Bed sediment size distributions of streams in the Cleveland metropolitan area, Ohio, US

Authors: Anne J. Jefferson, Garret A. Blauch, Catherine T. Ruhm, Laura Johansen, Christopher Greising, Emily Brown, Nageen Farooq, Suffiyan Safdar, and Andrea C. Stumpf. 

This data product contains stream bed material size distributions for 39 stream reaches in and near Cuyahoga County, Ohio. All data were collected using the Wolman pebble count technique (Wolman, 1954), in either transect or zig-zag forms (Bunte and Abt, 2001). Data were collected between 2016 and 2023 over the course of several projects, as described below. 

In 2016, Garrett Blauch, Catherine Ruhm, and Laura Sugano conducted Wolman pebble counts in 12 reaches (four reaches in each of three streams), for the purposes of assessing the relationship between surficial glacial geology and bed material. These results were presented in Blauch et al. (2017). In each reach, pebble counts were conducted in a zig-zag downstream fashion until at least 100 pebbles (larger than sand) had been measured. For reaches in Furnace Run and Chippewa Creek, the raw counts have been lost, but percent finer was retained, so a calculation was done to create a total count as established by the protocol. The percent finer was calculated into percent of total. That number was divided by a constant to create a total of a hundred pebble measurements plus sand. The presence and abundance of wood, bedrock, and anthropogenic debris were not recorded. 

In 2017, Garrett Blauch conducted Wolman pebble counts at 11 reaches in conjunction with measurements of large wood. In each reach, pebble counts were conducted in a zig-zag downstream fashion (at one or two step intervals), until at least 100 pebbles (larger than sand) had been measured. The abundance of wood, bedrock, and anthropogenic debris was recorded. Cohesive clay (encountered in JHN and EBR) was included in the bedrock count. Methods are fully described in Blauch (2018) and pebble counts were presented in Table 3 therein. Pebble counts are summarized in Blauch and Jefferson (2019).

In 2021, a team of students conducted Wolman pebble counts at 13 reaches in conjunction with measurements of anthropogenic debris and channel morphology. In each reach, 4-6 transects were established. Along each transect, at least 100 pebbles (larger than sand) were measured at one step intervals (10 cm intervals at EUCLOG). If the bankfull width was traversed before 100 pebbles were measured, one step upstream was taken and the measurement continued in the opposite direction. Once 100 pebbles were measured, measurements continued until the bankfull edge was reached. Pebble counts presented here are summed across all transects in the reach. The abundance of wood, bedrock, cohesive clay, and anthropogenic debris was recorded. In some reaches with substantial exposed bedrock, the width of the exposed bedrock was recorded in meters and not in counts. In three of the five transects collected for BIG at the BKN reach bedrock was noted for as approximately half the bankfull width. For the BRE reach on CHP, for three of the five transects, sandstone bedrock was noted as covering 12-15 m of the creek bed. For EUC, bedrock was noted in all five transects for the HPA reach covering 1.5-5m. In WES, bedrock was noted in all three reaches. For the BKN reach, one transect noted bedrock covering about 2 m. The PVY reach noted bedrock in five of six transects, covering approximately half the channel width. For the TUX reach, three of the five transects noted about 25% bedrock. Collection and organization of pebble count data was led by Christopher Greising, Emily Brown, and Nageen Farooq. 

In 2023, Suffiyan Safdar and Anne Jefferson conducted Wolman pebble counts at 3 reaches in conjunction with measurements of bank erosion and suspended sediment transport.  In each reach, pebble counts were conducted in a zig-zag downstream fashion (Bunte and Abt, 2001) at one step intervals, until at least 100 pebbles (larger than sand) had been measured. The abundance of wood, bedrock, and anthropogenic debris was recorded. These measurements, along with others for Chippewa Creek, Mill Creek, and West Creek are summarized in Safdar et al. (in review).

In 2023, we revisited all of the datasets described above to standardize reporting and create this data product. Within and across projects, the notation for sand was variable (sand, S, <2, 2), where 2 was recorded in a dataset with any other sand notation, we included values of 2 in the fine gravel category. In the associated data files, each reach has been given a unique identifier, beginning with three letters associated with the stream names. The streams, associated codes, and number of reaches per stream are: Abram Creek, ABR, one reach; Baldwin Creek, BAL, one reach; Big Creek, BIG, three reaches; Chippewa Creek, CHP, seven reaches; East Branch Rocky River, EBR, one reach; Euclid Creek, EUC, four reaches; Furnace Run, FUR, four reaches; Johnson Creek, JHN, one reach; Mill Creek, MIL, five reaches; Stickney, STK, one reach; West Creek, WES, seven reaches; Yellow Creek, YEL, four reaches.

The file for each reach has nine header rows that include the location and method used in data collection. The first three columns in each file are size class (text), size range (mm), and size finer than (mm) (which is equal to the largest number in the second column) to allow different ways of looking at the size classes. The next column is the count of the pebbles within each size class, followed by percent finer (calculated by using percent of total) and percent that size class takes up in the total number of pebbles counted (percent total). The final two columns (after a one column break) are the list of other materials counted and the counts of those materials.  

Acknowledgements:
We are grateful to the landowners for permission to sample streams on their properties, especially for the continued collaboration with Cleveland Metroparks. We are also deeply grateful to the undergraduates who helped us with this work, including Kyle Tobias, Sophia Muratori, Kayla Kearns, Justin Schroeck, Kylie Snyder, and Grace Yupa. Thanks to Nick Sutfin for introducing us to EUCLOG site and leading data collection there.

References Cited:
Blauch, G.A., Ruhm, C.T., Sugano, L.L., and Jefferson, A.J., 2017. Streambed Sediment and Hydraulic Geometry in the Post-Glacial Landscape of Northeast Ohio. Geological Society of America Northeastern and North-Central Joint Section Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, March 2017.

Blauch, G.A., 2018. Abundance, mobility, and geomorphic effects of large wood in urban streams. MS thesis. Kent State University. 124 pp. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1532016674833626

Blauch, G.A. and Jefferson, A.J., 2019. If a tree falls in an urban stream, does it stick around? Mobility, characteristics, and geomorphic influence of large wood in urban streams in northeastern Ohio, USA. Geomorphology. 337: 1-14. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2019.03.033

Bunte, K., Abt, S.R., 2001. Sampling Surface and Subsurface Particle-Size Distributions in Wadable Gravel- and Cobble-Bed Streams for Analyses in Sediment Transport, Hydraulics, and Streambed Monitoring (Fort Collins, CO).

Safdar, S., Jefferson, A.J., Costello, D.M., Blinn, A. in review. Urbanization and Suspended Sediment Transport Dynamics: A Comparative Study of Watersheds with Varying Degree of Urbanization using Concentration-Discharge Hysteresis.          

Wolman, M.G., 1954. A method of sampling coarse river-bed material. Trans. Am. Geophys.
Union 35, 951956.