Prepared in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs

Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban 

Wadeable Streams in Indiana

Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5078

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Cover Photograph: Pleasant Run Creek at Greenwood, Indiana. (Photograph by Bret A. Robinson, 

U.S. Geological Survey, taken January 24, 2013.)
Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of 

Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

By Bret A. Robinson

Prepared in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs

Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5078

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

SALLY JEWELL, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2013

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials 

as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.

Suggested citation:

Robinson, B.A., 2013, Regional bankfull-channel dimensions of non-urban wadeable streams in Indiana: U.S. Geological Survey, Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5078, 33 p.
iii

Contents

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

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

Basis of Regional Curves.....................................................................................................................2

Focus on Ungaged Sites .....................................................................................................................2

Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................2

Methods of Study...........................................................................................................................................3

Site-Selection Criteria..........................................................................................................................3

Identification of Bankfull Stage..........................................................................................................3

Site Identification and Location .........................................................................................................6

Bankfull-Channel Dimensions ..........................................................................................................10

Data Elements Required for Channel Classification .....................................................................10

Slope .........................................................................................................................................10

Sinuosity......................................................................................................................................10

Entrenchment Ratio...................................................................................................................10

Width/Depth Ratio .....................................................................................................................11

Dominant Sediment Size of Bed Materials............................................................................12

Rosgen Level II Classification...........................................................................................................12

Determinations of Drainage Area ....................................................................................................12

Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions...................................................................................................13

Northern Moraine and Lake Region ................................................................................................13

Central Till Plain Region.....................................................................................................................17

Southern Hills and Lowlands Region...............................................................................................19

Discussion............................................................................................................................................21

Limitations............................................................................................................................................26

Summary and Conclusions.........................................................................................................................26

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................27

Appendix 1. Channel-classification data and determinations for the channel-dimension 

study sites on non-urban wadeable streams in Indiana...........................................................31

Figures

1. Map showing physiographic regions and sections of Indiana.............................................4

2. Photographs showing the three most frequently observed field indicators of 

bankfull stage ................................................................................................................................6

3. Map showing location of the 82 sites where bankfull-channel-dimension data 

were collected in Indiana............................................................................................................7

4. Photographs showing field activities to establish the boundaries of measurement 

cross-sections where bankfull-channel-dimension data were collected........................11

5. Diagram illustrating steps taken to determine entrenchment ratios.................................11
iv

 6. Photograph showing gravelometer used to determine the dominant particle size 

Tables

1. Location information for the 82 sites where data were collected to document 

bankfull-channel dimensions of non-urban wadeable streams in Indiana ........................8

2. Drainage areas and bankfull-channel dimensions of study sites in the 

Northern Moraine and Lake region of Indiana ......................................................................15

3. Drainage areas and bankfull-channel dimensions of study sites in the 

Central Till Plain region of Indiana...........................................................................................17

4. Drainage areas and bankfull-channel dimensions of study sites in the 

Southern Hills and Lowlands region of Indiana.....................................................................19

5. Regression equations for estimating bankfull-channel dimensions of 

non-urban wadeable streams in Indiana................................................................................19

6. Comparison of bankfull-channel-dimension estimates from Indiana and from 

regional curves for the eastern United States.......................................................................22
v

Conversion Factors, Datums, and Abbreviated Units 

of Measure

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

square foot (ft2) 0.09290 square meter (m2)

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 

1983 (NAD 83).

Elevation, as used in this report, refers to distance above or below a local arbitrary 

vertical datum established only for the purposes of this study.

Other Abbreviations

Additional abbreviations and acronyms used in this report:

ABF bankfull-channel cross-sectional area

DA drainage area

DBF mean bankfull-channel depth

FEH fluvial erosion hazard

GOF goodness of fit

GPS global positioning system

IUPUI Indiana University–Purdue University at Indianapolis

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

WBF bankfull-channel width
vi

Acknowledgments

This report is part of a larger effort to develop a fluvial erosion hazard (FEH) mitigation program 

for Indiana. Funding for the FEH program and this investigation has been provided by the Indiana 

Office of Community and Rural Affairs. I would like to thank Kathleen Weissenberger (Indiana 

Office of Community and Rural Affairs) and the Indiana Silver Jackets for their continued support 

of the FEH effort. 

Bob Barr, Mike Stouder (both of the Indiana University–Purdue University at Indianapolis [IUPUI], 

Center for Earth and Environmental Science), and Matt Riggs (IUPUI, The Polis Center) provided 

key input when establishing field protocols and assisted with data collection at many sites. John 

Davis and John Bacone (both of the Indiana Department of Natural Resources) were instrumental in facilitating site access. Richard Williams and Scott McGarvie (both of Peabody Energy) 

provided valuable local knowledge regarding the stream channels of southwestern Indiana. The 

author gratefully acknowledges all of these individuals for the contributions they made to this 

investigation.

Jacqueline Cummins (U.S. Geological Survey) graciously endured swarming insects, quicksand, 

and record heat, all in the interest of establishing the best possible channel-dimension dataset. Thank you, Jackie, for your tremendous support through all phases of data collection and 

processing.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge Dr. Dale F. Ritter (Dusty) posthumously for his contributions 

to this effort. His guidance and wisdom profoundly influenced my understanding of geomorphic 

processes, the natural forces that shape streams, and the proper way to tell this story.
Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban 

Wadeable Streams in Indiana

By Bret A. Robinson 

Abstract

During floods, damage to properties and community 

infrastructure may result from inundation and the processes 

of erosion. The damages imparted by erosion are collectively 

termed the fluvial erosion hazard (FEH), and the Indiana Silver Jackets Multi-agency Hazard Mitigation Taskforce is supporting a program to build tools that will assist Indiana property owners and communities with FEH-mitigation efforts. As 

part of that program, regional channel-dimension relations are 

identified for non-urban wadeable streams in Indiana.

With a site-selection process that targeted the three largest physiographic regions of the state, field work was completed to measure channel-dimension and channel-geometry 

characteristics across Indiana. In total, 82 sites were identified for data collection; 25 in the Northern Moraine and Lake 

region, 31 in the Central Till Plain region, and 26 in the Southern Hills and Lowlands region.

Following well established methods, for each data-collection site, effort was applied to identify bankfull stage, determine bankfull-channel dimensions, and document channelgeometry characteristics that allowed for determinations of 

channel classification. In this report, regional bankfull-channel 

dimension results are presented as a combination of plots and 

regression equations that identify the relations between drainage area and the bankfull-channel dimensions of width, mean 

depth, and cross-sectional area. 

This investigation found that the channel-dimension data 

support independent relations for each of the three physiographic regions noted above. Furthermore, these relations 

show that, for any given drainage area, northern Indiana 

channels have the smallest predicted dimensions, southern 

Indiana channels have the largest predicted dimensions, and 

central Indiana channels are intermediate in their predicted 

dimensions. When considering the suite of variables that influence bankfull-channel dimensions, it appears that contrasting 

runoff characteristics between the three physiographic regions 

may explain much of the inequality observed in the measured 

channel dimensions. While this investigation targeted nonurban wadeable streams in Indiana, site conditions prevented 

data collection in some areas. Therefore, application of the 

results of this study always should include knowledge gained 

from local observations.

Introduction

Between 2006 and 2008, nearly all regions of Indiana 

were impacted by damaging floods. From this period of 

repeated flooding, 82 of the state’s 92 counties received at 

least one disaster declaration for documented flood impacts 

and these counties became eligible for some assistance due 

to their sustained losses. While inundation by flood waters 

resulted in significant damages for many individual property 

owners and communities, the most costly and long-lasting 

damages often were brought about by processes of erosion: 

the undermining of roadways, bridge-supporting elements, 

residential structures, and public assets; the catastrophic 

failure or filling of culverts; the loss of agricultural land; and 

interruptions to traffic flow and emergency services (Morlock 

and others, 2008). The damages imparted by erosion and 

stream-channel migration processes are collectively termed the 

fluvial-erosion hazard (FEH).

At the same time that the 2006 to 2008 flood damages 

were being documented, a new consortium of Federal and 

State agencies—the Indiana Silver Jackets Multi-agency Hazard Mitigation Taskforce—was being formed. A fundamental 

goal of the Silver Jackets team is to identify and support 

efforts that could reduce costs associated with natural hazards 

and promote hazard mitigation. By the fall of 2010, the Silver 

Jackets team identified a series of science-based tools that 

could be assembled to help communities reduced their FEH 

risks. One of the identified tools was regional bankfull-channel-dimension curves for Indiana streams.
2 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

Basis of Regional Curves

A fundamental concept within the field of fluvial geomorphology is that, as one moves downstream within a 

watershed, there is a predictable and quantifiable rate of 

increase in bankfull-channel dimensions. The early efforts to 

describe and document this concept can largely be attributed 

to three interrelated documents—Emmett and Leopold, 1963; 

Leopold, and others, 1964; and Dunne and Leopold, 1978. 

(For a more complete discussion of the historical development 

of this concept, the reader is directed to Emmett, 2004.) These 

three documents present results for four distinct regions—the 

San Francisco Bay region of California, the Upper Green 

River of Wyoming, the Upper Salmon River of Idaho, and the 

Eastern United States—and ultimately led to the recognition 

that downstream bankfull-channel-dimension increases are 

significantly influenced by geologic, climatic, and land-use 

controls.

In the initial work described above, and in numerous 

related papers that have followed, the means to predict bankfull-channel dimensions typically are presented as a combination of plots—commonly referred to as regional curves—and 

regression equations. Both of these tools are used to show 

the relation between drainage area and some desired channel 

dimension (for example: width of the bankfull channel, mean 

depth of the bankfull channel, and(or) cross-sectional area 

of the bankfull channel). These relations are established by 

collecting bankfull-channel-dimension data at stable sites that 

span a broad range of drainage areas and applying simple 

regression techniques to determine the best fit lines and their 

corresponding equations.

Where they are available, regional channel-dimension 

curves can be applied in a variety of engineering, streamrestoration, and floodplain-management activities to aid 

in field verification of bankfull-channel dimensions and to 

provide general descriptive and interpretive parameters. In the 

engineering realm, regional curves aid in sizing bridges and 

culverts and the placement of roadways and buried infrastructure. In stream-restoration activities, regional curves provide 

a range of target dimensions that assist in verification of 

field-identified bankfull-channel features; these verified fieldidentified features, in turn, provide appropriate dimensions 

as required for commonly applied natural-channel-design 

techniques. Regional curves also allow for the identification 

of stream reaches that depart significantly from their expected 

bankfull-channel-dimension values. For sound floodplain

management, and in particular FEH-mapping applications, 

predictions of bankfull-channel dimensions are key to identifying zones where fluvial erosion may threaten existing or 

planned buildings or infrastructure (Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, 2009b).

Prior to the effort described in this report, regional bankfull-channel-dimension curves and the associated regression 

equations had not been published for a dataset collected from 

Indiana streams. Therefore, when predicted bankfull-channel 

dimensions were desired for Indiana waterways, regional 

curves and equations developed for other geographic areas 

were required as substitutes to generate estimated channeldimension values. 

