95.48

985

SECTION NO. 7

June 5

95.51

1,000

June 7

93.82

460

June 10

93-51

371

June 22

94.17

548

July 10

91.24

40

ELEVATION, IN FEET

Distance,

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2k

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

3^

35

36

37

38

39

40

in feet

95.65

95.74

94.28

93.30

93.44

92.06

91.25

90.46

89.99

89.78

89.57

89.46

89.44

89.46

89.88

90.15

90.35

90.64

90.35

90.75

90.89

94.21

93.80

92.22

91.53

90.76

90.17

90.11

89.58

89.54

89.65

89.96

90.01

90.15

90.18

90.13

90.09

90.19

90.27

93.53

93.26

91.96

91.38

90.80

90.45

90.22

89.85

89.73

89.73

89.85

89.98

90.14

90.69

91.18

90.88

91.81

91.13

93.76

92.70

91.86

91.40

90.88

90.40

90.17

89.90

89.60

89.66

89.78

89.84

89.99

90.10

90.48

90.81

91.18

91.43

93.45

92.68

91.81

91.29

90.70

90.44

90.06

89.84

89.61

89.62

89.69

89.93

89.99

90.12

90.16

90.24

90.63

90.69

93.82

92.82

91.70

91.39

90.85

90.44

90.17

89.87

89.64

89.74

89.72

89.87

89.82

89.97

90.22

90.22

90.40

90.72

93-51

93.01

92.21

91-39

90.90

90.54

90.20

89-93

89.64

89.53

89.61

89.81

90.12

90.36

90.66

90.64

90.41

90.78

93.97

92.95

91.99

91.34

90.95

90.64

90.25

89.89

89.70

89.67

89.79

89.92

89.95

90.19

90.42

90.47

90.52

90.57

95.62

95.72

94.06

92.45

91.63

91.06

90.74

90.17

89.94

89.63

89.45

89.50

89.67

89.84

90.00

90.18

90.26

90.34

90.53

90.57
36 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

CROSS SECTION NO. 7" Continued

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Discharge 

(ftVs)

May 8

92.48

200

May 27

95.09

818

May 31 June 2 June 5 June 7 June 10 June 22

95.03 95.48 95.51 93.82 93-51 94.17

846 985 1,000 460 371 548

July 10

91.24

40

ELEVATION, IN FEET

Di stance,

41

42

43

kk

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

in feet

90.83

91.02

91.11

91.18

91.2i»

91.16

91.80

92.99

93.22

93.88

94.81

95.04

90.61

90.74

90.92

90.97

91.19

91.56

91.85

93.28

93.37

93.34

93.37

93.63

93.77

94.09

94.39

94.54

94.73

94.95

95.09

91.28 91.48 90.83 90.82 91-30 90.58

91.05 91.27 90.98 90.87 91.71 90.70

91.16 91.54 90.96 90.96 91.81 90.79

91.28 91.68 91.09 91.22 91.51 91.12

91.45 91.87 91.51 91.70 91.76 91.57

91.46 92.23 91.86 91-92 91-91 92.17

91.85 92.81 92.36 92.34 92.26 92.72

93.33 93.30 93.21 93.29

93.33 93.23 93.40

93.46

93.26

93.68

93.73

94.13 93.82

90.58

90.74

90.89

90.80

91.10

90.80

91.50

92.95

93.20

93.40

94.35

95.04
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.— Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

37

CROSS SECTION NO. 8

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Di scharge 

(ftVs)

Distance,

0

1

2

3

k

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2k

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

3k

35

May 8

92.39

200

in feet

95.56

95.36

95.13

93.60

91.00

90.95

90.73

90.62

90.31

89.93

89.75

89.57

89.59

89.62

89.76

89.99

90.05

May 27

94.85

818

94.85

93.21

91.35

90.70

90.53

90.26

90.13

89.9^

89.90

89.98

89.95

90.0*1

90.05

May 31

94.74

846

3k. 7k

93.02

90.93

90.69

90.49

90.24

89.76

89.88

89.79

89.89

89.93

90.19

90.13

June 2

95.20

985

94.57

93.20

91.07

90.65

90.08

89.76

89.20

88.77

89.02

89.22

89.58

89.90

90.24

June 5

95.26

1,000

ELEVATION,

94.54

93.21

90.88

90.16

89.76

89.68

89.00

88.86

88.81

89.21

89.46

89.86

90.0*1

June 7

93-70

465

IN FEET

93.70

92.78

91.17

90.12

90.11

89.62

89.27

88.92

89.00

89.20

89.18

89.1*7

89.85

June 10

93.39

369

92.57

91.14

90.57

89.71

89.58

89.51

89.55

89.69

89.84

89.53

89.77

89.84

June 14

95.92

1,300

92.98

91.01

90.30

90.06

89.72

89.24

88.88

89.07

89.17

89.29

89.52

89.91

June 22

93.96

540

93.12

91.04

90.34

89.63

89.46

88.96

88.84

88.81

88.99

89.26

89.26

89.38

July 10

91.20

40

95.58

95.45

95.11

93.50

91.38

91.20

90.83

90.05

89.56

89.48

89.38

89.29

89.20

89.50

89.52

89.59

89.73
38 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Discharge 

(ftVs)

Distance,

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

May 8

92.39

200

in feet

90.34

90.37

90.29

90.31

90.57

90.84

90.94

90.83

91.08

91.30

92.23

92.35

93.40

94.80

94.78

May 27

94.85

818

90.09

90.15

90.12

90.17

90.46

90.52

90.56

90.58

90.69

90.87

91.73

92.94

94.85

May 31

94.74

846

90.42

90.69

90.96

90.72

90.13

90.54

90.17

90.34

90.84

90.86

91.28

92.48

94.74

CROSS

June 2

95.20

985

90.72

90.52

90.48

90.18

90.20

90.44

90.48

90.80

90.92

91.22

91.38

92.67

94.89

SECTION NO.

