Sunteți pe pagina 1din 16

Geological Society of America Reviews in Engineering Geology, Volume VII

1987

The importance of hollows in debris flow

studies;

Examples from Marin County,

California

Steven L. Reneau William E. Dietrich Department of Geology and Geophysics University of California at Berkeley Berkeley, California 94720

ABSTRACT

Hollows are the concave-out portions of hillslopes not occupied by channels. The topographic convergence in hollows forces colluvial debris to accumulate and causes shallow subsurface runoff to be concentrated during storms. Consequently, hollows are more susceptible to landsliding than side slopes and constitute important mappable source areas of debris flows. Hollows can be extremely subtle topographic features that require recognition in the Held; these subtle hollows are commonly tributary to larger hollows, and greatly increase the density of mappable debris flow sources. In a study area in Marin County, California, hollows are spaced 20 to 60 m apart along the slope, resulting in a density of 25 to 35 km of hollow axis per km 2 . Even the subtle hollows can produce debris flows capable of destroying houses, particularly when large trees are carried by a flow. Mitigation measures that focus on draining the main hollow axis may be inadequate because of the destructive ability of debris flows shed from small tributary swales and from side slopes. Road runoff discharged onto hollows can trigger landslid- ing and gullying, but this problem can be prevented by extending culverts downslope to stream channels. Along the drainage network, from subtle tributary hollows to major hollows, and to first-order channels where many additional hollows enter, the recur- rence interval of debris flow events probably systematically decreases as the number of upslope sources increases, perhaps reaching the lowest recurrence interval on second- order channels. Farther downstream, debris flows may occur less frequently. A greater emphasis on hollows as debris flow source areas and as paths for flows from upslope should make a significant contribution toward identifying the hazard to existing struc- tures and toward improved siting of new development.

INTRODUCTION

The importance of hollows as mappable sources of debris flows on steep, soil-mantled hillslopes is becoming increasingly recognized in many regions where land-use pressures are leading to housing construction in narrow river valleys and on the sur- rounding slopes. The debris flows are generally produced during high-intensity rainstorms by the rapid mobilization of shallow landslides in colluvial soils (Fig. 1). Hollows are sites of long-term accumulation of colluvial debris and of convergence of shallow ground water during storms (e.g., Dietrich and Dunne, 1978; Okunishi and Iida, 1981), both of which contribute to the high susceptibility of these sites to failure. Here we briefly review

research that has demonstrated the significance of hollows as sources of debris flows, and discuss research concerned with quantification of the debris flow hazard. Three case studies are then presented that address several aspects of debris flow hazards and that illustrate the importance of identifying even the subtlest hollows on hillslopes. Finally, some of the practical implications of our review and case history analyses are discussed.

HOLLOWS AND DEBRIS FLOWS

Hack and Goodlett (1960) and Hack (1965) proposed a three-fold division of hillslopes into hollows, noses, and side

165

166

Reneau and Dietrich

Figure 1. Landslide scar in grassy hollow at head of Bootjack Creek, Mount Tamalpais, Marin County, California. Landslide occurred during January 1982 storm, mobilizing as a debris flow; margins of debris flow path are visible in foreground. Scar is 55 m long, 1.0 to 2.5 m deep; ground slope is 27°; arrow points to lower end of landslide scar. Bedrock is greenstone of Franciscan assemblage.

slopes, and we have adopted their terminology here. A hollow is "any area on the slope in which the contours are concave out- ward away from the ridge," and they "generally occur in the valley axis at the stream head as a sort of extension of the chan- nel" (Hack, 1965, p. 20). A nose is "the area on the interfluve in which the slopes are convex outward toward the valley" (Hack, 1965, p. 21), and side slopes are areas with straight contours located between noses and either hollows or channels. Examples of hollows in several landscapes are shown in Figure 2. A hollow can be a concave slope of any size, and can occur as an isolated area on a side slope, as shown in valleys A and B of Figure 2B. The examples shown by Hack (1965) in Figure 2B illustrate the fact that hollows can form a branching drainage network above the channel head. In this chapter, the term "swale" is used inter- changeably with hollow.

There is considerable variation between workers in different areas and with different backgrounds in the terminology used to describe hillslopes. For example, Jacobson (1985) stated that the local usage of the term "hollow" in parts of the Appalachians refers to first- and second-order valleys, whereas the term "cove" refers to unchanneled basins. In forested areas of Oregon, hollows are referred to as "headwalls" (F. J. Swanson, personal commun- ication). In Japan, Tsukamoto (1973) introduced the term "zero- order basin" to refer to unchanneled basins; these basins include the noses and side slopes draining into hollows in addition to the axial region, and are the main source areas for debris flows in parts of Japan (e.g., Tsukamoto, 1973; Tsukamoto and others, 1982; Oyagi, 1984). We prefer the terminology of Hackjo the term zero-order basin because it implies a finer scale examination of hillslopes, and, in describing the processes acting at each point on a hillslope, the fundamental differences are whether flow lines

Importance

of hollows in debris flow studies

200

0

200

400

M O

FECI

CONTOUR INTERVAL

10 FEET

 

DATUM

IS APPROXIMATE

MEAN

SEA LEVEL

 

167

Figure 2 (this and facing page). Examples of landscapes that are regularly divided into hollows and noses. A, Idealized drawing of hillslopes in Shenandoah Valley of Virginia and West Virginia; from Hack (1965, Fig. 4). Hollows drain sides of each valley; channel occurs where slope from ridge crest to stream channel becomes sufficiently long, as at H near right side of figure. B, Topographic maps of four valleys in areas of different relief, Shenandoah Valley; from Hack (1965, Fig. 9). Hollows indicated by stippled pattern. Valley A underlain by sandstone; valley B, by carbonate rocks; valleys C and D, by shale. C, Photograph of clearcut slopes, Mt. Peter and Cedar Creek drainage, Siuslaw River basin, central Oregon Coast Range. Bedrock is Eocene Tyee Sandstone. Hollows are primary source of debris flows in this area (Swanson and others, 1981). D, Oblique aerial photograph of grassy slopes of Bolinas Ridge, Marin County, California; San Francisco Bay in background. Bedrock beneath ridge is green- stone of Franciscan assemblage.

168

Reneau and Dietrich

of water and colluvial debris are convergent, parallel, or diver- gent; these distinctions formed the basis for Hack's definitions of hollows, side slopes, and noses. This terminology has also re- ceived wide usage in geomorphic literature. Prior to 1960, the landslide literature contains rare reference to topographic concavities as preferred sites of failure. Our pres- ent understanding of the importance of hollows as sources of debris flows originates with the work of Hack and Goodlett (1960) in the Appalachian Mountains of Virginia. The impor- tance of hollows in the Appalachians and the Adirondacks has been confirmed by many other workers, including Williams and Guy (1971, 1973), Woodruff (1971), Clark (1973), Bogucki (1976, 1977), Lessing and others (1976), and Pomeroy (1984). Much of this work was spurred by the widespread landsliding from Hurricane Camille in 1969 and the consequent recognition that debris flows or debris avalanches are a major geologic hazard in eastern North America.

