Economic Geology

Vol. 73, 1978, pp. 416-426

BasinDynamics,ChannelProcesses,
andPlacerFormation'
A Model Study
JOHNADAMS,G. L. ZIrVFFR,
ANDC. F. McLANE
Abstract

The role of basin dynamics, tectonics, and channel processesin the formation of
placershas not beenwell understood. In this study,theseproblemswere investigatedin
a miniature drainage basin suhjectedto rejuvenation. Sedimentsamplescollecteddur-
ing the experiment show the responseof total sedimentdischarge and heavy mineral
dischargeto rejuvenation. Total sedimentyield peakedshortly after rejuvenationbegan
and then decayedexponentially. This decaydoesnot characterizemagnetiteyield which
was producedin discrete events separatedby periods of little output.
Sampleswithin the sourcearea indicated that magnetite was concentratedand stored
on uplandsand hillslopesas well as in the floodplain. Valley fill contained horizontal
layers depositedas the channel shifted laterally and trough-shapedscour and fill de-
posits,which marked former channelcourses. Within these depositsmagnetite was con-
centratedon bedrockchannelbottoms,on alluvial channelbottoms ("false bottoms"), and
in similar positionswithin terrace deposits.
Complex responsedominatesbasin rejuvenation. Initially, placers are destroyedand
transportedfrom the basin. Aggradation then overloadschannelsand heavy minerals
are stored. This is succeededby degradation'during which heavy minerals are con-
centrated and flushed from the basin. Superimposedupon this complex response are
shorterperiodsof heavy mineral transportand storagecontrolledby internal geomorphic
thresholds. In both cases,heavy mineral transport is directly controlled by channel
activity. Storage occurswhen the channelaggrades,and when the channeldegrades
heavy minerals are concentratedin the channelsand transportedfrom the basin.
Although basin rejuvenationdestroysexisting placers,it also createsan environment
for the formation of new placers. In addition, the complexresponseof the sourcebasin
to a single uplift will cause the multiple rexvorkingof alluvium necessaryfor placer
formation.

Introduction Despite the extensive descriptionof bedrock and

Two problemsrelating to placer formation have not "false-bottom"placers in the literature, there is no
yet been resolved. The first is the relationshipof generally accepted mode of formation of these de-
placerfieldsto basindynamicsand regionaltectonics, posits. Cheney and Patton (1967) considerthat the
and the second is the relationship of individual concentrationof heavy mineralsat or near bedrockis
placersto channelactivity. axiomatic and that this concentrationis causedby
Lindgren (1933, p. 225) and Bateman (1950, p. unusually large floods that rework the channel al-
229) suggestthat placer fields are most readily hwium. By contrastGunn (1968) suggests
that the
formedin deeplyweatheredareasof moderaterelief heavymineralsmove downwardas the gravelsof the
that are subjectedto progressive
smalluplifts. These channelbedare agitatedby streamflow.Tuck (1968)
causestreamrejuvenationand successive reworking considersthat heavy minerals are concentratedon
of streamdepositsinto rich placers. For the efficient the channelbedrockfloor during periodsof down-
reworking of sediment,a channelgradient must be cutting and that theseare later buried by channel
poisedbetweenexcessivedegradationand aggrada- aggradation.
tion, and Bateman(1950, p. 234) has suggested that The explanationof Tuck is supportedby a model
a gradientof 0.006 (30 feet per mile) is optimalfor study(Shepherdand Schumm,1974) whichindicates
placer formation. For similar reasonsSigov et al. that magnetite forms a lag deposit on the channel
(1972) concludethat placerdepositsare not formed floor when the channel degradesand that this con-
during periodsof major uplift or subsidence because centrationis buried when the channellater aggrades.
at thesetimes the transport processesare not con- Two concepts recently developed by Schumm
ducive to the reworking and concentrationof low- (1977) and his studentscan be usedto explainchan-
grade deposits. nel and basin processesand relate these to placer
416
 BASIN DYNAMICS: .4 MODEL STUDY 417

formation. The various componentsof a basin

(floodplain,hillslopes,divides,tributaries,and main
channel) respondat different times and at different
ratesto externalchange(rejuvenationin this case)
and this resultsin a complexresponsemechanism.
The conceptof complexresponsewas first developed
during experimentalwork (Schumm and Parker,
1973). It hassincebeenusedto interpretvalleyter-
racesalong Douglas Creek in northwesternColorado
(Womack and Schumm,1977). Schumm(1973, p.
307) illustrates four stages of complex response
(Fig. 1) and describescomplexresponseas follows:
Incision occurredfirst at tile mouth of tile system,
and then progressively upstream, successivelyre-
juvenatingtributariesand scouringthe alluviumpre-
viouslydeposited
in thevalley. As erosionprogressed
upstream, the main channel became a conveyor of
upstream sediment in increasing quantities, and the
inevitable result was that aggradation occurred in
the newly cut channel. However, as the tributaries Braided
eventually became adjusted to the new baselevels,
sedimentloadsdecreased,and a new phaseof chan- ,.,(C hanneI
nel erosionoccurred. Thus, initial channelincision
and terrace formationwas followedby depositionof
an alluvial fill, channelbraiding, and lateral erosion,
and then, as the drainagesystemachievedstability,
renewed incision formed a loxv alluvial terrace.
r,
7
''4:'. ..:. '0.'
....Jl
. I,/,
y/4

