Analyses of the erosion of fine sediment deposit for a large dam-removal project: an empirical approach

References

• AECOM and Stillwater Sciences, 2015. Draft dam removal concepts evaluation report, Matilija Dam Removal, Sediment Transport, and Robles Diversion Mitigation Project. Prepared for Ventura County Watershed Protection District, August.
   Google Scholar
• Booth, D.B., et al., 2014. A method for spatially explicit representation of sub-watershed sediment yield, Southern California, USA. Environmental Management, 53 (5), 968–984. doi: 10.1007/s00267-014-0251-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bountry, J. and Randle, T., 2001. Hydraulic and sediment transport analysis and modeling, Appendix B in Savage Rapids Dam Sediment Evaluation Study, Bureau of Reclamation. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) (1996). Sediment analysis and modeling of the river erosion alternative. Elwha River Ecosystem and Fisheries Restoration Project, Washington, Elwha Technical Series PN-95-9, October.
   Google Scholar
• Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), 2006. Hydrology, hydraulics, and sediment studies for the Matilija Dam ecosystem restoration project, Ventura, CA – DRAFT Report (November 2006), 323 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Chang, S., 1963. A review of gravitation theory of sediment suspension. Journal of Water Conservancy, 3, 11–23. Published in Chinese.
   Google Scholar
• Chien, N., 1989. Dynamics of high suspended sediment concentration flows. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press. ISBN 7-302-00509-5/TV.7, published in Chinese.
   Google Scholar
• Chien, N. and Wan, Z., 1991. Mechanics of sediment transport. Beijing: Science Press. ISBN 703-002321-8/TV.7. Published in Chinese.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, M.J., et al., in review. Channel response to sediment release: insights from a paired dam-removal analysis. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms.
   Google Scholar
• Cui, Y. and Wilcox, A., 2008. Development and Application of Numerical Models of Sediment Transport Associated with Dam Removal. Chapter 23 in Sedimentation Engineering: Processes, Measurements, Modeling, and Practice, ASCE Manual 110, Garcia, M.H., ed., 995–1020, ASCE, Reston, VA, ISBN 978-0784408149.
   Google Scholar
• Cui, Y., et al., 2014. Marmot Dam removal project, Sandy River, Oregon: lessons learned from sediment transport model predictions and long-term post-removal monitoring. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000894.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cui, Y., et al., under review. Modeling sand transport following Simkins Dam removal: DREAM-1 prediction compared with field observations. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (Submitted on 21 December 2015, manuscript number HYENG-9873).
   Google Scholar
• Ferrer-Boix, C., Martín-Vide, J.P., and Parker, G., 2014. Channel evolution after dam removal in a poorly sorted sediment mixture: experiments and numerical model. Water Resources Research, 50 (11), 8997–9019. doi: 10.1002/2014WR015550
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graf, W.L., 1977. The rate low in fluvial geomorphology. American Journal of Science, 177 (2), 178–191. doi:10.2475/ajs.277.2.178.
   Google Scholar
• Greimann, B.P. and Huang, J., 2006. One-dimensional modeling of incision through reservoir deposits. In: Federal interagency sedimentation conference, subcommittee on sedimentation, Reno, NV, 8.
   Google Scholar
• Hanson, G.J. and Cook, K.R., 2004. Apparatus, test procedures, and analytical methods to measure soil erodibility in-situ. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 20 (4), 455–462. doi: 10.13031/2013.16492
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langendoen, E.J., 2010. Assessing post-dam removal sediment dynamics using the CONCEPTS computer model. Second joint federal interagency conference, Las Vegas, NV, June 27–July 1.
   Google Scholar
• Langendoen, E.J., Wells, R.R., and Simon, A., 2005. Numerical simulation of post dam removal sediment dynamics along the Kalamazoo River between Otsego and Plainwell, Michigan. In: G. E. Moglen, ed. Watershed management. Williamsburg, VA: ASCE, 12.
