Detectability and Interpretational Uncertainties: Considerations in Gauging the Impacts of Land Disturbance on Streamflow
Publication: Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 20, Issue 8
Abstract
Hydrologic impacts of land disturbance and management can be confounded by rainfall variability. As a consequence, attempts to gauge and quantify these effects through streamflow monitoring are typically subject to uncertainties. This paper addresses the quantification and delineation of different sources of how uncertainty is manifested in a long-term hydrologic monitoring study and through two concepts: (1) detectability, i.e., the chance of observing anticipated changes in streamflow following a known change in land cover; and (2) interpretational uncertainty, i.e., the chance of improperly attributing an observed effect to the wrong cause. The paper offers probabilistic interpretation of each concept and illustrates, through a set of hypothetical monitoring experiments, the dependence of these entities on factors such as monitoring duration and the choice of indicators. Central to the experiments is a resampling scheme which randomly redistributes historical rainfall events and thereby generates an ensemble of weather scenarios. The rainfall events are coupled with a hydrologic model to generate of preurbanization and simulated posturbanization runoff events. In each hypothetical monitoring experiment, two indicators, i.e., runoff ratio and scaled peak discharge rates, are computed and compared for designated subsets of the preurbanization and posturbanization rainfall-runoff time series and the outcomes of the experiments are then synthesized to derive the probabilities. The results suggest that (1) the duration of observation very likely enhances detectability but does not necessarily reduce interpretational uncertainties, and (2) extending the duration of baseline monitoring alone yields only a minor decrease in uncertainty.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
We are indebted to Dr. Mohamed Hantush at USEPA who offered a number of valuable suggestions. Three anonymous reviewers provided a number of insightful comments that helped greatly in improving the quality of the work. The contributions of these individuals are graciously acknowledged here.
References
Ames, D. P., Neilson, B. T., Stevens, D. K., and Lall, U. (2005). “Using Bayesian networks to model watershed management decisions: An east Canyon Creek case study.” Hydroinf., 7(4), 267–282.
Arnold, C., and Gibbons, J. (1996). “Impervious surface coverage: The emergence of a key environmental indicator.” J. Am. Plan. Assoc., 62(2), 243–258.
Beighley, R., Kargar, M., and He, Y. (2009). “Effects of impervious area estimation methods on simulated peak discharges.” J. Hydrol. Eng., 388–398.
Beighley, R. E., and Moglen, G. (2003). “Adjusting measured peak discharges from an urbanizing watershed to reflect a stationary land use signal.” Water Resour. Res., 39(4), 1093.
Booth, D. B., and Jackson, C. R. (1997). “Urbanization of aquatic systems: Degradation thresholds, stormwater detection, and the limits of mitigation.” J. Am. Resour. Assoc., 33(5), 1077–1090.
Brabec, E., Schulte, S., and Richards, P. L. (2002). “Impervious surfaces and water quality: A review of current literature and its implications for watershed planning.” J. Plann. Lit., 16(4), 499–514.
DeWalle, D., Swistock, B., Johnson, T., and McGuire, K. (2000). “Potential effects of climate change and urbanization on mean annual streamflow in the United States.” Water Resour. Res., 36(9), 2655–2664.
Downer, C. W., Ogden, F. J., Martin, W. D., and Harmon, R. S. (2002). “Theory, development, and applicability of the surface water hydrologic model CASC2D.” Hydrol. Processes, 16(2), 255–275.
Downer, C. W., and Ogden, F. L. (2006). Gridded surface subsurface hydrologic analysis (GSSHA) user's manual, version 1.43, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, 207.
Green, W. H., and Ampt, G. (1911). “Studies of soil physics, part I: The flow of air and water through soils.” J. Agr. Sci., 4(1), 1–24.
James, B. R., and Gorelick, S. M. (1994). “When enough is enough: The worth of monitoring data in aquifer remediation design.” Water Resour. Res., 30(12), 3499–3513.
Jaynes, E. (2003). Probability theory: The logic of science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Khatri, K. (2013). “Risk and uncertainty analysis for sustainable urban water system.” Ph.D. thesis, CRC Press, London, U.K.
Leopold, L. B. (1968). “Hydrology for urban land planning—A guidebook on the hydrologic effects of urban land use.”, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA, 18.
Liu, Y., Freer, J., Beven, K., and Matgen, P. (2009). “Towards a limits of acceptability approach to the calibration of hydrological models: Extending observation error.” J. Hydrol., 367(1–2), 93–103.
Natrella, M. (2012). “NIST/SEMATECH e-handbook of statistical methods.” NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, 〈http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmc/section2/pmc22.htm〉 (Nov. 21, 2013).
Ogden, F. L., and Saghafian, B. (1997). “Green and Ampt infiltration with redistribution.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 386–393.
Pucci, A. A., and Pope, D. A. (1995). “Simulated effects of development on regional ground-water/surface-water interactions in the northern coastal plains of New Jersey.” J. Hydrol., 167(1–4), 241–262.
Randhir, T. (2003). “Watershed-scale effects of urbanization on sediment export: Assessment and policy.” Water Resour. Res., 39(6), 1169.
Rose, S., and Peters, N. (2001). “Effects of urbanization on streamflow in the Atlanta area (Georgia, USA): A comparative hydrological approach.” Hydrol. Processes, 15(8), 1441–1457.
Shuster, W., and Pappas, E. (2011). “Laboratory simulation of urban runoff and estimation of runoff hydrographs with experimental curve numbers implemented in USEPA SWMM.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 343–351.
Shuster, W. D., Bonta, J., Thurston, H., Warnemuende, E., and Smith, D. (2005). “Impacts of impervious surface on watershed hydrology: A review.” Urban Water, 2(4), 263–275.
Shuster, W. D., Warnemuende, E., and Zhang, Y. (2008). “A laboratory-scale simulation of runoff response from pervious-impervious systems.” J. Hydrol. Eng., 886–893.
Thiemann, M., Trosset, M., Gupta, H., and Sorooshian, S. (2001). “Bayesian recursive parameter estimation for hydrologic models.” Water Resour. Res., 37(10), 2521–2535.
van Asselt, M. B. A., and Rotmans, J. (2002). “Uncertainty in integrated assessment modeling.” Clim. Change, 54(1–2), 75–105.
Yue, S., Pilon, P., and Cavadias, G. (2002). “Power of the Mann-Kendall and Spearman’s rho tests for detecting monotonic trends in hydrological series.” J. Hydrol., 259(1–4), 254–271.
Zhang, Y., and Shuster, W. (2014a). “The comparative accuracy of two hydrologic models in simulating warm-season runoff for two small, hillslope catchments.” J. Am. Resour. Assoc., 50(2), 434–447.
Zhang, Y., and Shuster, W. D. (2014b). “The impacts of spatial distribution of impervious area on runoff response of hillslope catchments—A simulation study.” J. Hydrol. Eng., 1089–1100.
Zhang, Y., Smith, J. A., and Baeck, M. L. (2003). “Space-time variability of rainfall and extreme flood response in the Menomonee River basin, Wisconsin.” J. Hydrometeorol., 4(3), 506–517.
Zhao, B., Tung, Y., Yeh, K. C., and Yang, J. (1997). “Storm resampling for uncertainty analysis of a multiple-storm unit hydrograph.” J. Hydrol., 194(1–4), 366–384.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Nov 22, 2013
Accepted: Oct 4, 2014
Published online: Nov 17, 2014
Discussion open until: Apr 17, 2015
Published in print: Aug 1, 2015
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.