Similar understanding of the importance of hollows as de- bris flow sources in western North America developed from re- search on landslide problems on logged and unlogged slopes in coastal Alaska (Swanston, 1967, 1969), British Columbia (O'Loughlin, 1972), and the Oregon Coast Range (Pierson, 1977; Dietrich and Dunne, 1978; Swanson and others, 1981; Swanson and Roach, 1985), on chaparral slopes in southern California (Kojan and others, 1972; Hollingsworth and Kovacs, 1981), and in coastal scrub and grasslands in central California (Lehre, 1981, 1982). Much attention has recently been focused on hollows as debris flow source areas since a major, destructive storm in the San Francisco Bay area in January 1982 (Smith and Hart, 1982; Shiemon and Wright, 1983; Reneau and others, 1984; Sitar and Johnson, 1984; Smith, 1984; Reneau and Die- trich, 1985,1987; Johnson and Sitar, 1986; Shiemon and others, this volume; Ellen and Wieczorek, 1987), and since the destruc- tive pulses of debris flows in Utah in 1983 (e.g., Anderson and others, 1985; Keaton and others, 1985).

The studies cited above clearly establish that, where shallow landslides in colluvium occur, hollows can be the primary sources for debris flows. The importance of hollows may vary, however, as a function of the geologic and climatic setting in different areas, and may show variations within a given region. Numerous stud- ies have documented the tendency of rapid debris flows to be produced by shallow landslides in cohesionless, sandy, or gravelly soils, and of slower earthflows to be produced by landslides in clay-rich soils. In addition, in areas where debris flows occur, significant variations in fine-scale texture of the topography may exist that influence the relative importance of hollows in compar- ison to other topographic positions. In general, it appears that the greater the area of a hillslope or an unchanneled valley occupied by side slopes, the less important hollows are as sources of debris flows. A few examples are given below that illustrate how the importance of hollows as sites of debris flow initiation may vary in different areas.

In Marin County, California, Ellen and others (1987) have reported that hollows are relatively more important as debris flow

sources in terrain characterized by massive bedrock and a regular division of the topography into drainages and interfluves, and less important where the bedrock is less uniform and the topography is correspondingly less regular. In interbedded flows, tuffs, and volcanic breccias of the central Oregon Cascade Range, Marion (1981) found that side slopes are more frequent sites of landslide initiation than hollows, perhaps due to these slopes occupying a higher percentage of the total landscape. On stratified sandstone and shale bedrock in the Appalachian Plateau of West Virginia, Jacobson (1985) found that shallow landslides in colluvium tend to initiate along benches on side slopes, and not along hollow axes. Along the slopes of river valleys in the Appalachian Plateau of Pennsylvania, also with stratified sandstone and shale bedrock, Pomeroy (1981,1982) found that the topography lacks a regular division into hollows and noses, and that hollows are correspond- ingly of little importance as debris flow source areas. Nearby, however, where the slopes are steeper and sandstone predomi- nates, hollows are the most important source (Pomeroy, 1984).

Much progress has been made toward understanding the debris flow hazard and toward reducing the destruction caused by these flows. On a regional level, the relative hazard from debris flows on different slopes can be identified based on studies that correlate the location of previous landslides with soil and topo- graphic factors. For example, Hollingsworth and Kovacs (1981) have proposed that the finer the soil texture, the gentler the slope on which debris flows are initiated in the Santa Monica Moun- tains of southern California. For portions of Marin and Sonoma Counties in central California, Ellen and others (1983) have pre- pared a regional map delineating slopes susceptible to debris flows. They used interpretation of aerial photographs to divide the region into different terrain types, and used detailed field studies of selected areas to document the types of shallow land- slides in each unit (e.g., debris flows versus earthflows); they believe that debris flows are most common in areas of massive, resistant bedrock, where there is a regular division of hillslopes into drainages and interfluves.

Important research is being conducted by Japanese workers to allow the prediction of potential failure sites on a given hill- slope. A recent summary of this research is provided by Oyagi (1984), and two examples from Japan are mentioned here. Okimura (1983) has used a two-dimensional stability analysis to predict the least-stable portion of a slope, incorporating longitud- inal variations in slope gradient and soil thickness. Potential landslide size can be predicted with this method. Okimura and Kawatani (1987) coupled a three-dimensional ground-water- flow model with an infinite slope stability analysis to predict the relative stability of 10- by 10-m square units of hillslope; soil thickness and hydraulic conductivity were held constant in this method. Despite the numerous assumptions inherent in such models, both analyses showed reasonable correspondence be- tween the predicted sites of lowest stability and observed land- slide scars. Models of this kind should eventually prove to be of great value in predicting the stability of individual hillslopes in developed areas.

Importance of hollows in debris flow studies

169

Within areas that are susceptible to debris flows, possibly the most important task is to identify the paths that these flows will follow. It is widely recognized that debris flows propagate down existing drainages. The hazard is least on divergent and planar slopes, and increases in areas of topographic convergence and down-channel on alluvial fans. Even subtle hollows can ef- fectively funnel flows. For example, Hollingsworth and Kovacs (1981) recognized that very subtle swales have a greater risk of experiencing a debris flow than planar slopes, and that these subtle features require recognition in the field.

The debris flow hazard is perhaps greatest along second- order (as defined by the Strahler [1952] method) channels, with these channels receiving debris flows from multiple first-order basins upslope, which in turn are fed by numerous hollows. The hazard generally declines farther downstream as the drainage area increases. As flows propagate downstream, they should tend to slow down with decreasing channel gradient, and to thin and spread out with increasing valley-floor width, eventually stopping once the yield strength of a flow is no longer exceeded (e.g., Johnson, 1970, 1984; Costa, 1984). Debris flows may also be- come diluted downstream by the addition of flood waters, de- creasing the density and possibly the destructiveness of flows (e.g., Benda, 1985). Benda (1985) studied debris flows in the central Oregon Coast Range, and found that they typically terminated at the junction of second-order and higher order channels; relatively few flows propagated down fourth-order channels. Similarly, one debris flow that was studied in detail on Inverness Ridge in Marin County, California, became nonerosive where a second-order channel entered a third-order channel, and where the channel gradient dropped from 6° to 4° (Ellen, 1987). Two houses built along a second-order channel nearby were destroyed in the same storm by another debris flow. In the Wasatch Range of Utah, Lips and others (1984) have also predicted runout distances for debris flows based on channel gradient and the volume of poten- tial debris flows.

This chapter presents three case studies from sites of recent debris flow and gullying problems in Marin County, California; site locations are shown in Figure 3. These erosional events were mainly associated with the storm January 3-5, 1982, during which 36-hr rainfall totals reached 300 to 400 mm for much of Marin County, and locally exceeded 600 mm in the Santa Cruz Mountains to the south (Smith and Hart, 1982; Ellen and Wiec- zorek, 1987). In comparison, the mean annual rainfall in Marin County is about 600 to 900 mm (Rantz, 1971). These case stud- ies address several aspects of debris flow hazards in this region, and attempt to illustrate the importance of mapping the finest detail of the topography to develop methods of hazard reduction in developed areas.

