Forest operations, extreme flooding events, and considerations for hydrologic modeling in the Appalachians—A review

Eisenbies, Mark H.; Aust, W. Michael; Burger, James A.; Adams, Mary Beth

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2007.01.051

Cited by 119 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 195 publications

(328 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Logging roads cut into steep hillsides can intercept shallow subsurface flowpaths from upland hillslopes, thereby delivering this water to the stream channel as surface runoff [36]. Because vegetation is usually reestablished after logging operations and the catchment structure is relatively unaltered, the impact of harvesting on streamflow is generally thought to be short-lived, though dense and poorly constructed logging road networks can prolong the impact [37].…”

Section: Landuse and Land Cover Changesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mountaintop Removal Mining and Catchment Hydrology

Miller

Zégre

2014

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mountaintop mining and valley fill (MTM/VF) coal extraction, practiced in the Central Appalachian region, represents a dramatic landscape-scale disturbance. MTM operations remove as much as 300 m of rock, soil, and vegetation from ridge tops to access deep coal seams and much of this material is placed in adjacent headwater streams altering landcover, drainage network, and topography. In spite of its scale, extent, and potential for continued use, the effects MTM/VF on catchment hydrology is poorly understood. Previous reviews focus on water quality and ecosystem health impacts, but little is known about how MTM/VF affects hydrology, particularly the movement and storage of water, hence the hydrologic processes that ultimately control flood generation, water chemistry, and biology. This paper aggregates the existing knowledge about the hydrologic impacts of MTM/VF to identify areas where further scientific investigation is needed. While contemporary surface mining generally increases peak and total runoff, the limited MTM/VF studies reveal significant variability in hydrologic response. Significant knowledge gaps relate to limited understanding of hydrologic processes in these systems. Until the hydrologic impact of this practice is better understood, efforts to reduce water quantity and quality problems and ecosystem degradation will be difficult to achieve.

show abstract

Section: Landuse and Land Cover Changesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mountaintop Removal Mining and Catchment Hydrology

Miller

Zégre

2014

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bruijnzeel (2004) notes that with human population increasing rapidly in some parts of the world (with associated increases in living standards), per capita demand for water, timber and other forest products is increasing, and pressure on the world's remaining forests is growing steadily. Quantifying the hydrological impacts of various forestry operations (thinning, selective harvesting, clearcutting with and without roads, and removal of understory or riparian vegetation) is still an important activity (Eisenbies et al, 2007;Wei et al, 2008). Schnorbus & Alila (2004) note that (until only very recently) forest hydrologists have relied almost exclusively on a single technique to pursue these research questions: the paired catchment approach.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Land-cover impacts on streamflow: a change-detection modelling approach that incorporates parameter uncertainty

Seibert

McDonnell

2010

Hydrological Sciences Journal

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Land-cover impacts on streamflow: a change-detection modelling approach that incorporates parameter uncertainty. Hydrol. Sci. J. 55(3), 316-332. AbstractThe effect of land-use or land-cover change on stream runoff dynamics is not fully understood. In many parts of the world, forest management is the major land-cover change agent. While the paired catchment approach has been the primary methodology used to quantify such effects, it is only possible for small headwater catchments where there is uniformity in precipitation inputs and catchment characteristics between the treatment and control catchments. This paper presents a model-based change-detection approach that includes model and parameter uncertainty as an alternative to the traditional paired-catchment method for larger catchments. We use the HBV model and data from the HJ Andrews Experimental Forest in Oregon, USA, to develop and test the approach on two small (<1 km 2 ) headwater catchments (a 100% clear-cut and a control) and then apply the technique to the larger 62 km 2 Lookout catchment. Three different approaches are used to detect changes in stream peak flows using: (a) calibration for a period before (or after) change and simulation of runoff that would have been observed without land-cover changes (reconstruction of runoff series); (b) comparison of calibrated parameter values for periods before and after a land-cover change; and (c) comparison of runoff predicted with parameter sets calibrated for periods before and after a land-cover change. Our proof-of-concept change detection modelling showed that peak flows increased in the clear-cut headwater catchment, relative to the headwater control catchment, and several parameter values in the model changed after the clear-cutting. Some minor changes were also detected in the control, illustrating the problem of false detections. For the larger Lookout catchment, moderately increased peak flows were detected. Monte Carlo techniques used to quantify parameter uncertainty and compute confidence intervals in model results and parameter ranges showed rather wide distributions of model simulations. While this makes change detection more difficult, it also demonstrated the need to explicitly consider parameter uncertainty in the modelling approach to obtain reliable results.Key words change detection; forest hydrology; forest harvesting; HJ Andrews; HBV model Impacts de l'occupation du sol sur les écoulements en rivière: une approche de détection de changement par modélisation qui inclut les incertitudes sur les paramètres Résumé L'effet de la modification de l'occupation et de la couverture du sol sur la dynamique des écoulements reste mal compris. Dans la plupart des cas, la gestion des forêts est le facteur le plus important quant à la modification de l'occupation du sol. L'approche d'analyse des bassins versants par appariement est la principale méthode pour quantifier de tels effets. Cependant, cette méthode n'est adaptée que dans le cas de petits bassins versants de tête, où les précipitations incide...

show abstract

“…Chronic disturbances or changes may exhaust ecosystem resilience, leading to a rapid change of state (7,27,39). Anthropogenic perturbations can also lower the initiation threshold for certain natural disasters (40)(41)(42), complicating exceedance thresholds for ecosystem change. Furthermore, when major episodic processes exceed thresholds of resilience, they may reset ecosystem attributes (16) (Fig.…”

Section: Implementing a Broader Sustainability Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Broader perspective on ecosystem sustainability: Consequences for decision making

Sidle

Benson

Carriger

et al. 2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the concept of ecosystem sustainability has a long-term focus, it is often viewed from a static system perspective. Because most ecosystems are dynamic, we explore sustainability assessments from three additional perspectives: resilient systems; systems where tipping points occur; and systems subject to episodic resetting. Whereas foundations of ecosystem resilience originated in ecology, recent discussions have focused on geophysical attributes, and it is recognized that dynamic system components may not return to their former state following perturbations. Tipping points emerge when chronic changes (typically anthropogenic, but sometimes natural) push ecosystems to thresholds that cause collapse of process and function and may become permanent. Ecosystem resetting occurs when episodic natural disasters breach thresholds with little or no warning, resulting in long-term changes to environmental attributes or ecosystem function. An example of sustainability assessment of ecosystem goods and services along the Gulf Coast (USA) demonstrates the need to include both the resilient and dynamic nature of biogeomorphic components. Mountain road development in northwest Yunnan, China, makes rivers and related habitat vulnerable to tipping points. Ecosystems reset by natural disasters are also presented, emphasizing the need to understand the magnitude frequency and interrelationships among major disturbances, as shown by (i) the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and resulting tsunami, including how unsustainable urban development exacerbates geodisaster propagation, and (ii) repeated major earthquakes and associated geomorphic and vegetation disturbances in Papua New Guinea. Although all of these ecosystem perturbations and shifts are individually recognized, they are not embraced in contemporary sustainable decision making.ecosystem stressors | complex system behavior | sustainability analysis | cascading effects | coastal zone management

show abstract

Forest operations, extreme flooding events, and considerations for hydrologic modeling in the Appalachians—A review

Cited by 119 publications

References 195 publications

Mountaintop Removal Mining and Catchment Hydrology

Mountaintop Removal Mining and Catchment Hydrology

Land-cover impacts on streamflow: a change-detection modelling approach that incorporates parameter uncertainty

Broader perspective on ecosystem sustainability: Consequences for decision making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About