Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Application of the experimental watershed approach to advance urban watershed precipitation/discharge understanding

  • Published:
Urban Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Reliable methods are required to provide the detailed hydrologic information necessary to improve management of water resources and aquatic ecosystems in developing/urbanizing watersheds. A case study was implemented in a representative 230 km2 mixed-use, urbanizing watershed to advance precipitation/discharge understanding. Precipitation and streamflow were monitored in five sub-watersheds (nested-scale experimental watershed study design), partitioned by dominant land use type. Data were collected at 30-min intervals through the 2009 to 2015 water years. Individual sub-watershed area-normalized flow and runoff coefficients differed by as much as 400%. Two high density, urban sub-watersheds displayed large runoff coefficients indicating disproportionately high flow response to precipitation inputs. Regression analyses of sub-watershed land use characteristics and flow metrics showed strong (i.e. R2 > 0.9) statistically significant (p < 0.05) linear relationships for percentage developed, forest, and agriculture land cover. Observed relationships between land use and flow metrics illustrate the complexity of contrasting and intermingled land use types in urbanizing, mixed-land-use watersheds. Results highlight the variable hydrologic impacts of land use and suggest the potential for vegetation management as a tool for streamflow mediation in urban settings. The work is one of the first to utilize the experimental watershed method to isolate and quantify land use impacts in the context of a contemporary mixed-land-use watershed. Collectively, results emphasize the utility of the method for land and water resource managers seeking science-based information to guide management decisions and more effectively target remediation efforts in contemporary multiple-land-use watersheds.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Booth D, Jackson C (1997) Urbanization of aquatic systems: degradation thresholds, stormwater detection, and the limits of mitigation. J Am Water Resour Assoc 33:1077–1090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Booth D, Hartley D, Jackson R (2002) Forest cover, impervious surface area, and the mitigation of stormwater impacts. J Am Water Resour Assoc 38:835–845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brezonik P, Stadelmann T (2002) Analysis and predictive models of stormwater runoff volumes, loads, and pollutant concentrations from watersheds in the twin cities metropolitan area, Minnesota, USA. Water Res 36:1743–1757

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brown L, Gray R, Hughes R, Meador M (2005) Introduction to the effects of urbanization on stream ecosystems. Am Fish Soc Symp 47:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • City of Columbia, Missouri (2016a) Columbia Missouri water system. https://www.como.gov/WaterandLight/Water/watersystem.php. Accessed 1 Dec 2016

  • City of Columbia, Missouri (2016b) Columbia regional wastewater treatment plant. https://www.como.gov/PublicWorks/Sewer/wwtppg_4.php. Accessed 1 Dec 2016

  • Dottori F, Martina MLV, Todini E (2009) A dynamic rating curve approach to indirect discharge measurement. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 13(6):847–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helsel DR, Hirsch RM (1992) Statistical methods in water resources, vol 49. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Homer CG, Dewitz JA, Yang L, Jin S, Danielson P, Xian G, Coulston J, Herold ND, Wickham JD, Megown K (2015) Completion of the 2011 national land cover database for the conterminous United States-representing a decade of land cover change information. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 81(5):345–354

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper L (2015) A stream physical habitat assessment in an urbanizing watershed of the Central USA. Master’s Thesis, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri

  • Huang D (2012) Quantifying stream bank erosion and deposition rates in a Central U.S. urban watershed. Master’s Thesis, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri

  • Hubbart JA (2011) Urban floodplain management: understanding consumptive water use potential in urban forested floodplains. Stormwater Journal 12(6):56–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbart JA, Link TE, Gravelle JA, Elliot WJ (2007) Timber harvest impacts on water yield in the continental/maritime hydroclimatic region of the United States. For Sci 53(2):169–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbart JA, Freeman G (2010) Sediment laser diffraction: a new approach to an old problem in the central U.S. Stormwater Journal 11:36–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbart JA, Holmes J, Bowman G (2010) TMDLs: improving stakeholder acceptance with science-based allocations. Watershed Sci Bull 1:19–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbart JA, Muzika RM, Huang D, Robinson A (2011) Improving quantitative understanding of bottomland hardwood forest influence on soil water consumption in an urban floodplain. The Watershed Science Bulletin 3:34–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbart JA, Zell C (2013) Considering streamflow trend analyses uncertainty in urbanizing watersheds: a baseflow case study in the Central United States. Earth Interact 17(5):1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hubbart JA, Kellner E, Hooper L, Lupo AR, Market PS, Guinan PE, Stephan K, Fox N, Svoma BM (2014) Localized climate and surface energy flux alterations across an urban gradient in the central US. Energies 7(3):1770–1791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ice GG, Stednick JD (2004) A century of forest and wildland watershed lessons. Society of American Foresters, Bethesda MD, p. 287

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. (2015) Long range water system study, Prepared for: City of Columbia, Water and Light Department, Columbia, Missouri. Available: http://www.como.gov/WaterandLight/Documents/LongRangeWaterStudy.pdf

  • Karwan DL, Gravelle JA, Hubbart JA (2007) Effects of timber harvest on suspended sediment loads in Mica Creek, Idaho. For Sci 53(2):181–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellner E, Hubbart JA (2016) A comparison of the spatial distribution of vadose zone water in forested and agricultural floodplains a century after harvest. Sci Total Environ 542:153–161