Focus on Ungaged Sites 

Many previously published bankfull-channel-dimension 

studies (Harman and others, 1999; White, 2001; McCandless and Everett, 2002; Cinotto, 2003; Sherwood and Huitger; 

2005; and Mistak and Stille, 2008) have focused their data collection at sites where the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has 

operated a streamgage and established a long-term record of 

streamflow—herein referred to as gaged sites. This approach 

has both advantages and disadvantages when compared to 

studies that include data collection at ungaged sites. In terms 

of an advantage, collecting channel-dimension data at gaged 

sites allows one to determine if bankfull stage identified in 

the field is confirmed by streamflow-discharge data; many 

hold that bankfull stage is associated with a discharge that is 

equaled or exceeded every 1 to 2 years (Wolman and Miller, 

1960; Dunne and Leopold, 1978). By focusing data collection at gaged sites, some investigators have found a means for 

independent confirmation of the bankfull stages they identify 

using commonly applied field indicators. 

At the same time, limiting data collection to gaged sites 

greatly restricts the range of some site characteristics. For 

example, in Indiana approximately 5 percent of active and 

discontinued USGS streamgages have been established at sites 

with drainage areas less than 5 mi2 (Scott E. Morlock, U.S. 

Geological Survey–Indiana Water Science Center, oral commun., 2010). Because historically there has been very limited 

bankfull-channel-dimension data derived from sites with 

drainage areas less than 5 mi2 and because most anthropogenic 

channel alterations are made to sites with small drainage areas, 

this investigation focused data collection at ungaged sites. By 

not restricting data-collection activities to gaged sites, a robust 

dataset was developed and it included a significant amount of 

data obtained from sites with relatively small drainage areas.

Purpose and Scope

This report presents methods and results of a geomorphic investigation to document bankfull-channel dimensions 

for non-urban wadeable streams in Indiana. The methods 

section presents the criteria used in the site-selection process, 

field techniques used to identify bankfull stage, and methods 

employed to measure channel-dimension, -geometry, and 

sediment-size characteristics for each study site included in 

this investigation. The section on bankfull-channel-dimensions 

describes the data analysis process and presents the relations 

discovered between drainage area and bankfull-channel 

width, mean depth, and cross-sectional area for three 

distinct physiographic regions of Indiana. This section also 
Methods of Study 3

discusses one of the variables that may contribute to the 

observed relations and limitations that should be considered 

when applying the study results.

Methods of Study

When completing geomorphic investigations along 

natural channels, modern-day researchers are fortunate to have 

available numerous sources that present well documented 

techniques for data collection and analysis. Data-collection 

methods used in this investigation were, for the most part, 

selected from Harrelson and others (1994), Powell and others 

(2003), Rosgen (1996), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (2003). Data analysis and presentation methods benefited 

from the published results of Montgomery and Buffington 

(1993), Harman and others (1999), White (2001), McCandless 

and Everett (2002), Cinotto (2003), Lawlor (2004), Sherwood 

and Huitger (2005), and Mistak and Stille (2008). 

The sections that follow describe methods applied when 

activities were undertaken to document bankfull-channel 

dimensions and identify the channel type for each reach where 

data were collected. In most cases these methods were applied 

in the field; however, for some data elements (for example the 

measurement of channel sinuosity at relatively large sites) 

it was more appropriate to use map or aerial-photographic 

resources for data acquisition.

From the initial phases of study design and data collection, it was recognized that no two field sites are alike and 

that, in order to produce a high-quality channel-dimension 

dataset, the study design needed to incorporate consistent and 

repeatable field methods. The difficulty of accurately determining bankfull stage in the field has been discussed by many 

(Williams, 1978; Johnson and Heil, 1996; Juracek and Fitzpatrick, 2003), and Roper and others (2008) demonstrated that 

inconsistencies between field crews can lead to disparity for 

channel-classification results. While every attempt was made 

to minimize these potential inconsistencies, it is acknowledged 

that these difficulties are real and that, to some unknown 

extent, the data and results presented herein are influenced by 

these inherent errors.

Site-Selection Criteria

The Physiographic Divisions of Indiana report, authored 

by Gray (2000), presents a two-tiered system for discussing 

the areas of Indiana with distinct physiographic characteristics. His coarsest tier of distinction divides the state into four 

regions; the Northern Moraine and Lake region; the Maumee Lake Plain region, the Central Till Plain region, and the 

Southern Hills and Lowlands region (fig. 1). In turn, Gray 

divides three of his four regions into smaller divisions (or sections) where he discusses local characteristics and the details 

that allow for distinctions at a finer level of resolution. In this 

channel-dimension report, the discussions of physiographic 

regions refer to Gray’s coarsest tier, and based on its limited 

size and description, for this report the Maumee Lake Plain 

region is grouped with the Northern Moraine and Lake region.

To identify bankfull-channel-dimension relations for any 

area, it is desirable to develop a dataset collected at widely 

distributed sites. With a multiple-decade history of working in 

Indiana streams and a review of Gray’s (2000) Physiographic 

Divisions of Indiana, it was anticipated that measured bankfull-channel dimensions might vary from north to south and 

between physiographic regions. Therefore, from the outset of 

this investigation, the site-selection process was developed as 

a stratified sample design that tried to include a roughly equal 

number of sites from the Northern Moraine and Lake region, 

the Central Till Plain region, and the Southern Hills and Lowlands region. 

With an initial minimum target of 72 sites for data collection, the site-selection process tried to identify at least 24 sites 

within each of these three physiographic regions. (The only 

physiographic section intentionally excluded from data collection was the Mitchell Plateau, which is an area characterized 

by extensive karst development. In karst landscapes, variable 

underground water-flow pathways preclude accurate determinations of drainage area for any given stream reach.)

When developing regional bankfull-channel-dimension 

curves, it also is desirable to build a dataset that includes 

sites spanning a broad range of drainage areas. Because this 

investigation focused on wadeable streams, it was anticipated 

that data collection would be completed at sites with drainage 

areas ranging from less than 1 mi2 to approximately 200 mi2. 

However, because Indiana experienced drought conditions 

during the 2011 and 2012 field seasons, data collection by 

wading was possible and completed at several sites with drainage areas greater than 200 mi2

.

To facilitate site access and establish a dataset from the 

most natural—least disturbed—stream reaches in Indiana, the 

site-selection process focused on protected lands in generally 

rural settings. These areas included: Hoosier National Forest, 

Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, and Big Oaks National 

Wildlife Refuge; Indiana state parks, forests, nature preserves, 

and fish and wildlife management areas; large military holdings; county and municipal parks; and regional land trusts. 

After identifying potential data-collection sites using online 

aerial-photographic imagery, reconnaissance visits were 

undertaken to determine if sites were accessible, the channel 

and its banks appeared to be stable, and there was sufficient 

field evidence to make a confident determination of bankfull 

stage.
4 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

Dearborn

Upland

Muscatatuck

Plateau

Norman

Upland

Mitchell

Plateau

Martinsville

Hills

Wabash

Lowland

Boonville

Hills

Crawford

Upland

Scottsburg

Lowland

Charlestown

Hills

Iroquois

Till Plain

Central

Wabash

Valley

Tipton

Till

Plain

Bluffton

Till Plain

New Castle

Till Plains

and

Drainageways

Lake Michigan

Border Valparaiso

Morainal

Complex

St. Joseph

Drainageways

Auburn

Morainal

Complex

Plymouth

Morainal

Complex

Warsaw

Moraines

and

Drainageways

Kankakee

Drainageways

EXPLANATION

Northern Moraine and Lake

Physiographic regions

of Indiana

Maumee Lake Plain

Central Till Plain

Southern Hills and Lowlands

Names and shading patterns 

on the map identify the 

physiographic sections 

presented in Gray (2000).

Base from U.S. Geological Survey

digital data 1:100,000 1983

Universal Transverse Mercator

projection zone 16, NAD 1983

Modified from Gray (2000)

Figure 1. Physiographic regions and sections of Indiana.
Methods of Study 5

Identification of Bankfull Stage

Accurately identifying bankfull stage is essential where 

meaningful determinations of bankfull-channel dimensions are 

to be completed. Because proper identification and understanding of bankfull stage is vital to channel-restoration and 

-management activities, the interested reader is encouraged to 

study some of the numerous resources that are available for 

this subject: Harrelson and others (1994), Rosgen (1996), U.S. 

Department of Agriculture (2003), and Vermont Agency of 

Natural Resources (2009a).

In this investigation, when a site was first visited, the field 

crew walked the study reach and searched for reliable field 

indicators of bankfull stage. For most sites, this search was 

carried out over a channel length approximately equal to 20 

times the bankfull-channel width. During these activities, most 

time and effort was applied at the inside of meander bends and 

along straight channel reaches; at these locations, field indicators of bankfull stage have the greatest opportunity to develop 

and be preserved. 

 The available literature describes numerous channel-side 

features that may be observed in the field to aid in identifying bankfull stage. These include the elevation of the adjacent 

floodplain, the level top of point bars, breaks in channel-bank 

slopes, changes in vegetation, scour lines, and changes in 

sediment-size characteristics. A U.S. Department of Agriculture (2003) video—A Guide to Identification of Bankfull Stage 

in the Northeastern U.S.—discusses some of the fundamental 

science aspects of bankfull stage and the bankfull channel. 

In that video presentation, on-camera narrators visit several 

locations to illustrate some of the field indicators that may be 

observed when one sets out to use geomorphic evidence to 

identify bankfull stage in the field. 

In this effort to document bankfull-channel dimensions 

for Indiana streams, the methods and field indicators recommended by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (2003) video 

were adopted as fundamental to our study design and field 

approach. Also, in efforts to foster consistency between sites 

and the proper identification of bankfull stage at all sites, (1) 

the author participated in all data-collection activities at all 

sites, (2) there was a consistency of USGS field personnel 

throughout the duration of our field activities, (3) photographs 

from all field sites were shared and discussed with other experienced researchers, and (4) many field sites were visited by 

local researchers experienced with Indiana streams.

In the investigation described herein, three field indicators of bankfull stage were found to be the most frequently 

observed and reliable: the lowest horizontal tread of the floodplain adjacent to the active channel, the location and form of 

channel-side trees, and a transition to all sand deposition in 

overbank locations. At all field sites selected for data collection, multiple examples of these and other field indicators of 

bankfull stage were sought to confirm the identified bankfull 

elevation.

At most sites where it was possible to identify bankfull 

stage with confidence, one could walk up the slope of the 

channel bank, step just beyond the active channel, and find a 

location where one’s foot would rest on the lowest horizontal 

tread of the active floodplain. An example of this can be seen 

in figure 2A. At this location, the right foot of the investigator 

remains on the slope of the channel bank, while her left foot 

rests on the horizontal tread of the local floodplain. For many 

data-collection sites, the channel-side edge of this lowest horizontal surface was the single most frequently observed and 

utilized field indicator of bankfull stage. 

In forested settings of the eastern United States, trees tend 

to grow on the fluvial plain and up to the boundary that separates the fluvial plain from the active channel; however, trees 

generally do not become established within the active channel 

(U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2003). During field activities it was consistently observed that trees growing within the 

boundaries of the active channel exhibit a growth form that 

divulges their location within the active channel, and from this 

growth form one can deduce a portion of the life history of 

these trees. 