CASE STUDIES

Madrone Park Circle, Mill Valley

At a house along Madrone Park Circle in Mill Valley, a debris flow struck during the night of January 4,1982, sweeping

Figure 3. Location map of Marin County, California, case studies.

the house from its foundation and depositing it 45 m downslope in a narrow second-order valley, effectively blocking the flow; this obstruction may have prevented damage to other houses directly downstream that were built on the valley floor (Ellen, 1987). Miraculously, the woman and her daughter in the house when the debris flow hit were not killed. The landslide that mobilized into a debris flow occurred within a dense hardwood forest, dominated by California laurel (Umbellularia californica) and coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), on a 30° hillslope, shown in Figures 4 and 5. The headscarp was located 95 m below the ridge crest in a subtle colluvium-mantled hollow, and the failure plane was 1 to 2 m below the ground surface, generally within a reddish soil horizon; the majority of the roots are restricted to the upper 80 cm here. Sand cone tests provided dry bulk densities of 1.20 to 1.35 g/cm 3 for the upper

170

Reneau and

Figure 4. Topographic map of hillslope above Madrone Park Circle, Mill Valley, where debris flow in 1982 destroyed house built in axis of subtle hollow. Foundation of house shown as three solid black lines along 150-ft contour, and drainage area above house shown by dashed lines. Ridge crest is at top of map. A indicates headscarp of 1982 landslide scar, within very subtle topographic concavity; B, point where debris flow banked into swale, producing some erosion of ground surface; C, old, vegetated landslide scar with distinct scarps; D, very degraded landslide scar bowl at head of swale. Contour interval = 5 ft; datum is arbitrary; 100-ft contour approximately 300-ft elevation. Area surveyed by Moran Engineering, Berkeley.

root-permeated horizon, and 1.60 to 1.75 g/cm 3 for the lower horizons (A. Kropp and Associates, Berkeley, California). The colluvium is derived from graywacke sandstone of the Franciscan assemblage, and consists of roughly 45 percent sand, 40 percent silt, 10 to 15 percent clay, and minor gravel. No bedrock was exposed in the landslide scar, and an auger hole in the axis reached weathered sandstone bedrock at a depth of 3.5 m below the original ground surface.

During the initial landslide, about 300 m 3 of colluvium and the overlying forest was mobilized. The mass of trees and satu-

Dietrich

Figure 5. Photograph of Madrone Park Circle landslide scar. Person is at point B in Figure 4.

rated colluvium banked into the main swale, incorporating more trees, and causing minor erosion of the surface. Several trees along the perimeter of the debris flow path withstood the flow, and mudlines across them provided valuable information about the thickness and velocity of the flow. A detailed reconstruction of the debris flow has been attempted to understand its character- istics when it reached the house.

The approximate surface of the Madrone Park Circle debris flow was reconstructed along six cross sections surveyed perpen- dicular to the center line of the flow path, using the elevation of each edge of the path and mudlines on standing trees to estimate depth (Figs. 6,7). The average depth of the flow at each tree was determined as the midpoint between mudlines on the upslope and downslope sides. The depths on individual trees sometimes agreed well with a straight-line approximation between one edge of the path and either the opposite edge or another tree, while at others the flow surface apparently bulged upward. The flow wid- ened from 13 m al Section 5, at the base of the sear, to 22 m at

Importance of hollows in debris flow

studies

171

3.4

N

I

i

'2.0

5.3

2.9

5.3

3.3

2.9 j

10

3.3

17/

10m

Figure 6. Map of Madrone Park Circle debris flow path, showing sur- veyed cross sections and flow velocities calculated from mudlines on standing trees. Trees indicated by inverted triangles, with calculated ve- locity given in meters per second. Centerline of Section 5 is at 223-ft contour; foundation of house shown below Section 10.

Section 10, and thinned from a possible maximum thickness of about 1.7 m at Section 7 to only about 0.8 m at Section 10, immediately above the house. Measurements of the elevation difference of the mudlines between the upslope and downslope sides of the trees were used to calculate velocity for 10 trees along the debris flow path; the location of these trees is shown in Figure 6. We used the equation and pressure coefficient employed by Wigmosta (1983) to map the velocity field of a mudflow generated during the 1980 Mt. St. Helens eruption:

V=(Cgh)\

(1)

where C is the pressure coefficient, taken as 1.21; £ is gravita- tional acceleration; and h is the difference in mudline elevation. Figure 8 shows a composite velocity profile across the debris flow path between Sections 6 and 7, at approximately the 210-ft con- tour. The maximum velocity in the center of the flow was at least

Figure 7. Cross sections across debris flow path, showing estimated flow surface and superelevation of flow around bend in swale. Solid dots indicate flow depths determined from mudlines on standing trees on or near each section. Eroded areas shown by stippled pattern. South side of Section 5 includes lower end of 1982 landslide scar; older landslide scar bowl present on north side. Apparent cross-sectional area of Section 7 is anomalously large; flow depth here may be overestimated.

Distance (m )

Figure 8. Composite velocity profile across 1982 debris flow path be- tween Sections 6 and 7. Each point is vertically averaged velocity calcu- lated using mudlines on standing trees. Lower curve drawn assuming that maximum vertically averaged velocity is 5.3 m/sec; used to calculate minimum average velocity for entire flow. Upper curve drawn assuming that velocity increased linearly from margins, providing maximum pos- sible average velocity.

172

Reneau and Dietrich

TABLE 1. VEGETATION TRANSECT DATA, MADRONE PARK CIRCLE

Tree weight

Number Of Trees per Transect*

 

All

(lbs)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Transects

0-200

6

2

_

6

2

1

1

18

200-500

1

-

-

3

2

3

5

14

500-1,000

-

1

4

-

2

2

1

10

1,000-2,000

-

-

1

-

3

2

2

8

2,000-3,000

-

-

1

1

-

2

-

4

3,000-4,000

-

1

1

-

-

-

-

2

4,000-5,000

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

Total Weight 5,391

Area (ro 2 )*

87

3,862 10,045

87

87

3,599

91

6,564 9,679

94

87

4,665

84

43,805

617

•Multiple laurel stems growing from a single base were counted as one tree. *5- by 20-m belt transect on slope converted to horizontal area.

5.3 m/sec, and possibly as high as 10 m/sec. The velocity of the flow in the center undoubtedly varied more gradually than in- ferred from the fitted lines to the data, perhaps having a constant velocity "plug" as predicted in Bingham materials (e.g., Johnson, 1970,1984). Integration of the curves in Figure 8 across Sections 6 and 7 yielded a minimum average velocity for the entire flow of about 4 m/sec, and a maximum average velocity of about 6 m/sec. The curvature of the debris flow path produced a superele- vation of the flow surface at Sections 5 through 9, as shown in Figure 7, and we used this to provide an additional estimate of the average flow velocity, as described by Johnson (1984):

V = (r g cosd tana) 14 .

(2)

where r is the radius of curvature of the bend, a is the cross-flow slope, and 6 is the channel slope. This yielded a mean velocity for the entire flow of 4.7 to greater than 10 m/sec, depending on how the radius of curvature was measured. We found equation (2) difficult to employ because of the rapidly varying radius of curvature; hence the velocity estimate from equation (1) based on the mudlines around trees is probably more accurate. As dis- cussed by Costa (1984), neither method of back-calculating de- bris flow velocities has yet been verified with measured velocities, although it is encouraging that both methods provided roughly similar estimates here.

