Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · sir20095272

Indicators of streamflow alteration, habitat fragmentation, impervious cover, and water quality for Massachusetts stream basins

Abstract

Massachusetts streams and stream basins have been subjected to a wide variety of human alterations since colonial times. These alterations include water withdrawals, treated wastewater discharges, construction of onsite septic systems and dams, forest clearing, and urbanization—all of which have the potential to affect streamflow regimes, water quality, and habitat integrity for fish and other aquatic biota. Indicators were developed to characterize these types of potential alteration for subbasins and groundwater contributing areas in Massachusetts. The potential alteration of streamflow by the combined effects of withdrawals and discharges was assessed under two water-use scenarios. Water-use scenario 1 incorporated publicly reported groundwater withdrawals and discharges, direct withdrawals from and discharges to streams, and estimated domestic-well withdrawals and septic-system discharges. Surface-water-reservoir withdrawals were excluded from this scenario. Water-use scenario 2 incorporated all the types of withdrawal and discharge included in scenario 1 as well as withdrawals from surface-water reservoirs—all on a long-term, mean annual basis. All withdrawal and discharge data were previously reported to the State for the 2000–2004 period, except domestic-well withdrawals and septic-system discharges, which were estimated for this study. The majority of the state’s subbasins and groundwater contributing areas were estimated to have relatively minor (less than 10 percent) alteration of streamflow under water-use scenario 1 (seasonally varying water use; no surface-water-reservoir withdrawals). However, about 12 percent of subbasins and groundwater contributing areas were estimated to have extensive alteration of streamflows (greater than 40 percent) in August; most of these basins were concentrated in the outer metropolitan Boston region. Potential surcharging of streamflow in August was most commonly indicated for main-stem river subbasins, although surcharging was also indicated for some smaller tributary subbasins. In the high-flow month of April, only 4.8 percent of subbasins and groundwater contributing areas had more than 10 percent potential flow alteration. A majority of the state’s subbasins and groundwater contributing areas were also indicated to have relatively minor alteration of streamflow under water-use scenario 2 (long-term average water use, including surface-water-reservoir withdrawals). Extensive alteration of mean annual flows was estimated for about 6 percent of the state’s subbasins and groundwater contributing areas. The majority of subbasins estimated to have extensive long-term flow alteration contained reservoirs that were specifically designed, constructed, and managed to supply drinking water to cities. Only a small number of subbasins and groundwater contributing areas (1 percent) were extensively surcharged on a long-term, mean annual basis. Because site-specific data concerning surface-water-reservoir storage dynamics and management practices are not available statewide, the seasonal effects of surface-water-reservoir withdrawals on downstream flows could not be assessed in this study. The impounded storage ratio (volume of impounded subbasin or groundwater-contributing-area storage divided by mean annual predevelopment outflow from the subbasin or contributing area, in units of days) indicates the potential for alteration of streamflow, sediment-transport, and temperature regimes by dams, independent of water use. Storage ratios were less than 1 day for 33 percent of the subbasins and groundwater contributing areas, greater than 1 month for about 40 percent of the cases, and greater than 1 year for 3.2 percent of the cases statewide. Dam density, an indicator of stream-habitat fragmentation by dams, averaged 1 dam for every 6.7 stream miles statewide. Many of these dams are not presently (2009) being managed. The highest dam densities were in portions of Worcester County and in the Plymouth-Carver region, respectively, reflecting the historical reliance of Massachusetts industry upon water power and agricultural water-management practices in southeastern Massachusetts. Impervious cover is a frequently used indicator of urban land use. About 33 percent of the state’s 1,429 subbasins and groundwater contributing areas are relatively undeveloped at the local scale, with a local impervious cover of less than 4 percent. About 18 percent of Massachusetts subbasins and contributing areas are highly developed, with a local impervious cover greater than 16 percent. The remaining 49 percent of subbasins and contributing areas have levels of urban development between these extremes (4 to 16 percent local impervious cover). Cumulative impervious cover, defined for the entire upstream area encompassed by each subbasin, shows a smaller range (0 to 55 percent) than local impervious cover. Both local and cumulative impervious cover were highest in metropolitan Boston and other urban centers. High elevated impervious-cover values were also found along major transportation corridors. The water-quality status of Massachusetts streams is assessed periodically by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection pursuant to the requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act. Streams selected for assessment are commonly located in larger subbasins where some degree of impairment is expected. In the 72 percent of the state’s subbasins and groundwater contributing areas with assessed streams in 2002, more than 50 percent of the assessed stream miles were considered impaired. All of the assessed stream miles were considered impaired in 66 percent of the subbasins and groundwater contributing areas with assessed streams. Large streams, such as the main stems of rivers that make up most of the assessed stream miles, also are in many cases the receiving waters for treated wastewater discharges and for this reason may be more susceptible to water-quality impairments than smaller streams. Subbasins and contributing areas with large fractions of assessed stream miles that are listed as impaired are distributed across the state, but are more prevalent in eastern Massachusetts.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 41.24° to 42.89° latitude; -73.51° to -69.93° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Peter K. Weiskel, Sara L. Brandt, Leslie A. DeSimone, Lance J. Ostiguy, Stacey A. Archfield. 2010. Indicators of streamflow alteration, habitat fragmentation, impervious cover, and water quality for Massachusetts stream basins. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20095272

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