We consistently observed that the vast majority of trees 

growing within the active channel, and below the elevation of 

bankfull stage, had curved trunks just above their root collars

(fig. 2B). In these settings, one could deduce that the trees had 

originally grown on the fluvial plain adjacent to the active 

channel. Then, channel-migration processes had caused the 

trees to lean toward the active channel as they slowly were 

undercut by erosion of the channel bank. Because trees are 

phototropic, with time they adjust their growth form to seek 

their overhead light source. As this process continues slowly 

over years, trees that have been undercut by bank erosion 

exhibit a distinctly curved trunk just above their root collar. 

During field activities, when trees with curved trunks were 

observed, it was learned that one needed to look to a slightly 

higher elevation than the root collar if bankfull stage was to be 

identified.

The third field indicator of bankfull stage that significantly contributed to the investigation’s field efforts was the 

identification of well sorted sand deposits just beyond the 

boundary of the active channel (fig. 2C). For most sites where 

data collection was completed, the bedload material observed 

in the active channel was a poorly sorted mixture of sand, 

gravel, and in some locations cobbles. During high-streamflow 

periods, this entire mixture of sediment may become mobile 

within the active channel; however, it is generally only 

the sand fraction of this mixture that is carried beyond the 

boundaries of the active channel and deposited in channel-side 

locations. Where they could be found, the channel-side edge 

of these sand deposits often helped in the identification of 

bankfull stage. In the rare cases when a site was visited shortly 

after a period of flooding, these sand deposits often were readily observed; however, at most sites these sand deposits only 

were identified after some effort to expose them from under 

the vegetation and leaf litter that covered the active floodplain.
6 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

A.

B.

C.

Bankfull stage

Bankfull stage

Bankfull stage

Curved trunk

Figure 2. The three most frequently observed field indicators of bankfull stage.

While first working at a site and trying to determine if a 

consistent elevation of bankfull stage could be identified, the 

field crew walked the study reach and flagged those locations 

where field indicators of bankfull stage were observed. Then, 

along with capturing photographic records, field observations 

of topographic, vegetative, and sediment-texture characteristics were recorded and a bankfull-stage determination was 

made. Only those sites that produced a confident determination of bankfull stage were selected for inclusion in this study. 

At those sites where a consistent elevation of bankfull 

stage was identified, a single representative channel cross section was selected for the measurement of channel-dimension 

data. The cross sections selected for data collection targeted 

locations where the observed channel width was representative 

of the entire study reach; typically at or very near a riffle and 

in a generally straight channel segment.

Site Identification and Location

Because this investigation was attempting to collect 

channel-dimension data from a roughly equal number of 

sites in the three broadest physiographic regions of Indiana, 

a site-identification system based on these three regions was 

established and applied. In this system, sites in the Northern 

Moraine and Lake region were sequentially numbered beginning with RC–100, sites in the Central Till Plain region were 

sequentially numbered beginning with RC–200, and sites in 

the Southern Hills and Lowlands region were sequentially 

numbered beginning with RC–300. This site-identification 

system did not influence the data-analysis process; any desired 

grouping of data could be completed regardless of site number. 

This site-identification system simply allowed for an easy recognition of the number of sites measured in each of the three 

physiographic regions. Figure 3 shows the location of each 

data-collection site and places them within the physiographic 

boundaries shown in figure 1. In total, data-collection activities were completed at 82 sites statewide; 25 sites were in the 

Northern Moraine and Lake region, 31 in the Central Till Plain 

region, and 26 in the Southern Hills and Lowlands region.

A handheld global positioning system (GPS) unit with an 

approximate 20-ft horizontal accuracy was used to document 

the location of each measurement cross section. Additional 

site-identification data—county name and stream name—also 

were recorded and are presented in table 1.
Methods of Study 7

EXPLANATION

!!!

RC-215

RC-216

RC-325

RC-324

RC-323

RC-322

RC-321

RC-320 RC-319

RC-318

RC-317

RC-315

RC-314

RC-313

RC-312

RC-311

RC-309

RC-308

RC-307

RC-303

RC-301 RC-302

RC-230

RC-229

RC-228

RC-227

RC-226

RC-225 RC-224

RC-223

RC-222

RC-221

RC-220

RC-217 RC-219

RC-214

RC-213

RC-212

RC-211

RC-210

RC-209

RC-208

RC-206 RC-205

RC-204

RC-203

RC-202

RC-200

RC-124 RC-123

RC-121 RC-120

RC-104 RC-116

RC-115

RC-114

RC-110

RC-109 RC-107

RC-106

RC-102

RC-100 RC-101

RC-103

RC-122

RC-105

RC-111

RC-112

RC-113

RC-117

RC-118

RC-119

RC-207 RC-201

RC-218

RC-316

RC-300

RC-304

RC-305

RC-306

RC-310

RC-224

RC-108

Base from U.S. Geological Survey

digital data 1:100,000 1983

Universal Transferse Mercator

projection zone 16, NAD 1983

Central Till

Plain region

Northern Moraine

and Lake region

Southern Hills

and Lowlands region

Channel-dimension

data-collection site

(In this report, the Maumee

Lake Plain is grouped with

the Northern Moraine and

Lake region.)

Figure 3. Location of the 82 sites where bankfull-channel-dimension data were collected in Indiana.
8 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

Table 1. Location information for the 82 sites where data were collected to document bankfull-channel dimensions of non-urban 

wadeable streams in Indiana.—Continued

Site 

identifier Stream name County Latitude (degrees north)

Longitude 

(degrees west)

RC–100 Dunes Creek Porter 41.65963° 87.05952°

RC–101 West Branch Trail Creek LaPorte 41.67324° 86.84835°

RC–102 Unnamed tributary to Munson Ditch Porter 41.64473° 87.03922°

RC–103 Dilts Anstis Ditch Pulaski 41.13365° 86.59145°

RC–104 Turkey Creek Lagrange 41.66350° 85.27290°

RC–105 Bloody Run Lagrange 41.67418° 85.25302°

RC–106 Unnamed tributary to Yellow River Marshall 41.35350° 86.30513°

RC–107 Tippecanoe River Pulaski 41.05228° 86.59711°

RC–108 Dunes Creek Porter 41.65683° 87.05786°

RC–109 West Branch Fish Creek Steuben 41.06270° 84.85790°

RC–110 Fish Creek Steuben 41.53268° 84.86885°

RC–111 Crooked Creek Steuben 41.73478° 85.11887°

RC–112 Fawn River Steuben 41.74150° 85.17490°

RC–113 Pigeon Creek Steuben 41.67095° 85.19530°

RC–114 Tippecanoe River Fulton 41.11780° 86.31418°

RC–115 Elkhart River Noble 41.45731° 85.56543°

RC–116 Little Elkhart River Elkhart 41.71085° 85.72884°

RC–117 Pigeon River Lagrange 41.70690° 85.38350°

RC–118 Pigeon River Lagrange 41.68683° 85.28208°

RC–119 Pigeon Creek Lagrange 41.67813° 85.25349°

RC–120 Pigeon Creek Steuben 41.65139° 85.17424°

RC–121 Munson Ditch Porter 41.65637° 87.04851°

RC–122 Unnamed tributary to St. Joseph River St Joseph 41.74854° 86.26575°

RC–123 Juday Creek St Joseph 41.70667° 86.20503°

RC–124 Christiana Creek Elkhart 41.70108° 85.97973°

RC–200 Crest Branch Marion 39.87328° 86.31056°

RC–201 DeLong Creek Marion 39.85445° 86.31564°

RC–202 Big Pine Creek Warren 40.40059° 87.32887°

RC–203 Carpenter Creek Jasper 40.80081° 87.17146°

RC–204 Pleasant Run Johnson 39.63340° 86.19308°

RC–205 Killbuck Creek Madison 40.13448° 85.66860°

RC–206 Cicero Creek Hamilton 40.17455° 85.99806°

RC–207 White Lick Creek Hendricks 39.84992° 86.39773°

RC–208 Sugar Creek Montgomery 39.94516° 87.06145°

RC–209 Conns Creek Shelby 39.42617° 85.67605°

RC–210 Unnamed tributary to Brookville Lake Franklin 39.48084° 84.96046°

RC–211 Unnamed tributary to Brookville Lake Franklin 39.47907° 84.96328°

RC–212 Sugar Creek Boone 40.14423° 86.62525°

RC–213 Burnett Creek Tippecanoe 40.50702° 86.84550°

RC–214 Williams Creek Marion 39.92337° 86.17100°

RC–215 Unnamed tributary to Mississinewa Lake Wabash 40.67448° 85.89515°
Methods of Study 9

Table 1. Location information for the 82 sites where data were collected to document bankfull-channel dimensions of non-urban 

wadeable streams in Indiana. —Continued

Site 

identifier Stream name County Latitude (degrees north)

Longitude 

(degrees west)

RC–216 Liston Creek Wabash 40.67107° 85.92036°

RC–217 Unnamed tributary to Mississinewa Lake Wabash 40.68687° 85.93034°

RC–218 Brook Creek Huntington 40.74001° 85.50659°

RC–219 Mississinewa River Grant 40.58618° 85.66258°

RC–220 Salamonie River Huntington 40.74312° 85.50883°

RC–221 Wabash River Wells 40.72842° 85.13698°

RC–222 West Fork White Lick Creek Hendricks 39.76330° 86.51534°

RC–223 White Lick Creek Hendricks 39.75991° 86.41679°

RC–224 Mississinewa River Miami 40.72680° 86.00350°

RC–225 Unnamed tributary to Mississinewa River Miami 40.72542° 85.99890°

RC–226 Unnamed tributary to Wabash River Wells 40.72348° 85.12030°

RC–227 Dry Branch Creek Montgomery 40.03001° 86.88803°

RC–228 Hurricane Creek Johnson 39.47831° 86.04985°

RC–229 Bronnenberg Ditch Madison 40.10514° 85.61900°

RC–230 Unnamed tributary to Memorial Creek Henry 39.95138° 85.38841°

RC–300 Unnamed tributary to Bryant Creek Monroe 39.32310° 86.48410°

RC–301 Unnamed tributary to Bryant Creek Monroe 39.32866° 86.49898°

RC–302 Greasy Creek Monroe 39.29280° 86.43630°

RC–303 Big Creek Jefferson 38.79976° 85.61531°

RC–304 Unnamed tributary to Crooked Creek Brown 39.11369° 86.30732°

RC–305 Unnamed tributary to Crooked Creek Brown 39.11340° 86.30812°

RC–306 Strahl Creek Brown 39.14016° 86.21174°

RC–307 Unnamed tributary to Dry Branch Brown 39.14903° 86.30790°

RC–308 Crooked Creek Brown 39.10964° 86.31317°

RC–309 Dry Branch Brown 39.14706° 86.30677°

RC–310 Dry Branch Brown 39.15061° 86.30820°

RC–311 Unnamed tributary to Sycamore Creek Morgan 39.50398° 86.43002°

RC–312 Laughery Creek Ripley 38.99488° 85.16612°

RC–313 Muscatatuck River Jennings 39.11644° 85.47443°

RC–314 Unnamed tributary to Anderson River Crawford 38.30915° 86.67017°

RC–315 Anderson River Crawford 38.30766° 86.67045°

RC–316 Big Creek Jefferson 38.89171° 85.46195°

RC–317 Herberts Creek Jefferson 38.78112° 85.50961°

RC–318 Marble Creek Jefferson 38.89962° 85.46262°

RC–319 Middle Fork Creek Jefferson 38.85138° 85.46037°

RC–320 Unnamed tributary to Boggs Creek Martin 38.81951° 86.86492°

RC–321 Unnamed tributary to French Lick Creek Orange 38.48137° 86.57059°

RC–322 Unnamed tributary to Rattlesnake Creek Owen 39.38697° 86.82717°

RC–323 Rattlesnake Creek Owen 39.39195° 86.83398°

RC–324 Unnamed tributary to Doe Creek Putnam 39.48255° 86.84801°

RC–325 Hogs Defeat Creek Orange 38.44680° 86.45953°
10 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

Bankfull-Channel Dimensions

To measure bankfull-channel dimensions, a removable 

stake was placed in the ground at the location where bankfull 

stage was identified along the selected measurement cross section (fig. 4A). From this stake, a fiberglass measuring tape was 

oriented perpendicular to flow and extended to the opposite 

channel bank. All measurements of bankfull-channel dimensions were then completed along the line established by this 

fiberglass tape.

