Cost effective stream-gaging strategies for the Lower Colorado River basin; the Blythe field office operations

Moss, Marshall E.; Gilroy, Edward J.

doi:10.3133/ofr801048

Cited by 54 publications

(143 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

141

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Long-term trends in the discharge-rating shifts may occur because of natural or anthropogenic activities upstream. For instance, Moss and Gilroy (1980) found that impoundment of sediments behind Davis Dam resulted in the degradation of the channel below the dam and caused a long-term trend in the discharge-rating shifts for the Colorado River below Davis Dam.…”

Section: Streamflow-gaging Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Burkham and Dawdy (1968) put forth the assumption that the uncertainty in the discharge-rating shift is the major source of uncertainty in computed discharges. Moss and Gilroy (1980) also used this assumption and developed a method for estimating the standard error of the annual discharge that considers the serial correlation of errors in the discharge-rating shifts. Neglecting this serial correlation may result in an underestimated uncertainty in the annual discharge (Moss and Gilroy, 1980).…”

Section: Previous Error-estimation Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moss and Gilroy (1980) also used this assumption and developed a method for estimating the standard error of the annual discharge that considers the serial correlation of errors in the discharge-rating shifts. Neglecting this serial correlation may result in an underestimated uncertainty in the annual discharge (Moss and Gilroy, 1980). The estimates of the standard error of the annual discharge presented in this study were determined by using a modified version of the Moss and Gilroy (1980) method.…”

Section: Previous Error-estimation Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Neglecting this serial correlation may result in an underestimated uncertainty in the annual discharge (Moss and Gilroy, 1980). The estimates of the standard error of the annual discharge presented in this study were determined by using a modified version of the Moss and Gilroy (1980) method. The modifications include use of either the Sauer and Meyer (1992) method or semivariograms to estimate the uncertainty in discharge measurements, rather than the Carter and Anderson (1963) method.…”

Section: Previous Error-estimation Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This method was expanded by Sauer and Meyer (1992). Estimates of the standard error of discharge measurements are used, along with other information, to determine estimates of the standard error of computed discharges (Burkham and Dawdy, 1968;Moss and Gilroy, 1980;Wahlin and others, 1997). Burkham and Dawdy (1968) put forth the assumption that the uncertainty in the discharge-rating shift is the major source of uncertainty in computed discharges.…”

Section: Previous Error-estimation Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Standard errors of annual discharge and change in reservoir content data from selected stations in the lower Colorado River streamflow-gaging station network, 1995-99

Anning¹

2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Streamflow-gaging Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Error-estimation Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Error-estimation Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Error-estimation Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Error-estimation Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Standard errors of annual discharge and change in reservoir content data from selected stations in the lower Colorado River streamflow-gaging station network, 1995-99

Anning¹

2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cost-effective network design for groundwater flow monitoring

Andričević

1990

Stochastic Hydrol Hydraul

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development of a decision-making methodology to design a water quality monitoring network

Keum

Kaluarachchi

2015

Environ Monit Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of water quality monitoring stations in the USA has decreased over the past few decades. Scarcity of observations can easily produce prediction uncertainty due to unreliable model calibration. An effective water quality monitoring network is important not only for model calibration and water quality prediction but also for resources management. Redundant or improperly located monitoring stations may cause increased monitoring costs without improvement to the understanding of water quality in watersheds. In this work, a decision-making methodology is proposed to design a water quality monitoring network by providing an adequate number of monitoring stations and their approximate locations at the eight-digit hydrologic unit codes (HUC8) scale. The proposed methodology is demonstrated for an example at the Upper Colorado River Basin (UCRB), where salinity is a serious concern. The level of monitoring redundancy or scarcity is defined by an index, station ratio (SR), which represents a monitoring density based on water quality load originated within a subbasin. By comparing the number of stations from a selected target SR with the available number of stations including the actual and the potential stations, the suggested number of stations in each subbasin was decided. If monitoring stations are primarily located in the low salinity loading subbasins, the average actual SR tends to increase, and vice versa. Results indicate that the spatial distribution of monitoring locations in 2011 is concentrated on low salinity loading subbasins, and therefore, additional monitoring is required for the high salinity loading subbasins. The proposed methodology shows that the SR is a simple and a practical indicator for monitoring density.

show abstract

Cost effective stream-gaging strategies for the Lower Colorado River basin; the Blythe field office operations

Cited by 54 publications

References 6 publications

Standard errors of annual discharge and change in reservoir content data from selected stations in the lower Colorado River streamflow-gaging station network, 1995-99

Standard errors of annual discharge and change in reservoir content data from selected stations in the lower Colorado River streamflow-gaging station network, 1995-99

Cost-effective network design for groundwater flow monitoring

Development of a decision-making methodology to design a water quality monitoring network

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About