Geology ReportsSearch

Geology topics

Cara L. Peterman-Phipps

Publications and source records attributed to Cara L. Peterman-Phipps.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Disentangling geomorphic equifinality in sediment and hydrologic connectivity through the analyses of landscape drivers of hysteresis

Sources, transport mechanisms and pathways of fine sediment in river systems are dependent on a multitude of climatic, geomorphic and anthropogenic factors, resulting in geomorphic equifinality, in which it is difficult to parse how different landscape processes affect sediment transport across different spatiotemporal scales. The objectives of this study are to 1) provide a conceptual model to consider how differing spatial distributions and hydrologic timing of sediment sources, both upland and in-channel, can result in equifinal sediment transport outcomes, and 2) utilize analytical methods with widely available environmental datasets to infer sediment processes from stream gaging data. Hysteretic patterns of observed storm events were classified based on their direction and timing of peak sediment concentration, relative to streamflow, using records from 35 U.S. Geological Survey stream gages in the period between 2007 and 2023 within two different physiographic regions: the Mid-Atlantic Delaware River Basin (DRB) and the Midwestern Illinois River Basin (IRB). The DRB contains mixed forest, urban, suburban and agricultural watersheds over diverse topography, and the IRB is primarily an intensively managed agricultural watershed on flat terrain. We use principal component analysis and linear discriminant analysis to infer regional hydrologic relations with turbidity dynamics, and to identify the primary hydrologic and land surface characteristics most effective at distinguishing between hysteretic classes in each region. These analyses reveal underlying regional relations in storm event hydrodynamics and landscape characteristics that contribute to varying patterns in sediment dynamics. Incorporating these sediment dynamic relations with spatial distributions and hydrologic timing of sediment sources could help to improve process understanding and predictive capability of fine sediment transport in watersheds.

Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, New Jersey, New York,

Opportunities and challenges for precipitation forcing data in post-wildfire hydrologic modeling applications

The frequency and extent of wildfires have increased in recent decades with immediate and cascading effects on water availability in many regions of the world. Precipitation is used as primary input to hydrologic models and is a critical driver of post-wildfire hydrologic hazards including debris flows, flash floods, water-quality effects, and reservoir sedimentation. These models are valuable tools for understanding the hydrologic response to wildfire but require accurate precipitation data at suitable spatial and temporal resolutions. Wildfires often occur in data-sparse, headwater catchments in complex terrain, and post-wildfire hydrologic effects are particularly sensitive to high-intensity, short-duration precipitation events, which are highly variable and difficult to measure or estimate. Therefore, the assessment and prediction of wildfire-induced changes to watershed hydrology, including the associated effects on ecosystems and communities, are complicated by uncertainty in precipitation data. When direct measurements of precipitation are not available, datasets of indirect measurements or estimates are often used. Choosing the most appropriate precipitation dataset can be difficult as different datasets have unique trade-offs in terms of spatial and temporal accuracy, resolution, and completeness. Here, we outline the challenges and opportunities associated with different precipitation datasets as they apply to post-wildfire hydrologic models and modeling objectives. We highlight the need for expanded precipitation gage deployment in wildfire-prone areas and discuss potential opportunities for future research and the integration of precipitation data from disparate sources into a common hydrologic modeling framework.

WIREs Water

A call for strategic water-quality monitoring to advance assessment and prediction of wildfire impacts on water supplies

Wildfires pose a risk to water supplies in the western U.S. and many other parts of the world, due to the potential for degradation of water quality. However, a lack of adequate data hinders prediction and assessment of post-wildfire impacts and recovery. The dearth of such data is related to lack of funding for monitoring extreme events and the challenge of measuring the outsized hydrologic and erosive response after wildfire. Assessment and prediction of post-wildfire surface water quality would be strengthened by the strategic monitoring of key parameters, and the selection of sampling locations based on the following criteria: (1) streamgage with pre-wildfire data; (2) ability to install equipment that can measure water quality at high temporal resolution, with a focus on storm sampling; (3) minimum of 10% drainage area burned at moderate to high severity; (4) lack of major water management; (5) high-frequency precipitation; and (6) availability of pre-wildfire water-quality data and (or) water-quality data from a comparable unburned basin. Water-quality data focused on parameters that are critical to human and (or) ecosystem health, relevant to water-treatment processes and drinking-water quality, and (or) inform the role of precipitation and discharge on flow paths and water quality are most useful. We discuss strategic post-wildfire water-quality monitoring and identify opportunities for advancing assessment and prediction. Improved estimates of the magnitude, timing, and duration of post-wildfire effects on water quality would aid the water resources community prepare for and mitigate against impacts to water supplies.