June 5

95.26

1,000

ELEVATION,

89.98

90.12

90.57

90.86

90.76

90.64

90.70

90.76

90.98

91.11

91.53

92.83

94.91

, 8 Continued

June 7

93.70

465

IN FEET

89.97

89.90

89.82

89.83

90.07

89.88

90.39

90.65

90.87

91.11

92.58

92.77

93.00

June 10

93.39

369

90.29

90.09

90.29

90.52

90.27

90.18

90.27

90.62

90.85

90.71

91.21

92.73

93.39

June 14

95.92

1,300

89.97

89.90

89-77

89.60

89.60

89.58

89.75

89.92

90.24

90.70

91.24

92.32

94.86

94.85

June 22

93.96

540

89.74

89.92

89.80

89.88

89.74

90.01

90.21

90.37

90.46

90.46

91.14

92.58

93.96

July 10

91.20

40

89.94

90.07

90.22

90.38

90.46

90.29

90.19

90.16

90.14

90.58

91.38

92.33

94.77

94.81

94.43

93.92

93.99

94.43
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

39

CROSS SECTION

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Discharge 

(ftVs)

May 8

92.38

200

May 27

94.79

822

May 28

95.40

1,150

May 30

95.17

1,050

May 31

94.69

858

June 2

95.12

985

ELEVATION, IN

Distance,

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

in feet

95.12

94.82

94.79

93.84

92.41

90.42

90.39

90.43

90.45

90.46

90.48

90.44

90.47

90.13

90.13

90.05

89.83

94.63

93.29

90.69

90.60

90.47

90.41

90.70

90.91

90.89

91.01

90.79

90.59

90.31

95.22

95.28

94.80

94.85

94.93

95.40

92.13

89.98

89.82

89.62

89.59

89.50

89.44

89.47

89.53

89.62

89.50

89.47

93.17

90.15

89.84

89.65

89.52

89.41

89.47

89.47

89-49

89.53

89-57

89.57

94.69

93.44

90.01

90.16

90.10

90.19

90.09

89.99

89.87

89.65

89.63

89.67

89.65

94.92

93.12

90.56

90.53

90.42

89.94

89.90

89.89

89.75

89.98

89.93

89.92

89.86

NO. 9

June 5

95.12

1,000

FEET

94.72

93.20

90.03

89.86

89.72

89.55

89.54

89.72

89.72

89.52

89.61

89.56

89.47

June 7

93.69

470

93.69

90.57

90.84

90.82

90.86

90. 3k

90.89

90.84

90.79

90.57

90.07

89.77

June 10

93.38

367

93-38

90.70

90.88

90.86

90.88

90.81

90.90

90.48

90.1*5

90.28

90.03

89.54

June 14

95.75

1,390

94.77

93.28

89.92

89.84

89.71

89.60

89.57

89.65

89.54

89.56

89.52

89.47

89.49

June 22

93.91

538

93.22

90.11

90.19

90.16

90.09

90.13

90.46

90.41

90.36

90.09

90.03

89.73

July 10

91.20

40

95.06

95.11

94.77

94.99

94.91

93-36

90.18

90.08

90.38

90.46

90.56

90.85

90.43

90.40

90.34

90.29

90.20

90.10
40 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

CROSS SECTION NO. 9" Continued

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Discharge 

(ftVs)