The flow carried woody debris removed from about 600 m 2 of forest: 60 percent of the area constituted the landslide scar and 40 percent the central portion of the debris flow path. Vegetation measurements were made to estimate the nature and weight of this component of the flow. An examination of aerial photo- graphs taken before and after the storm, both 1:20,000 scale stereopairs and high-quality 1:1,000 scale enlargements, indicated that the forest composition within the scar and debris flow path was comparable to that remaining in the adjacent forest. In order

to quantify the forest composition, the heights and diameters of all trees larger than 5 cm in diameter were measured in seven 5- by 20-m belt transects in the undisturbed forest; for each tree the approximate weight was determined using equations derived for estimating standing tree biomass (Pillsbury and Stephens, 1978; N. H. Pillsbury, unpublished data). These equations exclude below-ground biomass and branches smaller than 5 cm in diame- ter, and as such provide conservative estimates of total woody debris weight.

From the vegetation transect data, we estimate that about 44,000 lb, or 20 metric tonnes, of woody debris is present in a roughly 600-m 2 area of this hardwood forest, as summarized in Table 1. California laurels provide 65 percent of this weight, and coast live oaks the remaining 35 percent. In the transects, single laurels and oaks reach an estimated 2,155 and 3,765 lb, respec- tively, and one clump of three laurel stems growing from a single base has a combined weight of 4,645 lb. The largest trees are 50 cm in diameter; the maximum height, 19 m.

The number and weight of trees carried by this debris flow were clearly substantial, and despite the short distance traveled, these trees likely played a major role in damaging the house. This is also indicated by scars on standing trees 4 m above the ground, resulting from the impact of trees either carried or toppled by the flow. The house was elevated above the ground on stilts, and it may well have been the force of the trees rather than the flow itself that dislodged the house.

This debris flow is especially illustrative of the subtleties of the topography that need to be recognized in order to decrease the hazard that these flows present to development. In our review above, we emphasized that recognition of potential source areas and delineation of probable debris flow paths are the two most practical needs to minimize the debris flow hazard. The house on Madrone Park Circle was built with considerable care given in order to avoid disruption of the slope; no road was excavated, and a small tram was used to reach the house from the road

Importance of hollows in debris flow studies

173

Figure 9. Oblique aerial photograph of western portion of Glenwood subdivision, San Rafael, on floor of fourth-order valley.

below. Unfortunately, the house was built directly in the axis of a small but distinct swale that could both produce a debris flow and serve as the path for any debris flow off the upper slope (Fig. 4). Developed areas in southern Marin County had been damaged by debris flows on many occasions in the last several decades (Rice and others, 1976), and the susceptibility of this specific slope to shallow landslides in the colluvium could be seen by the presence of two much older landslide scars nearby, distinguisha- ble on the detailed topographic map (Fig. 4). The swale is not shown on the 1:24,000-scale U.S. Geological Survey topographic map, and neither the swale nor the older scars would be visible through the dense forest canopy if standard aerial photographs were employed to map the most hazardous areas. Clearly, for purposes of mapping, aerial photographs in forested areas are inadequate, and the hillslopes surrounding potential develop- ments must be carefully inspected on the ground to identify subtle topographic concavities that may be source areas or paths for debris flows.

Glenwood Subdivision, San Rafael

During the January 1982 storm, the drainage basin above the Glenwood subdivision in eastern San Rafael experienced

abundant shallow landsliding, as discussed by Smith and Hart (1982). Two houses built along a third-order channel were de- stroyed by a debris flow at a site where damage from another flow had occurred in 1973. The 1973 flow is discussed by John- son (1984). As at the Mill Valley site, a dense hardwood forest obscures the finest detail of the topography, although a regular division of the topography into drainages and interfluves is clear, as shown in Figure 9. The landslide scars in this area are being studied in detail to document their distribution and characteris- tics, and to determine the depositional history of colluvium in hollows (Reneau and others, 1986; Reneau and Dietrich, 1987). Significantly, only about one-third of the 1982 landslides origi- nated along the axes of major hollows that could be recognized on the l:24,000-scale U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps. One-half the remainder originated along the axes of subtle hol- lows, comparable to the swale above the Mill Valley house or the even subtler concavity where the Mill Valley scar is located (Fig. 4), and the rest originated from side slopes. Figure 10 is a plan map of a relatively large unchanneled basin above the Glenwood subdivision that intersects a first-order channel, showing a branching network of hollows and tneToca- tion of landslide scars oFvarying age. The bedrock is sandstone and shale of the Franciscan assemblage. The lower portion of the

174

1ST <*$£ C

^

A

^

Reneau

and Dietrich

CHOCKSTONE LANDSLIDE BASIN

DRAINAGE AREA- 6500IVT SWALE DENSITY - 29 KM, W

1982 SCAR

PRE-1982 SCARS

f \

DISTINCT, VEGETATED

 

DEGRADED

VAGUE

0102 0

SWALE AXIS

METERS

Figure 10. Plan map of an unchanneled basin in watershed above Glenwood subdivision, San Rafael, that produced a debris flow in 1982, showing drainage boundary, swale axes, and landslide scars. Scars are grouped into different age classes based on scarp degradation: youngest pre-1982 scars are vegetated yet retain vertical scarps; intermediate age scars have distinct margins although no vertical scarps remain; oldest scars have vague margins and scarps are reduced to rough slope breaks.

main hollow failed in January 1982, mobilizing about 550 m 3 of

colluvium as a debris flow. The failure at this site may have been strongly influenced by the colluvial stratigraphy, with prominent textural variations existing both longitudinally and vertically. At the headscarp of this scar, the failure plane was 2.7 m deep and the total colluvium thickness was about 5.5 m, consisting of a 3-m-thick layer of coarse openwork gravel overlain by a denser, finer textured colluvium with matrix-supported gravel. The lower gravel layer pinched out downslope. Subsurface flow within the gravel, derived from the bedrock (e.g., Wilson and others, 1984; Wilson and Dietrich, 1985) or perched on the bedrock-colluvium interface, may have produced excessive pore pressures at the base of the denser, upper colluvium, and may have been responsible for failure. Similarly, Hayes (1985) has measured excessive pore pressures in a hollow in the Santa Cruz Mountains within a discontinuous basal sand of relatively high hydraulic conductiv- ity. Such coarse basal layers often do not exist, but where present they could play a major role in determining the stability-durjng storms.

In the basin shown in Figure 10, there are two subtle swales tributary to the main hollow, and all of the swales contain pre- 1982 landslide scars. These older scars can be seen only by direct field observation. As shown at the Mill Valley site, the older scars further demonstrate the recurrent nature of landsliding from these slopes and the importance of the smaller swales as source areas for debris flows. Although the density of scars in this basin is high compared to most in the area, it is rare to find a basin of similar

size without any scars. The presence of scars at different longitud- inal positions along a single hollow (Fig. 10) indicates that, for purposes of stability evaluations, hollows should be envisioned as consisting of multiple potential debris flow sources. Failure along a portion of a hollow does not preclude subsequent failure else- where in the basin.

