Quantitative comparisons of the morphometry of glaciated and fluvial valleys in central Idaho were used to investigate the differences in valley relief and width in otherwise similar geologic and geomorphic settings. The local relief, width, and crosssectional area of valleys were measured using GIS software to extract information from USGS digital elevation models. Hillslope gradients were also measured using GIS software. Power-law relationships for local valley relief, width, and cross-sectional area as a function of drainage area were developed. Local valley relief in glaciated valleys relates to drainage area with a power-law exponent similar to fluvial valleys, but glaciated valleys are deeper for a given drainage area. Local valley width in glaciated valleys is greater than in fluvial valleys, but the exponent of the power-law relationship to drainage area is similar in both valley types. Local valley cross-sectional area in glaciated valleys increases with drainage area with a power-law exponent similar to fluvial valleys, however, glacial valleys have roughly 80% greater cross-sectional area. Steep valley walls in glaciated basins increase the potential for bedrock landsliding relative to fluvial basins. Both the Olympic Mountains of Washington and valleys in central Idaho show relationships in which glaciated valleys are up to 30% deeper than fluvial valleys despite differences in lithology, tectonic setting, and climate.

Hyporheic exchange is now widely acknowledged as a key driver of ecosystem processes in many streams. Yet stream ecologists have been slow to adopt nuanced hydrologic frameworks developed and applied by engineers and hydrologists to describe the relationship between water storage, water age, and water balance in finite hydrosystems such as hyporheic zones. Here, in the context of hyporheic hydrology, we summarize a well-established mathematical framework useful for describing hyporheic hydrology, while also applying the framework heuristically to visualize the relationships between water age, rates of hyporheic exchange, and water volume within hyporheic zones. Building on this heuristic application, we discuss how improved accuracy in the conceptualization of hyporheic exchange can yield a deeper understanding of the role of the hyporheic zone in stream ecosystems. Although the equations presented here have been well-described for decades, our aim is to make the mathematical basis as accessible as possible and to encourage broader understanding among aquatic ecologists of the implications of tailed age distributions commonly observed in water discharged from and stored within hyporheic zones. Our quantitative description of “hyporheic hydraulic geometry,” associated visualizations, and discussion offer a nuanced and realistic understanding of hyporheic hydrology to aid in considering hyporheic exchange in the context of river and stream ecosystem science and management.