May 8

92.38

200

May 27

94.79

822

May 28

95.40

1,150

May 30

95.17

1,050

May 31

94.69

858

June 2

95.12

985

ELEVATION, IN

Di stance,

36

37

38

39

4o

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

in feet

89.79

89.60

89.82

89.78

89.79

89.84

89.91

90.06

90.10

90.06

90.60

93.25

94.10

94.24

90.21

89.99

89.87

89.79

89.84

89.76

89.92

89.90

89.89

90.00

90.11

90.10

93.79

94.23

94.25

93.96

94.66

94.11

94.17

94.22

89.37

89.49

89.65

89.71

89.71

89.75

89.88

89.90

90.00

89.99

90.12

90.52

93.76

94.23

94.23

93.88

93.78

94.18

94.18

94.18

89.51

89.47

89.64

89.67

89-77

89.77

89.82

89.92

90.02

89.89

90.32

90.34

93.79

94.17

89.54

89.57

89.67

89.71

89.78

89.82

89.89

89.91

89.86

89.87

89.87

90.45

93.81

94.18

89.57

89.66

89.70

89.68

89.74

89.82

89.89

89.92

89.93

89.90

90.12

90.54

93.78

94.24

June 5

95.12

1,000

FEET

89.49

89-50

89.57

89-71

89-75

89.77

89.80

89.81

89.74

89-74

89.82

90.34

93.75

94.12

June 7

93.69

470

89.54

89.81

89.79

89.69

89-81

89.82

89.94

89-97

89.97

89.93

89.82

90.48

93.69

June 10

93.38

367

89.82

89.74

89.68

89.78

89.81

69.78

89.78

89.73

89.78

89.86

89.80

90.58

93.38

June 14

95.75

1,390

89.41

89.47

89.63

89.66

89.73

89-77

89.86

89.88

89.94

89.86

90.40

90.48

93.97

94.25

June 22

93-91

538

89.63

89.53

89.66

89.71

89.79

89.73

89.96

89.83

89.81

89.83

89.81

90.44

93.91

July 10

91.20

40

89.96

89.66

89-50

89.64

89.69

89-74

90.05

89.83

89.83

89.85

89.91

90.43

90.80

93-60

94.18

94.27

94.07

93-78

94.07

94.13
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 41 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

CROSS SECTION NO

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Discharge 

(ft 3 /s)

Distance,

0

1

2

3

k

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

H

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2k

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

May 8

32.2k

200

in feet

95.07

94.66

94.08

94.09

94.52

94.31

93.53

90.70

90.35

89.79

89.45

89.40

89.58

89.85

89.81

89.79

89.32

83. kk

89.40

May 26

93.13

350

92.33

90.41

89.73

89.61

89.65

89.74

89.73

89.70

89.63

89.60

89.62

89.45

May 27

94.54

774

94.50

93.57

90.23

89.91

89.25

89.00

89.65

89.63

89.65

89.70

89.65

89.60

89.50

May 28

95.34

1,130

94.18

94.22

94.36

94.57

93.69

90.21

89.87

89.36

89.04

88.92

88.87

89.06

89.06

89.21

89.08

89/16

May 30

95.06

1,040

94.57

93.86

90.22

89.52

89.26

89.03

88.80

88.88

88.96

89.12

89.11

89.06

89.06

May 31 June 2

94.60

866

ELEVATION

94.45

93.77

90.20

89.78

89.31

89.00

88.89

88.99

89.32

89.16

89.25

89.20

89.10

94.99

985

. 10

June 5

95.08

1,000

June 7

93.59

k62

June 10

93.27

367

June 14

95.68

1,370

June 22

33.8k

535

July 10

96.19

40

, IN FEET

94.51

94.47

32. kQ

90.17

89.77

89.03

88.93

88.71

89.48

89.79

89.89

89.79

89.89

89.94

92.18

90.30

89.63

89.20

89.19

88.97

89.08

89.12

8g.11

89.18

89.18

89.18

92.85

90.28

89.64

88.87

83. kk

89.54

89.54

89.80

89.71

89.79

83. kk

89.51

92.60

90.51

89.79

89.56

89.62

89.52

89.37

89.39

89.77

90.27

90.22

89.54

94.58

32.2k

90.17

90.03

88.80

88.93

88.63

88.76

88.83

89.08

89.08

89.08

89.10

92.84

90.53

89.66

89.08

89.06

89.09

89.36

89.59

89.54

89-78

89.80

89.61

95,18

94.99

94.11

93.99

94.55

93.65

91.15

90.28

90.02

89.28

89.28

89.36

89.45

89.59

89.58

89.65

89.68

89.15
42 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

CROSS SECTION NO. 10--Cont inued

Date May 8

Water

surface . elevation 9Z ' Z4

(feet)

Discharge .

(ft3/ S ) 2 °°

May 26 May 27

93.13 94.54

350 774

May 28

95.34

1,130

May 30 May 31 June 2 June 5 June 7 June 10 June 14 June 22 July 10

95.06 94.60 94.99 95.08 93-59 93-27 95-68 93-84 96.19

1,040 866 985 1,000 462 367 1,370 535 40

ELEVATION, IN FEET

Distance, in feet

36 89.31

37

38 89.09

39

40 89.30

41

42 89. 06

43

44 89-55

45

46 90.26

47

48 91.44

49 93.44

50

51 93.71

52

53 93.84

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

89.43 89.15

89.26 89.00

89.38 89.05

89.29 89.18

89.43 89.67

90.23 90.28

90.52 90.95

93.13

93.69

93.82

93.82

92.45

93.65

89.07

89.07

89.03

89.22

89.75

90.55

91.57

93.83

93.90

93.66

93.56

93.72

88.98 89.05 89-57 89-23 89.59 89-65 89.16 89-34 89-65

89-06 89-12 89-22 89-13 89-22 89-57 89-18 89-14 89.48

89.05 89.08 89-16 88.96 89-19 89.47 89-08 89-19 89.20

89.16 89.19 89-14 89-14 89-17 89-22 89-03 89-29 89.11

89.76 89.60 89.69 89-60 89.63 89-57 89-60 89-82 89-59

90.24 90.50 90.57 90.33 90.68 90.27 90.03 90.34 90.06

92.03 91-05 90.99 91-95 92.23 91-09 90.78 92.06 91-03

93-27 93.58

93-54 93-75 93-84 93-71 93-83

94.06 93.88 93-84 94.03 93-93 93-92

93-87

93-89

93-59

93.77

92.84

r

94.34

94.79
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 4.—Soundings of cross sections, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