The second concept, geomorphic thresholds
(Schumm,1973), showshoxvchannelpatternis con-
trolled by slopethresholdswithin the fluvial system.
It hasbeenknown for sometime that channelpattern
is closelyrelatedto channelslope(Leopoldand Wol-
man, 1957). Recent work (Schumm and Khan,
1972) hasshownthat a criticalthresholdslopeexists
abovewhich a straight streamwill becomemeander-
ing and a secondcritical thresholdexists abovewhich
the meanderingstreamwill becomebraided.
Fro. 1. Diagrammatic cross sectionsof experimental chan-
During the summer of 1976 research was con- nel 1.5' m from outlet of drainage system (base level) show-
ductedat the Rainfall Erosion Facility (REF) at ing responseof channel to one lowering of base level (from
Colorado State University into the evolution of the Schumm, 1973).
A. Valley and alluvium, which was deposited during pre-
drainagenet and the hydrologyof an experimental vious run, before base-level lowering. The low width-depth
drainagebasin. Thesestudiesfollowedthe develop- ratio channel flows on alluvium.
B. After base-level lowering of 10 cm, channel incises into
lnent of the basinfrom its initial configuration(two alluvium and bedrock floor of valley to form a terrace. Fol-
slopingplanes) to the formation of an "equilibrium" lowing incision, bank erosion widens channel and partially
drainagebasin. This basinwas then rejuvenatedby destroys terrace.
C. An inset alluvial fill is depositedas the sediment dis-
a drop in baselevel, and the basin was then allowed chargefrom upstreamincreases.The high width-depthratio
to developto equilibrium. Morphologicalsimilarities channel is braided and unstable.
D. A second terrace is formed as the channel incises
betweenthe REF drainagepattern,drainagedensity, slightly and assumesa loxv width-depth ratio in responseto
and streamprofileto thoseof naturaldrainagebasins reducedsedimentload. With time, in nature, channelmigra-
havebeenshownby earlierworkers(Parker, 1977). tion will destroypart of the loxverterrace and a flood plain
will form at a lower level.
Magnetite had been observed to concentratein the
REF channelsduring an earlier study (Macke, The time spanof tectonicprocesses makesit im-
1977) in an aggrading
river channel,
but the present possibleto observethe effect of thesechangeson
experimentprovidedan opportunityto studyplacer placerformationin any naturalbasin. However,the
formation in a drainage basin as it underwent re- drop in base level in the REF simulatesbasin re-
jurenation. juvenationand from a studyof heavymineralpro-
418 ,XID,xIMS,
ZIMPiVER,,xINDMcL,XINE
Fro. 2. The Rainfall Erosion Facility (REF) before enclosure. Crane shows
scale,box is 15 rn long.
ductionand storagein the basinduring this periodit
is possibleto relateplacerformationto the rejuvena-
tion processes.
The quantityof heavymineralsstoredin the REF
allowsthe formationof placer depositsto be related
to the complexresponseof the basinto rejuvenation.
This estimationtogetherwith observations of channel
activity also allows the recognitionof conditions
favorableto placerformation. Thus it is possibleto
usethe REF to relatebasinand channelprocesses to
the formationof placersand to studythe heavymin-
eral exportfrom a drainagebasinthroughtime.
Equipment and Methods
The Rainfall Erosion Facility consistsof a 9.1 m
by 15.2m plywoodbox (Fig. 2) 1.8 m deepthat was
filledto an averagedepthof 0.9 m with a 1:1 mixture
of localtopsoilandplastersand(meansize1.55phi,
standarddeviation1.9 phi) whichcontained0.4 per-
cent magnetite. This material was compactedby
rollingand is referredto as bedrockin contrastwith
the reworked sediments(alluvium) found in the
channels.
Controlledrainfall was applied to the surfaceat
ratesof 20, 28, and 56 mm/hr. The highestintensity
of rainfall was used to developthe drainage basin
and for mostof the hydrologicinvestigations.This
resulted in a runoff on the order of 1.3 liters per
second. A small flume was attached to the front of
the REF to controlbaselevel and providean outlet
for runoff and sediment. Sedimentproductionfrom
the model basin was measuredonly at this outlet
flume,and thusinformationon sedimentsupplyfrom
the individual tributaries to the main channel is nc
available. During the experimentbase level wa
loweredby removinga plankfrom beneaththe outk
flume and loweringthe flume.
During the developmentof the basin, sedime
sampleswere taken at 15-minuteintervals (sample
11-18 and 20-28) for much of the run, and at 3t2
minuteintervals(samples31--46) for the remainde
Sample intervals during other times (samples1-1(
19, 20, 29, 30, and 47-50) varied from 8 minutest
134 minuteswith a meanof 31 minutes.Each sampl
representsthe total water and sedimentdischarg
from the basinfor a measuredperiodthat varied be
tween 1.5 and 2.8 seconds. These data were later co
rectedto a constantsamplingperiodof 2 seconds an.
thenadjustedsothat eachsamplewasequivalentto.
secondsof the 56 mm/hr rain intensity,so that th
data wouldnot be biasedby the samplingperiod.
The sedimentsampleswere suctionfiltered,drie
andweighedto determinethe sedimentyield. To re
moveclay and low-densitycomponents thesesample
were washedand pannedto aboutone-eighthof thei
initial volumein a gold pan. The fine grain size c
the magnetite(mean size 3 phi) precludedremov
of the fine grains by wet sievingsinceabout one
quarter of the magnetitewould also have passe.
throughthe sieve. The cleanedsampleswere subse
quentlydried and the magnetitefractionseparatedb
a hand magnetand weighed. The error involved i:
thisprocedurewasapproximately 6 percentbasedo:
replicatesampling. Magnetiteyieldswere then corn
pared to the total sedimentyield, and the deviation
from the expectedvaluesrelatedto the observation
 BASIN .DYNAMICS: 4 MODE STUDY 419

