Spatial Variations in Carbon Storage along Headwater Fluvial Networks with Differing Valley Geometry

We distinguish multiple valley types along headwater fluvial networks in the Colorado Front Range based on valley geometry (downstream gradient and valley-bottom width relative to active channel width) and the presence of biotic drivers (beaver dams or channel-spanning logjams associated with old-growth forest) capable of creating a multi-thread channel pattern. Valley type influences storage of fine sediment, organic matter, and carbon. Deep, narrow valleys have limited storage potential, whereas wide, shallow valleys with multi-thread channels have substantial storage potential. Multi-thread channels only occur in the presence of a biotic driver. Given the importance of headwater streams in the global carbon cycle, it becomes important to understand the spatial distribution and magnitude of carbon storage along these streams, as well as the processes governing patterns of storage. We compare carbon stored in three reservoirs: riparian vegetation (live, dead, and litter), instream and floodplain large wood, and floodplain soils for 100-m-long valley segments in seven different valley types. The valley types are (i) laterally confined valleys in old-growth forest, (ii) partly confined valleys in old-growth forest, (iii) laterally unconfined valleys with multi-thread channels in old-growth forest, (iv) laterally unconfined valleys with single-thread channels in old-growth forest, (v) laterally confined valleys in younger forest, (vi) recently abandoned beaver-meadow complexes with multi-thread channels and willow thickets, and (vii) longer abandoned beaver-meadow complexes with single-thread channels and very limited woody vegetation. Preliminary results suggest that, although multi-thread channel segments driven by beavers or logjams cover less than 25 percent of the total length of headwater river networks in the study area, they account for more than three-quarters of the carbon stored along the river network. Historical loss of beavers and old-growth forest has thus likely resulted in continuing loss of carbon storage in these headwater river networks.