43

CROSS SECTION NO. 11

Date

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

Discharge 

(ftVs)

May 8

92.25

200

May 27

94.57

800

May 28

95.28

1 ,120

May 30

95.05

1,030

May 31

94.61

866

June 2

95.00

985

ELEVATION, IN

Distance,

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2k

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

4o

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

in feet

95.34

95.13

92.82

92.28

90.76

90.34

90.01

89.64

89.58

89.76

89.74

89.79

89.34

89.68

89.70

89.61

90.21

90.44

90.42

90.37

90.47

90.64

90.79

90.87

90.89

90.86

92.89

93.69

93.92

94.26

93.72

91.17

90.66

90.29

89.94

89.19

89.15

89.29

89.42

89.67

89-73

89.95

90.19

90.39

90.47

90.69

90.87

91.09

91.12

91.54

91.59

91.70

91.45

92.39

93-61

93.93

94.93

92.76

90.57

90.50

90.12

89.75

89.23

88.63

88.68

88.92

89.48

89.60

89.81

90.09

90.30

90.41

90.33

90.45

90.83

90.80

90.86

90.95

91.16

91.47

92.19

93.60

93.85

93.84

92.82

92.43

90.52

90.21

89.75

88.95

88.65

88.32

88.23

88.30

88.55

88.63

89.05

89.22

89.64

90.05

90.30

90.57

90.65

90.75

90.92

90.93

91.17

92.55

93.71

93.99

94.61

94.20

91.08

90.69

90.12

89.88

89.10

88.67

88.48

88.32

88.59

88.52

89.11

89.61

89.79

90.11

90.14

90.30

90.56

90.73

90.77

90.97

90.76

90.99

92.61

93.69

93.84

93.37

94.18

92.68

90.61

90.20

89.86

89.18

88.97

88.35

88.70

89.25

89.40

89.70

90.05

90.19

90.48

90.62

90.55

90.94

91.05

91.20

91.24

91.41

91.30

92.25

93.64

93.95

93.90

June 5

95-10

1,000

FEET

94.10

90.92

90.56

90.10

89.88

89.21

88.71

88.82

89.05

89.20

89.45

89.72

89.75

90.05

90.12

90.42

90.52

90.69

90.80

90.82

90.90

90.92

91.10

92.51

93.82

93.99

June 7

93.61

475

93.45

93.61

91.74

90.61

90.17

89.93

89.28

88.69

88.65

88.83

89.01

89.46

89.74

90.06

90.13

90.29

90.45

90.67

90.83

90.83

90.83

90.91

90.91

91.11

92.86

93-61

June 10

93-24

365

93.24

92.84

92.69

90.59

90.28

89.82

89.41

88.66

88.43

88.64

88.86

89.06

89.52

90.08

90.32

90.49

90.29

90.51

90.72

90.81

91.05

91.04

91.04

91.10

92.42

93.24

June 14

95.66

1,370

92.79

90.81

90.48

90.06

89.78

89.17

88.49

88.36

88.24

88.35

88.79

89.16

89.19

89.54

89.74

90.11

90.41

90.64

90.73

90.77

90.85

90.85

90.87

92.20

June 22

93.81

535

92.99

91.46

90.59

90.23

89.97

89.31

88.72

88.49

88.41

88.93

89.16

89.51

89.76

90.24

90.33

90.53

90.91

90.96

90.91

90.94

90.97

91.03

90.96

92.29

93.81

July 10

91.18

40

95.36

95.44

95.39

94.98

91.10

90.53

90.12

89.84

89.15

88.62

88.60

88.93

89.14

89.46

89.71

90.00

90.11

90.15

90.30

90.50

90.67

90.80

90.86

90.92

90.92

90.82

91.19

93.52

93.86
44 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 5.—Summary data of total energy slopes, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974

Date May 8

Discharge 

(ftVs)

Cross 

sect ion 

no.

Distance 

(feet)

1 0 

2 200 

3 225 

4 340 

5 572 

6 690 

7 996 

8 1,072 

9 1,212 

10 1,254 

11 1,360

Mean Energy 1 

Slope of reach

^

Date

200

Water _ ,

surface Tota1 

ele_ energy

vation }j!j (ft) (ft)

93.43

93.26 

93.12 

92.87 

92.68 

92.48 

92.39 

92.38 

92.24 

92.23

V

Discharge 

(ftVs)

Cross 

sect ion 

no.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

9

10

11

Distance 

(feet)

0

200

225

340

572

690

996

1,072

1,212

1,254

1,360

Water 

surface 

elevation 

(ft)

97.25

96.96

96.79

96.60

96.34

_____

96.05

95.88

95.81

95.78

S 

e

Energy 

head 

loss 

(ft)

93.50 

0.18

93.32 

.06 

93.26 

.29 

92.97 

.17 

92.80 

.24 

92.56 

.09 

92.47 

.03 

92.44 

.13 

92.31 

.02 

92.29

= 0.00093

May 29

1,600

Total 

energy 

head 

(ft)

97.48

97.20

97.11

96.99

96.65

96.46

96.29

96.37

96.20

Energy 

head 

loss 

(ft)

