Preservation of thin tephras

INTRODUCTION Numerous observations attest to the rapid erosion from hillslopes of recently emplaced tephras. A survey of the literature on Soufrière (St Vincent, 1902), Rabaul (Papua New Guinea, 1937), Paricutin (Mexico, 1943-1945), Irazu (Costa Rica, 1963-64), Usu (Japan, 1977) and Mt St Helens (US...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Blong, R., Enright, N.J.
Format: Other/Unknown Material
Language:English
Published: 2011
Subjects:
Online Access:https://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/id/eprint/5785/
id ftmurdochuniv:oai:researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au:5785
record_format openpolar
institution Open Polar
collection Murdoch University: Murdoch Research Repository
op_collection_id ftmurdochuniv
language English
description INTRODUCTION Numerous observations attest to the rapid erosion from hillslopes of recently emplaced tephras. A survey of the literature on Soufrière (St Vincent, 1902), Rabaul (Papua New Guinea, 1937), Paricutin (Mexico, 1943-1945), Irazu (Costa Rica, 1963-64), Usu (Japan, 1977) and Mt St Helens (USA, 1980) together with occasional comments about other tephra-producing eruptions suggest the following conclusions: 1. Deep rills and gullies are quickly cut in fresh tephra especially where the development of an impermeable surface crust increases runoff volumes (Cilento, 1937, p47-8; Huggins, 1902, p20; Waldron, 1967, p11; Higashi et al., 1978; Kadomura et al., 1978; Lowdermilk and Bailey, 1946, p286; Collins et al., 1983). 2. Rates of rill and gully erosion are amongst the highest recorded anywhere while sediment concentrations in mudflows or secondary lahars may be as much as 65% by weight (Ollier and Brown, 1971; Waldron, 1967; Higashi et al., 1978). 3. Erosion of tephra is frequently proportional to slope steepness with extensive redeposition on valley floors. Rill erosion and shallow landsliding of tephra are important processes on steeper slopes. Topographic position is also important in determining how much tephra remains at a site (Anderson and Flett, 1903, p437; Segerstrom, 1950; 1960; Collins et al., 1983; Lehre et al., 1983). 4. The amount of vegetation remaining on tephra-mantled slopes influences erosion rates (Collins et al., 1983). Tephra erosion facilitates recovery of surviving vegetation (Lawrence and Ripple, 2000) and vegetation regrowth influences the retention of tephra (Segerstrom, 1950; 1960). 5. As much as one third to one half of the tephra may be removed from the slopes within one year or less of emplacement (Anderson and Flett, 1903, p453; Waldron, 1967, p11), though more detailed studies at Mt St Helens suggest only 11% of tephra was removed in the first year (Collins et al., 1983) and that erosion rates declined dramatically with time (Collins and Dunne, 1986). 6. The decline in erosion rate is not produced by revegetation but by increased infiltration capacity, decreased erodibility of the tephra exposed and the development of a stable rill network (Collins and Dunne, 1986). 7. In the long term, stability of the underlying substrate is an important influence on erosional removal of the tephra mantle (Blong and Pain, 1978). The examples on which the above conclusions are based do not always specify the thickness of the tephra mantle but observations were generally made close to the volcanoes where the tephra was at least 300 mm deep, and sometimes considerably deeper. On the other hand, erosional reworking and/or survival of thin (i.e., 10-300 mm) seems to have not been reported in any detail; although emplacement of thin tephras is usually less destructive of the vegetation cover it is not clear whether erosion of thin tephras is similarly rapid or whether preservation is ensured. Most studies of thin tephras relate to their use as chronostratigraphic marker beds and are commonly based on tephras preserved in lakes and/or swamp deposits. By and large, preservation of thin tephras in other situations is poorly documented. Nonetheless, thin tephras are of considerable value in geomorphic, geologic and archaeologic investigations as they form obvious marker horizons and cover large areas. The present contributions sets out observations on the preservation of thin tephras at four sites: near Mt Hagen and in the Western Finisterre Ranges, Papua New Guinea, on the slopes of Mt Rainier, Washington, USA, and on Kodiak Island, Alaska, USA. Each of the four studies was of only limited duration and detail but, collectively, the results provide considerable data on erosion and survival of thin tephras and the factors that influence their preservation.
format Other/Unknown Material
author Blong, R.
Enright, N.J.
spellingShingle Blong, R.
Enright, N.J.
Preservation of thin tephras
author_facet Blong, R.
