Advertisement

Biogeochemistry

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 177–197 | Cite as

Stream chemistry and hydrologic pathways during snowmelt in a small watershed adjacent Lake Superior

  • R. Stottlemyer
  • D. Toczydlowski
Article

Abstract

In regions with airborne contaminants and large snowpacks, there is concern over the impact that snowmelt chemical “pulses” — periods of sharp increase in meltwater solute concentration — could have on aquatic resources during spring runoff. A major variable in determining such an effect is the flow path of snowmelt solutes to the stream or lake. From December 1988, to late April 1989, the quality and quantity of precipitation, snowmelt, soil solution and streamwater were measured in a 176-ha gauged watershed on the south shore of Lake Superior. The main objectives were to (1) examine the change in flow path meltwaters take to the stream during distinct winter and spring hydrologic periods, (2) quantify ecosystem-level ion budgets prior to, during, and following snowmelt, and (3) examine if streamwater chemistry might be a sensitive indicator of change in ecosystem flow paths. Prior to peak snowmelt, groundwater made up 80% of stream discharge. During peak snowmelt, the groundwater level rose to the soil surface resulting in lateral water movement through near-surface macropores and as overland flow. Near the end of snowmelt, melt-waters exerted a piston action on deeper soil solution again increasing its relative contribution to streamwater discharge. Net groundwater drawdown during the study resulted in streamwater discharge about equal to precipitation inputs. Unfrozen soils and brief mid-winter thaws resulted in steady snowmelt throughout early and mid-winter. The snowpack lost > 50% of most ions prior to the period of major snowmelt and high stream discharge in late March and early April. Snowmelt and streamwater NO3 and NH4 pulses occurred before the period of overland flow and peak streamwater discharge (April 4–24). During overland flow, stream discharge of total N, P, DOC, and AI peaked. Nutrient budgets computed for distinct hydrologic periods were much more helpful in explaining ecosystem pathways and processes than were changes in solute concentration. For the study period, watershed base cation (CB) discharge was 23 times input and SO42− discharge exceeded input by 42%. H+ was the most strongly conserved ion with output < 0.2% of input. Also conserved were NH4+ with only 1.4% of input leaving the ecosystem and NO3 with output equal to 9.4% of input.

