Geology topics

Kendra E. Kaiser

Publications and source records attributed to Kendra E. Kaiser.

10 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2024

Biogeochemical and community ecology responses to the wetting of non-perennial streams

Transitions between dry and wet hydrologic states are the defining characteristic of non-perennial rivers and streams, which constitute the majority of the global river network. Although past work has focused on stream drying characteristics, there has been less focus on how hydrology, ecology and biogeochemistry respond and interact during stream wetting. Wetting mechanisms are highly variable and can range from dramatic floods and debris flows to gradual saturation by upwelling groundwater. This variation in wetting affects ecological and biogeochemical functions, including nutrient processing, sediment transport and the assembly of biotic communities. Here we synthesize evidence describing the hydrological mechanisms underpinning different types of wetting regimes, the associated biogeochemical and organismal responses, and the potential scientific and management implications for downstream ecosystems. This combined multidisciplinary understanding of wetting dynamics in non-perennial streams will be key to predicting and managing for the effects of climate change on non-perennial ecosystems.

Nature Water↗

USGS2023

A survey of non-USGS continuous streamflow gaging networks in the Pacific Northwest

Extensive streamflow data sources exist beyond the largest streamflow data provider in the United States, the U.S. Geological Survey. We developed and distributed a survey to about 300 individuals and organizations that collect streamflow data across the Pacific Northwest (Idaho, Oregon, Washington). We received 100 responses with 56% of those sufficiently complete to include in the analysis. From these responses, there are about 2000 streamflow monitoring locations in the region beyond the USGS monitoring network. The duration of record for gages is related to the size of the streamflow gaging network, with small and large networks generally operating monitoring locations for less than 5 years and more than 10 years, respectively. Quality assurance and quality control are variable across organizations, with 41% of respondents having at least two review steps and 13% that audit their data for long-term consistency. Results of this survey begin to establish the differing capabilities of large and small stream gaging networks and highlight how supporting the overall quality streamflow data collection and management within the water resources community will improve our ability to harmonize these datasets in the future.

Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Wyomin↗

USGS2023

Integration of distributed streamflow measurement metadata for improved water resource decision-making

Streamflow data are critical for monitoring and managing water resources, yet there are significant spatial gaps in our federal monitoring networks with biases toward large perennial rivers. In some cases, streamflow monitoring exists in these spatial gaps, but information about these monitoring locations is challenging to obtain. Here, we present a streamflow catalog for the United States Pacific Northwest that includes current and historical streamflow monitoring location information obtained from 32 organizations (other than the U.S. Geological Survey), which includes 2661 continuous streamflow gaging locations (22% are currently active) and 30,557 discrete streamflow measurements. A stakeholder advisory board with representatives from organizations that operate streamflow monitoring networks identified metadata requirements and provided feedback on the Streamflow Data Catalog user interface. Engagement with the water resources community through this effort highlighted challenges that water professionals face in collecting and managing streamflow data so that data are findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR). Over 60% of the streamflow monitoring locations in the Streamflow Data Catalog are not available online and are thus not findable through web search engines. Providing organizations technical assistance with standard measurement procedures, metadata collection, and web accessibility could substantially increase the availability and utility of streamflow information to water resources communities.

Water↗

USGS2022

Causes, responses, and implications of anthropogenic versus natural flow intermittence in river networks

Rivers that do not flow year-round are the predominant type of running waters on Earth. Despite a burgeoning literature on natural flow intermittence (NFI), knowledge about the hydrological causes and ecological effects of human-induced, anthropogenic flow intermittence (AFI) remains limited. NFI and AFI could generate contrasting hydrological and biological responses in rivers because of distinct underlying causes of drying and evolutionary adaptations of their biota. We first review the causes of AFI and show how different anthropogenic drivers alter the timing, frequency and duration of drying, compared with NFI. Second, we evaluate the possible differences in biodiversity responses, ecological functions, and ecosystem services between NFI and AFI. Last, we outline knowledge gaps and management needs related to AFI. Because of the distinct hydrologic characteristics and ecological impacts of AFI, ignoring the distinction between NFI and AFI could undermine management of intermittent rivers and ephemeral streams and exacerbate risks to the ecosystems and societies downstream.