In the Glenwood area, extensive areas of side slope are rare, and instead most hillsjopes are interrupted by hollows spaced about 20 to 60 m apart. For example, the maximum spacing in the Chockstone basin (Fig. 10), measured near the ridge crest, is about 40 m. Casual observations elsewhere in Marin County suggest that a fairly regular spacing between hollows is common. Documentation of a characteristic hollow spacing in an area may provide a useful measure of the topography to guide the location andmapping of potential debris flow source areas. An additional measure of the topography is the swale density, which we define as the total length of hollow axes in a basin divided by the total catchment area. This is analogous to standard drainage densities that measure the length of stream channels in an area. For se- lected unchanneled basins in the Glenwood area, we have mea- sured swale densities of 25 to 35 km/km 2 , with the 29 km/km 2 density of the Chockstone basin (Fig. 10) being typical. These densities provide a quantitative measure of the extent of potential debris flow sources in this area.

As discussed earlier, the recurrence interval for a debris flow event should decrease as upslope catchment area increases, being lower at the base of a large unchanneled basin than along a

Importance of hollows in debris flow studies

175

tributary hollow, and even lower along a first-order channel, perhaps reaching a minimum along second-order channels. This

is shown schematically in Figure 11. A recurrence interval can

also be expressed as the relative probability of a site experiencing

a debris flow in any year, with the probability, P, being the

inverse of the recurrence interval, R.I. (P = 1/R.L). If landslide events in a catchment are independent of each other and are randomly distributed through time, the probability of debris flow occurrence for catchments of varying size can be estimated by determining the number of upslope source areas and the probabil- ity of failure in each. The probability is given by:

/»=!-( !

-5,)(l-5 2 )

(l-*„)

,

(31

where s, is the probability of a debris flow from source i, and n is the total number of sources in the catchment. If each source has the same R.I., then equation (3) reduces to:

P=\-(\

-s)".

(4)

Where n is much smaller than the R.I., equation (4) can be closely approximated by:

P = sn

(5)

The recurrence interval for landslide initiation from a por- tion of a hollow can be estimated by dating colluvium that is involved in landsliding. Radiocarbon dates have been obtained from basal colluvium exposed in landslide scars in the San Rafael hardwood forests (Reneau and others, 1986), providing prelimi- nary estimates of at-a-site recurrence intervals of on the order of 10,000 yr (s = 0.0001). Basal dates do not always record the last landslide event at each site, and landslides may therefore be more frequent.

The number of discrete sources in large unchanneled basins

is uncertain. At a minimum, if each hollow comprised one source

area, then the Chockstone basin (Fig. 10), with two tributaries to

the main hollow, would contain three discrete sources. The pres- ence of five recognizable scars in this basin suggests that this estimate is low, and that the number of potential sources is actu- ally greater than five. As an upper limit, the number of possible sources is constrained by the length of landslides. Average land- slide length in this area is about 20 m (Reneau and Dietrich, 1987), and if we consider that this approximates the length of discrete source areas within a long hollow, the Chockstone basin, with 190 m of hollow axis, can then contain roughly 10 source areas.

An estimate of the probability of a failure somewhere in the Chockstone basin (Fig. 10), using equation (5) and an average R.I. of 10,000 yr, is 10 x 0.0001, or 0.001. This provides an average recurrence interval of about 1,000 yr. For a first- or second-order channel with five basins of this size upslope, the probability of a debris flow entering the channel from these basins is 5 x 0.001, or 0.005, and the recurrence interval is approxi-

!

1

i o

I

-O

Q

01

£

2

8

c

=3

O

O)

DC

high

low

most

hazardous

Catchment Size

Nose

Side

Small

Major

Slope

Hollow

Hollow

3

Stream Channel Order

2

4

Topographic Setting

Figure 11. Hypothetical relationship of recurrence interval of debris flows and catchment size, showing topographic setting.

mately 200 yr. The presence of smaller unchanneled basins tribu- tary to the stream channel, and the possibility of failures on side slopes, increases the number of sources and further decreases the recurrence interval of a debris flow event. The probabilities presented here should be considered rough preliminary estimates due to the simplified form of this analysis. Debris flows would be more frequent if the average recurrence interval for landslide initiation in a portion of a hollow is less than 10,000 yr. The frequency would be overestimated by this method if the number of discrete source areas in a large unchanneled basin is less than our estimate, or if the failures are not independ- ent of each other, such as where secondary failures are triggered within a debris flow path (e.g., Reneau and Dietrich, 1987; Ellen, 1987). These calculations also assumed that each discrete source has approximately the same R.I., while the at-a-site R.I. may vary between different sites in an area, possibly as a function of the strength of topographic convergence (Reneau and Dietrich, 1985, 1986). In addition, the minimum possible recurrence interval for debris flows is limited by the return period of a hydrologic event

176

Reneau

and Dietrich

500 m

j

Figure 12. Topographic map of part of Marin Headlands, immediately north of Golden Gate Bridge. Dashed lines indicate main roads; dotted lines, hollow axes; heavy solid lines, gullies; hachured line, landslide scarp. Hollow axes mapped using 1:24,000-scale San Francisco North 7.5-min Quadrangle, supplemented by available roadcut exposures of colluvial deposits; many hollows not crossed by roads are probably not shown; lower end of each hollow could not always be determined. Gullies mapped from 1982 aerial photographs. Contour interval = 100 ft. A indicates location of Figure 13; B, location of Figure 14; C, location of Figure 15.

sufficient to trigger failure. Despite the uncertainties involved, the increasing frequency of debris flows with increasing catchment size for low order catchments (Fig. 11) is clearly shown by these calculations, and the order-of-magnitude estimates are probably accurate. L. E. Benda and T. Dunne (personal communication) are also using a similar probabilistic approach to calculate the frequency of scouring events in channels in the Oregon Coast Range. To predict the decreasing frequency along higher order channels, factors such as channel gradient, valley floor width, debris flow volume, and tributary junction angles need to be addressed (e.g., Lips and others, 1984; Benda, 1985).

Marin

Headlands

Over at least the last 30 yr, but particularly since the Janu- ary 1982 storm, road runoff has produced extensive gullying in colluvial deposits below the main road along the Marin Head-

lands just north of the Golden Gate Bridge (Figs. 12, 13, 14). Exceptional exposures of colluvium, some exceeding 5 m in thickness, are located along this road beneath topographic con- cavities (Fig. 15). These deposits were partially mapped by Schlocker and others (1958) and described by Schlocker (1974). The exposures are all on slopes that feed into first- or higher order channels, and are located a horizontal distance of roughly 30 to 180 m below the ridge crest. The colluvium is predominantly unstratified angular gravel set in a finer textured matrix, derived from well-bedded chert and greenstone of the Franciscan assem- blage. In at least one hollow, the basal colluvium near the channel head is cemented to the underlying bedrock. A gully has formed above the road in one hollow, cutting a notch into the underlying bedrock. Farther north along the road, a similar notch-shaped cut is exposed at the base of a colluvial deposit, suggesting that fluvial incision of bedrock when a colluvial fill is absent has probably been an important process eroding the bedrock.

Importance

of hollows in debris flow

studies

177

Figure 13. Photograph of hillslopes in Marin Headlands (location A in Fig. 12). Golden Gate Bridge and San Francisco in upper right. Areas of darker vegetation crudely correspond to areas of thick colluvium, and grassy slopes are underlain by relatively thin soil. Arrows point to two gullies in colluvium below road.