,f 1,:tsi:uM ch:mnellchaviorrecordedduring the 350

experiment. 300

This experimentaldrainagebasin cannotbe con-

sidered a scale model. It does not meet the strict 250

rules of scale modeling necessaryto maintain geo- 200

metric, kinematic,and dynamicsimilitude(Hubbert,
1937; Albertsonet al., 1960). Instead, the drainage 150F
basindescribedin this study more closelyresembles 50
the analogmodeldescribed by Chorley(1967) which
o
Hooke (1968, p. 393) calls"a smallsystemin its 0 200 400 600 800 I000 1200

own right." An analogmodel,commonlyused in CUMULATIVE PRECIPITATION, mm

experimentalgeomorphology, doesnot model an in- Fzc. 4. Production of total sediment and magnetite from
dividualdrainagebasinbut modelssomeof the prop- the basin. Data have been corrected to a constant sampling
ertiesof drainagebasinsin general. This approach period of 2 sec of 56 mm rainfall.
is valid if the grossscalingrelationships
are met, the
modelreproduces somemorphologic characteristics
of ing a peak the data showexponentialdecaysimilar to
the prototype(a natural system), and the process the sedimentyield curve describedby Parker (1977,
whichproducedthe morphologiccharacteristics in the see also Schumm, 1977) based on more detailed
laboratorycanlogicallybe assumedto havethe same sampling. The suddenlowering of base level pro-
effecton the prototype(Hooke, 1968). Hooke also duceda knickpointwhichmigratedup the main chan-
demonstratesthat a model of this type is necessary nel. As this knickpoint passedtributary junctions,
becausethe scalemodelingof alluvial systemsis not knickpointsformedin the tributaries. These migra-
possibleat the presentstateof knowledge.The fail- ting knickpoints defined a "wave of dissection"
ure to maintain scaling ratios prevents the direct (Howard, 1971,p. 30) that movedthroughthe drain-
extrapolationfrom the modelto the prototype,but age system and was one cause of changesin the
we considerthat the results of experimentsof this amount of sediment released to the main channel and
type may be appliedqualitativelyto the field, even the fluctuationssuperimposed
on the generalsedi-
thoughthe rulesof scalemodelingwere not observed. ment decaycurve.
Results In contrast with the sediment production, ex-
ponential decay was not shown by the magnetite
The weight of magnetitein the undisturbedma- production. Instead,magnetitewas producedduring
terial was determinedto be 0.408 percent with a a series of discrete events that were separatedby
standarddeviationof 0.025 percent. The magnetite periodsduring which little magnetitewas movedout
concentrationin the sediment discharge samples of the basin. The data representedby Figure 4 in-
rangedfrom 0.068 to 2.01 percent,with a meanvalue dicate that both sedimentand magnetiteleave the
of 0.37 percent. When the magnetiteconcentration basin as pulsesbut that the magnitudeof the pulses
in the sampleswas plotted against cumulativepre- (relative to the expectedvalues) is relativelygreater
cipitation (an index of time or stage), the samples for the magnetitethan for the total sedimentproduc-
showedseveraldistinctpeaks(Fig. 3). tion.
Immediatelyfollowing the base-leveldrop, sedi- The data from Figure 4 were used to plot the
ment yield increasedsharply(Fig. 4). After reach- cumulativeproductionof magnetiteagainstthe cumu-
lative productionof total sediment(Fig. 5). The
samplesindicatethat a total of 7,280 kg of sediment
2.5 and 27.25 kg of magnetitewas movedout of the basin

1.5 during the experiment. Figure 5 showsthat there

7

are departuresfrom the straightline of slope0.00408

-- Bedrock that would be expectedif the magnetite had been
l/ l/ /Average transportedfrom the basin at the same rate as the
total sediment.
At three points (samples11, 15, and 18) slightly
o , more magnetitewas removedfrom the drainagebasin
o 0 200 400 600 800 IOO0 1200
CUMULATIVE PRECIPITATION, rnrn than canbe explainedfrom the yield of total sediment.
This excessmagnetitemay have been derived from
Fro. 3. VarJation in magnetite concentration in the sam-
ples with cumulativerainfall. The horizontal line represents the reworking of alluvial depositsinherited from the
the average magnetite concentration in the bedrock. precedingcycle of development.
420 ,'IDAMS, ZIMFER, AND McL,'tNE

4u ing toward their pro-rejuvenationratesand the basin

L / Net
wasagainapproaching equilibrium.Thus the samples
C)C).,
ofStorage
discussedhere represent changesin the basin as
z

equilibriumwas interruptedby a major base-level

drop. As this adjustmentto rejuvenationoccurred,
o
the erosionand reworkingof sedimentin the basin
z
2o
resultedin the concentration
and net storageof 2.5
kg of magnetite.