An optical level (fig. 4B) and stadia rod (fig. 4C) were 

used to project the elevation of the bankfull-stage-marker 

stake to the opposite channel bank and identify the location 

where bankfull stage would intersect that bank. Bankfullchannel-width measurements were completed by pulling the 

measuring tape tight along the established horizontal line and 

directly reading the tape to the nearest one-tenth of a foot. 

The optical level and stadia rod then were used to measure 

bankfull-channel depths at approximately 20 evenly spaced 

locations along the measurement cross section. In turn, these 

bankfull-depth measurements were used to calculate mean 

bankfull-channel depth and bankfull cross-sectional area. 

Bankfull-channel widths and mean bankfull-channel depths 

are reported in feet, while bankfull-channel cross-sectional 

areas are reported in units of square feet.

Data Elements Required for Channel 

Classification

In many scientific fields, classification systems group 

individuals by the common characteristics they share and 

attempt to identify order within observations made of a natural 

population. Following this desire to identify order, for more 

than a century stream-channel classification systems have been 

proposed: Davis (1899); Melton (1936); Leopold and Wolman 

(1957); Schumm (1963); Rosgen (1994). 

Today, because many practitioners view the Rosgen 

channel classification system (Rosgen, 1996) as a beneficial communication tool, it is widely applied in discussions 

of channel-naturalization projects. To classify our field sites 

within the Rosgen system, additional data elements were 

required. These included channel slope, sinuosity, entrenchment ratio, width/depth ratio, and a measure of the dominant sediment size found in the bed material of each study 

site. The methods used to measure these parameters and make 

determinations of classification are presented below. 

Slope

For sites where it was practical, channel slope was 

measured in the field and from a stream reach that extended 

approximately 10 to 20 times the measured bankfull-channel 

width. Working in an upstream direction, an optical level, 

stadia rod, and fiberglass measuring tape or electronic laser 

range finder were used to determine the amount of streambed 

rise over a measured length of channel. For the purposes of 

this study, it was determined that the most reliable and repeatable results were achieved from measurements that targeted 

the edge of water within the low-flow channel. For most sites, 

these data were collected as a series of measurements within 

the active channel.

For the largest sites, it was not practical to measure channel slope in the field. For these sites, online map resources 

(produced at a scale of 1:24,000) were used to identify where 

upstream and downstream contour lines crossed the mapped 

channel. Path-length tools then were used to measure the channel length between these contour crossings and a calculation 

of channel slope was completed.

Sinuosity

For each study site, channel sinuosity was determined 

following one of two methods. For large sites, where online 

aerial photographs with an appropriate level of detail were 

available, sinuosity was determined in the office. For these 

sites, fixed end points were identified and online tools were 

used to measure the channel length and valley length between 

the end points. For relatively small sites, where online 

resources did not provide a sufficient level of detail, sinuosity 

was measured in the field. At these sites, a fiberglass measuring tape or electronic laser rangefinder was used to measure 

the length of channel segments that followed the anticipated 

flow path of the active channel. The sum of these segments 

provided a measure of total channel length between identified 

end points. Then, working in the active channel and across the 

fluvial plain, a straight-line measurement was completed to 

determine the total valley length between these same two end 

points. For all sites, sinuosity was calculated as the ratio of 

channel length divided by valley length.

Entrenchment Ratio

Entrenchment ratio is a term used by Rosgen (1996) 

to express the relative change in water-surface width when 

a channel and attendant valley transition from bankfulldischarge conditions to substantial flooding. Calculation of 

entrenchment ratio is a multiple-step process (fig. 5). First, for 

a given cross section of interest, one must identify bankfull 

stage and measure the maximum water depth that would result 

from bankfull discharge. Then, this maximum water depth is 

doubled and measurements are completed to project how wide 

the water surface would be if there was discharge sufficient 

to produce the calculated water depth. In the Rosgen scheme, 

the portion of the valley bottom inundated by this hypothetical 

flood is referred to as the flood-prone area. Finally, entrenchment ratio is calculated by dividing the width of the floodprone area by the width of the bankfull channel.

During field activities, the width of the flood-prone 

area was determined after the 20 measurements of bankfullchannel depth had been completed along the bankfull-channel 
Methods of Study 11

A removable stake was placed to mark

the elevation of bankfull stage on the

chosen measurement cross section.

A.

B.

C.

An optical level (below) and stadia rod

were used to transfer the elevation of

bankfull stage to the opposite bank.

Figure 4. Photographs showing field activities to establish the boundaries of measurement cross-sections where bankfull-channeldimension data were collected.

Width of the flood-prone area

Bankfull width

Bankfull-marker stake

Maximum

bankfull depth

Steps taken to calculate entrenchment ratios:

1. Marker stake is placed at the identified bankfull stage.

2. Level and stadia rod are used to project bankfull stage to opposite bank.

3. Fiberglass tape is used to measure bankfull-channel width.

4. Twenty channel depths are measured and the maximum depth is identified.

5. The maximum depth is added to bankfull stage to identify the flood-prone area.

6. The width of the flood-prone area is measured.

7. Entrenchment ratio is calculated as flood-prone width divided by bankfull width.

Figure 5. Steps 

taken to determine 

entrenchment ratios.

measurement cross section. From these channel-depth measurements, the single largest depth value was identified and 

added to the elevation of bankfull stage at the bankfull-marker 

stake. Where it was practical, a fiberglass measuring tape or 

electronic laser range finder was used to measure the width of 

the projected flood surface. Where dense fluvial-plain vegetation or other obstructions made the use of these tools impractical, width of the flood-prone area was visually estimated.

Width/Depth Ratio

The width/depth ratio is calculated by dividing the 

bankfull-channel width by the mean bankfull-channel depth. 

This calculated value is unitless and is commonly used by 

geomorphologists as an expression of the general shape of the 

bankfull cross-channel profile; larger values describe relatively 

wide and shallow channels, while smaller values describe 

relatively narrow and deep channels.
12 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

Dominant Sediment Size of Bed Materials

At each study site, one of two methods was employed to 

complete bed-material-size determinations. For sites where 

gravel and(or) cobbles represented a significant portion of the 

bed material, representative transects were identified where 

bed-material particles could be collected using a modified 

Wolman (1954) pebble count. A gravelometer (fig. 6) was 

then used to measure the intermediate axis of each collected 

particle and determine the sediment-size class most frequently 

observed in the channel bed material. For other sites, where 

the bed-material texture prevented the use of a gravelometer 

or water depths were too great for hand sampling, observations—visual and tactual—made during surveying activities 

were used to identify the dominant size class of the channelbed material.

Rosgen Level II Classification

Beginning with its introduction in the mid-1990s, the 

Rosgen channel-classification system has been the focus of 

a spirited debate in modern geomorphic literature. Whereas 

many will describe the classification system as a useful communication tool, others (Miller and Ritter, 1996; Juracek and 

Fitzpatrick, 2003; Simon and others, 2005) have been very 

critical of its form-based approach to process-based systems. 

And while it is well beyond the purpose or scope of this investigation to contribute to this debate, it does seem appropriate, 

in the interest of completeness, to include level II classification 

results where they can be established.

The Rosgen level II classification results presented herein 

were derived by applying the criteria given in figure 5-3 of 

the Rosgen (1996) text. In that figure, classification-defining 

ranges for entrenchment ratio, width/depth ratio, and sinuosity are presented in table format to guide the classification 

process. It is important to note that this figure also includes a 

statement, given in the key below the table, that broadens the 

range of values presented in the table. This statement reads, 

“...entrenchment and sinuosity ratios can vary by +/- 0.2 

units; while values for width/depth ratios can vary by +/- 2.0 

units.” In this investigation, when attempting to classify each 

study reach within the Rosgen (1996) scheme, site data were 

evaluated against the broadest criteria ranges derived from the 

Rosgen figure 5-3 table and attendant key.

For most study sites, it was found that a single stream 

type (or class) could be identified from the class-defining criteria and that the site characteristics viewed in the field agreed 

well with the descriptions and images presented by Rosgen 

(1996). However, for 24 of the 82 study sites, it was found that 

the site-geometry data (1) did not match any of the Rosgen 

classes, (2) produced ambiguous results, or (3) fit the defining 

Figure 6. Gravelometer used to determine the dominant particle 

size of bed materials for sites with abundant gravel- and(or) 

cobble-sized particles.

criteria for a Rosgen class but did not resemble the Rosgenprovided descriptions or images. For these 24 sites, professional judgment was applied to determine if a single channel 

type could be identified as a reasonable fit for all site data and 

field observations. Even with this latitude, there were eight 

sites that were not classified because their measured characteristics or general appearance were judged to deviate too significantly from the Rosgen criteria, descriptions, and (or) images.

It should be noted that data-collection activities were 

completed only at sites where bankfull stage could be identified from physical evidence found in the field. With this 

restriction, the 82 study sites included, per the Rosgen classification system, 63 C-type channels, 4 E-type channels, 7 F-type 

channels, and 8 channels that did not produce an unambiguous 

and confident classification result (appendix 1). Although other 

channel types—A and G channels—were encountered in the 

field, they were not included for data collection because they 

typically do not yield an identifiable bankfull stage.

Determinations of Drainage Area

The USGS Web-based StreamStats tool for Indiana 

(http://streamstats.usgs.gov/indiana.html) was used to calculate the drainage area of each study site. When applying this 

tool, the user works with an interactive online map to identify 

their location of interest on a stream reach. The StreamStats 

tool then delineates the boundary of the watershed that drains 

to that location and allows the user to select, from a predefined 

list, the watershed characteristics to be calculated. For this 

investigation, drainage area was the key data element provided 

by StreamStats.
Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions 13

Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions

Data analysis completed in this investigation closely followed the analysis path described by Sherwood and Huitger 

(2005). To begin this process, data from all 82 sites were 

combined and simple-regression analysis was performed to 

establish initial statewide relations between drainage area and 

bankfull-channel width, mean depth, and cross-sectional area. 

For each study site, these preliminary equations were used to 

calculate predicted channel-dimension values and residuals—

predicted values minus measured values. The residuals where 

then viewed in terms of their location within the state to determine if some areas showed a consistent pattern of overprediction or underprediction.

