Streamflow, Sediment-Transport, and 

Water-Temperature Characteristics of 

Three Small Watersheds in the 

Alsea River Basin, Oregon 

Streamflow, Sediment-Transport, and 

Water-Temperature Characteristi·cs of 

Three Small Watersheds in the 

Alsea River Basin, Oregon 

By D. D. Harris and R. C. Williams 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 642 

Washington 19 71 
United States Department of the Interior 

ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretory 

Geological Survey 

W. A. Radlinski, Acting Director 

Free on application to the U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. 20242 
CONTENTS 

Page 

Definition of terms --------------------------- iv Analysis and in_~!]>retation of data-Continur"'-

1\bstract ------------------------------------ 1 Streamflovv-Continued 

Introduction --------------------------------

Hydrologic environment --------------------~·­

Data collected and methods used --------------

1 Distribution and volume of runoff -----

2 High flow --------------------------

3 Low flow ---------------------------

6 

9 

11 

12 

12 

14 

16 

-~(~_ 

_19_ 

Precipitation ---------------------------

Streamflovv ----------------------------- .Sediment transport ----------------------

3 Sediment transport ----------------------

3 Sediment concentration -------------- 3 Sediment load _________ .;. ____________ _ 

VVater temperatures --------------------- 4 Sediment yield ----------------------

Analysis and interpretation of data ----------- 4 VVater temperatures ---------------------

Precipitation ---------------------------

Streamflovv -----------------------------

5 Summary ----------------------------------

5 Selected references -------------------------- go 

FIGURE 1. 

2-19. 

ILLUSTRATIONS 

Map showing the study area ---------------------------------------------------------- Graphs shovving2. Relation of annual precipitation at Needle Branch and at Deer Creek gages t"' 

that at the Flynn Creek gage ------------------------------------------ 6 

3. Duration curves of discharge for the three study streams ---------------------- '1 

4. Range and seasonal distribution of flows for Needle Branch and Deer Creek---- 8 

5. Relation of annual runoff of Needle Branch a,nd of-Deer Creek to that of Flyn.., 

Creek for vvater years 1959-65 ----------------------------------------- 9 

6. Relation of seasonal runoff of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek to that of Flynn 

Creek for water years 1959-65 ------------------------------------------ 9 

7. Relation of peak flovv of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek to that of Flyn.., 

Creek for vvater years 1959-65 ----------------------------------------- 10 

8. Relation of 8-day high-flovv runoff of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek to the+. 

of Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65 --------------------------------- 11 

9. Lovv-flovv recession rates for Needle Branch and Deer Creek for water yeal'~ 

1959-65 -------------------------------------------------------------~- 12 

10. Relation of low flow of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek to that of Flynn Cree": 

for vvater years 1959-65 -------------------------------------~---------- 13 

11. Duration curves of suspended-sediment concentra~:~.ons for streams ------------- 14 

12. Relation of annual discharge-wei~h_~~~_mean conc~~!'_ation of Nee<!le Branch 

and of Deer Creek to that O!f Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65 --------- 14 

18. Relation of monthly sediment yi~ld.- of-N~edl~ lfranch-ll.l!<rof Deer Creek water-~ 

sheds to that of Flynn Creek watershed for water years 1959-65 ----------- 16 

14. Relation of annual sediment yield of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek water~ 

sheds to that of Flynn Creek watershed for vvater years 1959-65 ----------- 16 

15. Relation of maximum water tem1

perature of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek t9 

that of Flynn Creek for water years 1959=65 --~-----=~-~=---------------_--- 1'1 

m 
Page 

FIGURE 16. Relation of monthly average of maximum daily water temperature of Needle 

Branch and of Deer Creek to that of Flynn Creek for water years 195~-65 __ 

17. Relation of minimum water temperature of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek 

to that of Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65 -------------------------

18. Relation of monthly average of minimum daily water temperature of Needle 

Branch and of Deer Creek to that of Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65 __ 

19. Relation of monthly water-temperature range of Needle Branch and of Deer 

Creek to that of Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65 --------------------

18 

18 

19 

20 

TABLES 

Page 

TABLE 1. Annual precipitation, in inches, measured at the precipitation gages, and differences from 

that measured at the Flynn Creek gage ------------------------------------------- 5 

2. Annual runoff for each year of the calibration period ----------------------------------- 5 

3. Peak discharge and runoff for all peaks greater than 50 cfs per sq mi on Flynn Cree]· and 

concurrent peaks on Needle Branch and Deer Creek -------------------------------- 16-

4. Three-day high-flow runoff for Flynn Creek, Needle Branch, and Deer Creek ______________ 11 

5. Approximate composition of suspended-sediment load during the calibration period __________ 15 

6. Particle-size distribution of sediment deposited behind the concrete ccmtrol weirs fo~ the 

dates given ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 15 

7. Annual sediment yields, in tons per square mile, of the three principal watersheds for 1959-65 15 

DEFINITION OF TERMS 

Bedload is the sediment (1) that moves by sliding, 

rolling, or skipping on or very near the streambed, and 

(2) sediment that is moved by tractive or gravitational 

forces, or both, but at velocities less than those of the 

adjacent flow. 

Cubic feet per second (cfs) is the rate of discharge of 

a stream whose channel is 1 square foot in crosssectional area and whose average velocity is 1 foot per 

second. ~ 

Cubic feet per second per square mile (cfs per sq mi) 

is the average number of cubic feet of water flowing 

per second from each square mile of area drained, assuming that the runoff is distributed uniformly in time 

and area. 

Discharge-weighted mean sediment concentration is 

the theoretical sediment concentration if all the water 

and sediment passing a section during a time interval 

were mixed; concentrations are expressed in parts per 

million (ppm). 

Gaging station is a particular site on a stream, canal, 

lake, or reservoir where systematic observations of 

gage height or discharge are obtained. When used in 

connection with a discharge record, the term'is applied 

IV 

only to those gaging stations where a continuous record 

of discharge is obtained. 

Particle size is the diameter, in millimeters (mm), of 

suspended sediment or bed material determined by sieve 

and sedimentation methods. 

Particle-size classification agrees close!'~ with recommendations made by the American Geophysical Union 

Subcommittee on Sediment Terminolo~r (Lane and 

others, 1947, p. 937). The classification is as follows: 

Clay: Smaller than 0.004 mm. 

Silt: Between 0.004 and 0.062 mm. 

Sand: Between 0.062 and 2.0 mm. 

Gravel: Between 2.0 and 64.0 mm. 

The particle-size distributions given in this report are 

not necessarily representative of the particle sizes of 

sediment in transport in the natural str~am. Most of 

the organic matter is removed, and the. sample is subjected to mechanical and chemical disr~rsion before 

analysis of the silt and clay. 

Parts per million (ppm) for suspende~ sediment is 

computed as 1 million times the ratio of" the weight of 

sediment to the weight of the mixture of water and 

sediment. 
Prediction limits are lines about the regression curves 

for a selected significance level within the range of 

previously experienced values. They are computed from 

the equation : 

,U} =±t' Sp, L [(l+y)/2](n-2) 

where 

t is a value from statistical "t" distribution table 

(Dixon and Massey, 1957), 

"Y is a selected confidence level (95 percent), 

Sp is the standard error of prediction, and 

U and L are the upper and lower prediction limits 

about the curve. 

Runoff is that part of the precipitation that appears 

in surface streams. 

Runoff in inches (in.) shows the depth to which the 

drainage area would be covered if all the runoff for a 

given time period were uniformly distributed. 

Sediment is solid material that originates mostly 

from disintegrated rocks and is transported by, suspended in, or deposited from water; it includes chemical 

and biochemical precipitates and decomposed organic 

material such as humus. The quantity, characteristics, 

and cause of the occurrence of sediment in streams are 

influenced by environmental factors. Some major factors are: degree of slope, length of slope, soil characteristics, land usage, and quantity and intensity of precipitation. 

Sediment discharge is the rate at which dry weight of 

sediment passes a section of a stream or is the quantity 

of sediment, as measured by dry weight, or by volume, 

that is discharged in a given time. 

Sediment load is the total sediment being moved by 

the stream or the quantity of sediment that is transported in a given length of time. 

v 

Stage-discharge relation is the relation b~tween gage 

height and the volume of water flowing ir a channel, 

expressed as volume per unit of time. 

Standard error of estimate (Se) is a measure of the 

variation of points about the regression line. Lines 

drawn a vertical distance of one standard e~ror of estimate above and below the line of regression wiii encompass about two-thirds of the defining pointr" 

Standard error of prediction (Sp) is made. up of three 

parts: the error of the mean, the error of the slope 

of the line, and the standard error of estimate. It is 

computed as I 1 (X;_X) 11 

Sp=sev 1+-+--- n %x2 

where 

Se is standard error of estimate, 

n is number of items in the sample, 

X is any single value, 

X is the mean value for the period 1959-65, and 

~x2 is the summation of the squared de"'Tiation of X 

from X for the period 1959-65. 

Suspended sediment is the sediment that d any given 

time is maintained in suspension by the upvrard components of turbulent currents or that exists ir suspension 

as a colloid. 

Tons per day is the quantity of a substance in solution or suspension that passes a stream ser.tion during 

a 24-hour period. 

Water year is the 12-month period, Octob~r 1 through 

September 30. The water year is designr.ted by the 

calendar year in which it ends and which includes 9 of 

the 12 months. Thus, the year ending September 30, 

1959, is caiied the 1959 water year. 

Streamflow, Sediment-Transport, and Water-Temperature 

Characteristics of Three Small Watersheds in the 

Alsea River Basin, Oregon 

By D. D. Harris and R. C. Williams 

ABSTRACT 

Data collected during the prelogging period 1959-65 

indicate an average annual runoff for Needle Branch 

and Deer and Flynn Creeks of 74.2, 75.1, and 77.7 

inches, respectively. The measured precipitation at 

Flynn Creek of 92.9 inches was 5 inches less than at 

either Needle Branch or Deer Creek. Unit flood runoff 

during the prelogging period was found to be lowest on 

Flynn Creek and highest on Needle Branch. On Needle 

Branch, there appear to be two distinct low-flow 

patterns, one for a saturated and one for an unsaturated soil condition. The average annual sediment yield 

was highest on Flynn Creek, 321 tons per square mile, · 

and lowest on Needle Branch, 166 tons per square mile. 

Maximum water temperatures were 62°F on Flynn 

Creek and 61 °F on Needle Branch and Deer Creek. 

INTRODUCTION 

What are the effects of logging on the regimen of a stream? This que~tion is of major 

concern to water users and water-resource 

managers in a heavily forested State like Oregon, where many of the watersheds are subject 

to logging in the future. 

To investigate the effects of logging, three 

small watersheds in the Alsea River basin on 

the west slope of the Oregon Coast Range 

(fig. 1) were selected for study. This was an 

interdisciplinary investigation to evaluate the 

influence of specific logging methods on stream 

regimen and on aquatic resources. The study 

plan involved ( 1) clear-cut logging of one 

watershed, (2) stagger cutting (small, spaced 

clear cuts) of a second watershed, and (3) leav1 

ing a third watershed uncut as a control to 

evaluate changes in the logged watersheds. 

Data were to be collected on all thre~ watersheds for a period of 7 years to define the prelogging calibration. The Oregon State University Department of Fisheries and Wildlife and 

the Oregon State Game Commission are studying the effects of logging on fish habitat, particularly in relation to salmon spawning. The 

School of Forestry at Oregon State University 

is evaluating in detail the effects of lo~ging in 

small drainage basins within the tw,1 logged 

watersheds, Deer Creek and Needle Branch. 

The U.S. Geological Survey was to study the 

integrated effects of logging on the De~r Creek 

and Needle Branch watersheds. Other participants in the study are the U.S. Forest Service, 

U.S. Soil Conservation Service, and GeorgiaPacific Corporation. 

The purpose of this report is to d o.fine the 

hydrologic characteristics of the three principal 

study basins and to show the interrelations of 

these characteristics for the calibration period, 

water years 1959-65. The relations developed 

for both Needle Branch and Deer. Cr~ek with 

respect to Flynn Creek will be used latr~ during 

the treatment and recovery phases to do.termine 

the effects of logging. This report includes a 

discussion of streamflow, sediment tr·ansport, 

and water temperature of the three streams, 

and precipitation on the three water?heds. 
123--s-4' 

«·34· . . 

l . . . . .. .-/ \ ( . EXPLANATION 

\ • . . Gaging station 

. 

I --··-- Basin ·boundary 

«'32' 

~ 0 ~ 

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

0 

FIGURE 1.-Location of study watersheds in Alsea River basin. 

HYDROLOGIC ENVIRONMENT 

AU three streams in the study area flow in 

a southerly direction, and the basins lie in the 

path of the prevailing westerly winds from 

the Pacific Ocean. Altitudes range from 440. 

feet at the Needle Branch gaging station to 

1,600 feet at the highest point of the Deer Creek 

basin. The valleys are V -shaped and cut into 

the Tyee Sandstone of Tertiary age. The basins 

are characterized by a heavy canopy of 

Douglas-fir mixed with alder and are almost 

2 

completely covered by a heavy growth of understory vegetation that provides good protection 

against erosion and soil-moisture loss by 

evaporation. 

Deer Creek basin has a drainage~reaof 1.17 

square miles. Sidehill slopes averaqe about 40 

percent and are characteristically r'>vered by a 

thin mantle of stony soil. Basin altitudes range 

from 600 to 1,600 feet. The overstory is about 

60 percent Douglas-fir and 40 percent alder, and 
the understory is mainly of salmonberry and 

sword fern. 

Flynn Creek basin has a drainage area of 

0.78 square mile. Sidehill slopes average about 

34 percent and altitudes range from 680 to 

1,400 feet. Much of the basin is on a moderate 

dip slope of sandstone beds generally overlain 

by a thick layer of sandy soil. Overstory is about 

70 percent alder and 30 percent Douglas-fir, 

and the understory is similar to that of Deer 

Creek. 

Needle Branch basin has a drainage area of 

0.27 square mile. Sidehill slopes average about 

37 percent and are largely covered with shallow 

stony soil. Basin altitudes range from 440 to 

1,200 feet. The overstory is about 85 percent 

Douglas-fir and 15 percent alder, and vine maple 

is the principal understory plant. Thirty-two 

acres in the headwaters of Needle Branch was 

logged in the early 1950's. 

The mild, humid climate of the area is typical 

of the· coastal region of western Oregon. More 

than 90 inches of precipitation occurs annually, 

most of it from October to May. Temperatures 

generally range between 20°F and 90°F, with 

a mean of about 51 °F. 

DATA COLLECTED AND METHODS USED 

Measurements of precipitation, streamflow, 

sediment transport, and water temperature near 

the mouths of the three study streams provided the data needed to develop relations between basin hydrologic characteristics. 

PRECIPITATION 

Precipitation data were collected at weighingtype rain gages just downstream from each 

of the outflow stream-gaging stations. Because 

the gages are at the lowest altitude in each 

basin, the records undoubtedly do not indicate 

the average precipitation on the basins. Although the records probably indicate less than 

the basin average and are partly estimated, they 

are considered adequate to indicate approximate 

areal distribution and year-to-year variation of 

precipitation. 

STREAMFLOW 

Records of runoff for the three study basins 

were collected at standard U.S. Geological Sur8 

vey gaging stations. Stage records were obtained on continuous analog recorco.rs. The 

recorders are housed in 4- by 4-foo~ shelters 

over 42-inch culvert-pipe stilling wellq, each of 

which is connected to the stream by t"VO 2-inch 

intake pipes. The stage-control stru~ture for 

each station is a concrete V-notch weir. 

Discharges at the gaging stations were determined from stage-discharge relations defined 

by a series of discharge measuremerts. Highand medium-flow discharge measurements were 

made using either the standard Price or pygmy 

current meter; low-flow measurements were 

made volumetrically. On Flynn r.nd Deer 

Creeks, volumetric measurements were made 

by timing the filling of a concrete box located 

immediately downstream from the weirs; on 

Needle Branch they were made by timing the 

filling of a metal container of known volUme 

held below the weir. Each discharge measurement was plotted to the concurrent gage height. 

Stage-discharge relations were developed from 

the measurements for each site and were used 

to obtain the discharge data for the analyses. 

SEDIMENT TRANSPORT 

For the calibration period, the sediment load 

at the sampling· sites near the mouths of the 

three principal streams can be divided into three 

classifications: (1) That computed from data 

obtained with a U.S. DH-48 sedimert sampler 

at the sampling stations, (2) that which remained deposited in the weir pools because of 

backwater created by the weirs, and (3) that 

composed of coarse mineral and organic matter 

too large to be sampled with a U.S. DH-48 

sampler. 