0 25
Observations
after the experiment

I0 5 20

After completion of phasetwo of the experiment,
the distributionof magnetitewithin the basin was
sampled. Magnetite was concentratedin the channel
5 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 alluviumas placerdeposits,as indicatedbelow,and
CUMULATIVE PRODUCTION OF SEDIMENT, kg was also concentrated on the bedrock surface between
the channelswhererainsplashhad removedmuchof
the samples. Storage at ay oiat ca be calcubted omthe lighter alluvium.
the devbt{o betwee the data oits ad the fie o euM
oductio. oits bove the le st tsot Samplesof the drainagebasin surfacewere taken
o
at 24 grid locations. At eachpointa small (20-40 g)
samplewas scrapedfrom the surface and analyzed
An indicationof the magnetitestoredin the basin for the proportionof veightof magnetitein the sam-
can be calculated from the difference between the ob- ple. These weightsrangedfrom 0.91 to 4.88 percent
served and expected values for each point on the of the sampleweight, with a mean of 1.58 percent.
cumulativecurve (that is, the vertical deviationsof The samplescan be divided into three categories:
the samplepointsfrom the line of equalproduction). upland samples(13 samples),hillslopesamples(4
An increasein magnetitestoragerepresentsthe for- samples),and floodplainsamples(7 samples). Mean
mation of placerswithin the basin. :By contrast,a proportionsof magnetitefor eachcategorywere cal-
decreasein storagerepresentsthe flushingof mag- culated. Upland and hillslopeconcentrationswere
netite from the basinand the potentialformationof fonnd to be approximatelythe same,with meansof
placersdownstreamof the basin. 1.13 percent and 1.05 percent, respectively. Flood-
The plot of magnetitestorageagainst cumulative 1)lainsampleshad a meanof 2.72 percent,more than
rainfall (Fig. 6) showsthat magnetitestoragein the twice that found in hillslopeand ui)landsamples.
basin changeddramatically during 'the experiment. The amount of magnetite stored on tipland and
As the end of the experimentwas approachedthe rate hillslopesurfacesin the basincan be estimatedfrom
of magnetite storage decreased. Figure 4 indicates the productof the drainagearea (86.5% of the total
that sedimentand magnetitedischargewere decteas- basinarea of 105 m-is tiplandand hillslope), sample
depth (no greater than 0.006 m), bulk densityof
4.0 the surficialmaterial(determinedto be 1,390kg/ma),
3O
aud the proportion of magnetite in the samples
(1.1%).
u5 z.o The calculationindicatesthat approximately8.3 kg
of magnetitewas held essentiallyin situ on the bed-
o
25 j50 rock surface. This is an overestimate of the actual
co .0 45
magnetitestored becauseboth the actual sampling
--

depthand the thicknessof the magnetitesurfacelayer

vere less than 0.006 m.
Transverse cross sections of the channel were

20O 400
i
,,to
i

600
i I i

800
i i

I000
1 i

CUMULATIVE RAINFALL,
FG. 6. Storage of magnetite in the basin during the
experiment. Data from Figure 5. Zero storage assumedat
start of data collection,negative storage representsremoval
of existing magnetite placers.
1200
i
excavatedto study the alluvial fill. The valley fill
(Fig. 7) containedhorizontallayers, depositedas
the channelshiftedlaterally, and trough-shapedscour
and fill deposits, which marked former channel
mm
courses. Magnetite was frequently concentratedon
bedrock channel bottoms, alluvial channel bottoms
(false bottoms),and on the bedrockinterfaceof ter-
race deposits. It was commonlyassociatedwith
 B.4SIN DYNAMICS: .4 MODEL STUDY 421

coarsergrainedalluviumof presumedhydraulic
equivalence. A bulksampleof oneof theseplacer Channel Alluvml North
deposits contained 15 percentmagnetite (38 times
background), andlocally concentrationsofpuremag- A Sou i'
"
' Terroce'
Surfoce , Fill
i Hillslope
netitewereobserved.Elevennonrandom samples .

weretakento represent theseplacerdeposits.

Theserepresentative samples werecombined xvith South
Scorp
' ' "':/ "'
Active
the sevengrid samples to givea meanconcentration , , ActiveBedrockChnnel Alluv
of magnetite in thechannel filI andterracedeposits , eorocK ChannelBar
erroce ; Islond ....
of 5.34percent (13 timesbackground). Valleyde-
positscomprise 13.5percent(14.11m2) of thebasin
areaandhavea bulkdensityof 1,340kg/m. As-
Active
suming a meansampling depthof 0.006m, thisindi- Alluviol Chonnel (',,-: North
catesthat6.1 kg of magnetite wasstoredin thesede- Fill, ]L,- Scorp

posits, and, hence,channelstorageaccountsfor AlluvialIsland

slightlylessthanhalfof thetotalbasinstorage.
The combined estimates indicate14.4kg of mag-
netite were stored in the basin. This is an overesti-
Bedrock
mateof the actualstoragebecause
uplandsample Terroce Active
depthshave been overestimatedand channelconcen- Alluviol Chonnel
trationsmaybe biasedto,yardhighervalues. ",-z-
',,7i, ,
Analysisof the sediment discharge samples sug-
gestsa totalstorage
of 4.5kg, whichis in fair agree-
NOTE:
mentwith the magnetite estimatedby sampling the NOT TO SCALE
basinaftertheexperiment. ;,O ' BEDROCK

Manetiiestorageandbasinacliz,ily xxxxxxx MAGNETITE

CONCENTRATIONS

The equilibriumof the lower main channelbefore m. 7. S[etch crosssectionso cmml H. Cross sec-
the base-level
dropcorresponds
to Figure 1A. Little tions (top to bottom)tAAenAt 7.7 m, 5 m, m, Ad 2.4
sediment
wasbeingtransported
fromthebasin(sam- above basin oufiet. Cross section C is & confinuAtio
cross section B.
ples 1-10, Figure 4), and both total sedimentand
magnetitedischargewere approximately constant. indicating
that nmchmagnetitewasin transport.
Very shortperiodsof aggradation and degradation Lateralmigrationof the main channel,and under-
controlledby intrinsic thresholdswere observedin cuttingand failureof the valleyscarps,were at a
the lower main channel,but thesehad little effecton nfinimumwhenthesesamples werecollected.
sedimentdischarge. Samples 12,13,14,16,and17represent periods of
Initial channelresponse to base-level
drop cor- magnetitestorage. When thesesampleswere col-
responds to Figure lB. Twenty-seven minutesafter lected,
undercutting ofthevalleyscarps
andslumping
sample10 was collected,baselevel was lowered203 dominated thelowermainchannel activity.Themi-
mm to rejuvenatethe basin. hnmediately, the main gration of sediment waves and sediment from the
channelnarrowedand downcutthroughexisting collapse of valleyscarpstemporarilyoverloaded the
alluvial deposits. Total sedimentproductionin- lowerchannel andresultedin channel
braiding,lateral
creasedrapidlybut sedimentexportfrom the basin activity, andthestorage ofmagnetite. Theseperiods
wasnot continuous, as shownby samples11 to 18, of magnetite transportandstorage (samples 11-18)
andmagnetite storage(Fig.6) wentthrougha period are attributable
to localchannelcontrolby internal
of rapid fluctuation. thresholds.
Observationsmadeduringthisperiodprovidean During the stagecorresponding to Figure 1C
explanation
for thesefluctuations.
Samples 11, 15, (samples19-29) the lower main channelwas flooded
and18werecollected duringperiodsof downcutting.by sedimentfrom the upperchanneland its tribu-
Sample11wascollected asthefirstmajorknickpointtaries.Before thecollectionofsample 23 responseto
migrated
up the mainchannel.Justbeforesample base-level drop was confined mainlyto the lover
15 wascollected,a smaller
knickpoint migrated up mainchannels andthe lowerpartsof its tributaries.
themainchannel.Between samples 17 and 18 the After sample23 wascollected, the upperbasinre-
lowermainchannel
narrowed
andincised. Magnetitespondedactively and the lower 5 m of the basin
wasdeposited
alongthebanks
of theincised
channel,playeda morepassiverole.
422 ..4D.4MS,ZIMPFER, ,4ND McL,4NE

This periodwasdominatedby lateralmovementin The formationof bedrockplacerdepositsand false-

the lower main channel, and much sediment was bottomplacersin particularcan be explainedby the
flushed from storage in upper tributary channels. conceptsdescribedabove(Schumm,1977). Channel
However, betweensamples22 and 23, 26 and 27, and behavioris stronglyinfluencedby the responseof
27 and 28, the lower main channelincised(possibly the drainagebasinto external change(in this case
after wavesof sedimentmigrated out of the basin). rejuvenation) and to the crossingof internalthresh-
This incisionwas not accompaniedby magnetitepro- olds. During periods of low sedimentsupply the
duction becausethe system as a whole was still channel can scour and winnow the channel fill to
dominatedby the erosion and transport of stored bedrockand soconcentrate any heavymineralspres-
alluviumfrom the upper main channeland its tribu- ent in the channelfill. Theseconcentrations
may be
taries. Betweensamples18 and 28 the upper basin on the bedrocksurfaceor at an intermediatedepth in
was completelyflushedof lighter alluvium leaving the alluvium. Less extremescour,as expectedfrom
magnetite depositsexposedon the bedrock channel the conceptsof complex responseand geomorphic
bottom. thresholds,would imply only partial scour of the
This period of channel aggradation,transport of channelfill and the formationof false-bottomplacers
magnetite-poorsediment,and consequentmagnetite abovethe bedrocksurface(e.g., Fig. 1D). Assuming
storagewas the direct result of the complexresponse some preexisting distribution of heavy minerals
of the basin. within the channelfill, the deeperthe scour,and the
No observations of channel behavior could be made more sedimentreworked,the richer the depositcon-
during the period of magnetitetransport (samples centrated on the scour bottom. Hence, the concen-
30-33) becausethe run was made at night and the tration of heavymineralsin a channel-filldepositwill
REF lacks artificial illumination. However, at the generally increase downward to the bedrock, as ob-
endof the precedingperiodmosttributarieshad been servedin the field examples.
flushedof lighteralluviumleavingmagnetiteas a lag The interpretive framework presentedhere shows
deposit lying upon the bedrock channel bottoms. that channelresponseto a single rejuvenationevent
We postulatethat decliningsedimentsupplyto the results in a period of complexresponse. This com-
tributary channelscausedscourinto thesemagnetite- plex responseand the adjustmentof the channelto
rich lag deposits. This pulse of high magnitite pro- internal thresholds result in the formation of multi-
duction was probably brief becausethese channels story placers. Similar multistoryplacershave been
would rapidly cut into the underlying"barren" bed- observedduring channelaggradationfollowing a rise
rock where magnetitehad not yet beenconcentrated. in baselevel (Macke, 1977). A degradingchannelis
Someof the magnetitefrom this pulsewas probably more favorable to the formation of rich placers,
stored briefly in the alluvium of the main channel, though the conceptsof complex responseand geo-
but the decliningsedimentsupplywouldprogressively morphicthresholdsensurethat depositionin an ag-
affectthe channeldownstreamso that any deposition gradingchannelwill be interruptedby periodsof deg-
would be temporaryand most of the sedimentwould radation and the formation of false-bottomplacers.
be movedcompletelyout of the lower channel. This may be the origin of placer depositsthat occur
Magnetite storage returned to lower channelcon- high abovethe bedrocksurface,suchas thosein the
trol as the upper tributariesbecameadjustedto the Ross gold field.
base-levelchangeand the lower channelshiftedfrom Discussion
the stageof complexresponserepresentedby Figure
I'lacer morphology
1C to the stage representedby Figure 1D (samples
34-50). Samples34 and 35 representa period of In the present work, similarities between REF
lateralactivity,undercuttingof the scarps,and major heavy mineral concentrationsand natural placers
bank caving. A braided channel filled most of the were observed. For example,residualplacersformed
lower main channelvalley. Betweenthe collectionof on the modeluplandsare conaparable to the dispersed
samples36 and 37, lateral activity ceasedand the residualdepositsthat Krook (1968) considersmight
main channel first narrowed and incised and then be- be held in situ by vegetationand later remobilizedby
camebraidedagain. a climaticchangeto enter the channelsas a workable
During the final period (samples38-50) the chan- deposit. Four otherplacertypeswere alsoobserved.
nel was again dominatedby lateral activity and re- lctive channelplacers: During pausesin the ex-
mained braided. At this time the whole drainage perimentwhen the channelwas drainedwhile it was
basin was adjustedto the rejuvenation,and mag- degrading, magnetite concentrationswere observed
netite storagewas again controlledby local overload- to form dongatepay streakson the bedrock. During
ing of the channels. aggradationthesedepositswere coveredby alluvium
 BASIN DYNAMICS: A MODEL STUDY 423