0.28

.09

.12

.3*

.19

 -

.17

.17

= 0.00091

May 26

385

surface Total *TMTM 

, energy head

'. head loss 

Vff ^n (ft) (ft)

94.33

94.09 

94.05 

94. 00 

93-82 

93.54 

93.44 

93.40 

93.32 

93.27

3 = 

e

Water 

surface 

elevation 

(ft)

96.58

96.51

96.35

96.17

96.00

95.79

95.43

95.35

95.36

S~e

9*. 43 

0

9*. 17 

94.25 

9*. 13 

93.96 

93.66 

93.57 

93.50 

93.46 

93.39

= 0.00078

May 30

1,240

.26

.12 

.17 

.30 

.12 

.07 

.04 

.07

Total Energy 

energy head 

head loss 

(ft) (ft)

96.79

96.60

96.69

96.49

96.27

96.06

95.75

95.82

95.70

= 0.00085

0.17

.20

.22

.21

 31

.12

May 27

750

Water T _ .

surface Total 

energy

e ! e head vation ( .

(ft) (ft)

95.72

95.51 

95.40 

95.26 

95.11 

94.92

94.63 

94.52 

94.49

S = 

e

Water 

surface 

elevation 

(ft)

95.84

95.73

95.67

95.48

95.36

95.14

94.85

94.73

94.66

94.66

S 

e

Energy 

head 

loss 

(ft)

95.89 

0.25

95.64

95.67 

.21 

95.46 

.16 

95.31 

.19 

95.12 

.26

94.86 

.05 

94.81 

.09 

94.72

' 0.00098

May 31

886

Total 

energy 

head 

(ft)

96.01

95.87

95.93

95.77

95.59

95.38

95.12

94.96

94.96

94.89

Energy 

head 

loss

(ft)

0.14

 

.16

.18

.21

.26

.16

-07

= 0.00092

May 28

1,150

Water T . , _

surface Total E " er9y 

. energy head

el e~ head loss 

V£;y (ft) (ft)

96.63

96.41 

96.28 

96.05 

95.86 

95.77 

95.57 

95.43 

95.36 

95.36

S~e =

Water 

surface 

elevation 

(ft)

95.89

95.87

95.72

95.24

94.85

94.75

94.75

S~ e

96.82 

0.23

96.59

96.61 

.26 

96.35 

.22 

96.13 

.10 

96.03 

.15 

95.88 

.15 

95.73

95.80 

95.67

0.00085

June 1

910

Total Energy 

energy head 

head loss 

(ft) (ft)

96.06

0.04

96.02

.01

96.01

.54

 

95.47

.38

 

95.09

.02

95.07

.07

95.00

= 0.00085
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 5.—Summary data of total energy slopes, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

45

Date

Di scharge 

(ftVs)

Cross 

sec- Distance 

tion (feet) 

no.

1 0

2 200

3 225

4 340

5 572

6 690

7 996

8 1,072

9 1,212

10 1,254

11 1,360

Date

Discharge 

(ftVs)

Cross 

sec- Distance 

tion (feet) 

no.

1 0

2 200

3 225

4 340

5 572

6 690

7 996

8 1,072

9 1,212

10 1,254

11 1,360

Water 

surface 

elevation 

(ft)

96.03

95.96

95.83

95.78

_____

95.39

95.11

95.04

94.91

94.91

S 

e

Water 

surface 

elevation 

(ft)

3k. 2k

94.06

93-96

93.90

93.71

93.50

93.39

93-38

93.29

93-26

S 

e

June 2

960

Total 

energy 

head 

(ft)

96.20

96.11

96.13

96.05

95.62

95.38

95.29

95.27

95.18

Energy 

head 

loss 

(ft)

0.09

.08

.43

____

.24

.09

.02

.09

= 0.00082

June 10

369

Total 

energy 

head 

(ft)

3k. 3k

94.13

94.15

9^.03

93.85

93.63

93.51

93.48

93.42

93.38

Energy 

head 

loss 

(ft)

0.21

.12

.18

.22

.12

.03

.06

.04

= 0.00073

Water 

surface 

elevation 

(ft)

96.36

96.28

96.15

96.04

95.87

95.73

95.49

95.35

95.26

95.29

S 

e

Water 

surface 

elevation 

(ft)

95.83

95.59

95.57

_____

95.19

95.21

94.97

94.93

94.80

94.82

S 

e

June 3

1,100

Total 

energy 

head 

(ft)

96.54

96.45

96.47

96.34

96.13

95.98

95.80

95.64

95.69

95.60

Energy 

head 

loss (ft)

0.09

.13

.21

.15

.18

.16

____

.09

= 0.00076

June 12

850

Total 

energy 

head 

(ft)

95.99

95.73

95.86

_____

95.41

95.43

95.22

95.15

95.10

95.07

Energy 

head 

loss 

(ft)

0.26

.45

____

.21

.07

.05

.03

= 0.00067

Water 

surface 

elevation 

(ft)

96.21

96.07

96.01

95.91

95.76

95.72

95.36

95.26

95.15

S 

e

Water 

surface 

elevat ion 

(ft)

96.96

96.71

96.56

96.46

_____

96.14

95.95

95.76

95.68

95.66

S 

e

June 4

1,040

Total 

energy 

head 

(ft)