Enright, N.J.
author_sort Blong, R.
title Preservation of thin tephras
title_short Preservation of thin tephras
title_full Preservation of thin tephras
title_fullStr Preservation of thin tephras
title_full_unstemmed Preservation of thin tephras
title_sort preservation of thin tephras
publishDate 2011
url https://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/id/eprint/5785/
long_lat ENVELOPE(6.545,6.545,62.545,62.545)
ENVELOPE(162.483,162.483,-78.283,-78.283)
ENVELOPE(115.083,115.083,-66.500,-66.500)
ENVELOPE(49.200,49.200,-68.150,-68.150)
geographic Hagen
Huggins
Waldron
Flett
geographic_facet Hagen
Huggins
Waldron
Flett
genre Kodiak
Alaska
genre_facet Kodiak
Alaska
op_source Blong, R. and Enright, N.J. <https://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/view/author/Enright, Neal.html>orcid:0000-0003-2979-4505 (2011) Preservation of thin tephras. Unpublished manuscript .
op_relation https://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/id/eprint/5785/
full_text_status:public
_version_ 1766059050137550848
spelling ftmurdochuniv:oai:researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au:5785 2023-05-15T17:04:43+02:00 Preservation of thin tephras Blong, R. Enright, N.J. 2011 https://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/id/eprint/5785/ eng eng https://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/id/eprint/5785/ full_text_status:public Blong, R. and Enright, N.J. <https://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/view/author/Enright, Neal.html>orcid:0000-0003-2979-4505 (2011) Preservation of thin tephras. Unpublished manuscript . Others 2011 ftmurdochuniv 2020-01-05T18:42:44Z INTRODUCTION Numerous observations attest to the rapid erosion from hillslopes of recently emplaced tephras. A survey of the literature on Soufrière (St Vincent, 1902), Rabaul (Papua New Guinea, 1937), Paricutin (Mexico, 1943-1945), Irazu (Costa Rica, 1963-64), Usu (Japan, 1977) and Mt St Helens (USA, 1980) together with occasional comments about other tephra-producing eruptions suggest the following conclusions: 1. Deep rills and gullies are quickly cut in fresh tephra especially where the development of an impermeable surface crust increases runoff volumes (Cilento, 1937, p47-8; Huggins, 1902, p20; Waldron, 1967, p11; Higashi et al., 1978; Kadomura et al., 1978; Lowdermilk and Bailey, 1946, p286; Collins et al., 1983). 2. Rates of rill and gully erosion are amongst the highest recorded anywhere while sediment concentrations in mudflows or secondary lahars may be as much as 65% by weight (Ollier and Brown, 1971; Waldron, 1967; Higashi et al., 1978). 3. Erosion of tephra is frequently proportional to slope steepness with extensive redeposition on valley floors. Rill erosion and shallow landsliding of tephra are important processes on steeper slopes. Topographic position is also important in determining how much tephra remains at a site (Anderson and Flett, 1903, p437; Segerstrom, 1950; 1960; Collins et al., 1983; Lehre et al., 1983). 4. The amount of vegetation remaining on tephra-mantled slopes influences erosion rates (Collins et al., 1983). Tephra erosion facilitates recovery of surviving vegetation (Lawrence and Ripple, 2000) and vegetation regrowth influences the retention of tephra (Segerstrom, 1950; 1960). 5. As much as one third to one half of the tephra may be removed from the slopes within one year or less of emplacement (Anderson and Flett, 1903, p453; Waldron, 1967, p11), though more detailed studies at Mt St Helens suggest only 11% of tephra was removed in the first year (Collins et al., 1983) and that erosion rates declined dramatically with time (Collins and Dunne, 1986). 6. The decline in erosion rate is not produced by revegetation but by increased infiltration capacity, decreased erodibility of the tephra exposed and the development of a stable rill network (Collins and Dunne, 1986). 7. In the long term, stability of the underlying substrate is an important influence on erosional removal of the tephra mantle (Blong and Pain, 1978). The examples on which the above conclusions are based do not always specify the thickness of the tephra mantle but observations were generally made close to the volcanoes where the tephra was at least 300 mm deep, and sometimes considerably deeper. On the other hand, erosional reworking and/or survival of thin (i.e., 10-300 mm) seems to have not been reported in any detail; although emplacement of thin tephras is usually less destructive of the vegetation cover it is not clear whether erosion of thin tephras is similarly rapid or whether preservation is ensured. Most studies of thin tephras relate to their use as chronostratigraphic marker beds and are commonly based on tephras preserved in lakes and/or swamp deposits. By and large, preservation of thin tephras in other situations is poorly documented. Nonetheless, thin tephras are of considerable value in geomorphic, geologic and archaeologic investigations as they form obvious marker horizons and cover large areas. The present contributions sets out observations on the preservation of thin tephras at four sites: near Mt Hagen and in the Western Finisterre Ranges, Papua New Guinea, on the slopes of Mt Rainier, Washington, USA, and on Kodiak Island, Alaska, USA. Each of the four studies was of only limited duration and detail but, collectively, the results provide considerable data on erosion and survival of thin tephras and the factors that influence their preservation. Other/Unknown Material Kodiak Alaska Murdoch University: Murdoch Research Repository Hagen ENVELOPE(6.545,6.545,62.545,62.545) Huggins ENVELOPE(162.483,162.483,-78.283,-78.283) Waldron ENVELOPE(115.083,115.083,-66.500,-66.500) Flett ENVELOPE(49.200,49.200,-68.150,-68.150)