The major part of the load was s·ampled at 

the three sites and computed by methods outlined in the U.S. Geological Surv~y watersupply paper series "Quality of Surfr~e Waters 

of the United States" and in the rep0rts of the 

U.S. Inter-Agency Committee on 't'ater Resources (1957a, 1957b, 1959, 1961, 1963). During the 1959-61. water years, the suspendedsediment load was sampled with U.S. DH-48 

samplers at footbridges several hundred feet 

upstream from the gaging stations. Beginning 

with the 1962 water year, sampling was done 
on the concrete control weirs. In the sampling 

process, the nozzle of the U.S. DH-48 sampler 

traversed the entire depth of the stream-from 

water surface to the crest of the weir. Some 

particles that normally travel as bedload were 

caught by the samplers. However, in this report 

the sediment concentration and load obtained 

from sediment samples are termed "suspended 

sediment" to differentiate from the sediment 

load computed by adding an increment for the 

sediment retained just upstream from the weirs 

where sampling was done. To obtain equivalent 

records for the entire calibration period, adjustments were made to the suspended-sedimentload records for the 1959-61 water years, on the 

basis of comparison samples obtained at the 

two sites on each stream during the 1961 water 

year. 

The part of the sediment load trapped in the 

weir pools was determined by cross-section 

surveys at the end of each water year, beginning in 1962. The volume of fill, or scour, was 

computed by the method of average-end areas. 

Two samples of the deposit were analyzed for 

particle-size distribution, and the specific 

weight was determined. Volume of the deposit 

was converted to weight for direct combination with the suspended-sediment load. The load 

represented by sediment in the deposits is probably not directly related to the suspendedsediment load. However, these streams have 

the competence to move substantial amounts 

of coarse sediment only during the highflow period when essentially all the suspended 

sediment is tran_sported. Therefore, for the 

purpose of this study the deposited sediment 

was prorated by the year and by the month on 

the basis of the suspended-sediment load. 

The part of the coarse sediment load that 

was neither sampled nor trapped in the weir 

pools cannot be accurately determined. During 

1965, samples were obtained using a 1,4-inch 

wire-mesh basket (in the shape of the weir 

notch) placed in the weir notch for selected 

periods. The unsampled loads at the sampling 

stations were approximated from the amount 

of material trapped during a specific period of 

time. Although this method did not provide an 

accurate determination, it did provide data to 

4 

appraise the importance of the une·~mpled load. 

It was found that the streams transported 

coarse mineral and orga1,1ic material only during 

periods when suspended-sediment loads were 

very high. Because the amounts detected were a 

very small percentage of the total sediment 

loads at those times, the unsampled loads probably represented only a small perc~ntage of the 

annual load. The relations of the s£iiment yield 

of Deer Creek and Needle Braner watersheds 

to that of Flynn Creek watershed probably are 

not materially in error by using this method of 

approximating the coarse unsampled load. 

Methods used for particle-size analysis are 

outlined in reports of the U.S. Inter-Agency 

Committee on Water Resources (1957a, 1957b, 

1959, 1961, 1963). To approximate. the organic 

fraction of the suspended-sediment load, organic 

materials were separated from the mineral 

sediments, dried, and weighed. 

WATER TEMPERATURES 

The daily maximum and minimum water 

temperatures used in subsequent parts· of this 

report were determined by use of thermograph 

attachments on the water-stage: recorders, 

which provided continuous records for each 

stream. 

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATIO:i.'"' OF DATA 

The analysis of data was intended to define 

the hydrologic characteristics of the prelogging 

period1 for future comparison with those of the 

postlogging period. The methods of analysis 

used are patterned after standard correlation 

methods (Ezekiel and Fox, 195!\) and are 

similar to those previously used b;., Schneider 

and Ayer (1961) and by Richardson (1965) to 

determine changes in the hydrologic characteristics caused by changes in vegetative cover. 

The principal method was to relate streamflow, 

sediment transport, and water temperatures of 

Needle Branch and Deer Creek to those of the 

control stream, Flynn Creek. Regression lines 

of the relations and their equations were developed. From these equations, valua.s of dependent variables (Needle Branch and Deer Creek) 

can be estimated from values of the independent 

variable (Flynn Creek). 
Prediction limits at the 95-percent level were 

computed for the regressions to determine the 

significance of future changes of individual 

values. The 95-percent prediction limits are 

shown for all relations. If future individual 

values plot outside the prediction limits shown, 

the change resulting from logging will be considered significant. 

Comparison of prelogging with po.stlogging 

conditions by covariance analysis should provide a better method of measuring the significance of future changes in relations than would 

the use of the standard error of prediction ; 

however, because covariance analysis requires 

both prelogging and postlogging data, it is not 

further considered in this prelogging report. 

PRECIPITATION 

To isolate the effects of logging on streamflow, sediment transport, and water temperature, using relations of Needle Branch and of 

Deer Creek with Flynn Creek, the areal distribution of precipitation must be reasonably consistent over the three-basin study area. Therefore, for later comparison with precipitation 

data for the postlogging period, it was important to study the areal distribution that 

occurred during the 7 -year calibration period. 

Annual precipitation at the three rain gages 

is shown in table 1. The annual average precipitation at Needle Branch and at Deer Creek 

exceeded that at Flynn Creek by more than 4.5 

inches. In 1959 precipitation at the Needle 

Branch gage was more than 12 inches greater 

than at the Flynn Creek gage; in 1965 precipitation at the Needle Branch gage was nearly 2 

inches less than at Flynn Creek gage. 

The relations between cumulative precipitation for Needle Branch and Flynn Creek and 

for Deer Creek and Flynn Creek are shown in 

figure 2. The relations were fairly consistent 

throughout the study period, although the one 

for Needle Branch shows progressively less 

excess precipitation in relation to Flynn Creek. 

The indicated change on Needle Branch is 

assumed to be of a temporary nature, but the 

assumption will be investigated further during 

the postlogging period. 

5 

TABLE 1.-Annual precipitation, in inches, measured at 

the precipitation gages, . and difference:~ from that 

measured at the Flynn Creek gage 

Needle Branch Deer Creek 

Flynn 

Creek Difference Difference 

Water Precipi- Precipi- from Precipi- from 

year tation tation Flynn Creek tatio"' Flynn Creek 

1959 ____ 103.70 115.76 +12.06 109.00 +5.30 

1960 ____ 82.29 91.81 +9.52 88.34 +6.05 

1961_ ___ 105.86 109.84 +3.98 111.29 +5.43 

1962 ____ 85.68 90.54 +4.86 88.52 +2.84 

1963 ____ 83.59 87.52 +3.93 88.05 +4.46 

1964 ____ 95.34 96.63 +1.29 99.02· +3.68 

1965 ____ 94.09 92.30 -1.79 98.24 +4.15 

Mean_ 92.93 97.77 +4.84' 97.49 +4.56 

Extension of the cumulative pr~cipitation 

relations after logging will help to indicate if 

a future change in a streamflow relation was 

the result of logging alone. 

STREAMFLOW 

In deciding which streamflow relations should 

be defined for the calibration period, consideration was given to the changes that could be expected as a result of logging. Log~ing could 

result in changing (1) the timing, B real distribution, and volume of runoff, (2) the. magnitude 

of high flows and flood peaks, and ( 3) the 

magnitude and duration of summer low flows. 

Distribution and Volume of Runoff 

Annual runoff from the three study basins 

for water years 1959-65 is shown in table 2, 

and the daily mean discharges are r'xblished in 

annual reports of the U.S. Geolog~~al Survey 

(1960, 1961, 1961-64, 1966c). 

Flow-duration curves developed for the three 

study streams (fig. 3) show the flow characteristics throughout the range of di~charge, in 

cubic feet per second per square mile, without 

TABLE 2.-Annual runoff, in inches, for each year of the 

calibration period 

Water Flynn Need\• Deer 

year Creek Bran<'h Creek 

1959 -------------- 78.60 84.04 78.63 

1960 -------------- 72.18 69.55 67.81 

1961 -------------- 93.30 85.56 89.64 

1962 -------------- 66.45 61.61 64.27 

1963 -------------- 69.17 62.83 64.68 

1964 -------------- 77.21 75.28 74.90 

1965 -------------- 87.07 80.80 85.47 

Mean ------ 77.71 74.24 75.06 
500 zen 

QlLI 

~0 400 t: z CL.-

Oz 

u.~-

300 0: ~ CL.lLI 

lLI~ 200;;:: u 

~ -l 

100;:::) :::E 

;:::) 

u 

0 

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 

CUMULATIVE PRECIPITATION AT FLYNN CREEK, IN INCHES 

FIGURE 2.-Relation of annual precipitation at Needle Branch and at 

Deer Creek gages to that at the Flynn Creek gage. 

regard to the sequence of occurrence. The curves 

cannot be used for precise future evaluation 

of changes in flow characteristics. However, for 

a general comparison of the three streams, the 

curves are used to show the average percentage 

of time that specified discharges were equaled 

or exceeded. The curves merge above 10 cfs per 

sq mi, indicating similar high-flow characteristics in the three basins. However, low-flow 

characteristics differ. For example, a discharge 

of 0.3 cfs per sq mi is equaled or exceeded 96 

percent of the time on Deer Creek, 93 percent 

of the time on Flynn Creek, and 83 percent of 

the time on Needle Branch. 