96.39

96.23

96.32

96.20

96.01

95.96

95-65

95.53

95.44

Energy 

head 

loss 

(ft)

0.16

.12

.19

.05

.31

.13

.09

____

p = 0.00071

June 14

1,380

Total 

energy 

head 

(ft)

97.17

96.91

96.97

96.81

_____

96.40

96.27

96.12

96.17

96.07

Energy 

head 

loss 

(ft)

0.26

.16

.41

___-

.13

.15

.10

= 0.00083

Water 

surface 

el evation 

(ft)

93.57

93.50

93.44

_____

92.90

92.89

92.83

92.81

S~e

Water 

surface 

elevation 

(ft)

94.92

94.77

94.72

94.65

94.22

93.99

93.89

93.88

S 

e

June 9

273

Total Energy 

energy head 

head loss 

(ft) (ft)

_____

93.62

93.67

.12

93.55

.55

- -

____

93.00

93.00

.07

92.93

.02

92.91

= 0.00073

June 22

556

Total Energy 

energy head 

head loss 

(ft) (ft)

95.04

0.18

94.86

94.96

.13

94.83

.43

----

94.40

.26

 

94.14

.05

94.09

.04

94.05

= 0.00078
46 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 

TABLE 5.—Summary data oj total energy slopes, Bedload Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974—Continued

Date

Discharge 

(ftVs)

Cross 

sect ion 

no.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Distance 

(feet)

0

200

225

340

572

690

996

1,072

1,212

1,254

1,360

Water 

surface 

elevat ion 

(ft)

92.38

92.31

92.08

91.86

91.39

91.24

91.20

91.20

91.19

91.18

S

e

July 10

40

Total 

energy 

head 

(ft)

92.39

92.32

92.09

91.87

91.42

91.26

91.21

91.21

91.20

91.19

Energy 

head 

loss 

(ft)

0.07

.23

.22

.45

.16

.05

.01

.01

= 0.00101

J The mean energy slope of the reach was calculated by a least-squares regression.
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 47

TABLE 6. — Summary data of hydraulic characteristics of cross sections in the Bedload

Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974

CROSS SECTION IF

[Distance, 0+00 feet; active bed-stations,

Date

May 8

May 28

May 30

May 31

June 2

June 5

June 7

June 10

June 14

June 22

July 10

Water Discharge Area Width

Day surface 

no. elevation V fl w 

(feet) (ft 3 /s) (ft 2 ) (ft)

1 93. M 200 96 74

21 96.63 1,150 335 88

23 96.27 1,080 306 87

2k 95.66 814 245 85

26 96.05 975 272 86

29 96.08 975 281 86

31 94- 46 435 139 78

34 94.25 303 137 77

38 96.88 1,300 352 89

46 94.90 560 184 85

64 92.38 40

CROSS SECTION 2S

[Distance, 2+00 feet; active bed-stations,

Date

May 26

May 2?

May 28

May 29

June 5

June 9

June 14

July 10

[D

Date

May 8

May 2k

May 27

May 29

July 10

Water Discharge Area Width 

Day surface 

no. elevation

(feet) (ftVs) (ft 2 ) (ft)

19 94.11 398 146 41

20 95-50 759 250 54

21 96.33 1,120 325 63

22 97.00 1,580 358 63

29 96.10 1,000 315 58

33 93-60 275 156 40

38 96.60 1,280 334 63

64 92.26 40 43 37

CROSS SECTION 3S

istance, 2+25 feet; active bed-stations,

Water Discharge Area Width

Day surface Q & V 

no. elevation

(feet) (ft 3 /s) (ft 2 ) (ft)

1 93.26 200 105 48

17 92.67 104 88 4?

20 95.59 810 276 66

22 96.85 1,560 400 69

64 92.26 40 86 49

18 to 86 feet]

Depth 1 Velocity2

2 u 

(ft) (ft/s)

1.30 2.08

3.81 3.43

3.52 3.53

2.88 3.32

3.16 3.58

3.27 3.47

1.78 3.13

1.78 2.21

3-96 3.69

2.16 3.04

24 to 52 feet]

Depth 1 Velocity 2

a u

(ft) (ft/s)

3-56 2.73

4.63 3.04

5.16 3.45

5.68 4.42

5.43 3.17

3.90 1.76

5.30 3.83

1.16 .93

26 to 70 feet]

Depth 1 Velocity2

a n

(ft) (ft/s)

2.19 1.90

1.87 1.18

4.18 2.93

5.80 3.90

1.76 .47

Mean

bed 

elevation 

(ft) 3

92.13

92.31

92.32

92.45

92.55

92.48

92.58

92.37

92.43

92.48

92.23

Mean 

bed 

elevation 

(ft) 3

90.3

89.2

88.4

88.3

88.1

89.2

88.5

91.4

Mean 

bed

elevation 

(ft) 3

91.00

90.75

90.20

89.86

90.50

TABLE 6 . — Sunimary datii of hydraulic characteristics 0,f cross s ections in thle Bedloa

Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974 Continued

[Di

Date

May 8

May 27

May 28

May 29

May 30

May 31

June 2

June 5

June 7

June 10

June 14

June 22

July 10

stance ,3 + 40

Water

Day surface 

no. elevation 

(feet)

1

20

21

22

23

24

26

29

31

34

38

46

64

[Distance

Date

May 8

May 27

May 28

May 30

May 31

June 2

June 5 

June 7

June 10

June 14

June 22

July 10

Day 

no.