BioScience↗

USGS2022

Predictions and drivers of sub-reach-scale annual streamflow permanence for the upper Missouri River basin: 1989-2018

The presence of year-round surface water in streams (i.e., streamflow permanence) is an important factor for identifying aquatic habitat availability, determining the regulatory status of streams, managing land use change, allocating water resources, and designing scientific studies. However, accurate, high resolution, and dynamic prediction of streamflow permanence that accounts for year-to-year variability at a regional extent is a major gap in modeling capability. Herein, we expand and adapt the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) PRObability of Streamflow PERmanence (PROSPER) model from its original implementation in the Pacific Northwest (PROSPER PNW ) to the upper Missouri River basin (PROSPER UM ), a geographical region that includes mountain and prairie ecosystems of the northern United States. PROSPER UM is an empirical model used to estimate the probability that a stream channel has year-round flow in response to climatic conditions (monthly and annual) and static physiographic predictor variables of the upstream basin. The structure and approach of PROSPER UM are generally consistent with the PROSPER PNW model but include improved spatial resolution (10 m) and a longer modeling period. Average model accuracy was 81 %. Drainage area, upstream proportion as wetlands, and upstream proportion as developed land cover were the most important predictor variables. The PROSPER UM model identifies decreases in streamflow permanence during climatically drier years, although there is variability in the magnitude across basins highlighting geographically varying sensitivity to drought. Variability in the response of perennial streams to drought conditions among basins in the study area was also observed.

Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming↗

USGS2021

Pervasive changes in stream intermittency across the United States

Non-perennial streams are widespread, critical to ecosystems and society, and the subject of ongoing policy debate. Prior large-scale research on stream intermittency has been based on long-term averages, generally using annually aggregated data to characterize a highly variable process. As a result, it is not well understood if, how, or why the hydrology of non-perennial streams is changing. Here, we investigate trends and drivers of three intermittency signatures that describe the duration, timing, and dry-down period of stream intermittency across the continental United States (CONUS). Half of gages exhibited a significant trend through time in at least one of the three intermittency signatures, and changes in no-flow duration were most pervasive (41% of gages). Changes in intermittency were substantial for many streams, and 7% of gages exhibited changes in annual no-flow duration exceeding 100 days during the study period. Distinct regional patterns of change were evident, with widespread drying in southern CONUS and wetting in northern CONUS. These patterns are correlated with changes in aridity, though drivers of spatiotemporal variability were diverse across the three intermittency signatures. While the no-flow timing and duration were strongly related to climate, dry-down period was most strongly related to watershed land use and physiography. Our results indicate that non-perennial conditions are increasing in prevalence over much of CONUS and binary classifications of 'perennial' and 'non-perennial' are not an accurate reflection of this change. Water management and policy should reflect the changing nature and diverse drivers of changing intermittency both today and in the future.

Environmental Research Letters↗

USGS2021

Beyond streamflow: Call for a national data repository of streamflow presence for streams and rivers in the United States

Observations of the presence or absence of surface water in streams are useful for characterizing streamflow permanence, which includes the frequency, duration, and spatial extent of surface flow in streams and rivers. Such data are particularly valuable for headwater streams, which comprise the vast majority of channel length in stream networks, are often non-perennial, and are frequently the most data deficient. Datasets of surface water presence exist across multiple data collection groups in the United States but are not well aligned for easy integration. Given the value of these data, a unified approach for organizing information on surface water presence and absence collected by diverse surveys would facilitate more effective and broad application of these data and address the gap in streamflow data in headwaters. In this paper, we highlight the numerous existing datasets on surface water presence in headwater streams, including recently developed crowdsourcing approaches. We identify the challenges of integrating multiple surface water presence/absence datasets that include differences in the definitions and categories of streamflow status, data collection method, spatial and temporal resolution, and accuracy of geographic location. Finally, we provide a list of critical and useful components that could be used to integrate different streamflow permanence datasets.