tion of heavyminerals. Their work is supported

by
the occurrenceof magnetitein the scoursat a few
confluences
in the presentwork (Fig. 9). The pres-
ence of scour hollows does not in itself ensure the ac-
cumulationof heavyminerals,because the turbulence
generatedmay be sufficientto move both sediment
and heavy minerals.
Uhannelbedrockplacers: Almost all channelfills
examinedin the model basin showedmagnetitecon-
centrations
on thebedrock-alluviumcontact(Fig. 7).
Thesedepositsrangedfrom a thin veneeron bedrock
to comparativelythick depositsthat formed in the
thalweg.
Channel bedrock concentrations have been exten-
sivelyworked and are the most widely cited in the
literature. In the La Cholla area of Arizona, gold
was found at 13 and 5 m above bedrock, but "the
richestgold-bearinggravel occurswithin a few inches
of the bedrock"(Wilson, 1961,p. 30). In a second
Arizona example,Schrader(1915) describedplacers
in the Greatervilleareain whichthe paystreakswere
confined to narrow channels 2 to 4 m wide on bed-
rock that widenedand becamemore deeplyburied

Fro. 8. Magnetite concentrationsin the active lower main

channelwith channeldrainedfor mapping. Flow is toward
viewer; grid spacing1 m. Arrow indicatesregularlyspaced
scours.

to form buried concentrations,

which were observed
in the channel cross sections.
Figure 8 showsseveralfeaturesof areal heavy
nfineral concentrations in the model channel. The
photographshowsbedrockterraceswith scantcoarse
alluvial cover (left center), rhomboidalmagnetite
streaksare presentat bottomcenter,and a seriesof
regularlyspacedscoursandassociated magnetitecon-
centrationsare presentat top center. The regular
patternof scourswascausedby the standingwavesin
the channel that resulted from the shallow water
depthsandsteepslopes
in themodel. Thusthey,like
thoseof Wertz (1949), are probablyconfinedto
modelstudiesand shouldnot be considered
to repre-
sent field examples.
Scour hollows occur at the confluence of tributaries
in the modelbasin (Fig. 9). Mosleyand Schumm
(1977) suggest that thesescoursmay be a preferred
locationfor placerdepositsbecausescoursare deepest
at the confluence,and the positionof the scour re-
mains in approximatelythe same location. This Fro. 9. Scour and associatedheavy mineral concentration
promotesthe reworkingof sedimentand concentra- at tributary confluence.
424 ADAMS, ZIMPFER, AND McLANE

