Estimation of base flow on ungaged, periodically measured streams in small watersheds in western Pennsylvania

Hittle, Elizabeth; Risser, Dennis W.

doi:10.3133/sir20185150

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings indicated that the trend of DACP reversed due to open cut mining and only went back again when it was also affected by underground mining (Figure ). The results confirmed that the increase in baseflow was caused by open cut mining, which is similar to increased baseflow durations in mined catchments in the previous studies (Hittle & Risser, ). The increased baseflow is likely caused by the loss of evapotranspiration of vegetation removal and the change in overland flow and infiltration associated with landscape changes.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Dewatering activities to sustain the underground mining operations has drastically deceased groundwater level, which affected the recharge between groundwater and baseflow, resulting in Water Resources Research a reduction in baseflow and zero streamflow when precipitation is minimal (Abiye et al, 2018). Subsidence and large voids due to underground mining activities may enhance the effects of increasing hydraulic conductivity and the capacity of the subsurface water storage, which may result in the reduction of baseflows (Booth, 2002(Booth, , 2007Hittle & Risser, 2019). More research is needed to determine if these response mechanisms are consistent across different regions and when or how they vary with mining practices.…”

Section: Uncertainties Under the Climate Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The combination of the two makes direct interpretation of open cut mining effects difficult. Greater hydraulic conductivity and subsurface storage may lower groundwater levels in the mining affected area, resulting in the reduction or removal of baseflow and extending periods of zero streamflow when runoff and recharge from precipitation are minimal (Hittle & Risser, 2019). Integrated ecosystem service and trade-offs modeling indicates that cumulative impacts associated with multiple mines' interaction occurred, but the influence of these interactions was relatively weak (Wang et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Coal Mining Impacts on Baseflow Detected Using Paired Catchments

Sun

Song

Zhang

et al. 2020

Water Resources Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large‐scale coal mining not only disturbs natural landscapes but also alters catchment hydrological processes. Although investigating how mining activities such as open cut and/or underground mining change catchment baseflow is critical for understanding mining‐related hydrological mechanisms and for helping water resource management, published data on these changes have not been well documented. This study uses data‐driven approaches to examine how baseflow changes in four sets of paired catchments in the Hunter River Basin in Australia, which is one of the most intensive mining regions across the globe. The difference of cumulative anomaly percentage and double mass curves are used to detect the changes in baseflow and to identify the potential mining impacts. Our results show that underground mining has led to a decline in baseflow, while open cut mining has tended to increase baseflow, and significantly changed the baseflow trend for catchments where underground and open cut mining coexist. The mining impact signal, however, is on the top of regional climate change impacts that dominate baseflow annual variability. The data‐driven investigation cannot separate impacts due to multiple and overlapping disturbances of mining activities but provides insight and guidance for hydrological modeling to simulate mining impacts on hydrological regimes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%