The gullying downslope of the road has developed in re- sponse to runoff discharged from culverts that terminate a short distance below the road, as shown in Figure 14. It is common practice in road construction to direct road runoff to natural drainage ways under the reasonable assumption that the natural drainage path will transmit the water with a minimum amount of damage. This road, and many roads like it in soil-mantled landscapes, however, are generally well above stream channels and instead hollows are the natural drainage ways. The colluvium mantling the hollows often responds to the greatly increased input of water by either gullying or failing as a landslide, and the scars can continue enlarging for years. The potential for gullying in these deposits was described much earlier by Schlocker and oth- ers (1958), but apparently little was done to address this problem. Along a 2-km stretch of road in Figure 12, roughly 25 colluvium- mantled hollows are exposed, and 10 gullies are present below the road, some probably initiating as landslide scars. In addition, at least three landslides involving colluvium and road fill have directly affected the road. A similar problem exists in gravel-rich colluvium near a ridge crest in the Berkeley Hills, 20 km to the east (Reneau and others, 1984), and landslide studies elsewhere have often noted the role of road runoff in triggering failure (e.g., Sidle and others, 1985).

A practical solution to this problem is to extend the pipes containing the road runoff downslope to the nearest stream. Typ- ically, low-order streams in mountainous or hilly areas flow on bedrock, such that the localized increase in flow would have a minimal effect on erosion. Figure 16 is a graph plotting the dis- tance from channel heads upslope to ridge crests as a function of the average hollow gradient for a sample of Marin County hol- lows. For the hollows in the Marin Headlands, with an average

Figure 14. Deep gullies in colluvial deposits below main road in Marin Headlands (location B in Fig. 12). Note culvert to left of main gullies, where road runoff is discharged onto slope; roadcut above culvert ex- poses colluvial deposit beneath subtle hollow.

Figure 15. Colluvial deposit exposed in roadcut, roughly 75 m below ridge crest, Marin Headlands (location C in Fig. 12). About 3 m of colluvium underlies subtle topographic concavity. Contact with underly- ing bedrock of Franciscan chert is outlined.

gradient of roughly 50 percent, this graph predicts that the natural channel heads will be located 100 to 200 m below the main ridge crest, allowing an estimate of the pipe length and cost of this kind of mitigation work. Although more costly than short pipes, the savings in repair costs would have been substantial. Both empiri- cal and theoretical analyses (Dietrich and others, 1985, 1986) indicate that the relationship between hollow length or catchment area and average hollow gradient will vary with climate and bedrock. Hence, separate graphs like Figure 16 should be con- structed in different areas.

178

 

500

£

300

c

CD

J

"o

X

100

5 0

i

-

^S».

* \ *

\

1

+

> *

1

*

^^^

>

1

0.1 0.3

Reneau

and

o

V** A

•N

1—i—i

0.5

i

i

i

i

1.0

Hollow gradient (m/m)

Figure 16. Graph of maximum hollow length versus average hollow gradient, from Dietrich and others (1986, Fig. 5). Solid circles indicate hollows in Marin County, and remaining symbols indicate hollows in other areas described in Dietrich and others (1986).

DISCUSSION

AN D

CONCLUSION

It is well documented that, in many areas, hollows are the most important sources for debris flows. In parts of the San Francisco Bay area, for example, studies by several workers indi- cate that about two-thirds of failures initiate within hollows (Smith and Hart, 1982; Smith, 1984, 1987; Reneau and Dietrich, 1987; Ellen and others, 1987), demonstrating that hollows should be given the most emphasis in identifying debris flow source areas in this region. In some other areas, hollows appear to occupy a smaller portion of the total landscape, perhaps due to differences in the geologic and climatic setting, and consequently they are less important as sources of debris flows. In order to provide a re- gional basis for hazard evaluation, studies are clearly needed that systematically identify the location of past failures and the relative susceptibility of different bedrock types, slope gradients, and topographic positions in each region. The recent studies of Hollingsworth and Kovacs (1981) and Ellen and others (1983) are useful steps in this direction.

In urbanized areas, mitigation techniques are being devel- oped and applied to protect existing structures from debris flows (e.g., Hollingsworth and Kovacs, 1981; Smith and Hart, 1982; Baldwin and others, this volume). The subtlety of many hollows, their close spacing, and the common occurrence of failures on side slopes lead to important implications for mitigation mea- sures. In hilly areas susceptible to debris flows, few sites except ridge crests can be considered completely safe from this hazard;

Dietrich

the relative risk increases as the catchment area above individual structures increases, as illustrated in Figure 11. Although trench- ing and draining major swales may be an effective technique to stabilize specific deposits, the subtle swales and side slopes feeding into these hollows remain possible source areas.

Hollows are important not only as sources of debris flows, but also as conduits that funnel flows off the upper slopes, regard- less of where the failure is located. Identification of natural drain- ages thus forms the basis for the debris flow susceptibility maps of Smith (1984,1987). As shown in the Mill Valley and San Rafael case studies, and also noted by Hollingsworth and Kovacs (1981), these concavities can be extremely subtle features identi- fied only by careful inspection in the field; identification relying on standard topographic maps or using aerial photography, par- ticularly where a forest canopy exists, is inadequate.

Setbacks from channels need to be adequate to accommo- date flows that may reach 20 m or more in width, as demon- strated by the Mill Valley debris flow. In addition, two debris flows in first- and second-order channels that are described in detail in Ellen (1987) also locally exceed 20 m in width. Smith and Hart (1982) noted that the tendency of flows to bank around bends and produce a superelevation of the flow surface, as seen at the Mill Valley site, widens the hazardous zone. The height of this superelevation increases with increasing flow velocity and is greatest at the sharpest bends in debris flow paths. As a possible extreme example, one flow on Inverness Ridge in January 1982 was directed perpendicular to a second-order channel and rode directly up the opposite slope, rising 10 m in elevation; this pro- vided a minimum velocity of 14 m/sec for the flow (Ellen, 1987). In a separate study, we have prepared a debris flow susceptibility map for a proposed subdivision in San Rafael using previously calculated velocities of debris flows to estimate the superelevation that could occur at channel junctions where the curves in poten- tial debris flow paths were greatest. This procedure identified a broad area of relatively gentle slope set above a stream channel as being a potentially hazardous site for development; this area ex- tended for up to 50 m away from the channel, and erroneously would have been considered safe if the hazard zone was delin- eated as a 20-m-wide strip centered on the stream.

In forested areas, the importance of the woody debris con- tent of debris flows cannot be overemphasized where mitigation measures are being planned. Channels or basins designed to con- tain a given volume of debris may become blocked by an irregu- lar mass of trees, resulting in an overtopping of the structure and diversion of the flow. In the Mill Valley example, although the flow had traveled only a short distance from the landslide scar, the number and the weight of trees were substantial and may have been of primary importance in destroying the house.

The diversion of drainage from roads onto swales has been repeatedly shown to trigger landslides and gullying, and deserves greater attention in urbanized and developing areas. Actively eroding scars below roads can require expensive maintenance, as along the Marin Headlands, and road runoff can significandy increase the debris flow hazard to development downslope. The

Importance of hollows in debris flow studies

179

extension of culverts downslope beyond the colluvial deposits to natural stream channels is a relatively simple and effective meth- od to alleviate this problem. Compared to the potential for loss of life and destruction of houses in developed areas, the cost of installing and maintaining such culverts is minor. Much progress has been made in recent years toward under- standing the origin and characteristics of shallow landslides and resultant debris flows; this should lead to improved siting of new development. In particular, more emphasis must be given to po- tential hazards upslope and beyond the property boundaries of individual tracts of land. This emerging understanding of debris flow hazards also needs to be better communicated to people presently living in hazardous areas in hollows and along stream channels. Clearly, much remains to be accomplished to allow

development to exist in steep terrain with the minimum of risk from this hazard.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was partially supported by National Science Foundation grant EAR-84-16775. The field work included in the case studies was aided by numerous people who gave freely of their time and ideas, including D. Chambers, L. Dingier, E. Hughes, D. Marron, S. Raugust, P. Whiting, and C. Wilson. Soil analyses were provided by A. Kropp and Associates, and unpublished tree biomass equations were generously provided by N. Pillsbury.

REFERENCES CITED

Anderson, L. R., Keaton, J. R., and Brooks, R. K., 1985, Swale formation, soil development and variation in hydraulic conductivity at a landslide site in the Wasatch Range near Farmington, Utah [abs.]: EOS American Geophysical Union Transactions, v. 66, p. 900.

Benda, L. E., 1985, Delineation of channels susceptible to debris flows and debris floods, in Takei, A., ed., Proceedings, International Symposium on Erosion, Debris Row and Disaster Prevention, Tsukuba, Japan: Tokyo, Erosion Control Engineering Society, p. 195-201. Bogucki, D. J., 1976, Debris slides in the Mt Le Conte area. Great Smoky Mountains National Park, U.S.A.: Geografiska Annaler, v. 58A. p. 179-191. , 1977, Debris slide hazards in the Adirondack province of New York state:

Environmental Geology, v. 1, p. 317-328. Clark, G. M., 1973, Appalachian debris slide-debris flow characteristics and distribution south of the glacial border: Actualization of knowledge in map- ping high risk sites: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,

v. 5, p. 386-387.

Costa, J. E., 1984, Physical geomorphology of debris flows, in Costa, J. E., and

Developments and applications of geomorphology: Ber-

lin, Springer-Verlag, p. 268-317. Dietrich, W. E., and Dunne, T., 1978, Sediment budget for a small catchment in mountainous terrain: Zeitschrift fur Geomorphologie, suppl. 29, p . 191-206.

Dietrich, W. E., Reneau, S. L., and Wilson, C. J., 1985, The geomorphology of "zero order basins" [abs.]: EOS American Geophysical Union Transactions,

Fleisher, P. J., eds

v. 66, p. 898.

Dietrich, W. E., Wilson, C. J., and Reneau, S. L., 1986, Hollows, colluvium, and landslides in soil-mantled landscapes, in Abrahams, A. D., ed., Hillslope processes. Sixteenth Annual Binghamton Symposia in Geomorphology: Bos- ton, Allen and Unwin, p. 361-388.

Ellen, S., 1987, Debris flows and related phenomena in the storm, in Ellen, S., and Wieczorek, G. F., eds., Landslides, floods, and marine effects of the storm of

region, California: U.S. Geo-

January 3-5 , 1982, in the San Francisco Bay

logical Survey Professional Paper 1434 (in press).

Ellen, S., and Wieczorek, G. F., 1987, Landslides, floods, and marine effects of the

Bay region, California:

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1434 (in press). Ellen, S., Peterson, D. M., and Reid, G. O., 1983, Map showing areas susceptible to different hazards from shallow landsliding, Marin County and adjacent parts of Sonoma County, California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-1406.

Ellen, S., Cannon, S. H., and Reneau, S. L , 1987, Distribution of debris-flow phenomena in Marin County, in Ellen, S., and Wieczorek, G. F., eds., Landslides, floods, and marine effects of the storm of January 3-5, 1982, in the San Francisco Bay region, California: U.S. Geological Survey Profes- sional Paper 1434 (in press).

storm of January 3-5 , 1982, in the San Francisco

Hack, J. T., 1965, Geomorphology of the Shenandoah Valley, Virginia and West Virginia, and origin of the residual ore deposits: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 484, 84 p. Hack, J. T., and Goodlett, J. C , 1960, Geomorphology and forest ecology of a mountain region in the central Appalachians: U.S. Geological Survey Profes- sional paper 347, 66 p. Hayes, J., 1985, Hydrologic behavior of a colluvium-filled bedrock hollow [abs.]:

EOS American Geophysical Union Transactions, v. 66, p. 897.

Hollingsworth, R., and Kovacs, G. S., 1981, Soil slumps and debris flows: Predic- tion and protection: Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists,

v. 18, p. 17-28.

Jacobson, R. B., 1985, Spatial and temporal distributions of slope processes in the upper Buffalo Creek drainage basin, Marion County, West Virginia [Ph.D. thesis]: Baltimore, John Hopkins University, 484 p. Johnson, A. M., 1970, Physical processes in geology: San Francisco, Freeman, Cooper and Company, 577 p. , 1984, Debris flow, in Brunsden, D., and Prior, D. B., eds., Slope instability:

New York, John Wiley & Sons, p. 257-361. Johnson, K. A., and Sitar, N., 1986, Techniques for identification of source areas for debris flows: Berkeley, Department of Civil Engineering, University of California, Report No. UCB/GT/86-01, 38 p. Keaton, J. R., Anderson, L. R., and Brooks, R. K., 1985, Geomorphology, geometry and evidence for recurrence of slope failures in steep swales in metamorphic rock filled with colluvial and residual soil debris in the Wa- satch Range near Farmington, Utah [abs.]: EOS American Geophysical Union Transactions, v. 16, p. 900.

Kojan, E., Foggin, T. G., Ill, and Rice, R. M., 1972, Prediction and analysis of debris avalanche incidence by photogrammetry, Santa Ynez Mountains, California, in 24th International Geological Congress, Section 13,

p. 124-131.

Lehre, A. K., 1981, Sediment budget of a small California Coast Range drainage basin near San Francisco, in Davies, T.R.H., and Pearce, A. J., eds., Erosion and sediment transport in Pacific Rim steeplands: International Association of Hydrological Sciences Publication no. 132, p. 123-139. , 1982, Sediment mobilization and production from a small mountain catchment: Lone Tree Creek, Marin County, California [Ph.D. thesis]: Ber- keley, University of California at Berkeley, 320 p. Lessing, P., Kulander, B. R., Wilson, B. D., Dean, S. L., and Woodring, S. M., 1976, West Virginia landslides and slide prone areas: West Virginia Geologi- cal and Economic Survey Environmental Geology Bulletin 15, 64 p.

Lips, E. W., Ellen, S., and Wieczorek, G. F., 1984, Identifying debris flow and debris flood potential along the Wasatch Front between Salt Lake City and Willard, Utah: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,

v. 16, p. 576.

180

Reneau and Dietrich

Marion, D. A., 1981, Landslide occurrence in the Blue River drainage, Oregon [M.S. thesis]: Corvallis, Oregon State University, 114 p. Okimura, T., 1983, A slope stability method for predicting rapid mass movements on granite mountain slopes: Natural Disaster Science, v. 5, p. 13-30. Okimura, T., and Kawatani, T., 1987, Mapping of the potential surface-failure sites on granite mountain slopes: Proceedings of First International Geomor-

Japanese Geomorphological Union Transactions, v. 2, p. 291-300.

with Programs, v. 15, p. 328. Sidle, R. C„ Pearce, A., and O'Loughlin, C. L., 1985, Hillslope stability and land use: American Geophysical Union Water Resources Monograph 11, 140 p. Sitar, N., and Johnson, K. A., 1984, Identification of potential source areas for debris flows using color, black and white, and black and white infra-red photography: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 16,

phology Conference, Manchester, England, September 1985 (in press).

p.