Water↗

USGS2021

Spatial patterns and drivers of nonperennial flow regimes in the contiguous United States

Over half of global rivers and streams lack perennial flow, and understanding the distribution and drivers of their flow regimes is critical for understanding their hydrologic, biogeochemical, and ecological functions. We analyzed nonperennial flow regimes using 540 U.S. Geological Survey watersheds across the contiguous United States from 1979 to 2018. Multivariate analyses revealed regional differences in no-flow fraction, date of first no flow, and duration of the dry-down period, with further divergence between natural and human-altered watersheds. Aridity was a primary driver of no-flow metrics at the continental scale, while unique combinations of climatic, physiographic and anthropogenic drivers emerged at regional scales. Dry-down duration showed stronger associations with nonclimate drivers compared to no-flow fraction and timing. Although the sparse distribution of nonperennial gages limits our understanding of such streams, the watersheds examined here suggest the important role of aridity and land cover change in modulating future stream drying.

contiguous United States↗

USGS2020

Zero or not? Causes and consequences of zero-flow stream gage readings

Streamflow observations can be used to understand, predict, and contextualize hydrologic, ecological, and biogeochemical processes and conditions in streams. Stream gages are point measurements along rivers where streamflow is measured, and are often used to infer upstream watershed‐scale processes. When stream gages read zero, this may indicate that the stream has dried at this location; however, zero‐flow readings can also be caused by a wide range of other factors. Our ability to identify whether or not a zero‐flow gage reading indicates a dry fluvial system has far reaching environmental implications. Incorrect identification and interpretation by the data user can lead to inaccurate hydrologic, ecological, and/or biogeochemical predictions from models and analyses. Here, we describe several causes of zero‐flow gage readings: frozen surface water, flow reversals, instrument error, and natural or human‐driven upstream source losses or bypass flow. For these examples, we discuss the implications of zero‐flow interpretations. We also highlight additional methods for determining flow presence, including direct observations, statistical methods, and hydrologic models, which can be applied to interpret causes of zero‐flow gage readings and implications for reach‐ and watershed‐scale dynamics. Such efforts are necessary to improve our ability to understand and predict surface flow activation, cessation, and connectivity across river networks. Developing this integrated understanding of the wide range of possible meanings of zero‐flows will only attain greater importance in a more variable and changing hydrologic climate.

WIREs Water↗

USGS2019

Probability of streamflow permanence model (PROSPER): A spatially continuous model of annual streamflow permanence throughout the Pacific Northwest

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has developed the PRObability of Streamflow PERmanence (PROSPER) model, a GIS raster-based empirical model that provides streamflow permanence probabilities (probabilistic predictions) of a stream channel having year-round flow for any unregulated and minimally-impaired stream channel in the Pacific Northwest region, U.S. The model provides annual predictions for 2004-2016 at a 30-m spatial resolution based on monthly or annually updated values of climatic conditions and static physiographic variables associated with the upstream basin. Predictions correspond to any pixel on the channel network consistent with the medium resolution National Hydrography Dataset channel network stream grid. Total annual precipitation and percent forest cover were consistently the most important predictor variables among global and most subregional models, which had error rates between 17 and 22%. Probabilities were converted to wet and dry streamflow permanence classes with an associated confidence. Wet and dry classifications were used to derive descriptors that characterize the statistical and spatial distribution of streamflow permanence in three focal basins. Predicted dry channel segments account for 52 to 92% of the stream network across the three focal basins; streamflow permanence decreased during climatically drier years. Predictions are publicly available through the USGS StreamStats platform. Results demonstrate the utility of the PROSPER model as a tool for identifying areas that may be resilient or sensitive to drought conditions, allowing for management efforts that target protecting critical reaches. Importantly, PROSPER’s successful predictive performance can be improved with new datasets of streamflow permanence underscoring the importance of field observations.

Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington↗