Key words

Lake Superior nutrient budgets snow chemistry snowmelt stream chemistry watershed 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abrahams PW, Tranter M, Davies TD & Blackwood IL (1989) Geochemical studies in a remote Scottish upland catchment: II. Streamwater chemistry during snow-melt. Water, Air, and Soil Pollut. 43: 231–248Google Scholar
  2. Cadle SH, Dasch JM & Grossnickle NE (1984) Retention and release of chemical species by a northern Michigan snowpack. Water, Air, Soil Pollut. 22: 303–319Google Scholar
  3. Driscoll CT & Newton RM (1985) Chemical characteristics of Adirondack lakes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 19: 1018–1024Google Scholar
  4. Glass G & Loucks O (1986) Implications of a gradient in acid and ion deposition across the Northern Great Lakes States. Environ. Sci. & Technol. 20: 35–43Google Scholar
  5. Jeffries DS, Cox CM & Dillon PJ (1979) Depression of pH in lakes and streams in Central Ontario during snowmelt. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 26: 640–646Google Scholar
  6. Kelso JRM, Minns CK, Lipsit JH & Jeffries DS (1986) Headwater lake chemistry during the spring freshet in North-Central Ontario. Water, Air, Soil Pollut. 29: 245–259Google Scholar
  7. LaZerte BD & Dillon PJ (1984) Relative importance of anthropogenic versus natural sources of acidity in lakes and streams of Central Ontario. Can J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 41: 1664–1677Google Scholar
  8. Likens GE, Bormann FH, Pierce RS, Eaton, JS & Johnson NM (1977) Biogeochemistry of a Forested Ecosystem. Springer-Verlag, Inc., New York, 146 p.Google Scholar
  9. Maule CP & Stein J (1990) Hydrologic flow path definition and partitioning of spring meltwater. Water Resour. Res. 26 (12): 2959–2970Google Scholar
  10. Miller JB, Oberg JL & Sieger T Jr (1984) Water resources data for Michigan: water year 1984. U.S. Geol. Surv. Water Data Rept. MI-84, 276 p.Google Scholar
  11. Mollitor AV & Raynal DJ (1982) Acid precipitation and ionic movements in Adirondack forest soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 46: 137–141Google Scholar
  12. Mulholland PJ, Wilson GV & Jardine PM (1990) Hydrogeochemical response of a forested watershed to storms: Effects of preferential flow along shallow and deep pathways. Water Resour. Res. 26 (12): 3021–3036Google Scholar
  13. Nicolson JA (1988) Water and chemical budgets for terrestrial basins at the Turkey Lakes watershed. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 45 (Suppl. 1): 88–95Google Scholar
  14. NOAA (1986) Climatological data of Michigan. National Oceanogr. Atmos. Admin., Vol. 100, Nos. 1–4Google Scholar
  15. Peters NE (1984) Comparison of air and soil temperature as forested sites in the westcentral Adirondack Mountains. Northeast. Environ. Sci. 3: 67–72Google Scholar
  16. Reuss JO & Johnson DW (1986) Acid deposition and the acidification of soils and waters. Ecol. Studies # 59, Springer-Verlag, NY, 119 p.Google Scholar
  17. Roberge J & Plamondon AP (1987) Snowmelt runoff pathways in a boreal forest hillslope, the role of pipe throughflow. J. Hydrol. 95: 39–54Google Scholar
  18. Schindler DW, Beaty KG, Fee EJ, Cruikshank DR, DeBruyn ER, Findlay DL, Linsey GA, Shearer JA, Stainton MP & Turner MA (1990) Effects of climate warming on lakes of the central boreal forest. Science 250: 967–970Google Scholar
  19. Semkin RG & Jeffries DS (1988) Chemistry of atmospheric deposition, the snowpack, and snowmelt in the Turkey Lakes watershed. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 45 (Suppl. 1): 38–46Google Scholar
  20. Stottlemyer R (1982) Variation in ecosystem sensitivity and response to anthropogenic atmospheric inputs, Upper Great Lake region. In: Johnson AI & Clark RA (Eds) Int. Symp. Hydrometeorology (pp 79–83). American Water Resour. Assoc., Bethesda, MDGoogle Scholar
  21. Stottlemyer R (1987) Snowpack ion accumulation and loss in a Lake Superior Basin watershed. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 44 (11): 1812–1819Google Scholar
  22. Stottlemyer R & Hanson D Jr (1989) Atmospheric deposition and ionic concentrations in Forest Soils of Isle Royale National Park, Michigan. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 52: 270–274Google Scholar
  23. Stottlemyer R & Rutkowski D (1990) Multi-year trends in snowpack ion accumulation and loss, Northern Michigan. Water Resour. Res 26 (4): 721–737Google Scholar
  24. Stottlemyer R & Toczydlowski D (1990) Pattern of solute movement from snow into an Upper Michigan stream. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 47(2): 290–300Google Scholar
  25. Stottlemyer R & Troendle CA (1987) Trends in streamwater chemistry and input-output balances, Fraser Experimental Forest, Colorado. US Forest Service Rocky Mtn. For. Range Expt. Sta. Res. Pap. RM-275, 9 p.Google Scholar
  26. Wels C, Cornett RJ & LeZerte BD (1990) Groundwater and wetland contributions to stream acidification: An isotopic analysis. Water Resour. Res. 26 (12): 2993–3003Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Stottlemyer
    • 1
  • D. Toczydlowski
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesMichigan Technological UniversityHoughtonUSA

Personalised recommendations