The range and seasonal distribution of flows 

for Needle Branch and Deer Creek for the prelogging period are shown by the maximumminimum hydrographs in figure 4. The hydrographs, which will provide a basis for visual 

comparison with the patterns of the study 

streams after logging, were developed by using 

the maximum and minimum daily discharges 

in the 7 -year calibration period. 

The volume of runoff from a basin depends 

on precipitation, effects of changes in groundwater storage, and evapotranspiration. No 

ground-water data are available for this study; 

however, because ground-water storage at the 

6 

beginning of each water year seem~ to be small, 

the change from year to year is assrmed to be 

negligible. By assuming negligible change in 

ground-water storage, the differenc~ between 

precipitation and runoff is evapotranspiration. 

Although precipitation at the gages is not considered to be a reliable measure of precipitation on the basin, the difference betw~en measured precipitation and runoff should approximate the minimum evapotranspiration. Minimum annual evapotranspiration est~mated by 

this method (precipitation data fro"ll table 1 

minus runoff data from table 2) sh"lws 15.22 

inches at Flynn Creek, 23.53 inches at Needle 

Branch, and 22.43 inches at Deer Creek-an 

average of 20.39 inches for the thr<:\~ basins. 

Average annual lake evaporation for this area, 

as determined by the U.S. Weather Bureau from 

evaporation pan data (Kohler and others, 1959), 

is about 22.5 inches. On the basis of these data, 

evapotranspiration is estimated to be 21 inches. 

Logging normally tends to redun.e evapotranspiration initially and thereby increases the 

runoff. Theoretically, if evapotranspiration 

were entirely eliminated, Needle Branch runoff 

would be increased by 21 inches annually. Runoff for Deer Creek, where 25 percent of the 

basin will be clear -cut, would be increased by 
1000 

L&J 

...J 

2 I DEER CREEK 

L&J 

0.: 2 FLYNN CREEK ~ 

::) 

~ 100 3 NEEDLE BRANCH 

....... 

0.: ~ 

~ .... 

....... 

0 

s 

0.: 

L&J 10 

'~ "" "" "' Q. ....... 

1-

L&J " '"""' "' L&J 

l&. & 

0 

m 

::) 

0 

~ 1.0 

'~ 

'\ 

~ tJ" 

(!) 

0.: 

_'\ ~ 

~ ~ 

..3!o 

' ~ 

~ 

J: 

0 

en 

0 

~ 

..... ~ '""' ~ ~ 

'3 -- ~2::::: 1'-1 ... ~ t--

"" ----r--r--1--

~ ........ 0

·b.1 0.2 o.5 1 2 5 10 20 30 40 so so 10 80 90 95 98 99 99.f 99.8 99.9 

PERCENT OF TIME INDICATED DISCHARGE WAS EQUALED OR EXCEEDED 

FIGURE 3.-Duration curves of discharge for the three study streams 

(based on records for vvater years 1959-65). 

5.2 inches, or 25 percent of 21 inches. It is 

improbable that such a drastic increase in runoff would. actually occur, but the figures show 

the maximum potential increase. 

Annual runoff for Needle Branch and for 

Deer Creek were related to that of Flynn Creek 

by regression analyses (fig. 5). The relations 

were well defined by the annual values except 

for those of 1959 at Needle Branch. In 1959, 

the runoff at Needle Branch was 5 inches more 

than that at Flynn Creek, whereas in subsequent years runoff was always greater at Flynn 

Creek. Apparently, the difference was caused by 

a change in the areal distribution of precipitation, as indicated by the excess of 12 inches of 

precipitation measured at Needle Branch over 

7 

that at Flynn Creek in 1959. This compared 

with an average excess precipitati()n of 3.63 

inches in subsequent years. During· 1959-65, 

runoff from Flynn Creek progres?ively decreased in proportion to precipitation measured 

at the rain gage. This proportional decrease 

could have been caused by a change in the areal 

distribution of precipitation; howeve:r, because 

there was only one precipitation gr.ge in the 

Flynn Creek basin and because of t1'~ reduced 

accuracy of the partly estimated pr~'!Cipitation 

values, no further .analysis was mr1e of the 

precipitation-runoff relations. 

Regressions of seasonal runoff were: developed 

for future evaluation of changes (fig. 6). The 

period November-February was selected as the 
0 100~----------------------------------------------~----~ 

~ 0:: 

~ 0... 10~----~~--~--~~~--------------------------------~ 

~ 

~ 

~Maximum daily discharge 

~ 1. 0 I-+ ...... ----HIII~~~-----I~~------------4----------------.--f~ 

::J 

(.) 

3:: 

a.J 0.1 ...,._ __ ....,._ ________________________________ ~~~~-=-+ll---K---=-~ 

~ < 

~ 

~ 

0 0.01~~~~~~~""--:-~~~~~~~~""'-!-!~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

N£EDLE BRANCH MAXIMUM-MINIMUM HYDROGRAPH 1959-1~~5 

c 

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

frl 

en 

0:: 

~ 100 ~...,_----------r-----A----++--r--------------------------·--------1 

t-

~ 

L&J 

~ 

_,("Maximum daily discharge 

(.) m 10~~~--~------------------~~~~~-----------------M 

a 

Minimum 

FIGURE 4.-Range and seasonal distribution of :flows for Needle Branch and Deer Creek. 

8 
.. X 

0 

z 

<l: 

~ 

Cll 

UJ 

_J 

0 

~~·100 

E~. 8o 

LL 

LL 

0 

z 

:::> 60 ~ 

_J 

<l: 

~ 

NEEDLE BRANCH' DEER CREEK 

Y=3.52 + 0.91 X Y=l.02X- 4.20 

z 40L------L------L-------L------~-J 

<l: 40 60 80 100 120 40 60 80 100 

ANNUAL RUNOFF (X) OF FLYNN CREEK, IN INCHES 

FmURE 5.-Relation of annual runoff of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek 

to that of Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65. 

120 

dormant and rainy season, March-June as the 

growing and high-flow season, and July-October 

as the high-evapotranspiration and low-flow 

season. 

High Flow 

Regressions of peak discharges were developed to establish the high-flow relations of the 

three basins prior to logging. All peaks of 50 

cfs per sq mi or greater on Flynn C:~eek and 

concurrent peaks for Needle Branch f'.nd Deer 

Creek were used in the regressions and are 

listed in table 3. The regressions of p~ak flows 

-£ 100 

0 

z 

<l: 

~ 

m 

UJ 80 

_J 

0 

UJ 

UJ 

z 

~~ 60 

-x >-10 

-z LL- LLz 40 

0- z 

:::> 

~ 

_J 

<l: 20 

z 

0 

(/) 

<t 

UJ 

(/) 0 

0 

NEEDLE BRANCH DEER CREEK 

November to February 

Y=2. 37 + 0. 937X November to February 

Y =x -1.46 

Prediction limit Prediction limit 

March to June 

Y=0.66 +,0.906X 

20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60 

SEASONAL RUNOFF (X) OF FLYNN' CREEK, IN INCHES 

FIGURE 6.-Relatio_n of seasonal runoff of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek 

to that of Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65. 

9 

80 

100 

~ 

w 

UJ 

~ 

80 0 

~ 

UJ 

UJ 

0 

60 LL 

0 

-(/) >UJ 

-x LLO LLZ 

40 ozz 

:::>-

~ 

_J 

- 20 <l: 

z 

0 

(/) 

<X 

UJ 

(/) 

0 
TABLE 3.-Peak discharge and runoff for all peaks greater than 50 cfs per sq mi on Flynn Creek and 

concurrent peaks on Needle Branch and Deer Creek 

Flynn Creek Needle Branch Deer Creek 

Peak Runoff Peak Runoff Peak Runoff 

Water discharge (cfs per discharge (cfs per discharf'e (cfs per 

year Date (cfs) sqmi) (cfs) sqmi) (cfs) sqmi) 

1959 __________ Jan. 9 53 67.9 22 81.5 83 70.9 

Jan. 27 42 53.8 19 70.4 71 60.7 

1960----------- Feb. 9 43 55.1 20 74.1 67 57.3 1961_ _________ Nov. 24 78 100.0 33 122.2 114 97.4 

Feb. 10 64 82.1 28 103.7 106 90.6 

Feb. 13 47 60.3 18 66.7 76 65.0 1962 __________ Nov. 22 46 59.0 29 107.4 81 69.2 

Dec. 19 41 52.6 18 66.7 67 57.3 

Dec. 20 43 55.1 17 63.0 65 55.6 1963 __________ Nov. 26 65 83.3 28 103.7 105 89.7 1964 __________ Jan. 19 63 80.8 28 103.7 96 82.1 

Jan. 25 40 51.8 17 63.0 63 53.8 1965 __________ Dec. 1 43 55.1 17 63.0 70 59.8 

Dec. 22 90 115.4 32 118.5 130 111.1 

Jan. 28 137 175.6 50 185.2 201 171.8 

Mean -------------------------------------- 76.5 -------------- 92.9 -------------- 79.5 

of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek with Flynn 

Creek and prediction limits are shown in 

figure 7. 