658.

Okunishi, K., and lida, T., 1981, Evolution of hillslopes including landslides:

O'Laughlin, C. L., 1972, A preliminary study of landslides in the Coast Moun- tains of southwestern British Columbia, in Slaymaker, H. O., and McPher- son, H. J., eds., Mountain geomorphology: Geomorphological processes in

Smith, T. C, 1984, Delineating areas susceptible to debris avalanches and debris flows near Pacifica, California: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 16, p. 661.

1987, A method for mapping relative susceptibility to debris flows, with an example from San Mateo County, California, in Ellen, S., and Wieczorek,

,

the Canadian Cordillera: Vancouver, Tantalus Research, p. 101-111.

G.

F., eds

Landslides, floods, and marine effects of the storm of January

Oyagi, N., 1984, Landslides in weathered rocks and residual soils in Japan and surrounding areas: A state-of-the-art report: Proceedings of IVth Interna- tional Symposium on Landslides, Toronto, v. 3, p. 1-31. Pierson, T. C, 1977, Factors controlling debris-flow initiation on forested hill- slopes in the Oregon Coast Range [Ph.D. thesis]: Seattle, University of Washington, 166 p. Pillsbury, N. H., and Stephens, J. A., 1978, Hardwood volume and weight tables for California's central coast: Sacramento, California Department of Fores- try, 54 p. Pomeroy, J. S., 1981, Storm-induced debris avalanching and related phenomena in the Johnstown area, Pennsylvania, with reference to other studies in the Appalachians: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1191,22 p.

, 1982, Geomorphic effects of the July 19-20, 1977, storm in a part of the

Little Conemaugh River area, northeast of Johnstown, Pennsylvania: North- eastern Geology, v. 4, p. 1-9.

, 1984, Storm-induced slope movements at East Brady, northern Pennsyl-

vania: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1618, 16 p. Rantz, S. E., 1971, Precipitation depth-duration-frequency relations for the San Francisco Bay region, California: U.S. Geological Survey Basic Data Contribution 25.

Reneau, S. L., and Dietrich, W. E., 1985, Landslide recurrence intervals in colluvium-mantled hollows, Marin County, California [abs.]: EOS Ameri- can Geophysical Union Transactions, v. 66, p. 900.

, 1986, Landslide recurrence intervals from debris flow source areas, central

California Coast Ranges: Abstracts and Program, Association of Engineering Geologists, 29th Annual Meeting, San Francisco, p. 61.

, 1987, Size and location of colluvial landslides in a steep forested landscape,

in Proceedings, Symposium on Erosion and Sedimentation in the Pacific Rim, Corvallis, Oregon, 3-7 August, 1987: International Association of Hydrological Sciences Publication (in press). Reneau, S. L., Dietrich, W. E., Wilson, C. J., and Rogers, J. D., 1984, Colluvial deposits and associated landslides in the northern San Francisco Bay area, California, USA: Proceedings of IVth International Symposium on Land- slides, Toronto, p. 425-430. Reneau, S. L., Dietrich, W. E., Dom, R. I., Berger, C. R., and Rubin, M., 1986, Geomorphic and paleoclimatic implications of latest Pleistocene radiocarbon dates from colluvium-mantled hollows, California: Geology, v. 14, p. 655-658. Rice, S. J., Smith, T. C , and Strand, R. G., 1976, Geology for planning, central and southeastern Marin County, California: California Division of Mines and Geology Open File Report OFR 76-2 SF, 103 p. Schlocker, J., 1974, Geology of the San Francisco North quadrangle, California:

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 782, 109 p. Schlocker, J., Bonilla, M. G., and Radbruch, D. H., 1958, Geology of the San Francisco North quadrangle, California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellane- ous Geologic Investigations Map 1-272. Shlemon, R. J., and Wright, R. H., 1983, Soil-stratigraphic dating of colluvial- filled gullies, Pacifica, California: Geological Society of America Abstracts

3-5, 1982, in the San Francisco Bay region, California: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1434 (in press).

Smith, T. C , and Hart, E. W., 1982, Landslides and related storm damage,

35,

January

p. 139-152.

1982, San

Francisco

Bay region: California

Geology,

v.

Strahler, A. N., 1952, Hypsometric (area-altitude) analysis of erosional topog- raphy: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 63, p. 1117-1142. Swanson, F. J., and Roach, C. J., 1985, Frequency of debris avalanches from clearcut hollows, Siuslaw River basin, Oregon [abs.]: EOS American Geo- physical Union Transactions, v. 66, p. 900. Swanson, F. J., Swanson, M. M., and Woods, C , 1981, Analysis of debris- avalanche erosion in steep forest lands: An example from Mapleton, Oregon, USA, in Davies, T.R.H., and Pearce, A. J., eds., Erosion and sediment transport in Pacific Rim steeplands: International Association of Hydrologi- cal Sciences Publication no. 132, p. 67-75.

Swanston, D. N., 1967, Soil-water piezometry in a southeast Alaska landslide area: U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station Research Note PNW-68, 17 p. , 1969, Mass wasting in coastal Alaska: U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station Research Paper PNW-83, 15 p. Tsukamoto, Y., 1973, Study on the growth of stream channel; (1) Relation between stream channel growth and landslides occurring during heavy storm: Shin-sabo, v. 25, p. 4-13. Tsukamoto, Y., Ohta, T., and Noguchi, H., 1982, Hydrological and geomorpho-

logical studies of debris slides on forested hillslopes in Japan, in Walling,

D. E., ed., Recent developments in the explanation and prediction of erosion

and sediment yield: International Association of Hydrological Sciences Pub- lication no. 137, p. 89-98. Wigmosta, M., 1983, Rheology and flow dynamics of the Toutle River debris flows from Mount Saint Helens [M.S. thesis]: Seattle, University of Washing- ton, 184 p.

Williams, G. P., and Guy, H. P., 1971, Debris avalanches—A geomorphic hazard, in Coates, D. R., ed., Environmental geomorphology: Binghamton, State University of New York Publications in Geomorphology, p. 25-46.

, 1973, Erosional and depositional aspects of Hurricane Camille in Virginia,

1969: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 804, 80 p. Wilson, C. J., and Dietrich, W. E., 1985, Lag in the saturated zone and pore pressure development after peak runoff in hollows [abs.]: EOS American Geophysical Union Transactions, v. 66, p. 898.

Wilson, C. J., Reneau, S. L., Dietrich, W. E., and Narasimhan, T. N , 1984, Modelling the generation of excessive pore pressures in debris flow suscepti- ble deposits [abs.]: EOS American Geophysical Union Transactions, v. 65,

p. 889.

Woodruff, J. F., 1971, Debris avalanches as an erosional agent in the Appala- chian Mountains: Journal of Geography, v. 70, p. 399-406.

MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY DECEMBER 29,198 6

Printed in U.S.A.