Hydrologic evolution of drainage basins disturbed by surface mining, central Pennsylvania

Ritter, John B.; Gardner, Thomas W.

doi:10.1130/0016-7606(1993)105<0101:heodbd>2.3.co;2

Cited by 38 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Jorgensen and Gardner [54] attribute this variability to overburden lithology which ultimately controls the mineralogy and grain size during the redistribution of soils onto the mine surface and initial weathering. Surprisingly, there is little observed change in bulk density of shallow minesoil [54,89,90]. This dissonance is explained by Guebert and Gardner [62], who show the increase in infiltration rate is due to the development of an extensive macropore structure.…”

Section: Traditional Surface Miningmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…Infiltration rates of minesoil can be an order of magnitude lower than undisturbed forest soils [54,57,65] that cause the initiation of infiltration excess overland flow which dominates storm runoff in mined areas [54,57]. The dominance of surface pathways in runoff generation in mined catchments is further evidenced by the increase in total suspended solids downstream of mining activities [87] that originate from the mine surface during the period immediately following reclamation [88].…”

Section: Traditional Surface Miningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The dominance of surface pathways in runoff generation in mined catchments is further evidenced by the increase in total suspended solids downstream of mining activities [87] that originate from the mine surface during the period immediately following reclamation [88]. However, Ritter and Gardner [57] observed variability in the infiltration rate of mine soils through time; some minesoils maintain low infiltration rates with minimal recovery, while other minesoils return to near pre-mining rates in as little as four years. Jorgensen and Gardner [54] attribute this variability to overburden lithology which ultimately controls the mineralogy and grain size during the redistribution of soils onto the mine surface and initial weathering.…”

Section: Traditional Surface Miningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, long-term (e.g., decades) studies are needed to assess how reclaimed landscapes, including morphology and vegetation, and hydrologic processes evolve over time. For example, Ritter and Gardner [57] observed differences of the infiltration rate recovery of surface mines in Central Pennsylvania during a decade long study. This elicits questions about the hydrologic evolution of valley fills and reclaimed MTM surfaces, and at a broader scale, the stability of the new topographic structure imposed on MTM/VF-impacted catchments.…”

Section: Multiple Spatial and Temporal Scalesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequently, rainfall interception and storage capacities in grasslands are less than forested canopies, though the rates of evaporation from each are similar [76]. Losses to E t are generally less for grasslands compared to forests [77]; therefore, a larger proportion of precipitation is converted to runoff [9,57].…”

Section: Traditional Surface Miningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

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: Traditional Surface Miningmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Traditional Surface Miningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Traditional Surface Miningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Multiple Spatial and Temporal Scalesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Traditional Surface Miningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Mountaintop Removal Mining and Catchment Hydrology

Miller

Zégre

2014

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Initial hydro‐geomorphic development and rill network evolution in an artificial catchment

Schneider

Gerke

Maurer

et al. 2013

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The formation of erosion rills and gullies is a critical step in land surface development, but possibilities to study initial unaffected surface development under natural conditions and with well‐defined initial and boundary conditions are rare. The objective of this study was to characterize rill network development from ’point zero’ in the artificially‐created catchment ‘Hühnerwasser’. To ensure unaffected development, the study was largely restricted to the analysis of remotely‐sensed data. We analyzed a series of photogrammetry‐based digital elevation models (DEMs) for 10 points in time, over a period of five years and beginning with the initial state. The evolving erosion rill network was quantitatively described based on mapping from aerial photographs. DEMs and rill network maps were combined to specifically analyze the development of morphometry for different parts of the network and to characterize energy dissipation and connectivity. The restriction to remote‐sensing data did not allow for analyzing specific processes governing rill network development, nevertheless, two major development phases could be characterized. We observed a phase of growth of the rill network along with variations in drainage patterns during the first two years of development and a subsequent phase of reduction of its area along with comparably stable patterns. Region‐specific analysis of morphometry indicates that, besides effects of changing sediment characteristics and vegetation cover development, locally evolving hydro‐geomorphic feedback cycles influenced this development. Results show an increasing similarity of overall statistical characteristics (e.g. drainage density) for two parts of the catchment, but a persistent influence of initial conditions on specific rill geometry. The observed development towards higher orderliness and increased connectivity is consistent with experiments and concepts on drainage network evolution across scales; however, we did not observe major influences of rill piracy and cross grading or a reduction of energy dissipation with network development. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Comparison of stormflow responses of surface‐mined and forested watersheds in the Appalachian Mountains, USA

Negley

Eshleman

2006

Hydrological Processes

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The results of a hydrological analysis that was conducted as part of a larger, multifaceted, collaborative effort to quantify ecosystem functions in watersheds subjected to land-use and land-cover change are presented. The primary goal of the study was to determine whether a small watershed in the Appalachian region (USA) that was recently subjected to surface mining and reclamation practices produces stormflow responses to rain events that are different from those produced by a nearby reference watershed covered by young, second-growth forest. Water balances indicated that runoff yields did not vary significantly between the two watersheds on an annual basis. Statistically significant differences (p Ä 0Ð05) in runoff responses were observed on an event basis, however, with the mined/reclaimed watershed producing, on average (a) higher storm runoff coefficients (2Ð5ð), (b) greater total storm runoff (3ð), and (c) higher peak hourly runoff rates (2ð) when compared with the reference watershed. Results of a unit hydrograph analysis also showed, unexpectedly, that the modelled unit responses of the two watersheds to effective rainfall pulses were similar, despite the noted differences in land cover. Differences in stormflow responses were thus largely explained by dramatic reductions in cumulative rates of rainfall abstraction (measured using infiltrometers) attributable to soil compaction during land reclamation. Additional field hydrological measurements on other mined watersheds will be needed to generalize our results, as well as to understand and predict the cumulative hydrological impacts of widespread surface mining in larger watersheds and river basins.

show abstract

Hydrologic evolution of drainage basins disturbed by surface mining, central Pennsylvania

Cited by 38 publications

References 0 publications

Mountaintop Removal Mining and Catchment Hydrology

Mountaintop Removal Mining and Catchment Hydrology

Initial hydro‐geomorphic development and rill network evolution in an artificial catchment

Comparison of stormflow responses of surface‐mined and forested watersheds in the Appalachian Mountains, USA

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About