Three-day runoff totals for storm periods on 

Needle Branch and Deer Creek were correlated 

with concurrent totals for Flynn Creek (fig. 8). 

These totals, shown in table 4, are a measure 

of high-flow runoff volumes. Theoretically, in a 

statistical appraisal, independent samples of 

0 

z NEEDLE BRANCH 

0 200 

&3 

en 

a:: 

~ 

1-w W...J 150 

wLL ~· 

(.)IJJ 

-a:: Ill<! 

:::>:::> 

(.) 0 100 

zen 

- .. 0:: 

-w 

ca. 

3: 

~ 50 

Prediction limit 

:::.:::: 

<! 

w 

a. 50 100 150 200 

the 3-day flood volumes should lle used. However, four of the 25 periods usee, were only 1 

day apart and may not represe~t completely 

independent events of runoff; but.. because the 

major parts of the runoff were from entirely 

separate storms, the periods were used and are 

assumed to be independent. Tl' ~ frequently 

used unit-hydrograph method for determining 

runoff volumes was not used because precipita0 

DEER CREEK 

200 ~ &3 

en 

a:: 

~ 

Y=9.5+ 0.916X 1-W 

1!50 w...J 

wLL~ 

uw -0:: Ill<{ 

=>:::> 

uo 

100 zen 

-a:: 

~~ 

'Prediction limit ~ 50 LL 

:::.:::: 

<! 

~ 50 100 150 200 

FLYNN CREEK PEAK FLON{)(1), IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND PER SQUARE MILE 

FIGURE 7.-Relation of peak flow of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek to that of 

Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65. 

10 
TABLE 't-Three-day high-flow runoff for Flynn Creek, 

Needle Branch, and Deer Creek 

Water 

year 

Period 

of 

high flow 

1959______ Nov. 19-21 

Jan. 8-10 

11-13 

27-29 

1960______ Feb. 6-8 

9-11 

15-17 

196L_____ Nov. 23-25 

Feb. 10-12 

13-15 

Mar. 13-15 

1962______ Nov. 22-24 

Dec. 19-21 

Mar. 25-27 

1963______ Nov. 25-27 

Feb. 2-4 

Mar. 30-Apr. 1 

1964______ Jan. 6-8 

19-21 

24-26 

Mar. 11-13 

1965______ Nov. 30-Dec. 2 

Dec. 22-24 

25-27 

Jan. 27-29 

Runoff, in inches 

Flynn Needle 

Creek Branch 

3.58 

4.86 

3.19 

3.86 

3.39 

4.48 

2.19 

5.82 

6.06 

5.01 

3.48 

2.67 

4.82 

3.67 

5.24 

2.91 

2.77 

3.34 

4.91 

4.48 

2.53 

4.24 

9.11 

4.77 

11.11 

4.19 

5.36 

3.39 

4.41 

3.07 

4.75 

1.86 

6.29 

6.27 

4.59 

3.31 

3.87 

5.23 

3.11 

5;62 

2.67 

2.80 

3.84 

5.21 

4.41 

3.07 

4.53 

9.50 

4.42 

11.7i 

Mean ____________________ 4.50 4.70 

.)... 

-

LL..cn. 

LL.. w 12 

o:c zU 

:::>Z 

a::-

z 

~-: 8 ,=.1:1: 

LL..U 

IZ 

:1:<( 

~a:: 

:r:m 

~ ~ 4 

oo 

LLttl 

wz 

a:: 

NEEDLE BRANCH 

Y=0.02 + 1.04X 

Deer 

Creek 

3.94 

4.70 

2.92 

4.16 

3.56 

4.32 

2.03 

5.69 

5.97 

4.93 

3.94 

2.96 

4.99 

3.56 

5.02 

2.64 

2.26 

3.27 

4.74 

4.70 

2.45 

4.35 

8.68 

4.80 

11.82 

4.50 

:t:LL 

~0 0 ~------~--------~------~--~ 

tion and runoff data were not adequately 

synchronized. 

Maximum deviations from the relation curyes 

were 1.07 inches for Needle Branch ar1 0.58 

inch for Deer Creek. On Needle Branch, the 

3-day runoff volumes ranged from 1.86 t,1 11.71 

inches and averaged 4. 7 0 inches. On Deer Creek, 

the 3-day runoff volumes ranged from 2.03 to 

11.82 inches and averaged 4.50 inches. 

The Needle Branch-Flynn Creek flocd-peak 

relation is much more erratic than th~ Deer 

Creek-Flynn Creek relation, whereas the 3-day 

high-flow runoff relations for these streams are 

consistent and well defined. Peak runoff is lower 

on Flynn Creek than on either Needle Branch 

or Deer Creek, whereas 3-day runoff volumes 

are about the same on Deer and Flynn Creeks 

and highest on Needle Branch. 

Low Flow 

The hydrographs in figure 4 show t1,.,t the 

recession from the winter and spring hig"l flows 

generally begins in late spring and ends in 

September or October. The time and vol·1me of 

flow at the beginning of the recession are: major 

factors in determining the low-flow rate in late 

DEER CREEK 

Y = 1 • 02 X - 0 . 09 

-.)... 

-

LL.. 12 LL.. (f) 

ow 

z:c 

:::>U 

a::z 

3:z E' 0- .:J .. LL..~ 

•w :Cw S2a:: 

:cu 

~' ~ ffi 

0 

ow 

10 

w 

WLL 

a::o 

:c 

~ 

0 4 8 12 0 4 8 12 

THREE-DAY HIGH-FLOW RUNOFF {X) OF FLYNN CREEK, IN INCHES 

FIGURE 8.-Relation of 3-day high-flow runotf total of Needle Branch and of 

Deer Creek to that of Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65. 

11 
summer and early fall. The recession rate is 

controlled principally by the permeability of 

the soils, by the geology, and by evapotranspiration. Therefore, a change in evapotranspiration 

caused by removal of vegetation and a disruption of the soils could change the low-flow 

pattern. 

Recession equations were developed by relating Qo, the discharge at some instant, to Qt, 

the discharge t days later, for both Needle 

Branch and Deer Creek (fig. 9). A time interval, 

t, of 5 days was used, and only dry periods were 

selected for the analysis. Recession coefficients, 

the recession rates, determined from the regressions were 0.711 for Needle Branch and 0.879 

for Deer Creek. 

Low-flow regressions were developed for 

Needle Branch and Flynn Creek and for Deer 

Creek and Flynn Creek to define the relations 

existing prior to logging (fig. 10). In the regressions, mean daily flows were used up to· an 

equivalent of 2.5 cfs per sq mi, which amounts 

to 0.7 cfs on Needle Branch, 3.0 cfs on Deer 

Creek, and 2.0 cfs on Flynn Creek. In comparison, the lowest flows recorded were 0.01, 0.22, 

and 0.13 cfs on Needle Branch, Deer Creek, and 

Flynn Creek, respectively. 

6 5 0.40 

~ 0:: 

w 

a.. 

1--

wo:: 

ww 

LL.!-: 

u<t 

co ...J 0.10 

:::JC/) 

u ~ 0.08 

~0 

w 

(!) 

0:: 

<t 

I 

u 

~ 

0 

NEEDLE BRANCH 

0.02 L--..L.----'-----'-----L.....-.I.....----'----'-----L---1 

0.02 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.1 

On Needle Branch there appear to b.e two 

distinct low-flow relations. One relation is for 

periods when the soil ·mantle of the basin is 

saturated after heavy rains, an~ another relation is for periods when the soil has not reached 

saturation. Saturated condition~ usually occur 

after a rain of about 2 inches arrl are indicated 

when the stream rises as a resul~ of a light rain 

during the recession period. Unsaturated conditions are indicated when ther~ is no stream 

rise as a result of light to medium rains during 

the recession period. In Deer and Flynn Creek 

basins, the soil mantle apparently stays saturated longer and the streams rise after even a 

slight rain during the recession period. 