In this analysis, it was seen that the initial statewide 

equation overpredicted bankfull-channel width for 23 of the 

25 sites measured in the Northern Moraine and Lake region 

and underpredicted bankfull-channel width for 25 of the 26 

sites measured in the Southern Hills and Lowlands region. 

With this recognition, the data were then grouped by physiographic region and simple regression again was applied to 

develop more refined estimating equations. In each case, it 

was observed that the coefficient-of-determination values (r2) 

produced by the grouped data were greater and thus indicated 

a better fit than the preliminary statewide regression equations.

Following the same procedure described above, the 

residuals calculated from the regional equations were viewed 

by location within their physiographic region. However, in 

this case there was no geographic pattern of overprediction 

or underprediction seen within the plotted residuals. From 

this analysis, it is concluded that the data best support regression equations and regional curves grouped by physiographic 

region.

It should be noted that an underlying assumption of 

linear-regression applications is that the residuals produced by 

the developed model(s) are normally distributed. To test for 

normality of residuals, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Goodnessof-Fit (GOF) statistical test was applied to the residuals and 

regional bankfull-channel-dimension equations developed in 

this investigation. The p-value statistics generated from this 

test indicate that the residuals resulting from the predictive 

channel-dimension equations are in some cases not normally 

distributed. Therefore, the user should understand that, in 

addition to drainage area, there may well be other explanatory variables that influence channel dimensions but are not 

included in the simple regression equations discussed herein.

Northern Moraine and Lake Region

In many locations, the geologic materials underlying the 

Northern Moraine and Lake region are characterized as sandrich deposits associated with outwash, alluvial-fan aprons, 

and dunes (Gray, 2000). Excluding the alluvium associated 

with the largest river valleys in central and southern Indiana, 

this region generally has the most widespread and thickest 

sand deposits. The surface topography includes areas of low 

relief and areas of gently rolling moderate relief. Most of the 

large wetland areas that remain in Indiana are found within 

this region and, prior to draining for agricultural development, 

much of this region supported vast wetland complexes.

The Northern Moraine and Lake region held all of the 

E-type channels encountered during this investigation (appendix 1) and a reach of Little Elkhart Creek photographed in 

Wolcottville, Ind. (fig. 7N) was seen as representative of 

many of the channels in this region. Here, the channel of 

Little Elkhart Creek is sinuous but stable, with banks that are 

cohesive and well stabilized by a dense growth of grasses and 

herbaceous wetland plants. (In more rural locations within 

this physiographic region, the channelside vegetation also 

was seen to include significant amounts of woody vegetation 

adapted for growth in wetland settings.) The width/depth ratio 

is 10.9, which generally describes a relatively narrow and deep 

channel. Even during a prolonged period of drought during the 

2012 summer, water flow in this channel was seen to be well 

sustained by groundwater contributions. When considering all 

82 data-collection sites, it appears that groundwater contributions may be one of the key parameters that distinguishes 

northern Indiana stream channels from the channels visited 

elsewhere. 

In this region, bankfull-channel-dimension data were 

collected at a total of 25 sites (table 2). From these data, 

simple regression equations (table 5; equations 1, 2, and 3) 

and regional curves for bankfull-channel width, mean bankfull-channel depth, and bankfull-channel cross-sectional area 

(fig. 8) were developed. (Table 5 is found just ahead of the 

“Discussion” section.)
14 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

N.

C.

S.

Figure 7. Three selected channel reaches generally seen to be representative of Indiana’s contrasting 

physiographic regions: a reach of Little Elkhart Creek in Wolcottville (N) in the Northern Moraine and Lake region, 

a reach of White Lick Creek at Avon (C) in the Central Till Plain region, and an unnamed tributary to Bear Creek in 

Yellowwood State Forest (S) in the Southern Hills and Lowlands region.
Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions 15

Table 2. Drainage areas and bankfull-channel dimensions of 

study sites in the Northern Moraine and Lake region of Indiana.

Site 

identifier

Drainage area 

(miles2)

Bankfullchannel 

width (feet)

Mean bankfull-channel 

depth (feet)

Bankfull 

crosssectional 

area (feet2)

RC–100 6.24 21.5 1.8 39.8

RC–101 19.1 38.5 3.6 136.7

RC–102 0.14 8.4 0.8 6.7

RC–103 6.87 31.0 2.2 67.4

RC–104 63.7 44.3 1.9 86.1

RC–105 8.69 25.5 1.6 40.5

RC–106 18.4 37.5 2.8 103.2

RC–107 941 134.0 4.3 572.6

RC–108 6.16 20.0 1.5 30.4

RC–109 1.82 15.1 1.6 23.3

RC–110 45.1 34.9 3.3 114.2

RC–111 58.2 73.1 2.1 156.5

RC–112 87.4 39.7 2.2 86.9

RC–113 124 58.5 2.7 157.8

RC–114 636 152.0 5.9 897.2

RC–115 281 88.1 3.0 267.4

RC–116 116 67.7 1.9 127.8

RC–117 239 90.3 3.7 331.8

RC–118 213 68.5 3.6 245.9

RC–119 131 78.0 2.8 215.1

RC–120 119 47.0 3.2 151.2

RC–121 1.44 13.8 1.7 23.7

RC–122 .26 10.7 .8 9.1

RC–123 29.9 27.5 2.0 55.5

RC–124 117 47.0 2.6 122.5
16 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

0.1

1

10

100

1,000

0.1 1 10 100 1,000

Bankfull-channel

cross-sectional area

Bankfull-channel width

Mean bankfull-channel depth

Mean depth and width, in feet Cross-sectional area, in square feet

Drainage area, in square miles

Figure 8. Regional channel-dimension curves for estimating bankfull-channel width, mean depth, and crosssectional area of non-urban wadeable streams in the Northern Moraine and Lake physiographic region of Indiana. 
Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions 17

Central Till Plain Region

The Central Till Plain region is described as an area 

underlain by thick sequences of cohesive, silt- and clay-rich 

till deposits (Gray, 2000). Except where it is dissected by the 

major streams of the region, overall upland relief is very low. 

Because many of the channels in this region are flowing on or 

attempting to cut into valley sides of erosion-resistant till, in 

many locations the boundary conditions of the channels are 

best characterized as semialluvial.

The 31 data-collection sites in this region included 21 

C-type channels and 4 F-type channels (appendix 1). The 

C-type reach of White Lick Creek at Avon, Ind. (fig. 7C) was 

seen as generally representative of the reaches where channel-dimension data were collected in the Central Till Plain 

physiographic region. At this location, the channel-boundary 

conditions can be described as fairly erosion resistant. The 

point bar that defines the left bank (looking downstream) of 

the channel contains a cohesive mixture of coarse and fine 

grained alluvium and it is well stabilized by trees and grasses. 

Along its right bank, the channel is attempting to cut into the 

native till that underlies this area. In some locations, till also 

is exposed in the bed of the channel. Here the channel has 

limited sinuosity, a fairly gentle slope, and a regularly repeating pattern of riffles and pools. The channel had a measured 

width/depth ratio of 14.8, which falls well within the range of 

values expected for C-type channels. 

In the Central Till Plain physiographic region, bankfullchannel-dimension data were collected at a total of 31 sites 

(table 3). From these data, simple regression equations (table 

5; equations 4, 5, and 6) and regional curves for bankfullchannel width, mean bankfull-channel depth, and bankfullchannel cross-sectional area (fig. 9) were developed.

Table 3. Drainage areas and bankfull-channel dimensions of 

study sites in the Central Till Plain region of Indiana.

Site 

identifier

Drainage area 

(miles2

)

Bankfullchannel 

width (feet)

Mean 

bankfullchannel 

depth (feet)

Bankfull 

crosssectional 

area (feet2

)

RC–200 0.62 24.0 1.8 42.4

RC–201 .82 19.0 1.2 22.4

RC–202 192 126.0 2.4 308.4

RC–203 29.4 47.5 3.3 157.1

RC–204 20.4 54.5 2.6 143.0

RC–205 98.8 69.7 3.0 208.1

RC–206 131 91.0 5.4 498.4

RC–207 32.2 52.7 4.3 224.3

RC–208 660 174.0 6.8 1190.3

RC–209 79.4 102.1 4.1 414.4

RC–210 9.69 34.5 2.9 99.0

RC–211 2.06 31.2 1.8 54.7

RC–212 240 127.0 6.5 820.5

RC–213 51.3 74.0 5.0 371.7

RC–214 14.7 46.4 1.4 63.2

RC–215 .32 15.8 1.6 22.8

RC–216 2.67 22.7 2.3 52.3

RC–217 .58 12.1 1.5 18.7

RC–218 6.89 42.0 1.3 56.1

RC–219 682 153.3 2.1 315.5

RC–220 445 141.5 4.3 612.6

RC–221 506 93.6 2.0 184.3

RC–222 28.7 48.4 4.6 223.3

RC–223 75.9 79.5 5.4 427.1

RC–224 812 166.5 3.3 548.6

RC–225 .15 7.2 0.8 6.0

RC–226 1.09 14.1 1.7 23.3

RC–227 3.12 19.0 1.6 31.3

RC–228 16.4 28.8 1.8 53.0

RC–229 1.76 19.4 1.4 26.5

RC–230 .04 7.8 1.0 7.8
18 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

0.1

1

10

100

1,000

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000

Mean depth and width, in feet Cross-sectional area, in square feet

Drainage area, in square miles

Bankfull-channel

cross-sectional area

Bankfull-channel width

Mean bankfull-channel depth

Figure 9. Regional channel-dimension curves for estimating bankfull-channel width, mean depth, 

and cross-sectional area of non-urban wadeable streams in the Central Till Plain physiographic 

region of Indiana.
Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions 19

Southern Hills and Lowlands Region

Of the three physiographic regions discussed in this 

report, the Southern Hills and Lowlands region exhibits the 

greatest diversity of geologic and topographic character. In 

many locations, this physiographic region is beyond the southernmost glacial boundary in Indiana and underlying bedrock 

units are at or very near the land surface. The bedrock units 

that underlie this region gently dip to the west; into the Illinois 

Basin. The bedrock units most resistant to erosion form upland 

areas that roughly trend from north to south (fig. 1). Those 

bedrock units which are less resistant to erosion underlie the 

lowlands that run between uplands. This area of the state generally has the greatest local relief and highest drainage density; 

thereby producing Indiana’s most rugged topography. 

Table 5. Regression equations for estimating bankfull-channel 

dimensions of non-urban wadeable streams in Indiana.

[WBF, bankfull width, in feet; DBF, mean bankfull depth, in feet; ABF, 

bankfull cross-sectional area, in square feet; DA, drainage area, in square 

miles]

Equation 

number Equation

Coefficient of 

determination 

(r-squared)

Northern Moraine and Lake region

1 WBFn = 13.4 DA 0.318 0.92

2 DBFn = 1.3 DA 0.176 0.75

3 ABFn = 17.0 DA 0.495 0.92

Central Till Plain region

4 WBFc = 18.2 DA 0.327 0.94

5 DBFc = 1.6 DA 0.159 0.56

6 ABFc = 28.8 DA 0.487 0.88

Southern Hills and Lowlands region

7 WBFs = 27.2 DA 0.286 0.94

8 DBFs = 1.9 DA 0.183 0.58

9 ABFs = 50.9 DA 0.468 0.87

Table 4. Drainage areas and bankfull-channel dimensions of 

study sites in the Southern Hills and Lowlands region of Indiana.