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kochendorfer J, Hubbart JA (2010) The relative roles of climate and rural land-use changes in streamflow trends in the upper Mississippi River basin. The American Meteorological Society. Journal of Earth Interactions 14(20):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konrad CP, Booth DB (2005) Hydrologic changes in urban streams and their ecological significance. In American Fisheries Society Symposium 47:157–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Kutta E, Hubbart J (2014) Improving understanding of microclimate heterogeneity within a contemporary plant growth facility to advance climate control and plant productivity. J Plant Sci 2(5):167–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerch RN, Kitchen NR, Baffaut C, Vories ED (2015) Long-term agroecosystem research in the Central Mississippi River basin: Goodwater Creek experimental watershed and regional nutrient water quality data. J Environ Qual 44(1):37–43

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell JJ (2003) Where does water go when it rains? Moving beyond the variable source area concept of rainfall-runoff response. Hydrol Process 17(9):1869–1875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller DE, Vandike JE (1997) Groundwater resources of Missouri (Vol. 2). Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geology and Land Survey

  • Missouri Climate Center (2014) http://climate.missouri.edu/. Accessed: 17 Sept 2014

  • Nichols J, Hubbart JA, Poulton BC (2016) Using macroinvertebrate assemblages and multiple stressors to infer urban stream system condition: a case study in the central US. Urban Ecosystems 19:1–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Richter BD, Sparks RE, Stromberg JC (1997) The natural flow regime. Bioscience 47(11):769–784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savenije HH (1996) The runoff coefficient as the key to moisture recycling. J Hydrol 176(1):219–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz FW, Zhang H (2003) Fundamentals of groundwater. John Wiley & Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Searcy JK (1959) Flow-duration curves. US Government Printing Office, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Stice A (2015) Stormwater fee increases would pay for repairs, upgrades. Columbia Daily Tribune http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/politics/elections/stormwater-fee-increase-would-pay-for-repairs-upgrades/article_2a29f9a9-e480-5097-b7ad-ec34ccc2a817.html. Accessed 1 Dec 2016

  • Sunde MG, He HS, Zhou B, Hubbart JA, Spicci A (2014) Imperviousness change analysis tool (I-CAT) for simulating pixel-level urban growth. Landsc Urban Plan 124:104–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunde MG, He HS, Hubbart JA, Scroggins C (2016) Forecasting streamflow response to increased imperviousness in an urbanizing Midwestern watershed using a coupled modeling approach. Appl Geogr 72:14–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svoboda M, LeComte D, Hayes M, Heim R, Gleason K, Angel J, Rippey B, Tinker R, Palecki M, Stooksbury D, Miskus D, Stephens S (2002) The drought monitor. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 83(8):1181–1190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (2016) National Inventory of Dams. http://nid.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=838:12. Accessed 29 Nov 2016

  • United States Census Bureau (USCB) (2015) http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/29/2915670.html. Accessed 20 Sept 2015

  • Vogel RM, Fennessey NM (1994) Flow-duration curves. I: new interpretation and confidence intervals. J Water Resour Plan Manag 120(4):485–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wahren A, Feger KH, Schwarzel K, Münch A (2009) Land-use effects on flood generation-considering soil hydraulic measurements in modelling. Adv Geosci 21:99–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh CJ, Roy AH, Feminella JW, Cottingham PD, Groffman PM, Morgan RP II (2005) The urban stream syndrome: current knowledge and the search for a cure. J N Am Benthol Soc 24(3):706–723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson DR, Stokes RA, Ruprecht JK (1987) Response of input and output of water and chloride to clearing for agriculture. J Hydrol 94(1–2):1–28

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zeiger SJ, Hubbart JA (2015) Urban stormwater temperature surges: a central US watershed study. Hydrology 2(4):193–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeiger SJ, Hubbart JA, Anderson SH, Stambaugh MC (2016) Quantifying and modelling urban stream temperature: a central US watershed study. Hydrol Process

  • Zeiger SJ, Hubbart JA (2016) Nested-scale nutrient flux in a mixed-land-use urbanizing watershed. Hydrol Process 30:1475–1490

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zell C, Kellner E, Hubbart JA (2015) Forested and agricultural land use impacts on subsurface floodplain storage capacity using coupled vadose zone-saturated zone modeling. Environ Earth Sci 74:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Q, Ball WP, Moyer DL (2016) Decadal-scale export of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment from the Susquehanna River basin, USA: analysis and synthesis of temporal and spatial patterns. Sci Total Environ 563:1016–1029

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang YK, Schilling KE (2006) Increasing streamflow and baseflow in Mississippi River since the 1940s: effect of land use change. J Hydrol 324(1):412–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou B, He HS, Nigh TA, Schulz JH (2012) Mapping and analyzing change of impervious surface for two decades using multi-temporal Landsat imagery in Missouri. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 18:195–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding was provided by the Missouri Department of Conservation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 7 through the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (P. N: G08-NPS-17) under Section 319 of the Clean Water Act. Additional funding was provided by partners of the Hinkson Creek Watershed Collaborative Adaptive Management program. Results presented may not reflect the views of the sponsors and no official endorsement should be inferred. Special thanks are due to Sean Zeiger. Collaborators include (but are not limited to) Boone County Public Works, City of Columbia, University of Missouri, and the U.S. Geological Survey.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Natural Resources, University of Missouri, 203-T ABNR Building, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA

    Elliott Kellner

  2. Institute of Water Security and Science, Davis College, Schools of Agriculture and Food, and Natural Resources, West Virginia University, 3107 Agricultural Sciences Building, Morgantown, WV, 26506, USA

    Elliott Kellner & Jason A. Hubbart

Authors
  1. Elliott Kellner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jason A. Hubbart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elliott Kellner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kellner, E., Hubbart, J.A. Application of the experimental watershed approach to advance urban watershed precipitation/discharge understanding. Urban Ecosyst 20, 799–810 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-016-0631-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-016-0631-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation