Presentation on theme: "USING HYDROLOGY TO COMPARE A REGIONAL HYDROGEOMORPHIC (HGM) CLASSIFICATION ACROSS A LATITUDINAL GRADIENT OF THE APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS Charles Andrew Cole."— Presentation transcript:
USING HYDROLOGY TO COMPARE A REGIONAL HYDROGEOMORPHIC (HGM) CLASSIFICATION ACROSS A LATITUDINAL GRADIENT OF THE APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS Charles Andrew Cole - Penn State University Chris Cirmo - SUNY, Cortland Denise Wardrop - Penn State University Robert P. Brooks - Penn State University Jessica Peterson – Penn State University
1997 HGM key for the Ridge and Valley A quick means of identifying HGM subclass A direct way into the assessment of function May or may not work anywhere else along the Appalachian Mountains Objective: Use hydrology to assess HGM key north and south along Appalachian Mountains
Reference Wetlands Group of natural wetlands w/in a region Pristine to disturbed Used to develop range of expected conditions Problems include: Lack of good data Hard to get good data Need landscape component Relationship between functions and values?
Riparian Depression Adjacent to streams Surface outlet with unidirectional flow No water from overbank flooding Soils saturated, rarely flooded Low energy systems PEM, PSS, PFO
Slope On topographic gradient Surface and groundwater Saturated, rarely inundated Low energy systems PEM, PSS, PFO
Headwater floodplain Adjacent to 1st, 2nd order streams Not much overbank flooding. Overland flow, groundwater Saturation. Often dry Low to high energy Frequently PFO, PSS
New York wetlands were substantially impacted by beaver Hard to find any site that was not modified by a beaver Really altered the duration of wet periods (though not dry periods) Reduced fluctuations
We will need to revamp the HGM classification Works well south … other locations depend on beavers?