Site 

identifier

Drainage area 

(miles2

)

Bankfullchannel 

width (feet)

Mean 

bankfullchannel 

depth (feet)

Bankfull 

crosssectional

area (feet2

)

RC–300 0.20 16.6 0.9 14.9

RC–301 1.20 27.0 2.4 64.0

RC–302 1.74 35.0 1.2 43.7

RC–303 147 113.0 4.3 489.6

RC–304 .08 12.7 .9 11.6

RC–305 .46 22.8 1.7 39.6

RC–306 1.04 23.7 1.6 37.4

RC–307 .06 12.0 .6 7.7

RC–308 2.51 42.0 2.6 110.5

RC–309 .83 25.5 1.6 39.5

RC–310 1.27 31.7 1.9 59.3

RC–311 .24 18.9 1.6 31.0

RC–312 186 149.0 2.8 414.6

RC–313 59.2 78.0 2.5 194.8

RC–314 1.01 26.0 2.5 64.2

RC–315 4.69 58.3 4.6 269.9

RC–316 29.5 72.0 4.6 332.7

RC–317 9.97 53.3 2.4 129.4

RC–318 4.70 37.0 2.9 108.1

RC–319 10.8 38.0 3.7 140.9

RC–320 .19 19.4 1.8 36.0

RC–321 .53 17.8 1.4 24.0

RC–322 1.13 34.3 3.5 118.7

RC–323 .50 26.0 1.9 48.5

RC–324 1.09 25.6 2.2 57.7

RC–325 7.53 41.7 3.3 136.9

In this region, 22 of the 26 channel reaches selected for 

data acquisition were C-type channels (appendix 1). From all 

the sites visited here, an unnamed tributary to Bear Creek in 

Yellowwood State Forest (fig. 7S) was selected as representative of the channels in this region where data were collected. 

With nearby uplands cored by bedrock, this channel is in an 

area of high local relief and it has a relatively steep slope 

when compared to channel reaches measured in the northern 

and central portions of Indiana. Because the uplands tend to be 

steep and have relatively low infiltration capacities, rainstorms 

that produce high precipitation rates often lead to flashy runoff 

conditions in the channels and valley bottoms. The small channels in this region tend to have limited sinuosity; however, it is 

believed that in many cases this has resulted from the channels 

being straightened and forced to the valley side to accommodate agricultural pursuits in the valley bottoms (Parola and 

others, 2007).

In the figure 7 example, the channel bed and banks are 

clastic alluvium that may be easily eroded when channelfilling streamflows occur. This channel has a measured width/

depth ratio of 17.0, which generally indicates a relatively wide 

and shallow channel with a geometry adjusted to transport 

sediment as bedload (Ritter and others, 2011). 

In this physiographic region, bankfull-channel-dimension 

data were collected at a total of 26 sites (table 4). From these 

data, simple regression equations (table 5; equations 7, 8, 

and 9) and regional curves for bankfull-channel width, mean 

bankfull-channel depth, and bankfull-channel cross-sectional 

area (fig. 10) were developed.
20 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

0.1

1

10

100

1,000

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000

Drainage area, in square miles

Mean depth and width, in feet Cross-sectional area, in square feet

Bankfull-channel

cross-sectional area

Bankfull-channel width

Mean bankfull-channel depth

Figure 10. Regional channel-dimension curves for estimating bankfull-channel width, mean depth, 

and cross-sectional area of non-urban wadeable streams in the Southern Hills and Lowlands 

physiographic region of Indiana.
Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions 21

Discussion

The channel-geometry and bankfull-channel-dimension 

data collected in this investigation reveal that the character 

and dimensions of stream channels in Indiana vary between 

physiographic regions. For any given drainage area, northern 

Indiana channels have the smallest predicted bankfull-channel 

dimensions, southern Indiana channels have the largest predicted bankfull-channel dimensions, and central Indiana channels are intermediate in their predicted dimensions (figs. 11, 

12, and 13). When considering the suite of variables that influence bankfull-channel dimensions, it appears that contrasting 

runoff characteristics between the three physiographic regions 

may explain much of the inequality observed.

In the Northern Moraine and Lake region, sand-rich 

deposits and a low-relief to gently rolling landscape promote 

the infiltration of precipitation. A map presented by Clark 

(1980) indicates that average annual runoff for some portions 

of northern Indiana is less than 10 in. per year and less than 

60 percent of the runoff realized in some portions of southern 

Indiana. With less annual runoff, the channels of northern 

Indiana tend to be smaller than the channels of central and 

southern Indiana. The northern region also includes E-type 

channels, and streamflows tend to be more sustained by 

groundwater contributions.

In the Southern Hills and Lowlands region, near-surface 

bedrock and a rugged landscape character tend to promote 

rapid runoff. From Clark (1980) we see that, for much of 

southern Indiana, runoff is in excess of 14 in. per year. With 

a higher volume of runoff and a more flashy character, the 

predicted dimensions of southern Indiana channels tend to be 

larger than the channels of central and northern Indiana.

As mentioned previously, early work to document the 

relations between drainage area and bankfull-channel dimensions resulted in a published set of regional curves for the 

eastern United States (most often attributed to Dunne and 

Leopold, 1978). While the eastern United States regional 

curves have been and can be applied to Indiana streams, it 

should be recognized that those curves were derived from a 

fairly limited set of data and from data collected over a very 

broad geographic region. In this light, the bankfull-channeldimension curves established in this investigation can, for 

Indiana applications, be viewed as an attempted refinement of 

the eastern United States regional curves.

Estimates of bankfull-channel dimensions calculated 

from the curves identified for Indiana and the eastern United 

States regional curves (Dunne and Leopold, 1978) for streams 

with drainage areas of 0.5, 1, 5, 25, 50, 100, and 200 mi2 are 

presented in table 6. This table also includes comparisons 

between the three Indiana curves and the eastern United States 

regional curves. For the range of drainage areas presented in 

the table, five generalities are recognized:

1. For the smallest sites (for example drainage areas 

ranging from 0.5 to 1 mi2), the channel-dimension 

curves identified for northern Indiana streams generally confirm the dimensions predicted by the eastern 

United States regional curves.

2. As drainage area increases, there is greater disparity 

between the northern Indiana and eastern United 

States regional curves, and the northern Indiana 

curves consistently predict channel dimensions that 

are smaller than the dimensions predicted by the 

eastern United States curves.

3. For the smallest sites (again, drainage areas ranging 

from 0.5 to 1 mi2), the southern Indiana regional 

curves predict channel widths that are approximately 

twice the widths predicted by the eastern United 

States regional curves.

4. As drainage area increases, the disparity between the 

southern Indiana and eastern United States regional 

curves decreases, and for sites with drainage areas 

ranging from 50 to 200 mi2 the southern Indiana 

curves generally agree with the channel-dimension 

estimates derived from the eastern United States 

curves.

5. Over the entire range of drainage areas (0.5 to 200 mi2), 

results derived from the central Indiana curves produce channel-dimension estimates that are generally 

closest to results derived from the eastern United 

States regional curves.

For any application of regional bankfull-channeldimension curves, it is important that the user recognize that 

most often there is significant natural variability contained 

within the datasets used to establish the regional relations. An 

example of this natural variability is seen in the plot of mean 

bankfull-channel depth included in figure 9. In this plot (and 

in regional curves in general), the best fit line represents the 

central tendency of the measured data; however, it is readily 

apparent that very few of the measured data fall on the best 

fit line and many of the data points are well off of the best fit 

line. Therefore, while a best-fit line can be identified and a 

regression equation describing that line can be presented, it 

will be prudent for the user to consider the many variables that 

may influence channel dimensions and the scale of variability 

that may be present in the channel dimensions of any natural 

waterway.
22 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

Table 6. Comparison of bankfull-channel-dimension estimates from Indiana and from regional curves for the eastern United States.

[Regional curves for the eastern United States from Dunne and Leopold (1978). mi2, square miles; ft, feet; ft2, square feet]

Estimates of bankfull-channel dimensions

Drainage 

area 

(mi2)

Bankfullchannel 

characteristic

Northern 

Indiana 

regional 

curves

Central 

Indiana 

regional 

curves

Southern 

Indiana 

regional 

curves

Eastern 

United 

States 

regional 

curves

Comparison of 

estimates from 

northern Indiana 

and eastern 

United States 

regional curves 

in percent 

difference

Comparison of 

estimates from 

central Indiana 

and eastern 

United States 

regional curves 

in percent 

difference

Comparison of 

estimates from 

southern Indiana 

and eastern 

United States 

regional curves 

in percent 

difference

0.5 Width (ft) 11 15 22 11 0 36 100

0.5 Mean depth (ft) 1.2 1.4 1.7 1.2 0 17 42

0.5 Cross-sectional 

area (ft2)

12 21 37 13 -8 62 185

1 Width (ft) 13 18 27 14 -7 29 93

1 Mean depth (ft) 1.3 1.6 1.9 1.5 -13 7 27

1 Cross-sectional 

area (ft2)

17 29 51 21 -19 38 143

5 Width (ft) 22 31 43 27 -19 15 59

5 Mean depth (ft) 1.7 2.1 2.6 2.4 -28 -13 8

5 Cross-sectional 

area (ft2)

38 63 108 63 -40 0 71

25 Width (ft) 37 52 68 51 -27 2 33

25 Mean depth (ft) 2.3 2.7 3.4 3.9 -41 -31 -13

25 Cross-sectional 

area (ft2)

84 138 230 187 -55 -26 23

50 Width (ft) 46 65 83 67 -31 -3 24

50 Mean depth (ft) 2.6 3.0 3.9 4.7 -45 -36 -17

50 Cross-sectional 

area (ft2)

118 194 318 299 -61 -35 6

100 Width (ft) 58 82 102 88 -34 -7 16

100 Mean depth (ft) 2.9 3.3 4.4 5.8 -50 -43 -24

100 Cross-sectional 

area (ft2)

166 271 439 479 -65 -43 -8

200 Width (ft) 72 103 124 116 -38 -11 7

200 Mean depth (ft) 3.3 3.7 5.0 7.1 -54 -48 -30

200 Cross-sectional 

area (ft2)

234 380 608 767 -69 -50 -21
Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions 23

1.0

10

100

1,000

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000

Bankfull-channel width, in feet

Drainage area, in square miles

South

Central

North

Data collected in the Southern Hills and Lowlands region

Data collected in the Central Till Plain region

Data collected in the Northern Moraine and Lake region

Figure 11. Comparison of the regional channel-dimension curves for estimating bankfull-channel 

width of non-urban wadeable streams in Indiana.
24 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

0.1

1

10

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000

Data collected in the Southern Hills and Lowlands region

Data collected in the Central Till Plain region

Data collected in the Northern Moraine and Lake region

Mean bankfull-channel depth, in feet

Drainage area, in square miles

South

Central

North

Figure 12. Comparison of the regional channel-dimension curves for estimating mean bankfull-channel 

depth of non-urban wadeable streams in Indiana.
Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions 25

1.0

10

100

1,000

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000

Drainage area, in square miles

Bankfull-channel cross-sectional area, in square feet

South

Central

North

Data collected in the Southern Hills and Lowlands region

Data collected in the Central Till Plain region

Data collected in the Northern Moraine and Lake region

Figure 13. Comparison of the regional channel-dimension curves for estimating bankfull-channel 

cross-sectional area of non-urban wadeable streams in Indiana.
26 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

Limitations

It should be noted that the regression equations and 

regional curves presented in this report were developed from 

a dataset that had geographic limitations. While substantial 

effort was applied to collect channel-dimension data from the 

broadest possible area, modifications to channels and channel networks impacted by drainage-improvement practices 

(for example tile drains and ditching) prevented data collection in some portions of Indiana. Therefore, when the results 

presented herein are applied, it will be prudent for the end user 

to consider where data were collected, where data are lacking, 

and incorporate knowledge gained from their own observations of local conditions.