As a result of logging, the greatest changes. 

in recession rates and low flm"Ts undoubtedly 

will occur in the year immediately following 

logging, and they should diminisb. in subsequent 

years. For this reason, the postlogging analysis 

should include an evaluation of (1) the abrupt 

effects of logging and (2) the gradual changes 

brought about by regrowth of ve<retation. 

SEDIMENT TRANSPORT 

Sediment Concentration 

During the 7 -year calibration period, sediment concentrations of the three study streams 

2.0 

6 

z 

0 

DEER CREEK 

u 

w 

(f) 

1.0 0:: 

w 

a.. 0.8 1-- Wo:: 

0.6 ww 

LL.I-:: 

u<t co...J 

0.4 :::>CJ) 

u~ 

0.3 ~0 

~10 

~ 

w 0.2 (!) 

0:: 

<t 

I 

u 

(f) 

B 

0.1 

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 2.0 

DISCHARGE (X), IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND 

FIGURE 9.-Low-:flow recession rates for Needle Branch and Deer Creek for water years 1959-65. 

12 
2.0 ~ 

(.) 

z 

<lo 

a::z 

mo 

w frl 1.5 

i5cn 

Wa:: 

~~ 

~ ~ J.O. LLI-

$:LL 

-u 

~~ lL (.) 0.5 

~~ 

g 

NEEDLE BRANCH 

Saturated soil conditions 

Y=0.43X- 0.05 ·< 

DEER CREEK 

4.0 

3.0 

2.0 

conditions 

0 

.. ~0 

wz 

LLIO 

a:(.) 

~~ LLia:: IJ.ILLI 

Oa.. 

LLt- OIJ.I 

-LLI >-LL 

-

0 

0 1.0 2.0 3.0 0 1.0 2.0 3.0 

LOW FLOW (X) OF FLYNN CREEK, IN CUBIC FEET PER SEGQND 

FIGURE 10.-Relation of low flow of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek to that of 

Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65 . 

• 

were generally low, but they varied considerably. Minimum suspended-sediment concentrations were less than 1 ppm (part per million); 

observed maximums reached 969, 1,860, and 

1,480 ppm for Needle Branch, Flynn Creek, 

and Deer Creek, respectively. 

The duration curves given in figure 11 were 

developed from daily mean values of suspendedsediment concentration for the 7 years of 

record. These curves were used to compare the 

suspended-sediment concentrations of the three 

streams for the calibration period and should 

serve as a· basis for comparing calibrationperiod concentrations with those for specific 

periods after logging. As computed from the 

curves, the daily suspended-sediment concentration each year averaged less than 1 ppm on 66, 

58, and 40 days for Needle Branch, Flynn Creek, 

and Deer Creek, respectively. Daily concentrations averaged more than 100 ppm on 2, 3, and 

3 days for Needle Branch, Flynn Creek, and 

Deer Creek, ;respectively. 

The duration curves in figure 11 show that 

during 2 percent of the time, when concentrations exceeded 50 ppm, the suspended-sediment 

concentrations of Flynn and Deer Cre~ks compared closely. However, the concentration of 

Flynn Creek was generally lower thar. that of 

Deer Creek the rest of the time. The cc ~centration of Needle Branch was generally lower than 

· that of the other two streams all the t~me. 

18 

Values of discharge-weighted mean concentration are an index of the relation of sediment 

load to water discharge of the three streams. 

These values provide a means for comparing the 

sediment loads of tl}.e streams. To corr.pute the 

values used, the suspended-sediment load at 

the sampling station. was increased by the 

quantity of sediment deposited in the w~ir pools. 

In figure 12, the annual weighted-me.an concentrations of Needle Branch and of De~r Creek 

are related to that of Flynn Creek. Graphic 

and equation forms Qf the regression lines are 

shown. For Needle Branch, the maximum deviation from the regression line was + 5r percent 

for the 1962 water year; for Deer G":"eek, the 

maximum deviation was +32 percent for the 

1963 water year. 
.. ~ 1000 

~ 0::: 

1-

z LLI 

(.) 

z 

0 

uz 

0 ~ 3100 

~~ 

00::: LLILLJ 

en a.. I 

ocn 

LLII00::: 

ffi ~ 10 a.. 

~~ (f) 

1\.. 

\. 

·~ ~ ., \ 

., -- DEER CREEK 

-- FLYNN CREEK 

~ -·- NEEDLE BRANCH 

' ' . ' ""' .,, 

.,, 

'·~ t, 

~~ ~ 

................... 

1' ....... ........ 

.......... ~ !" ... z 

<( ........... ~ ................ 

LLI 

~ 

... 0 ""-.. .... ....., ' ~ '·~ 

~ i'~ ~ ~, 

1.0 . <X 

0 0.1 0.2 0.5 2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 99S 99B 99.9 

PERCENT OF TIME CONCENTRATION WAS EQUAL TO 

OR GREATER THAN INDICATED VALUE 

FIGURE 11.-Duration curves of suspended-sediment concentrations for streams 

(based on records for~ water years 1959-65). 

As indicated by both the duration and regression studies, in terms of sediment concentra"" 

tion, Deer Creek relates better with FlynU 

Creek than does Needle Branch. However,, 

changes caused by clear-cut logging in Needle~ 

Branch basin will probably be larger than 

those in Deer Creek basin and should be more 

conclusive, in spite of the poorer relation with 

Flynn Creek. As frequent short-period anomalies in sample concentrations occurred during 

the calibration period, it is believed that the 

most useful index will be the annual weighted .. 

mean concentration. 

Sediment Load 

The sediment load of the three study streamSl 

showed extreme seasonal variation during th~ 

calibration period. An average of 98 percent o 

the annual sediment load was discharged durin 

the 5-month· period November to March. Most 

of the load was discharged during short periods 

of intense rainfall and runoff. The sediment 

14 

10 10 20 50 100 200 300 

ANNUAL DISCHARGE -WEIGHTED MEAN CONCENTRATION (X). 

OF FLYNN CREEK, IN PARTS PEF' MILLIOI\i 

FIGURE 12.-Relation of annual disc.harge-weighted 

mean concentration of Needle Branc"' and of Deer 

Creek to that of Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65. 
load of each stream varied greatly from year 

to year because of changing runoff conditions 

caused by differences in amount and distribution of rainfall. Major floods that occurred in 

December 1964 and January 1965 greatly influenced the sediment load for the 1965 water 

year and probably will have carryover effects 

for the next several years. The combined sediment load of the three streams during the 

2-month period was larger than the combined 

load for the remainder of the 7 -year calibration 

period. The loads for the 1965 water year in the 

three streams were much greater than for the 

lowest year of record-11 times greater for 

Needle Branch, 19 ·times greater for Flynn 

Creek, and 12 times greater for Deer Creek. 

Suspended-sediment concentrations were 

rarely high enough to obtain enough material 

for standard particle-size analysis. Therefore, 

data on th~ particle-size distribution of the sediment loads are limited to a few analyses for each 

stream. Table 5 gives the composition of the 

suspended-sediment load based on these 

analyses. 

Two samples of deposited sediments taken 

in the weir pools on October 23, 1962, and October 9, 1964, were analyzed during the calibration period. The size distributions at the times 

of sampling are given in table 6. 

Determinations of specific weight of the deposited material were made for the two samples 

used for particle-size analysis (table 61

). The 

average values used for converting volume to 

weight were 72.4, 71.4, and 78.6 pounds per 

cubic foot for N.eedle Branch, Flynn Creek, and 

Deer Creek, respectively. 

A variety of climati,s! conditions and a wide 

range of sediment load during the 7 -year caliT ABLE 5.-Approximate composition of suspendedsediment load during the calibration period 

Percentage composition by weight 

Very 

fine 

Silt Sand gravel Clay (.004- (.062- (2.oStream Organic <<.004 .062 2.0 4.0 matter mm) mm) mm) mm) 

Flynn Creek _____ 10 12 32 46 0 

Needle Branch ___ 24 14 26 34 2 

Deer Creek ______ 19 10 25 46 0 

15 

TABLE 6.-Particle-size d~tribution of seditrmt de~ 

posited behind the concrete control weirs on the 

dates given 

Percentage in class by wf'lght 

Very fine 

Silt and Sand gravel Gravel 

Stream and date clay ( .062- (2.o- 4.0-

( <.062 mm) 2.0 mm) 4.0 mm) 64mm) 

Flynn Creek: 

Oct. 23, 1962 ____ 2 81 9 8 

Oct. 9, 1964 _____ 2 57 14 27 

Needle Branch: 

Oct. 28, 1962 ____ 2 67 15 16 

Oct. 9, 1964 _____ 4 64 12 20 

Deer Creek: 

Oct. 23, 1962 ____ 2 56 9 38 

Oct. 9, 1964 ----- 1 86 10 58 

bration period provide adequate data for future 

comparison. 

Sediment Yield 

Sediment yl_eld varied greatly from :rear to 

year, as is illustrated in table 7. The ~verage 

annual yield for the calibration period v~as 321 

and 298 tons per square mile for FlyniJ Creek 

and Deer Creek, respectively, whereas th~ average yield was only 166 tons per square n1ile for 

Needle Branch. Part of the reason for the lower 

sediment yield of Needle Branch watersl'~d can 

be attributed to less runoff and the retrainder 

to differences in soils, vegetation, hillslop~s, and 

stream gradients. 

The regressions of monthly sediment yields 

for the study watersheds are shown in figure 13. 

All the relations were fairly well definE'1. The 

TABLE 7.-Annual sediment _yields, in tons pm· square 

mile, of the three principal- water8Jl.ed8 · -

1for 1959-65 

Water 

year Flynn Creek Needle Branch n,~rCreek 

1959 -------- 88 59 91 

1960 -------- 65 41 91 

1961 -------- 388 186 340 

1962 -------- 188 141 118 

1963 -------- 114 117 162 

1964 -------- 226 184 213 

1965 -------- 1,270 480 1.070 

Mean __ 321 166 298 
NEEDLE BRANCH DEER CREEK 

Prediction Prediction 

FIGURE 13.-Relation of monthly sediment yield of Needle Branch and of Deer Cre,~k 

watersheds to that of Flynn Creek watershed for water years 1959-65. 

maxi~um deviations from the regression line 

for the Needle Branch-Flynn Creek relation 

were +151 and -75 percent, both on the low 2000~---~---.-------.-----.--. 

,..: 1000 

2::w 

9 j DEER CREEK 

!:!:!w 

>-a:: 500 1-<[ 

~~. ~a:: ow 

wa.. 

CJ)CJ) 

...JZ 200 

~~ 

~~ <[ 

505o 100 200 500 1000 2000 

ANNUAL SEDIMENT YIELD (X) OF FLYNN CREEK WATERSHED, 

IN TONS PER SQUARE MILE 

FIGURE 14.-Relation of annual sediment yield of 

Needle Branch and of Deer Creek watersheds to that 

of Flynn Creek watershed for water years 1959-65. 

16 

end of the relation. The maximu""n deviations 

from the Deer Creek-Flynn Creek regression 

line were +317 and -83 percent, both also on 

the low end of the relation. 

As expected, annual yields of the Needle 

Branch and Deer Creek watershedr relate to the 

yield of Flynn Creek watershed b~tter than do 

monthly yields. Annual-yield reg"""ession lines 

and equations are given in figure 14. Maximum 

deviations from the regression lir~ were +26 

and -18 percent for Deer Creek watershed 

and +50 and -35 percent for the Needle 

Branch watershed. Maximum d~viations occurred in years of relatively low seiiment yield. 

WATER TEMPERATURES 

During the calibration phase CJ~ the study, 

water temperatures of the thr~e principal 

streams agreed closely. The following table 

shows maximums, minimums, an-:1 ranges of 

temperature in degrees Fahrenheit of the three 

streams during 1959-65. 
Stream 

·~lynn Creek ___ _ 

''Teedle Branch __ ''leer Creek ____ _ 

Maximum Minimum 

62 

61 

61 

36 

35 

34 

Range 

26 

26 

27 

The daily maximum and minimum tempera-

~ures are reported in annual reports of the U.S. 

<1eological Survey. 

The streams are similarly oriented; therefore, 

~he small variations in the recorded temperatures of the three streams were probably caused 

··)y differences in altitude and vegetation or by 

instrument error. 

Maximum water temperatures will probably 

be affected greatly by logging. Figure 15 shows 

the monthly maximum water-temperature relations of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek to 

Flynn Creek in graphic and equation form. 

Because there appeared to be a seasonal difference between the basins, one equation was used 

for November-March and another for AprilOctober. For Needle Branch, the largest devia- · 

tions from the regression lines were +3.8°F 

and -2.2°F for April-October and +2.6°F 

for November-March. For Deer Creek, the 

largest deviations from the regression lines 

NEEDLE BRANCH 

November to March 

Y=-5.8 + 1. 107X 

were +4.2°F and -3.5°F for April-October 

and +2.0°F and -2.7°F for November-March. 

To evaluate the effects of logging on maximum water temperatures over a time rqriod 

longer than a_ day, a relation of the mc'lthly 

averages of daily maximums was devfloped 

for Needle Branch and for Deer Creek to Flynn 

Creek (fig. 16). For Needle Branch, the lr.rgest 

deviations from the regression lines were 

+2.4°F and -2.7°F for April-October and 

+3.8°F and -3.3°F for November-Marc]'. For 

Deer Creek, the largest deviations fron the 

regression lines were +2.9°F and -'3.5°F for 

April-October and +2.3°F and -2.6°T:" for 

November-March. 

The effect of logging on minimum water 

temperatures is expected to be less prono~1nced 

than on maximum water temperatures. Relations of monthly minimum water temperr.tures 

of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek to Flynn 

Creek showed no seasonal effect, and one regression line was applicable for all months for 

each stream. The relation shown in figure 17 

was good. The largest deviations from the regression line for Needle Branch were +3.0°F 

DEER CREEK 

November to March 

Y=9.5+0.804X 

Sf: ... ~ 

w 

w 

0:: 

(.) 

0:: 

w 

WI0-L&J LL.~ 

oz _w 

>-(r 

-:r: 

w~ 0:: ::::>W 

ti~ Q::(r 

We!> 

CL,I.LJ 

:Eo 

Wz 1---

0:: 

w 

ti ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

4-;, 3: 

WATER TEMPERATURE {X) OF FLYNN CREEK, IN DEGREES FAHRENHEIT 

FIGURE 15.-Relation of maximum water temperature of Needle Branch and of 

Deer Creek to that of Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65. 

17 
.. :I: 

(.) 

z <( 

a:: 

m 

60 

LLJ 

...J 

Ot-

~i:ij 

z:I: 

z 

U.. LLI 55 

oa:: _J: elf 

LLJV) 

O::LLI 

:::> LLI 50 

~ffi a::W 

LLJO 

a.z :e_ 

LLJ 

..... 

a:: 

LLJ 

~ ;: 

!=IG 16 

NEEDLE BRANCH 

Prediction limit 

April to October 

Y=-11.8 + 1.227X 

DEER CREEK 

April to October 

Y=6.7 + 0.874X 

Prediction 

1 imit 

November to March 

Y=-0.3 + l.OO'lX 

45 50 55 60 45 50 55 60 

WATER TEMPERATURE {X) OF FLYNN CREEK. IN DEGREES FAHREN~~~IT 

.. ~ 

LLJ 

LLJ 

a:: 

(.) 

a:: w._ 

LLJ_ 

ow 

u..J: 

55 0 ~ -J: 

>-0:: 

-~ LLJLL 

a:: en :::>LLI 

50~~ O::ffi 

~0 

~~ ..... 

45 a:: 

LLJ 

t:i 

~ 

FIGURE 16.-Relation of monthly average of maximum daily water temperature of Needle Branch and of 

Deer Creek to that of Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65 . 

.. :I: 

~ 55 

<( 

a:: 

m 

LLJ 

...J 

0 

LLJ ..... 50 

LLJz~ 

u..z 

0~ 

$:J: 

-~45 

LLJ 

a:: en ::JLLI 

t-LLI 

<(0:: 

Q::(!) 

~ ~40 

:Ez 

LLJ-

..... 

a:: 

LLJ 

i 

35 

NEEDLE BRANCH DEER CREEK 1 

Y=-10.7+ 1.231X 

"'---Prediction 1 imit ~-- Prediction limit 

40 45 50 35 

WATER TEMPERATURE{X) OF FLYNN CREEK. 

FIGURE 17.-Relation of minimum water temperature of Needle Branch and cf 

Deer Cre~ to that of Flynn Creek for water- years 1959-65. 

18 

F.. 

