United States Department of Agriculture
Natural Resources Conservation Service		 National Water Management Center Go to Accessibility Information
Skip to Page Content
 Photo of River Bend





Sugar Creek Watershed Geomorphic Approach and Goals

 GEOMORPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
 GEOMORPHIC APPROACH AND GOALS

TOTAL AND UNCONTROLLED DRAINAGE AREA VERSES STREAM LENGTH

Graph of Total and Uncontrolled Drainage Area vs. Stream Length
Click on Image for Larger View (17 KB)

BANKFULL CHANNEL WIDTHS AS A FUNCTION OF UNCONTROLLED DRAINAGE AREA

Bankful Channel Widths as a Function of Uncontrolled Drainage Area
Click on Image for Larger View (14 KB)

SUGAR CREEK PROFILES 1966 - 1997

Graph of the 1966-1997 Sugar Creek Profiles
Click on Image for Larger View (41 KB)

SUGAR CREEK SUSPENDED SEDIMENTS VERSES DISCHARGE

Graph of Sugar Creek Suspended Sediments vs Discharge
Click on Image for Larger View (10 KB)

OTHER BASIN FACTS

Basin Area: 232.4 square miles = 148,748 acres
Mean Basin Elevation: To Be Determined (TBD)
Mean Basin Slope: TBD Feet/Feet (ft/ft) = ft/mile
Average Overland Flow Distance: TBD feet

PROBLEMS/OPPORTUNITIES

There are four primary problems that exist in the Sugar Creek Watershed today.

  1. Sedimentation in the Washita River downstream from the confluence with Sugar Creek.
  2. Degrading bed elevations and corresponding bank instability along Sugar Creek's main channel and tributaries.
  3. Degrading side lateral channels.
  4. Possible excessive sedimentation in some of the floodwater retarding structures.

THE GEOMORPHIC APPROACH

Sugar Creek's drainage network is not functioning as anticipated. A complicated inter-relationship exists between the upstream flood retarding structures, land use, roads and highways, the tributary reaches of the watershed, and the Washita River. A geomorphic study of the watershed was recommended to get a "big picture" of the drainage system's interactions.

A good classification scheme should:

  1. simplify a complex drainage network into understandable pieces.
  2. categorize stream types based on reproducible parameters measured in the field.
  3. uphold channel evolution models as verified through observation of similar, but "aged" stream reaches.
  4. facilitate a methodology to assess present, and potential future conditions amongst varied reaches.

Dave Rosgen's Classification System was agreed upon as the basis to describe, express, and relate the reaches' present state and characteristics. The classification system also lends itself to predicting the streams future evolutionary stage.

The geomorphic study and principles will be used in conjunction with a strategy to implement restoration projects on critical areas that are most probable of success in reducing excessive sedimentation, increasing wildlife habitat, increasing water quality, and reducing instability to the rest of Sugar Creek's main stem and tributary reaches.

GOALS

  1. Protect the existing infrastructure (roads and flood retarding structures) from headcut undercutting.
  2. Arrest upstream migration of headcuts in the tributaries and subsequent channel widening.
  3. Strengthen/protect channel banks and reduce the rate of meander migration.
  4. Improve habitat along riparian corridors.
  5. Minimize operation and maintenance costs
  6. Maintain Flood Protection

< Back to Sugar Creek Fluvial Geomorphic Restoration Study Page
< Back to H&H Streambank/Wetland Restoration Technical Page