skip to main content

Search for: All records

Award ID contains: 1652293

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.

  1. Green infrastructure is an increasingly popular approach to mitigate widespread degradation of urban waters from stormwater pollution. However, many stormwater best management practices (BMPs) have inconsistent water quality performance and are limited to on-site, land-based deployments. To address basin-wide pollutant loads still reaching urban streams, hyporheic zone engineering has been proposed as an in-stream treatment strategy. Recognizing that regulator and practitioner perspectives are essential for innovation in the water sector, we interviewed U.S. water management professionals about the perceived risks, opportunities, and knowledge gaps related to in-stream stormwater treatment. We used engineered hyporheic zones as a case study to understand interviewee perspectives on an emerging class of in-stream treatment technologies. Interviews revealed that many considerations for in-stream stormwater treatment are common to land-based BMPs, but in-stream BMPs have additional unique design and siting requirements. Here, we synthesize practitioner goals, their recommendations on in-stream BMP design, and open research questions related to in-stream BMPs. Many interviewees suggested pairing engineered hyporheic zones with other BMPs in a treatment train to improve in-stream treatment, while simultaneously reducing risk and cost. We discuss how treatment trains and other strategies might also help overcome regulatory hurdles for innovative stormwater treatment.
  2. Abstract. A comprehensive set of measurements and calculated metricsdescribing physical, chemical, and biological conditions in the rivercorridor is presented. These data were collected in a catchment-wide,synoptic campaign in the H. J. Andrews ExperimentalForest (Cascade Mountains, Oregon, USA) in summer 2016 during low-dischargeconditions. Extensive characterization of 62 sites including surface water,hyporheic water, and streambed sediment was conducted spanning 1st- through5th-order reaches in the river network. The objective of the sample designand data acquisition was to generate a novel data set to support scaling ofriver corridor processes across varying flows and morphologic forms presentin a river network. The data are available at https://doi.org/10.4211/hs.f4484e0703f743c696c2e1f209abb842 (Ward, 2019).
  3. Abstract. Although most field and modeling studies of river corridorexchange have been conducted at scales ranging from tens to hundreds of meters,results of these studies are used to predict their ecological andhydrological influences at the scale of river networks. Further complicatingprediction, exchanges are expected to vary with hydrologic forcing and thelocal geomorphic setting. While we desire predictive power, we lack acomplete spatiotemporal relationship relating discharge to the variation ingeologic setting and hydrologic forcing that is expected across a riverbasin. Indeed, the conceptual model of Wondzell (2011) predicts systematicvariation in river corridor exchange as a function of (1) variation inbaseflow over time at a fixed location, (2) variation in discharge withlocation in the river network, and (3) local geomorphic setting. To testthis conceptual model we conducted more than 60 solute tracer studiesincluding a synoptic campaign in the 5th-order river network of the H. J. Andrews Experimental Forest (Oregon, USA) and replicate-in-time experimentsin four watersheds. We interpret the data using a series of metricsdescribing river corridor exchange and solute transport, testing forconsistent direction and magnitude of relationships relating these metricsto discharge and local geomorphic setting. We confirmed systematic decreasein river corridor exchange space through the river networks, from headwatersto the larger main stem. However, we did not find systematicmore »variation withchanges in discharge through time or with local geomorphic setting. Whileinterpretation of our results is complicated by problems with the analyticalmethods, the results are sufficiently robust for us to conclude that space-for-timeand time-for-space substitutions are not appropriate in our study system.Finally, we suggest two strategies that will improve the interpretability oftracer test results and help the hyporheic community develop robust datasets that will enable comparisons across multiple sites and/or dischargeconditions.« less