1

20

21

23

24

26

29 

31

34

38

46

64

93.12

95.51

96.25

96.77

96.14

95.74

95.88

95.89

94.30

93.97

96.51

94.70

92.08

,5 + 22

Water

surface 

elevation

(feet)

92.87

95.37

96.10

95.86

95.43

95.65

95.80 

94.25

93.94

96.44

94.65

91.86

CROSS

feet; active

Discharge

Q 

(ft 3 /s)

200

814

1,150

1,480

1,100

822

985

980

448

371

1,220

560

40

CROSS 

feet; active

Discharge

Q

(ft 3 /s)

200

822

1,140

1,070

834

985

990 

450

371

1,330

555

40

SECTION 4F

bed-stations,

Area Width

A V 

(ft 2 ) (ft)

66 54

194 66

249 70

278 71

244 69

203 66

226 68

230 68

125 60

111 58

258 70

153 62

SECTION 5F 

bed-stations,

Area Width

A W

(ft 2 ) (ft)

78 39

225 63

261 70

231 68

193 63

224 66

244 66 

147 61

137 60

284 71

170 63

43 35

58 to

Depth 1

a 

(ft)

1.22

2.94

3.56

3.92

3.54

3.08

3.32

3.38

2.08

1.91

3.69

2.47

16 to

Depth 1

a

(ft)

2.00

3.57

3.73

3.40

3.06

3.39

3.70 

2.41

2.28

4.00

2.70

1.23

104 feet]

Velocity2

u 

(ft/s)

3.03

4.20

4.62

5.32

4.51

4.05

4.36

4.26

3.58

3.34

4.73

3.66

66 feet]

Velocity2

u

(ft/s)

2.56

3.65

4.37

4.63

4.32

4.40

4.06 

3.06

2.71

4.68

3.26

.93

Mean 

bed

elevation 

(ft) 3

91.89

92.16

92.18

92'. 18

92.11

92.00

92.01

91.98

91.99

91.95

92.19

91.99

91.89

Mean 

bed

elevat ion 

(ft) 3

91.66

91.55

91.75

92.12

92.20

91.99

91.66 

91.66

91.54

91.76

91.71

91.38
48 SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING

TABLE 6. — Summary data of hydraulic characteristics of cross sections in the Bedload 

Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974 Continued

CROSS SECTION 6F

[Distance, 6+90 feet; active bed-stations,

Date

May 8

May 27

May 28

May 31

June 2

June 5

June 7

June 10

July ID

Water Discharge Area Width 

Day surface 

no. elevation " 

(feet) (ftVs) (ft 2 ) (ft)

1 92.68 20D 73 48

20 95.20 822 231 69

21 95.90 1,140 266 76

24 95-26 846 217 69

26 95.50 985 249 70

29 95.56 995 248 70

31 93.94 i(6o 150 61

34 93.71 371 138 61

64 91.39 iio 25 39

12 to

De'pth 1

a 

(ft)

1.52

3.35

3.50

3.14

3.56

3.54

2.46

2.26

.64

42 feet]

Velocity2 

(ft/s)

2.74

3.56

4.29

3.90

3.96

4.01

3.07

2.69

1.60

Mean 

bed 

elevation 

(ft) 3

91.13

91.06

91.40

91.33

91.14

91.27

90.98

90.99

90.96

CROSS SECTION 7F 

[Distance, 9 + 96 feet; active bed-stations,

Date

May 8 

May 27

May 31

June 2

June 5

June 7

June 10

June 22

July 10

Water Discharge Area Width 

Day surface 

no. elevation * 

(feet) (ftVs) (ft 2 ) (ft)

1 92.48 200 88 45 

20 95.09 818 229 64

24 95.03 846 214 64

26 95.48 985 247 65

29 95.51 1,000 264 65

31 93.82 460 155 60

34 93.51 371 123 48

46 94.17 548 169 63

64 91.24 40 39 41

12 to

Depth 1

a 

(ft)

1.96 

3.58

3.34

3.80

4.06

2.58

2.56

2.68

.95

52 feet]

Velocity2 

(ft/s)

2.27 

3.57

3.95

3.99

3.79

2.97

3.02

3.24

1.03

Mean 

bed 

elevation 

(ft) 3

90.43 

90.40

90.74

90.75

90.49

90.50

90.69

90.53

90.32

TABLE 6. — Summary data of hydraulic c 

Trap reach, East Fork River,

haracteristics of cross sections in the Bedloao 

May-July 1974 Continued

CROSS SECTION 8S

[Distance, 10 + 72

Date

May 8

May 27

May 31

June 2

June 5

June 7

June 10

June 14

June 22 

July 10

Water 

Day surface 

no. elevation 

(feet)

1 92.39

20 94.85

24 94.74

26 95.20

29 95-26

31 93-70

34 93.39

38 95.92

46 93-96 

64 91.20

feet; active bed-stations

Discharge 

Q 

(ftVs)