55:i 

LLJ 

LLJ 

a:: 

(.) 

a::._ 

5o~w OJ: 

z 

U..LLJ 

oa:: 

-J: 

>-~ 

45~ en 

a::LLI ::JLLI 

~ffi a::LLI 

LLJO 

40~~ LLJ 

..... 

a:: 

LLJ 

~ ~ 
NEEDLE BRANCH DEER CREEK 

Y=-11.9 + 1.245X Y =-2. 7 + 1.045X 

F'IGURE 18.-Relation of monthly average of minimum daily water temperature of Needle Branch and of 

Deer Creek to that of Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65. 

and -4.5°F, and for Deer Creek, +3.6°F and 

-2.5°F. 

To evaluate the effects of logging on minimum 

water temperatures over a period longer than 

a day, a relation of th~ monthly averages of 

daily minimums was used for Needle Branch 

and for Deer Creek to Flynn Creek. The regression lines for these relations are shown in 

figure 18. The largest deviations from the regression line for Needle Branch were +2.6°F 

and -1.8°F, and for Deer Creek, +2.5°F and 

-2.3°F. Because some of the variations in 

minimums were averaged out over the monthly 

period, the standard errors of prediction were 

reduced from those for minimum water 

temperature. 

.Water-temperature range is an index of 

environmental influence on water temperature. 

Temperature range of the three streams was 

relatively small during the calibration period, 

principally because the dense vegetation shortened exposure time of the streams to solar 

energy. Temperature range is expected to increase significantly in Needle Branch and Deer 

Creek after logging. To evaluate changes, re19 

lations of monthly water-temperature range for 

Needle Branch and for Deer Creek to Flynn 

Creek were developed for the calibration period. 

Graphic and equation forms of the regression 

line are shown in figure 19. The largest deviations from the regression line for Needle 

Branch were +4.0°F and -3.9°F, and for 

Deer Creek, +4.7°F and -4.3°F. 

Because the above relations have small standard errors of prediction, evaluation of th~ effect 

of logging on maximums, minimum~, and 

ranges of water temperature can probably be 

made with reasonable confidence. 

SUMMARY 

Hydrologic data collected during the 7 -year 

calibration period covered a wide range of 

climatic and flow conditions. To define the 

hydrologic characteristics of the streams for 

the calibration period, streamflow, se:iiment 

transport, and water temperatures of Needle 

Branch and Deer Creek were related to that of 

the control stream, Flynn Creek. PrE'tliction 

limits at the 95-percent level were computed for 
':>!. 

w 

w 

a:: 

L> 

a:: 

w 

w 

Cl 

Cl 

z 

<( 

:z: 

L> 

z 

<( 

a:: 

lD 

16 

15 

14 

0~~~2~~3--~4--5~~6~~~8--~9--IL0~~~~2--~13~14 

MONTHLY WATER-TEMPERATURE RANGE (X) OF FLYNN CREEK, 

IN DEGREES FAHRENHEIT 

FIGURE 19.-Relation of monthly water-temperature 

range of Needle Branch and of Deer Creek to 

that of Flynn Creek for water years 1959-65. 

the regression line of each relation to determine 

the significance of future individual changes. 

Generally, the zones or belts between the upper 

and lower prediction limits were narrower for 

streamflow and water-temperature regressions 

than wer.e those for sediment-transport regressions. Because of these narrower prediction 

zones, smaller individual changes in streamflow 

and water temperature are required to determine the significance of the changes. 

If the areal distribution of rainfall does not 

change and if streamflow of Flynn Creek remains within the calibration range, changes 

caused by logging might be evaluated by use 

of the prediction-limit method or the covariance 

method. Although the prediction-limit method 

will be used to evaluate future individual 

changes, the covariance method should provide 

the best technique to measure the significance 

of future changes in the relations. 

SELECTED REFERENCES 

Dixon, W. J., and Massey, F. J., Jr., 1957, Introduction 

to statistical analysis: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 

488 p. 

20 

Ezekiel, Mordecai, and Fox, K. A., 1!1159, Methods of 

correlation and regression analyr;s: New York, 

John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 548 p. 

Kohler, M.A., Nordenson, T. J., and Baker, D. R., 1959, 

Evaporation maps for the UnitE:d States: U.S. 

Weather Bur. Tech. Paper 37, 13 p. 

Lane, E. W., and others, 1947, Repcrl of the Subcommittee on Sediment Terminolog;r: Am. Geophys. 

Union Trans., v. 28, no. 6, p. 936-938. 

Ostle, Bernard, 1963, Statistics in research: Ames, 

Iowa State Univ. Press, 585 p. 

Reinhart, K. G., Eschner, A. R., and Tr:~mble, G. R., Jr., 

1963, Effect on streamflow of four forest practices 

in the mountains of West Virgin~.a: U.S. Forest 

Service Research Paper NE-1, 79 p. 

Richardson, Donald, 1965, Effect of lo.?ging on runoff 

in upper Green River basin, W r.~hington: U.S. 

Geol. Survey open-file rept., 45 p. 

Riggs, H. C., 1963, The base-flow recesr'ion curve as an 

indicator of ground wat.er: lnter:"1'at. Assoc. Sci. 

Hydrology, Extr. Pub. 63, p. 352-f·13. 

Schneider, W. J., and Ayer, G. R., 1961, Effect of 

reforestation on streamflow in central New York: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply p,"'per 1602, 61 p. 

U.S. Geological Survey, 1960, Surface water supply of 

the United States 1959, Part 14. Pacific slope 

basins in Oregon and lower Columl .;a River basin: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 1638, 300 p. 

---1961, Surface water supply of t:h~ United States, 

1960, Part 14. Pacific slope basinr in Oregon and 

lower Columbia River basin: U .f. Geol. Survey 

Water-Supply Paper 1718, 305 p. 

---1961-64, Surface water records of Oregon: U.S. 

Geol. Survey Water Resources Div. basic-data 

reports. 

---1964, Quality of surface waters· of the United 

States, 1962, Parts 9-14. Colorado River basin to 

Pacific slope basins in Oregon and lower Columbia 

River basin: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 1945, 691 p. 

---1965, Water quality records in Oregon, 1964: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Water Resources Div., 135 p. 

---1966a, Quality of surface water:~ of the United 

States, 1959, Parts 9-14. Colorado River basin to 

Pacific slope basins in Oregon and lower Columbia 

River basin: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 1645, 524 p. 

---1966b, Quality of surface water~ of the United 

States, 1963, Parts 9-14. Colorado River basin 

to Pacific slope basins in Orer-0n and lower 

Columbia River basin: U.S. Geol. Survey WaterSupply Paper 1951, 781 p. 

---1966c, Water resources data for Oregon, Part 1. 

Surface water records, 1965: U.~· .. Geol. Survey 

Water Resources Div., 359 p. 
---1966d, Water resources data for Oregon, Part 2. 

Water quality records, 1965: U.S. Geol. Survey 

Water Resources Div., 149 p. 

---1967, Quality of surface waters of the United 

States, 1961, Parts 9-14. Colorado River basin 

to Pacific slope basins in Oregon and lower 

Columbia River basin: U.S. Geol. Survey WaterSupply Paper 1885, 677 p. 

---1968, Quality of surface waters of the United 

States, 1960, Parts 9-14. Colorado River basin to 

Pacific slope basins in Oregon and lower Columbia 

River basin: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 17 45, 607 p. 

U.S. Inter-Agency Committee on Water Resources 

1957a, The development and calibration of visuai 

accumulation tube, Report 11 of A study of methods 

used in measurement and analysis of sediment 

loads in streams: Minneapolis, Minn., St. Anthony 

Falls Hydraulic Lab., 109 p. 

---1957b, Some fundamentals of particle-size analysis, Report 12 of A study of methods used in 

21 

measurement and analysis of sedim&tit loads in 

streams: Wahington, U.S. Govt. Printin?: Office, 

55 p. 

---1959, Federal inter-agency sedimentatio:"l instruments and reports, Report AA of A study of 

method~ used in measurement and am'lysis of 

sediment loads in streams: Minneapolis, Minn., 

St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Lab., 41 p. 

---1961, The single stage sampler for suspended 

sediment, Report 13 of A study of meth"ds used 

in measurement and analysis of sedime"'t loads 

in streams: Washington, U.S. Govt. Printing 

Office, 105 p. 

---1963, Determinations of fluvial sediment discharge, Report 14 of A study of methods used in 

measurement and analysis of sediment loads in 

streams: Washington, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, 

151 p. 

Williams, R. C., 1964, Sedimentation in thr~e small 

forested drainage basins, Oregon: U.S. G~ol. Survey Circ. 490, 16 p. 

if U. S. GOVERNMENT PFTNTING OFFICE : 1971 0 - 428-735