Of particular note, there were no sites identified in a 

large portion of southwestern Indiana (fig. 3) where bankfullchannel-dimension data could be collected from stable and 

non-incised streams. This area is largely coincident with 

the Wabash Lowland physiographic division (Gray, 2000). 

Though this area is mapped as part of the Southern Hills and 

Lowlands region, its characteristics of low relief and thick 

sequences of till and alluvium may yield bankfull-channel 

dimensions that more closely follow the relations established 

for the Central Till Plain region to the immediate north. 

Therefore, because this area is not represented in the channeldimension dataset discussed herein, it is acknowledged that 

the channel-dimension relations identified for southern Indiana 

may not apply well in this area. All available resources should 

be considered when channel-dimension estimates are produced 

for channels in this area.

Likewise, the user should understand limitations within 

the channel-classification results (appendix 1). For several 

sites, the collected channel-geometry data produced ambiguous channel-classification results, and for a few sites the data 

did not fall within the defined range of any single channel 

type. Therefore, for many sites, professional judgment was 

applied to select the one channel type that best fit all site data 

and field observations. From experience gained in this investigation, it is anticipated that many channel reaches in Indiana 

will require careful consideration and professional judgment 

when Rosgen (1996) channel-classification is attempted. 

Summary and Conclusions

Between 2006 and 2008, many areas of Indiana were 

impacted by damaging floods. While some of the damage 

resulted from inundation by flood waters, processes of erosion 

and channel migration also produced costly impacts. With 

this recognition, the Indiana Silver Jackets—a consortium 

of Federal and State agencies that focuses on reducing risks 

associated with natural hazards—identified regional channeldimension curves as one of the science-based tools that should 

be developed to support mitigation efforts associated with 

fluvial-erosion hazards. 

Regional channel-dimension curves typically are presented as a combination of plots and regression equations that 

show the relation between drainage area and channel dimensions. In this investigation, the USGS has developed regional 

channel-dimension relations for non-urban wadeable streams 

in Indiana. These relations have been developed for the 

bankfull-channel dimensions of width, mean depth, and crosssectional area and describe how they relate to the predictive 

variable of drainage area. To ensure that channel-dimension 

data could be obtained from many sites with relatively small 

drainage areas, and because USGS streamgages are rarely 

established on sites with small drainage areas, the data-collection effort focused on ungaged sites across Indiana.

Because it was anticipated that channel dimensions might 

vary from south to north and between physiographic regions, 

the site-selection process tried to include a roughly equal number of sites from Indiana’s Northern Moraine and Lake region, 

Central Till Plain region, and Southern Hills and Lowlands 

region. The site-selection process also tried to ensure that data 

would be collected over a broad range of drainage areas within 

each of these targeted physiographic regions. In total, 82 sites 

were identified for data collection; 25 in the Northern Moraine 

and Lake region, 31 in the Central Till Plain region, and 26 in 

the Southern Hills and Lowlands region.

Following well established methods, data were collected 

at each site to identify bankfull stage, determine the dimensions of bankfull width, mean depth, and cross-sectional 

area, and document channel-geometry characteristics that 

allowed for determinations of channel classification. From the 

channel-dimension data, preliminary statewide relations were 

developed that relate channel dimensions to drainage area. By 

evaluating where these statewide relations overpredicted and 

underpredicted the measured channel dimensions, it was identified that the data supported independent relations for each of 

the three physiographic regions. 

In this investigation it was found that, for any given 

drainage area, northern Indiana channels have the smallest 

predicted dimensions, southern Indiana channels have the 

largest predicted dimensions, and central Indiana channels are 

intermediate in their predicted dimensions. When considering the suite of variables that influence channel dimensions, 

it appears that contrasting runoff characteristics between the 

three physiographic regions may explain much of the inequality observed in the measured channel dimensions.

The reader is cautioned that, while effort was applied 

to collect channel-dimension data from the broadest possible 

area, data collection was not possible in all portions of Indiana. Therefore, when the results presented herein are applied, 

it will be prudent for the user to incorporate knowledge gained 

from their own observations of local conditions.
References Cited 27

References Cited

Cinotto, P.J., 2003, Development of regional curves of 

bankfull-channel geometry and discharge for streams in the 

non-urban, Piedmont physiographic province, Pennsylvania 

and Maryland: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 03–4014, 27 p.

Clark, G.D., ed., 1980, The Indiana water resource availability, 

uses, and needs: Indianapolis, Indiana Department of Natural Resources, 508 p.

Davis, W.M., 1899, The geographical cycle: The Geographical 

Journal, v. 14, no. 5, p. 481–504.

Dunne, T., and Leopold, L.B., 1978, Water in environmental 

planning: New York, W.H. Freeman and Company, 818 p.

Emmett, W.W., 2004, A historical perspective on regional 

channel geometry curves: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Stream Notes, accessed January 23, 2006, at http://stream.

fs.fed.us/news/streamnt/jan04/jan04_02.htm.

Emmett, W.W., and Leopold, L.B., 1963, A dimensionless 

rating curve: U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources 

Division Bulletin, August, 1963, p. 22–24.

Gray, H.H., 2000, Physiographic divisions of Indiana: Indiana 

University, Indiana Geological Survey Special Report 61, 

15 p.

Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., Patterson, J.M., Clinton, D.R., 

Slate, L.O., Jessup, A.G., Everhart, J.R., and Smith, R.E., 

1999, Bankfull hydraulic geometry relationships for North 

Carolina streams: American Water Resources Association 

Wildland Hydrology Symposium, Bozeman, Montana [Proceedings], accessed November 30, 2012, at http://www.bae.

ncsu.edu/programs/extension/wqg/srp/rural_pied_paper.

html.

Harrelson, C.C., Rawlins, C.L., and Potyondy, J.P., 1994, 

Stream channel reference sites: An illustrated guide to field 

techniques: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station 

General Technical Report RM–245, 61 p.

Johnson, P.A., and Heil, T.M., 1996, Uncertainty in estimating 

bankfull conditions: American Water Resources Association 

Water Resources Bulletin, v. 32, no. 6, p. 1283–1291.

Juracek, K.E. and Fitzpatrick, F.A., 2003, Limitations and 

implications of stream classification: Journal of the American Water Resources Association, v. 39, no. 3, p. 659–670.

Lawlor, S.M., 2004, Determination of channel-morphology 

characteristics, bankfull discharge, and various design-peak 

discharges in western Montana: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Report 2004–5263, 19 p.

Leopold, L.B., and Wolman, M.G., 1957, River channel patterns: braided, meandering, and straight: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 282–B, 51 p.

Leopold, L.B., Wolman, M.G., and Miller, J.P., 1964, Fluvial 

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

and Company, 522 p.

McCandless, T.L., and Everett, R.A., 2002, Maryland stream 

survey: bankfull discharge and channel characteristics of 

streams in the Piedmont hydrologic region: U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service CBFO–S02–01, 40 p.

Melton, F.A., 1936, An empirical classification of flood-plain 

streams: The Geographical Review, v. 26, p. 593–609.

Miller, J.R. and Ritter, J.B., 1996, An examination of the 

Rosgen classification of natural rivers: Catena, v. 27, 

p. 295–299.

Mistak, J.L., and Stille, D.A., 2008, Regional hydraulic 

geometry curve for the Upper Menominee River: Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Technical 

Report 20081, accessed November 30, 2012, at http://www.

michigan.gov/documents/dnr/2008-1tr_363056_7.pdf.

Montgomery, D.R., and Buffington, 1993, Channel classification, prediction of channel response and assessment 

of channel condition: Seattle, University of Washington, Department of Geological Sciences and Quaternary 

Research Center Report TFW–SH10–93–002, 84 p.

Morlock, S.E., Menke, C.D., Arvin, D.V., and Kim, M.H., 

2008, Flood of June 7–9, 2008, in central and southern Indiana: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008–1322, 

15 p.

Parola, A.C., Vesely, W.S., Croasdaile, M.A., Hansen, C., and 

Jones, M.S., 2007, Geomorphic characteristics of streams in 

the Bluegrass physiographic region of Kentucky: Louisville, 

University of Louisville Stream Institute, Project final report 

for Kentucky Division of Water NPS 00–10, 60 p.

Powell, R.O., Miller, S.J., Westergard, B.E., Mulvihill, C.I., 

Baldigo, B.P., Gallagher, A.S., and Starr, R.R., 2003, Guidelines for surveying bankfull channel geometry and developing regional hydraulic-geometry relations for streams of 

New York State: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

03–92, 20 p.

Ritter, D.F., Kochel, R.C., and Miller, J.R., 2011, Process 

geomorphology: Long Grove, Illinois, Waveland Press, Inc., 

652 p.

Roper, B.B., Buffington, J.M., Archer, E., Moyer, C., and 

Ward, M., 2008, The role of observer variation in determining Rosen stream type in northeastern Oregon mountain 

streams: Journal of the American Water Resources Association, v. 44, no. 2, p. 417–427.
28 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

Rosgen, D.L., 1994, A classification of natural rivers: Catena, 

v. 22, no. 3, p. 169–199.

Rosgen, D.L., 1996, Applied river morphology: Pagosa 

Springs, Colorado, Wildland Hydrology, (variously 

paginated)

Schumm, S.A., 1963, A tentative classification of alluvial river 

channels: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 477, 10 p.

Sherwood, J.M., and Huitger, C.A., 2005, Bankfull characteristics of Ohio streams and their relation to peak streamflows: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2005–5153, 38 p.

Simon, A., Doyle, M., Kondolf, M., Shields, F.D., Jr., Rhoads, 

B., Grant, G., Fitzpatrick, F., Juracek, K., McPhillips, M., 

and MacBroom, J., 2005, How well do the Rosgen classification and associated natural channel design methods integrate and quantify fluvial processes and channel response?, 

in World Water Congress 2005: Impacts of global climate 

change: 2005 World Water and Environmental Resources 

Congress, Anchorage, Alaska [Proceedings], p. 584.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2003, Identifying bankfull 

stage in forested streams in the eastern United States: 

Stream Systems Technology Center, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Forest Service videotape, approx. 

46 minutes.

Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, 2009a, Identification 

of bankfull stage: Vermont stream geomorphic assessment, 

appendix K: accessed November 30, 2012, at 

http://www.vtwaterquality.org/rivers/docs/

assessmenthandbooks/rv_apxkidbankfullstage.pdf.

Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, 2009b, Bridge and 

culvert assessment protocol: Vermont stream geomorphic 

assessment, appendix G: accessed February 5, 2013, at 

http://www.vtwaterquality.org/rivers/htm/rv_geoassess.htm.