200

818

846

985

1.DOO

465

369

1,300

540 

40

Area Width 

A W 

(ft 2 ) (ft)

90 47

201 51

200 52

230 53

240 53

163 49

143 48

285 54

186 50 

53 42

14 to

Depth 1

a 

(ft)

1.91

3.94

3.85

4.34

4.53

3.33

2.98

5.28

3-72 

1.26

54 feet]

Velocity2 

u 

(ft/s)

2.20

4.07

4.17

4.28

4.17

2.85

2.58

4.56

2.90 

.75

Mean 

bed 

elevation 

(ft) 3

90.32

90.34

90.36

90.24

90.10

89.92

90.13

89.77

89.74 

89.93

[Distance, 12 + 12

Date

May 8

May 27

May 28

May 30

May 31

June 2

June 5

June 7 

June 10

June 14

June 22

July 10

Water 

Day surface 

no. elevation 

(feet)

1 92.38

20 94.79

21 95.40

23 95-17

24 94.69

26 95.12

29 95.12

31 93.69 

34 93-38

38 95.75

46 93.91

64 91.20

CROSS SECTION 9S 

feet; active bed-stations,

Discharge 

Q 

(ftVs)

200

822

1,156

1,050

858

985

1,000

47D 

367

1,390

538

40

Area Width 

A W 

(ft 2 ) (ft)

104 47

213 52

270 54

256 53

226 52

244 53

256 53

158 48 

146 47

288 56

181 49

50 46

14 to

Depth 1

a 

(ft)

2.21

4.10

5. DO

4.83

4.35

4.60

4.83

3.29 

3.11

5.14

3.69

1.09

58 feet]

Velocity2 

u 

(ft/s)

1.92

3.86

4.26

4.10

3.80

4.04

3-91

2.97 

2.51

4.83

2.97

.80

Mean 

bed 

elevat i on 

(ft) 3

90.13

9D.29

89.72

89.73

89.87

89.96

89.71

90.24 

90.17

89.74

89.98

90.09
SCOUR AND FILL IN A STREAM CHANNEL, EAST FORK RIVER, WESTERN WYOMING 49

TABLE 6 . — Summary data of hydraulic characteristics of cross sections in the Bedload 

Trap reach, East Fork River, May-July 1974 — Continued

CROSS SECTION

[Distance, 12 + 54

Date

May

May

May

May

May

May

June

June

June

June

June

June

July

8

26

27

28

30

31

2

5

7

10

14

22

10

Day 

no.

1

19

20

21

23

24

26

29

31

34

38

46

64

Water 

surface 

elevation 

(feet)

92.24

93.13

94.54

95.34

95.06

94.60

94.99

95.08

93.59

93.27

95.68

93.84

91.19

10S

feet; active bed-stations, 18 to

Discharge 

Q 

(ftVs)

2DO

350

774

1,130

1,040

866

985

1,000

462

367

1,370

535

40

Area 

A 

(ft 2 )

93

124

179

223

210

189

200

214

140

128

244

152

55

Width 

W 

(ft)

36

37.5

39.5

41

40.5

39.5

40

40.5

38

37.5

42

38

33

Depth 1 

3 

(ft)

2.58

3.31

4.53

5.44

5.19

4.78

5.00

5.28

3.68

3.41

5.81

4.00

1.67

42 feet]

Velocity2 

u 

(ft/s)

2.15

2.82

4.32

5.07

4.95

4.58

4.93

4.67

3.30

2.87

5.61

3.52

.73

Mean 

bed 

elevation 

(ft) 3

89.45

89-55

89.39

39.09

89.04

89.13

89.42

89.13

89.45

89.63

88.98

89.38

89.42

CROSS SECTION

[Distance

Date

May

May

May

May

May

June

June

June

June

June

June

July

8

27

28

30

31

2

5

7

10

14

22

10

13

2S

Day 

no.

1

20

21

23

24

26

29

31

34

38

46

64

= A/U.

= Q/A.

, 13+60

Water 

surface 

elevation 

(feet)

92.25

94.57

95.28

95.05

94.61

95.00

95.10

93.61

93.24

95.66

93.81

91.18

feet; active

Discharge 

Q 

(ftVs)

200

800

1,120

1,030

866

985

1,000

475

365

1,370

535

40

11S

bed-stations

Area 

A 

(ft 2 )

92

189

245

250

219

219

232

154

143

276

167

47

Width 

W 

(ft)

45

52

53

52.5

52

52

52.5

49

48

53

50

44

. 14 to

Depth 1 

3 

(ft)

2.04

3.63

4.62

4.76

4.21

4.21

4.42

3-14

2.98

5.21

3.34

1.07

54 feet]

Velocity2 

u 

(ft/s)

2.17

4.23

4.57

4.12

3.95

4.50

4.31

3.08

2.55

4.96

3.20

.85

Mean 

bed 

elevat ton 

(ft)*

90.15

90.40

90.11

89.68

89.82

90.15

90.04

90.07

90.03

89.74

90.04

90.01

3The mean bed elevation was calculated by averaging the bed elevation 

at even-numbered stations over the width of active bed. For the occasional 

instances when a cross section was sounded at odd-numbered stations, the 

bed elevation at even-numbered stations has been determined by linear interpolation.

AU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979-677-026/59