Whatever the cause of their unequal velocities swift and slow streams corrade their valleys differently. The erosion of a swift stream is chiefly at the bottom of its channel. The sluggish stream lowers its channel less rapidly, while lateral erosion is relatively more important. The result is that slow streams increase the width of their valleys more than the depth, while swift streams increase the depth more than the width. It follows that slow streams develop flats, while swift ones do not. Not only is a slow stream more likely to have a flat, and therefore a better chance to meander, but it is more likely to take advantage of opportunities in this line, for a slow stream gets out of the way for such obstacles as it may encounter, while a swift stream is much more likely to get obstacles out of its way.
Special phases of corrasion are introduced where waterfalls and other peculiarities dependent on inequalities of rock resistance occur.
Solution.—In most cases the solution effected by a stream is much less important than its mechanical work. Only when conditions are unfavorable to the latter, is solution the chief factor in the excavation of a valley. This may be the case where a stream’s bed is over soluble rock, such as limestone, and where the stream is clear, or its gradient so low that its current is sluggish. The solvent power of water is not influenced by the presence of sediment, though the presence of sediment offers the water a greater surface on which to work.
CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE RATE OF EROSION.
In considering the rate of erosion, both the work of the stream in its valley and that of the general run-off are to be considered. The conditions which favor the most rapid erosion in a stream’s channel are not necessarily those which determine most rapid degradation in the basin outside of the valley.
The Influence of Declivity.
In general the greater the declivity the more rapid the rate of erosion, whether in the stream’s channel or on the slopes above it. The truth of this conclusion is illustrated by the great erosive power of swift streams as compared with slow ones.
It does not follow, however, that high declivity favors each element of erosion. The effect of declivity on weathering is far from simple. For example, great declivity, by allowing more of the rainfall to flow off over the surface, and by causing it to flow off more promptly, restricts the work of solution, and therefore of decomposition, both at the surface and beneath it. High declivity is also unfavorable to the growth of vegetation, and so to the wedge-work of roots. On the other hand, a given amount of wedge-work of roots and ice is more effective where the slope is steep than where it is gentle, for such materials as are loosened descend the slopes more readily. The prompt removal of weathered materials, by exposing fresh surfaces of rock, accelerates weathering. The total amount of weathering may therefore not be diminished by the increase of slope, even though certain of its processes are hindered.
The effect of high declivity on transportation, the second element of erosion, is too patent to need explanation.
Corrasion likewise is favored by high declivity, for the abrasive power of a stream increases as the square of its velocity. With corrasive power increased, corrasion will also be increased if the water has tools to work with. Since high declivity greatly increases both the transporting and the corrasive power of running water, and favors certain elements of weathering, it is clear that the aggregate effect of high declivity is to favor erosion, whether in the channel of the stream or on the general surface of its drainage basin.