hi s., some ideas to bounce off you for comment                                 
                                                                                
goal: to make some simple calculations of peak Q that would be required         
to move average gravel clasts from 1st order hollows in each of the 3           
study areas (based on clast diameter / shape), then convert the peak            
Q to rainfall intensities required as a way of normalizing drainage             
areas for each site.  The rainfall intensities will then be compared            
to known historic records / estimates (e.g. Hurricane Camille, etc.)            
to see if the values are plausible.  Anomalously high values will be            
used to argue that debris slide / flow is the primary transport                 
mechanism, plausible values within known historic range will be used            
to argue that normal stream flow / traction is the primary transport            
mechanism... this is out of Hugh's play book (Mills, 1989)                      
                                                                                
Now for the question: Hugh measured the intermed. axis diameters of             
the 5 largest clasts and averaged them, then plugged data into                  
Costa (1983) regression equations for vel and depth required to                 
move those clasts (eq. 10 and 19). Then determined channel slope                
and hollow profile: vel + depth + slope + profile = Q critical                  
required to move the boulders of given average diameter (future                 
flood discharge estimate rather than paleoflood discharge estimate)             
                                                                                
Q critical is then converted to rainfall intensity using Dunne and              
Leopold equation I=Qp/CA  where I = intensity, Qp = peak Q, C =                 
runoff coefficient, A = drainage basin area (hugh used a C =                    
hi s., some ideas to bounce off you for comment                                 
                                                                                
goal: to make some simple calculations of peak Q that would be required         
to move average gravel clasts from 1st order hollows in each of the 3           
study areas (based on clast diameter / shape), then convert the peak            
Q to rainfall intensities required as a way of normalizing drainage             
areas for each site.  The rainfall intensities will then be compared            
to known historic records / estimates (e.g. Hurricane Camille, etc.)            
to see if the values are plausible.  Anomalously high values will be            
used to argue that debris slide / flow is the primary transport                 
mechanism, plausible values within known historic range will be used            
to argue that normal stream flow / traction is the primary transport            
mechanism... this is out of Hugh's play book (Mills, 1989)                      
                                                                                
Now for the question: Hugh measured the intermed. axis diameters of             
the 5 largest clasts and averaged them, then plugged data into                  
Costa (1983) regression equations for vel and depth required to                 
move those clasts (eq. 10 and 19). Then determined channel slope                
and hollow profile: vel + depth + slope + profile = Q critical                  
required to move the boulders of given average diameter (future                 
flood discharge estimate rather than paleoflood discharge estimate)             
                                                                                
Q critical is then converted to rainfall intensity using Dunne and              
Leopold equation I=Qp/CA  where I = intensity, Qp = peak Q, C =                 
runoff coefficient, A = drainage basin area (hugh used a C =                    