downstream. Cheneyand Patton (1967) conclude aggrading,the magnetiteis storedin the alluvial fill.
from field evidencethat the concentrationof heavy Superimposedupon this sequenceof magnetite
minerals on or near the bedrock surface is axiomatic. transportand storageare shorterperiodsof transport
False-bottom placers: One feature observed in and storagethat are controlledlocally by internal
l)oth this experiment and in studies by Macke thresholds. Channel behavior in the lower main
(Schumm, 1977, fig. 7-32) is the presenceof mag- channelcan be divided into periodsdominatedby
netite concentrations within the channel fill. These lateral cutting and periodsdominatedby vertical
have beenwidely recognizedin natural depositsas downcutting.Thesealternatingperiodscan be ex-
false-bottomplacers. Two placerdepositsabovethe plained by the concept of intrinsic thresholds
bedrockconcentrationwere recognizedin the Ex- (Schumm,1973). Duringperiodsof lateralactivity
celsior claim in the Sierra Nevada by Lindgren the channelis braidedor meandering(sinuous),is
(1911, fig'. 15) at 8 and 18 in above the be(lrock. aggrading,andmagnetiteis beingstoredin the drain-
Eight payablelevelsseparatedby barren gravelswere agebasin. Duringperiodsdominated by downcutting
present in a 120-meter shaft that failed to reach bed- thechannel is straightor meandering
(lesssinuous),
rockin the Rossgoldfieldof New Zealand(Acheson, is degrading,and magnetiteis beingexportedfrom
p. 119, in Galvin, 1906). ThesefaNe-bottomplacers the drainagebasin.
may interruptthe rapid increasein value as the bed- Three sources(responseto rejuvenation,normal
rock is approached,as is shownin a Yukon terrace bedloadtransport,and valley scarpcollapse)cause
gravel (Koch and Link, 1971, fig. 15.2). fluctuation in the sediment transport rate, control
Terraceplacers: During responseto the base-level channelaggradationand degradation,and determine
dropthe main channelformedmanybedrockterraces channelslope,pattern,and the type of channelactiv-
that were later abandoned when the channel downcut. ity. Channelactivity,in turn, controlsthe storageor
These terraceswere coveredby alluvium and con- transportof magnetitefrom the experimentalbasin
tainedheavymineral concentrations similar to those and,hence,the formationor destructionof placers.
describedfrom the channelfill deposits. These con- The modelpresentedhere suggests that the com-
centrationsindicate that multiple terrace levels may plex response to a singleuplift will supplythe multi-
have beenformed by a singlebase-leveldrop. These fold reworkingof channelalluviumthat is required
terracesand placerscorrespondto the benchor ter- for placerformation. Thus,althoughbasinrejuvena-
race depositsworked in many gold fieldssuchas in tion may destroyexistingplacers,it createsa suit-
the Sierra Nevada of California (gravels to 900 m ableenvironment for theformationof newplacers.
above stream level) describedby Lindgren (1911) The conceptual1nodelmay be used to explain
and at Nome, Alaska (200 m above stream level; placerdepositsrelatedto the SouthernAlps of New
ISndgren, 1933, p. 230). Zealand. Despiterapid uplift and modernerosionof
gold-bearingschists,few of the short, steeprivers of
Processmodelfor placerformation South Westland carry workable placer deposits.
The observationsand results presented in this \Vhere present,theseplacersconsistof small pockets
paper indicate that placer formation can be domi- of coarse"shotty" gold. Here channelslopesare
nated by processesoccurringin the fluvial system too steep,and uplift too rapid, to allow the accumula-
(Schumm,1977). Theseprocesses may be classified tion of muchgold in the activechannel.
into basin processes(dominatedby complex re- Rapid depositionof the erosionproductsoccursin
sponse)and channelprocesses(dominatedby geo- the fiords left by the glacial retreat, but again no
morphicthresholds). workabledepositshavebeenfoundin thesesediments.
Complexresponsecharacterizesthe rejuvenationof Economicdepositsare found only where sediments
the experimentaldrainagebasin. Initially, the lower havebeenreworkedinto marineplacers,for example,
main channel downcutswhile the upper basin re- at Okarito and GillespieBeach.
mains unaffectedby the drop in base level. When q'he older sedimentsof the Ross gold field were
knlckpointsnilgrateinto the upperlasin,the lower depositedin a similar environment,but here con-
mainchannelis floodedxvithexcesssediment andag- tinuousdepositionxvasinterrupted1)yperiodicchan-
grades. Later, when the upper basin comes into nel degradation andeconomic multistoryplacerswere
equilibriumwith the new baselevel, the lower main formed. These false-bottomplacers,which are at
channelwill againdowncutuntil it is alsoin equi- least120 m abovebedrock,are mosteasilyexplained
librium. As this responseoccurs,magnetiteis con- by the conceptsdevelopedhere.
centratedin the channelsand transportedfrom the Basin rejuvenationcausedby uplift is similarto
drainagebasin. In general,when the lower main thatcaused by a dropin baselevel (as in themodel),
channelis degrading,magnetiteis in transport'when therefore,channels in coastalareascut duringglacial
 BASIN DYNAMICS: A MODEL STUDY 425

periodsof low sea level might containhigher con- placersare formedas the resultof complexresponse
centrationsof heavy mineralsthan alluvium, which and the crossingof internalgeomorphicthresholds.
filledthe channelsduringinterglacialperiods. Such
subnlergedfluvial depositshavebeenworkedfor tin Acknowledgments
ore in southeasternAsia, and someAlaskan coastal
\Ve wish to thank Drs. Schumm,Ethridge, and
placersmay alsobe of a similarorigin. Thonlpson,and membersof the 1976 geomorphology
Conclusions seminar for helpful commentson an earlier draft.
The work was supportedby a grant from the U.S.
We hope that the resultspresentedhere will be of Army Research Oce and was completedwhile
generalinterestto geologistsand others involvedin Adams was supportedat ColoradoState University
the understandingof fluvial placers. It shouldbe l)y a scholarshipfrom the Xew Zealand University
stressedthat the resultsof the model experimentmust Grauts Committee.
he interpretedqualitatively,and that someprocesses
in the REF may not he comparableto natural situa- FICTORIA UNIVERSITY
tions. This experimenthas consideredonly a de- WELLINGTON,NEW ZEALAND
grading, rejuvenatedbasin and has not studied the G. L. Z. xN C. F. McL.
associateddepositionalenvironment. The deposition DEPARTMENT OF EARTH ESOURCES
of heavymineralsin an alluvial-fanenvironmentwas COLORADOSTATE UNIVERSITY
the subjectof earlier experimentalwork (Macke, FORTCoLkS, COLORadO 80523
1977) in the REF. g[arch 30, ugust 30, 1977
In this paper both field and model evidencehave
REFERENCES
beenusedto establisha proposedinterpretiveframe-
work (conceptual model) for the formation of Albertsou, M. L., Barton, J. R., and Simons, D. B., 1960,
Fluid mechanics for enginers: Englewood Cliffs, New
placers. We lack the opportunityto test the model Jersey, Prentice-Hall, 562 p.
ourselves,and therefore it is our hope that this Bateman, A.M., 1950, Economicmineral deposits,2nd ed.:
framework will be criticized, discussed,and tested. New York, John Wiley and Sons, 916 p.
Cheney, E. S., and Patton, T. C., 1967, Origin of the bed-
We conclude that: rock valuesof placer deposits: Ecmx. GEOL.,V. 62, p. 852--
853.
1. The REF providesan acceptableanalog model Chorley, R. J., 1967, Models in geography,chap. 3, , Chor-
for placerformation in a natural system;in both the ley, R. J., and Hagget, P., eds., Models in geography:
London, Methuen, 816 p.
REF and the natural systemdepositmorphologyis Galvin, P., ed., 1906, The New Zealand rainlug handbook:
similar. Wellington, New Zealand Government Printer, 589 p.
Gunn, C. B., 1968, Origin of the bedrockvalues of placer de-
2. Colnplex responseand the crossingof internal posits [disc.]: Ecoa. GEOL.,v. 63, p. 86.
geomorphicthresholdscan explain REF channelbe- Hooke, R. L., 1968, Model geology: Prototype and labora-
havior followingbasinrejuvenation. tory streams [disc.]: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 79, p.
391-394.
3. Total sedimentdischargeafter basin rejuvena- Howard, A.D., 1971, Stimulation of stream networks by
tion reachesa peak and then followsan exponential headward growth and branching: Geog. Analysis, v. 3, p.
29-54).
decay curve with superimposed fluctuations.Mag- Hubbert, M. K., 1937, Theory of scalemodelsas applied to
netite dischargedoesnot follow a decaycurve hut is the study of geologicstructures: Geol. Soc. America Bull.,
releasedas a seriesof pulses. v. 48, p. 1459-1520.
Koch, G. S., and Link, R. F., 1971, Statistical analysisof
4. Only a portionof the nlagnetitereleasedduring geologicaldata, vol. 2: New York, John Wiley and Sons,
the rejuvenationremainedin the basin,but muchof 438 p.
Krook, Leendert, 1968, Origin of bedrockvalues of placer de-
this was concentrated in the channeldeposits. posits [disc.]: Ecoa. GF.oL., v. 63, p. 844-846.
5. Basinrejuvenationmay initially destroyexist- I.eopold, L. B., and Wolman, M. G., 1957, River channel
patterns: braided, meandering,and straight: U.S. Geol.
ing placers,but conditionsfollowingrejuvenation Survey Prof. Paper 282-B, 85' p.
are favorableto the formationof nexvplacers. I.indgren, Waldemar, 1911, The tertiary gravels of the Sierra
Nevada of 'California: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 73,
6. Heavy nlineraltransportand storageand, tliu,% 226 p.
placer forniation can le related to channel1)ehavior. -- 1933, Mineral deposits,4th ed.: New York, McGraw-
7. Placersformduringalternateperiodsof mildas- Hill, 930 p.
Macke. D. L., 1977, Stratigraphy and sedimentologyof ex-
gradationand degradationthat result from the ex- perimental alluvial fans: Unpub. M.S. thesis, Colorado
ceedingof the internalgeomorphic thresholdswhich State Univ.
Mosley, M.P., and Schmnm, S. A., 1977, Stream jmctions
may follow rejuvenation. a probable location for bedrock placers: Ecoa. GF.oL., v.
8. Multistory placers with valuable mineral con- 72. p. 691-694.
centrationsare favoredby degradingchannelsbut Parker, R. S., 1977, Experimental study of basin evolution
and its hydrologic implications: Unpub. Ph.D. dissert.,
may also frrni in ag.'ra(ling
systems..51'nltistry Chn-ado State Univ.
 ADAMS ZIMPtR AND MLAN
Schrader, F. C., 1915, Mineral depositsof the Santa Rita and
Patagonia Mountains, Arizona: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull.
582, 373 p.
Schumm, S. A., 1973, Geomorphic thresholds and complex
response of drainage systems, in Morisawa, Marie, ed.,
Fluvial geomorphology: SUNY, Binghamton, N.Y., Pub-
lications in Geomorphology, p. 299-310.
1977, The fluvial system: New York, Wiley Inter-
science,352 p.
Schumm, S. A., and Khan, 1-I. R., 1972, Experimental study
of channel patterns: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 83, p.
1755-1770.
Schumm, S. A., and Parker, R. S., 1973, Implications of com-
plex responseof drainage systems for Quaternary alluvial
stratigraphy: Nature, Phys. Science,v. 243, p. 99-100.
Shepherd, R. G., and Schumm, S. A., 1974, Experimental
study of river incision: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 85, p.
257-268.
Sigov, A. P., Lomayer, A. V., Sigov, A. V., Storozhenko, K.
Y., Khrypor, V. N., and Shub, I. F., 1972, Placers of the
Urals, their formation, distribution, and elements of geo-
morphic prediction: Soviet Geography, v. 13, p. 375-387.
Tuck, Ralph, 1968, Origin of bedrock values of placer de-
posits [disc.]: EcoN. GoL., v. 63, p. 191-193.
Wertz, J. B., 1949, Logarithmic pattern in river placer de-
posits: EcoN. GoL., v. 44, p. 193-209.
\Vilson, E. D., 1961, Gold placers and placering in Arizona:
Arizona Bur. Mines Bull. 168, 124 p.
\omack, W. R., and Schumm, S. A., 1977, Terraces o{
Douglas Creek, northwestern Colorado: An example of
episodicerosion: Geology,v. 5, p. 72-76.