Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher.
Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?
Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
-
Flood peak magnitudes and frequency estimates are key components of any effective nationwide flood risk management and flood damage abatement program. In this study, we evaluated normalized peak design discharges (Qp) for 1,387 hydrologic unit code 16 to 20 (HUC16-20) watersheds in the White Mountain National Forest (WMNF), New Hampshire and in five Experimental Forest (EF) regions across the United States managed by USDA Forest Service (USDA-FS). Nonstationary regional frequency analysis (RFA) and single site frequency analysis (FA) with long-term high-resolution observed streamflow data along with the deterministic Rational Method (RM) and semi-empirical United States Geological Survey regional regression equation (USGS-RRE) were used. Additionally, a hydrologic vulnerability assessment was performed for 194 road culverts as a result of extreme precipitation-induced flooding on gauged and ungauged watersheds in the Hubbard Brook EF (HBR) within the WMNF. The RM outperformed the USGS-RRE in predicting Qp in the gauged and ungauged HUC16-20 watersheds of WMNF and in three other small, high-relief forest headwater watersheds—Coweeta Hydrologic Lab EF’s watershed-14, and watershed-27 in North Carolina and HJ Andrews EF’s watershed 8 in Oregon. However, the USGS-RRE performed better for larger watersheds, such as the Fraser EF’s St. Louis watershed in Colorado and the Santee EF’s watershed 80 in South Carolina. About 31 %, 26 %, and 56 % of the culverts at the HBR site could not accommodate the 100-yr Qp estimated by RFA, RM and USGS-RRE, respectively. Based on the chosen RIs and techniques, it is determined that except for one culvert with diameter = 0.91 m (36 in.), none of the culverts with diameter of 0.75 m (30 in.) or larger are hydrologically vulnerable. Our results suggest that the observation based RFA works best where multiple gauges are available to extrapolate information for ungauged watersheds, otherwise, RM is best-suited for smaller headwater watersheds and USGS-RRE for larger watersheds. Results from the hydrologic vulnerability analysis revealed that replacing undersized culverts with new culverts of diameter ≥ 0.75-m will improve flood resiliency, provided that the structure is geomorphologically safe (with minimal effects of debris flow, erosion, and sedimentation) and allows for both bank-full discharge and necessary fish passage within that design limit. This study has implications in managing road culverts and crossings at Forest Service and other forested lands for their resiliency to extreme precipitation and flooding hazards induced by climate change.more » « less
-
Abstract Urgency of Precipitation Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) estimation using the most recent data has grown significantly due to recent intense precipitation and cloud burst circumstances impacting infrastructure caused by climate change. Given the continually available digitized up-to-date, long-term, and fine resolution precipitation dataset from the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service’s (USDAFS) Experimental Forests and Ranges (EF) rain gauge stations, it is both important and relevant to develop precipitation IDF from onsite dataset (Onsite-IDF) that incorporates the most recent time period, aiding in the design, and planning of forest road-stream crossing structures (RSCS) in headwaters to maintain resilient forest ecosystems. Here we developed Onsite-IDFs for hourly and sub-hourly duration, and 25-yr, 50-yr, and 100-yr design return intervals (RIs) from annual maxima series (AMS) of precipitation intensities (PIs) modeled by applying Generalized Extreme Value (GEV) analysis and L-moment based parameter estimation methodology at six USDAFS EFs and compared them with precipitation IDFs obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Atlas 14 (NOAA-Atlas14). A regional frequency analysis (RFA) was performed for EFs where data from multiple precipitation gauges are available. NOAA’s station-based precipitation IDFs were estimated for comparison using RFA (NOAA-RFA) at one of the EFs where NOAA-Atlas14 precipitation IDFs are unavailable. Onsite-IDFs were then evaluated against the PIs from NOAA-Atlas14 and NOAA-RFA by comparing their relative differences and storm frequencies. Results show considerable relative differences between the Onsite- and NOAA-Atlas14 (or NOAA-RFA) IDFs at these EFs, some of which are strongly dependent on the storm durations and elevation of precipitation gauges, particularly in steep, forested sites of H. J. Andrews (HJA) and Coweeta Hydrological Laboratory (CHL) EFs. At the higher elevation gauge of HJA EF, NOAA-RFA based precipitation IDFs underestimate PI of 25-yr, 50-yr, and 100-yr RIs by considerable amounts for 12-h and 24-h duration storm events relative to the Onsite-IDFs. At the low-gradient Santee (SAN) EF, the PIs of 3- to 24-h storm events with 100-yr frequency (or RI) from NOAA-Atlas14 gauges are found to be equivalent to PIs of more frequent storm events (25–50-yr RI) as estimated from the onsite dataset. Our results recommend use of the Onsite-IDF estimates for the estimation of design storm peak discharge rates at the higher elevation catchments of HJA, CHL, and SAN EF locations, particularly for longer duration events, where NOAA-based precipitation IDFs underestimate the PIs relative to the Onsite-IDFs. This underscores the importance of long-term high resolution EF data for new applications including ecological restorations and indicates that planning and design teams should use as much local data as possible or account for potential PI inconsistencies or underestimations if local data are unavailable.more » « less
-
This manuscript aims to present the framework for the development of a four-stage tool for sustainable groundwater management as one of the highly interactive three-day workshop products. The four stages in the tool are (1) representing the target system, (2) description of the target system using components of DPSIR framework (drivers, pressures, state, impact, responses), (3) development of causal chains/loops, and (4) identifying knowledge gaps and articulating next steps. The tool is an output from the two-day Indo-US bilateral workshop on "Integrated Hydrochemical Modeling for Sustainable Development and Management of Water Supply Aquifers”. Four case studies from the invited talks, panel discussions, and breakout sessions were selected to demonstrate the developed four-stage framework to a coastal aquifer (India) and in high plains in Floridian, Piedmont, and Blueridge aquifers (United States of America). The developed tool can be practically used in the development of strategies for the sustainable use of groundwater in various regions around the world (e.g., planning/building/maintaining groundwater recharging structures). Continued work can result in establishing a center for excellence as well as developing a network project. The recommendations from the workshop were: (1) developing vulnerability analysis models for groundwater managers; (2) treatment and new ways of using low-quality groundwater; (3) adopting groundwater recharge; (4) mitigating pollutants getting into the aquifer; and (5) reducing groundwater use. This study provides a framework for future researchers to study the groundwater table related to the effectiveness of water recharging structures, developing a quantitative model from the framework. Finally, recommendations for a future study are more data collection on groundwater quality/recharge as well as enhancing outreach activities for sustainable groundwater management.more » « less
An official website of the United States government