White, K.E., 2001, Regional curve development and selection 

of a reference reach in the non-urban, Lowland sections of 

the Piedmont physiographic province, Pennsylvania and 

Maryland: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01–4146, 20 p.

Williams, G.R., 1978, Bank-full discharge of rivers: Water 

Resources Research, v. 14, no. 6, p. 1141–1154.

Wolman, M.G., 1954, A method of sampling coarse river-bed 

material: Transactions of the American Geophysical Union, 

v. 35, p. 951–956.

Wolman, M.G., and Miller, John C., 1960, Magnitude and 

frequency of forces in geomorphic processes: Journal of 

Geology, v. 68, p. 54–74.
Glossary 29

Glossary

The terms in this glossary were compiled from numerous sources. Some definitions have 

been modified for use within this report.

Alluvium Sediment deposits resulting from 

the operations of modern streams and rivers.

Bankfull channel The active stream channel during periods of bankfull discharge. 

Bankfull cross-sectional area The surface 

area, measured perpendicular to streamflow 

and in the vertical plane, through which 

water passes during periods of bankfull 

discharge.

Bankfull discharge The water discharge 

that completely fills the active channel just 

prior to overflow spilling onto the attendant 

floodplain.

Bankfull mean depth Determined from a 

single measurement cross section, the average depth of the active channel at bankfull 

discharge.

Bankfull stage The elevation (or level) on 

a channel bank that defines incipient flooding.

Bankfull width The width of the water 

surface in the active channel, measured at 

bankfull discharge and perpendicular to flow.

Bedload Material transported by a stream 

through the processes of rolling, sliding, and 

saltation. Also, sediment particles that, when 

moved by the action of streamflow, are in 

frequent contact with the streambed.

Bed material The geologic materials found 

in the boundary—bed and banks—of a 

stream channel.

Drainage area A measure of the horizontal projection of the land-surface area that 

contributes runoff to an identified point of 

interest.

Entrenchment ratio The water-surface 

width at two times the maximum bankfull 

depth divided by the bankfull width.

Field indicators of bankfull stage Physical evidence, which may be observed in the 

field, to help identify bankfull stage.

Flooding An overflowing of water onto normally dry land.

Floodplain The flat area of land adjacent to 

a channel which, within the current climatic 

regime, has been constructed by processes 

associated with the stream, and is subject to 

recurring inundation.

Fluvial Of, or pertaining to, rivers and 

streams. Also, the landforms, geologic deposits, 

and processes associated with the actions of 

flowing water.

Fluvial-erosion hazard The suite of risks to 

structures, property, and infrastructure elements 

that are brought about by the natural processes 

of stream-bank erosion and stream-channel 

meandering.

Fluvial plain The valley-floor (or valleyflat) land that has been produced by fluvial 

processes and may include the floodplain and 

adjacent terraces.

Geomorphology The branch of geology that 

studies the landforms of the earth’s surface and 

the processes that shape them.

Phototropic Growing toward a light source.

Physiographic region An area of common 

geologic materials, topographic character, and 

geomorphic history. 

Regional curves Plots established to show 

the relations between drainage area and the 

bankfull-channel dimensions of width, mean 

depth, and cross-sectional area.

Root collar Typically found at ground level, 

the transition zone the separates the roots from 

the trunk of a tree.

Rosgen channel classification A system 

of describing river channels based on channel geometry, stream plan-view patterns, and 

streambed material.
30 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

Sinuosity The ratio of channel length 

divided by the straight-line valley length 

between two end points that define a channel reach. A measure used to describe the 

amount a channel meanders.

Slope A measure of the vertical fall of 

a channel over a defined channel length; 

synonymous with gradient.

Wadeable A stream reach where it is 

practical for field observations and measurements to be completed while wading.

Watershed The land-surface area that 

potentially contributes surface runoff to an 

identified location; synonymous with drainage basin.

Width/depth ratio A term used to 

describe the general shape of a crosschannel profile; calculated by dividing 

the bankfull-channel width by the mean 

bankfull-channel depth.
Appendix 1 31

Appendix 1. Channel-Classification Data and Determinations for the ChannelDimension Study Sites on Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana
32 Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana

Appendix 1. Channel-classification data and determinations for the channel-dimension study sites on non-urban wadeable 

streams in Indiana.—Continued

[Rosgen level II classification based on Rosgen (1996). <.less than; —, channel reaches with no classification results, ambiguous classification results, 

or other characteristic that did not result in a confident classification.]

Site 

identification

Slope 

(feet/foot)

Sinuosity 

(feet/foot)

Width/depth ratio 

(feet/foot)

Entrenchment 

ratio (feet/foot)

Dominant 

channel material

Rosgen II 

classification1

RC–100 0.002 1.86 11.6 8.4 Sand E5b

RC–101 <0.001 1.39 10.8 5.1 Sand E5b

RC–102 .009 2.05 10.5 2.2 Sand C5

RC–103 .001 1.07 14.3 10.7 Sand C5

RC–104 <0.001 1.53 22.8 2.5 Sand C5cRC–105 .001 1.05 16.1 11.8 Sand C5

RC–106 .002 1.14 13.6 7.2 Sand C5

RC–107 <0.001 1.96 31.4 2.6 Sand C5cRC–108 .004 1.86 13.1 5.8 Sand E5b

RC–109 .002 1.37 9.8 10.9 Gravel E4b

RC–110 .001 1.52 10.7 6.9 Gravel C4

RC–111 .001 1.41 34.1 5.5 Sand C5

RC–112 .001 1.96 18.1 8.9 Sand C5

RC–113 .001 1.16 21.7 3.6 Gravel C4

RC–114 .001 1.50 25.8 6.3 Sand C5

RC–115 <0.001 1.40 29.0 2.8 Sand C5cRC–116 .001 1.22 35.9 8.4 Sand C5

RC–117 <0.001 1.38 24.6 5.8 Sand C5cRC–118 <0.001 1.19 19.1 11.7 Sand C5cRC–119 .001 1.44 28.3 7.4 Sand C5

RC–120 .001 1.29 14.6 7.2 Gravel C4

RC–121 .003 1.18 8.0 26.0 Sand —

RC–122 .007 1.00 12.6 2.3 Sand C5

RC–123 <0.001 1.11 13.5 10.5 Sand C5cRC–124 .002 1.51 18.0 5.5 Sand C5

RC–200 .009 1.14 13.6 4.2 Gravel C4

RC–201 .010 1.18 16.1 1.9 Gravel —

RC–202 .006 1.08 51.5 2.2 Bedrock2 C1

RC–203 .002 1.49 14.4 9.7 Gravel C4

RC–204 .004 1.23 20.8 4.2 Gravel C4

RC–205 .001 1.04 23.3 4.0 Gravel C4

RC–206 .003 1.26 17.0 14.2 Gravel C4

RC–207 <0.001 1.30 12.4 8.5 Sand C5cRC–208 .003 1.50 25.4 2.2 Bedrock C1

RC–209 .001 1.13 25.2 7.0 Bedrock C1

RC–210 .003 1.29 12.0 7.0 Gravel C4

RC–211 .012 1.46 17.8 16.0 Cobble C3

RC–212 .002 1.50 19.7 13.4 Gravel C4

RC–213 .004 1.19 14.7 9.7 Gravel C4

RC–214 .005 1.29 34.1 1.3 Gravel F4

RC–215 .008 1.84 8.8 13.1 Silt/Clay —

RC–216 .004 1.49 9.9 6.3 Gravel —

RC–217 .004 1.35 7.8 18.4 Silt/Clay —
Appendix 1 33

Appendix 1. Channel-classification data and determinations for the channel-dimension study sites on non-urban wadeable 

streams in Indiana.—Continued

[Rosgen level II cla

or other characterist

Site 

identification

RC–218

ssification based on R

ic that did not result 

Slope 

(feet/foot)

.001

osgen (1996). <.le

Sinuosity 

(feet/foot)

1.21

ss than; —, channel reac

in a confident classification.]

Width/depth ratio 

(feet/foot)

31.4

hes with no classifica

Entrenchment 

ratio (feet/foot)

3.9

tion results, ambiguous c

Dominant 

channel material

Gravel

lassification results, 

Rosgen II 

classification1

C4

RC–219 .002 1.37 74.7 1.4 Bedrock F1

RC–220 <0.001 2.40 32.7 4.2 Gravel C4cRC–221 <0.001 1.05 47.5 1.4 Bedrock F1

RC–222 <0.001 1.12 10.5 6.4 Sand C5cRC–223 .001 1.40 14.8 11.1 Sand C5

RC–224 .001 1.35 50.5 1.4 Gravel F4

RC–225 .018 1.00 8.6 2.0 Sand —

RC–226 <0.001 1.01 8.5 28.4 Sand —

RC–227 .001 1.60 11.5 10.0 Gravel C4

RC–228 .007 1.05 15.7 11.5 Sand C5

RC–229 .020 1.37 14.2 11.6 Gravel C4

RC–230 .008 1.38 7.8 7.6 Silt/Clay C6

RC–300 .010 1.12 18.5 3.7 Gravel C4

RC–301 .005 1.16 11.4 13.0 Gravel C4

RC–302 .009 1.22 28.0 8.2 Gravel C4

RC–303 .002 1.63 26.1 2.2 Gravel C4

RC–304 .019 1.35 13.9 31.5 Gravel C4

RC–305 .005 1.26 13.1 18.4 Gravel C4

RC–306 .011 1.11 15.0 8.5 Gravel C4

RC–307 .007 1.31 18.7 4.0 Gravel C4

RC–308 .004 1.07 16.0 8.2 Gravel C4

RC–309 .009 1.10 16.5 13.0 Gravel C4

RC–310 .008 1.17 16.9 9.9 Gravel C4

RC–311 .013 1.10 11.5 5.92 Gravel C4

RC–312 .002 1.84 53.6 1.3 Cobble F3

RC–313 .001 1.18 31.2 1.2 Bedrock F1

RC–314 .013 1.12 10.5 16.4 Gravel C4

RC–315 .006 1.11 12.6 9.5 Gravel C4

RC–316 .001 1.76 15.6 1.4 Sand F5

RC–317 <0.001 1.15 22.0 3.9 Bedrock C1cRC–318 .001 1.20 12.7 10.8 Gravel C4

RC–319 .002 1.28 10.3 6.3 Bedrock C1

RC–320 .020 1.08 10.5 5.4 Cobble C3

RC–321 .010 1.24 13.2 22.1 Gravel C4

RC–322 .009 1.13 9.9 2.0 Bedrock —

RC–323 .012 1.25 13.9 7.0 Gravel C4

RC–324 .007 1.20 11.4 9.8 Gravel C4

RC–325 <0.001 1.33 12.7 19.2 Bedrock C1c1

The definitive-criteria ranges used to determine reach classification were taken from Rosgen (1996) figure 5–3 and the variable ranges noted in the key of 

that figure were applied.

2

At sites where bedrock is identified as the dominant channel material, more than 50 percent of the channel boundary was exposed bedrock; however, in all 

cases some portion of the channel boundary was also clastic alluvium.


Robinson—Regional Bankfull-Channel Dimensions of Non-Urban Wadeable Streams in Indiana—Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5078