Frontiers in Water

Sediment concentrations and loads upstream from and through John Redmond Reservoir, east-central Kansas, 2010–19

Streambank erosion and reservoir sedimentation are primary concerns of resource managers in Kansas and throughout many regions of the United States and negatively affect flood control, water supply, and recreation. The Cottonwood and upper Neosho Rivers drain into John Redmond Reservoir, and since reservoir completion in 1964, there has been substantial conservation-pool sedimentation and storage loss in John Redmond Reservoir, causing storage capacity losses more rapidly than most other Federal reservoirs in Kansas. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Kansas Water Office, has monitored water quality (temperature, specific conductance, and turbidity) on the Cottonwood River (upstream from the reservoir) and Neosho River (upstream and downstream from the reservoir) since 2007 with additional sites added in 2009. The purpose of this report is to quantify suspended-sediment concentrations, loads, and yields entering and exiting John Redmond Reservoir during January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2019. Three water-quality monitoring sites were upstream from the reservoir (Cottonwood River near Plymouth, Kansas [USGS site 07182250; hereinafter referred to as “Cottonwood”]; Neosho River at Burlingame Road near Emporia, Kans. [USGS site 07179750; hereinafter referred to as “Burlingame”]; and Neosho River at Neosho Rapids, Kans. [USGS site 07182390; hereinafter referred to as “Neosho Rapids”]), and one water-quality monitoring site was downstream from the reservoir (Neosho River at Burlington, Kans. [USGS site 07182510; hereinafter referred to as “Burlington”]). The Neosho Rapids streamgage is downstream from the confluence of the Cottonwood and upper Neosho Rivers and has a contributing drainage area accounting for 91 percent of the total contributing drainage area to John Redmond Reservoir. Continuously measured streamflow, water quality, and discrete water-quality data were used to develop updated regression models to compute suspended-sediment concentrations, loads, and yields upstream and downstream from John Redmond Reservoir in east-central Kansas. Several turbidity sensors were deployed during the analysis period, and there are no established relations between the sensors; therefore, individual models for each sensor were developed. Model statistics for the turbidity and suspended-sediment concentration linear regression models were better (based on the coefficient of determination, root mean square error, and model standard percentage error) than the streamflow and suspended-sediment concentration linear regression models, indicating better model performance. Computed concentrations, loads, and yields do not account for the ungaged 9 percent of the drainage basin downstream from the Neosho Rapids streamgage. Mean daily suspended-sediment loads upstream from the reservoir were largest at Neosho Rapids (2,250 tons), second largest at Cottonwood (2,180 tons), and smallest at Burlingame (624 tons). Streamflow at Burlington was predominately regulated by reservoir releases, and mean daily suspended-sediment loads were smaller (286 tons) than at upstream sites. Among the upstream sites, Cottonwood had the largest mean daily suspended-sediment concentration (179 milligrams per liter [mg/L]), followed by Neosho Rapids (162 mg/L), and Burlingame (108 mg/L). Burlington had the smallest mean daily suspended-sediment concentration of all sites (46 mg/L). Annual reservoir trapping efficiency ranged from 82 to 94 percent, and the largest sediment mass trapped was during 2019 (2,230,000 tons). Reservoir storage decreased an estimated 7,750 acre-feet during 2010 and 2014–19. Using the mean trapping efficiency to estimate suspended-sediment loads during years with missing data (2011–13), the total estimated reservoir storage lost to sedimentation for the analysis period (2010–19) was 8,690 acre-feet, about 17 percent of the remaining storage space reported in 2007. The mean annual sedimentation rate during the analysis period (747 acre-feet per year) was about 85 percent larger than the design sedimentation rate (404 acre-feet per year) originally projected during construction. Different reservoir outflow management strategies, including operating near normal capacity as opposed to higher flood pool levels, could reduce the total reservoir storage lost by 3 percent (about 261 acre-feet), which is equal to 14 percent of the total sediment removed during the dredging operation in 2016. During the study period, about 56 percent of the total suspended-sediment load was transported during streamflows greater than the National Weather Service flood action stage at the upstream sites (0.1–5 percent of the record; Cottonwood mean: 48 percent; Burlingame mean: 40 percent; Neosho Rapids mean: 78 percent). Disproportionately large sediment loads were delivered during short periods of time, and localized efforts of stream erosion protection (streambank stabilization, riparian buffers) were likely to be overwhelmed. Precipitation frequency and intensity are projected to continue to increase in this region; therefore, future sediment reduction strategies that account for extreme episodic events may be beneficial. Changes to reservoir outflow management could also minimize sediment accumulation while still preserving flood control. Continued investigation of sediment reduction measures is necessary for future mitigation with the understanding that sedimentation rate is largely driven by high flows. Results from this study can be used to calibrate sediment models, explore sediment reduction strategies, highlight the importance of continued water-quality monitoring to determine effectiveness and changes in sediment transport, and assess the ability of John Redmond Reservoir to support designated uses into the future.

Kansas