   Google Scholar
• Major, J.J., et al., 2012. Geomorphic response of the Sandy River, Oregon, to removal of Marmot Dam. Professional Paper 1792, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Mussetter Engineering, Inc. (MEI), 2003. San Clemente Reservoir and Carmel River sediment-transport modeling to evaluate potential impacts of dam retrofit options. Prepared for American Water Works Service Company, VooHees, New Jersey, MEI Project No. 01-18.2, April.
   Google Scholar
• Newcombe, C.P., and Jensen, J.O.T., 1996. Channel suspended sediment and fisheries: a synthesis for quantitative assessment of risk and impact. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 16, 693–727. doi: 10.1577/1548-8675(1996)016<0693:CSSAFA>2.3.CO;2
   Google Scholar
• Pant, H.R., 2013. Erosion resistance of cohesive sediments in coastal saltmarshes. Thesie, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Louisiana State University.
   Google Scholar
• Partheniades, E., 1965. Erosion and deposition of cohesive soils. Journal of the Hydraulics Division, 91 (1), 105–139. ASCE.
   Google Scholar
• Qi, P., Sun, Z.Y., and Qi, H.H., 2010. Flood discharge and sediment transport potentials of the lower Yellow River and development of an efficient flood discharge channel. Zhengzhou: Yellow River Water Conservancy Press. ISBN 978-7-80734-946-4, published in Chinese.
   Google Scholar
• Stillwater Sciences, 2000. Numerical modeling of sediment transport in the Sandy River, OR following removal of Marmot Dam. Technical Report, Prepared for Portland General Electric Company, Portland, Oregon, March, 48p + 39 figures. Available from: www.stillwatersci.com [Accessed 3 March 2016].
   Google Scholar
• Stillwater Sciences, 2008. Klamath River dam removal study: sediment transport DREAM-1 simulation. Technical Report, Prepared for California Coastal Conservancy, 1330 Broadway, 13th Floor, Oakland, CA 94612, 73 pages, October. Available from: www.stillwatersci.com [Accessed 3 March 2016].
   Google Scholar
• Stillwater Sciences, 2010. Simulating sediment transport in the Patapsco River following dam removal with Dam Removal Express Assessment Model-1 (DREAM-1). Technical Report, prepared for Interfluve and American Rivers, 32 pages, January. Available from: www.stillwatersci.com [Accessed 3 March 2016].
   Google Scholar
• Stillwater Sciences, 2013. Modeling sediment transport dynamics and evaluating flooding risks in the Yuba and Feather rivers, California, following modifications to Englebright and Daguerre Point dams. Technical Report, prepared for National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Region, Habitat Conservation Diversion, 113p, June. Available from: www.stillwatersci.com [Accessed 3 March 2016].
   Google Scholar
• Stillwater Sciences, 2014. Matilija Dam Removal, Sediment Transport, & Robles Diversion Mitigation Study, watershed and impoundment-are sediment characterization, Task 2.2. Technical Memorandum, prepared for Management Team, Matilija Dam Ecosystem Restoration Project, June 3. Available from: www.matilijadam.org [Accessed 3 March 2016].
   Google Scholar
• URS and Stillwater Sciences, 2014. Draft initial options screening report, Matilija Dam Removal, Sediment Transport, and Robles Diversion Mitigation Project. Prepared for Ventura County Watershed Protection District, September. Available from: www.matilijadam.org [Accessed 3 March 2016].
   Google Scholar
• Vanoni, V.A., 1975. Sedimentation engineering, ASCE manuals and reports on engineering practice No. 54. New York, NY: ASCE. ISBN 0-87262-001-8.
   Google Scholar
• Wilcock, P., Pitlick, J., and Cui, Y., 2009. Sediment transport primer: estimating bed-material transport in gravel-bed rivers. General Technical Report, RMRS-GTR-226, May. USDA Rocky Mountain Research Station.
   Google Scholar
• Wilcox, A.C., O’Connor, J.E., and Major, J.J., 2014. Rapid reservoir erosion, hyperconcentrated flow, and downstream deposition triggered by breaching of 38 m tall Condit Dam, White Salmon River, Washington. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, 119, 1376–1394. doi:10.1002/2013JF003073.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar