Linking watersheds and streams through functional modeling of watershed processes David Theobald, Silvio Ferraz, Erin Poston, and Jeff Deems Natural Resource.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Functional Linkage of Water Basins and Streams: FLoWS v1 ArcGIS tools David Theobald, John Norman, Erin Peterson Natural Resource Ecology Lab, Dept of.
Advertisements

VARYING RESIDUAL VARIABILITY SEQUENCE OF GRAPHS TO ILLUSTRATE r 2 VARYING RESIDUAL VARIABILITY N. Scott Urquhart Director, STARMAP Department of Statistics.
Hydro Networks in GIS Network model Flow on Networks Hydrologic networks Linear referencing on networks Some slides in this presentation were prepared.
Predicting the likelihood of water quality impaired stream reaches using landscape scale data and a hierarchical methodology Erin Peterson Geosciences.
A framework for landscape indicators for measuring aquatic responses David Theobald, John Norman, Erin Poston, Silvio Ferraz Natural Resource Ecology Lab.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Action Plan for the Development of Watershed and Sub-Watershed Boundaries for northwestern Mississippi.
Standard watershed and stream delineation recipe - Vector stream (ex. NHD data) fusion into DEM raster (burning in) - Sink removal - Flow direction - Flow.
CEE 795 Water Resources Modeling and GIS Learning Objectives: Perform raster based network delineation from digital elevation models Perform raster based.
Robust sampling of natural resources using a GIS implementation of GRTS David Theobald Natural Resource Ecology Lab Dept of Recreation & Tourism Colorado.
Assessment of Flow Paths in Upland Areas and Vegetated Buffers August 2, 2004 I.J. Kim, S.L. Hutchinson, and J.M.S. Hutchinson* The department of Biological.
1 STARMAP: Project 2 Causal Modeling for Aquatic Resources Alix I Gitelman Stephen Jensen Statistics Department Oregon State University August 2003 Corvallis,
National Hydrography Data Use and Applications.
EPA & Ecology 2005 # 1 AN ACADEMICIAN’S VIEW OF EPA’s ECOLOGY PROGRAM ESPECIALLY ITS ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (EMAP) N. Scott Urquhart,
Erin E. Peterson Postdoctoral Research Fellow CSIRO Mathematical and Information Sciences Division Brisbane, Australia May 18, 2006 Regional.
State-Space Models for Within-Stream Network Dependence William Coar Department of Statistics Colorado State University Joint work with F. Jay Breidt This.
Functional linkage of watersheds and streams using landscape networks of reach contributing areas David Theobald, John Norman, Erin Peterson, Silvio Ferraz.
Functional linkage of watersheds and streams: ArcGIS FLoWS tools David Theobald, John Norman, Erin Poston, Silvio Ferraz Natural Resource Ecology Lab,
Ecologically representative distance measures for spatial modeling in stream networks Erin Peterson, David M. Theobald, and Jay Ver Hoef Natural Resource.
A framework to develop useful landscape indicators for measuring aquatic responses David Theobald, John Norman, Erin Poston, Silvio Ferraz Natural Resource.
TOPOGRID Hydrologically Correct Digital Elevation Model A central goal of our research is to develop landscape-level indicators that can be used to predict.
1 Accounting for Spatial Dependence in Bayesian Belief Networks Alix I Gitelman Statistics Department Oregon State University August 2003 JSM, San Francisco.
Quantifying fragmentation of freshwater systems using a measure of discharge modification (and other applications) David Theobald, John Norman, David Merritt.
PAGE # 1 Presented by Stacey Hancock Advised by Scott Urquhart Colorado State University Developing Learning Materials for Surface Water Monitoring.
0.6 – – – – – 15.9 MBSS Survey Sites 1996 Dissolved organic carbon (mg/l) 0.7 – – – –
Quantifying fragmentation of freshwater systems using a measure of discharge modification (and other applications) David Theobald, John Norman, David Merritt.
Distribution Function Estimation in Small Areas for Aquatic Resources Spatial Ensemble Estimates of Temporal Trends in Acid Neutralizing Capacity Mark.
Example For simplicity, assume Z i |F i are independent. Let the relative frame size of the incomplete frame as well as the expected cost vary. Relative.
Developing GIS indicators and metrics David Theobald Natural Resource Ecology Lab Colorado State University.
Hydrologic network metrics based on functional distance and stream discharge David Theobald & Mary Kneeland Natural Resource Ecology Lab Dept of Recreation.
Habitat association models  Independent Multinomial Selections (IMS): (McCracken, Manly, & Vander Heyden, 1998) Product multinomial likelihood with multinomial.
MSS/MBSS # 1 N. Scott Urquhart Joint work with Erin P. Peterson, Andrew A. Merton, David M. Theobald, and Jennifer A. Hoeting All of Colorado State University,
Distribution Function Estimation in Small Areas for Aquatic Resources Spatial Ensemble Estimates of Temporal Trends in Acid Neutralizing Capacity Mark.
1 Learning Materials for Surface Water Monitoring Gerald Scarzella.
Random Effects Graphical Models and the Analysis of Compositional Data Devin S. Johnson and Jennifer A. Hoeting STARMAP Department of Statistics Colorado.
Landscape and Urban Planning Volume 79, Issue 1Landscape and Urban Planning Volume 79, Issue 1, 15 January 2007, Pages Biological integrity in.
Distribution Function Estimation in Small Areas for Aquatic Resources Spatial Ensemble Estimates of Temporal Trends in Acid Neutralizing Capacity Mark.
Distribution Function Estimation in Small Areas for Aquatic Resources Spatial Ensemble Estimates of Temporal Trends in Acid Neutralizing Capacity Mark.
Extending the National Hydrography Dataset: A Spatial Framework for Water Resources Applications in West Virginia Jackie Strager Natural Resource Analysis.
NHD Stream Order Possibilities Timothy R. Bondelid Research Triangle Institute Research Triangle Park, North Carolina (919) ; fax (919)
Flow Time Time Series Hydro FeaturesHydro Network Channel System Drainage System ArcGIS Hydro Data Model.
A Simple Drainage Enforcement Procedure for Estimating Catchment Area Using DEM Data David Nagel, John M. Buffington, and Charles Luce U.S. Forest Service,
Digital Elevation Model Based Watershed and Stream Network Delineation Understanding How to use Reading
Introduction National Hydrography Dataset Plus (NHDPlus) Version 2.
Functional Linkage of Watersheds and Streams (FLoWS): Network-based ArcGIS tools to analyze freshwater ecosystems Introduction We have been involved, as.
NHD Products and Applications InterMountain GIS 2014 NHD Workshop April 7, 2014.
Creating Watersheds and Stream Networks
DAMARS/STARMAP 8/11/03# 1 STARMAP YEAR 2 N. Scott Urquhart STARMAP Director Department of Statistics Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO
Delaware River Basin SPARROW Model Mary Chepiga, , Susan Colarullo, , Jeff Fischer, ,
Data Sources for GIS in Water Resources by David R. Maidment, David G. Tarboton and Ayse Irmak GIS in Water Resources Fall 2009.
Data Sources for GIS in Water Resources by David R. Maidment, David G. Tarboton and Ayse Irmak GIS in Water Resources Fall 2011.
Esri UC 2014 | Technical Workshop | Creating Watersheds, Stream Networks and Hydrologically Conditioned DEMS Steve Kopp Dean Djokic.
NHD Tools for the Evaluation of Watershed Condition and Management Performance Authors: William Cooter (presenter) Peter Ilieve. Tim Bondelid Mark Bruhn.
The Pfafstetter Coding System in Hydrological modeling TANG, Qiuhong.
Data Sources for GIS in Water Resources by David R. Maidment, David G
Introduction to GIS in Water Resources David R. Maidment Director, Center for Research in Water Resources University of Texas at Austin CRWR.
The Future of NHDPlus 2009 NHD Stewardship Conference Denver, CO April 14-17, NHD Stewardship Conference Denver, CO April 14-17, 2009 Tommy Dewald.
Determining Watershed Parameters for Water Rights in the Cypress River Basin By: Hema Gopalan GIS in Water Resources (C E 394K) Fall 2001.
Watershed Parameters for Water Rights in the Trinity River Basin Melissa Figurski CE 394K.
VARYING DEVIATION BETWEEN H 0 AND TRUE  SEQUENCE OF GRAPHS TO ILLUSTRATE POWER VARYING DEVIATION BETWEEN H 0 AND TRUE  N. Scott Urquhart Director, STARMAP.
National Hydro Data Programs
STREAM NETWORK DELINEATION USING ARC HYDRO AND TauDEM: A comparison of approaches using The Upper Sevier and the Little Bear River Basins Alphonce C. Guzha.
Digital Elevation Model Based Watershed and Stream Network Delineation
Digital Elevation Model Based Watershed and Stream Network Delineation
Data Sources for GIS in Water Resources by David R
Data Sources for GIS in Water Resources by David R
Reflections on Exercise 4
TROUBLESOME CONCEPTS IN STATISTICS: r2 AND POWER
Data Sources for GIS in Water Resources
Development of a Hydrologic Model for the Wichita Falls District
Creating Watersheds and Stream Networks
Presentation transcript:

Linking watersheds and streams through functional modeling of watershed processes David Theobald, Silvio Ferraz, Erin Poston, and Jeff Deems Natural Resource Ecology Lab Dept of Recreation & Tourism Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO USA 19 May 2004

Watershed - Stream Stand-alone watershed Watershed HUCs/WBDReach Contributing Areas (RCAs) Grain (Resolution) Process/Functional Zonal Accumulate Up/down (net.)

Watershed - Stream Stand-alone watershed Watershed-based analyses (HUCs) Tesselation of true, adjoint catchments Watershed HUCs/WBDReach Contributing Areas (RCAs) Grain (Resolution) Process/Functional Zonal Accumulate Up/down (net.)

“Watershed”-based analyses % agricultural, % urban (e.g., ATtILA) % agricultural, % urban (e.g., ATtILA) Average road density (Bolstad and Swank) Average road density (Bolstad and Swank) Dam density (Moyle and Randall 1998) Dam density (Moyle and Randall 1998) Road length w/in riparian zone (Arya 1999) Road length w/in riparian zone (Arya 1999) But ~45% of HUCs are not watersheds But ~45% of HUCs are not watersheds EPA An ecological assessment of the US Mid-Atlantic Region: A landscape atlas. Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project

Watershed - Stream Overlapping watersheds - Delineate watershed from outlet Stand-alone watershed Watershed-based analyses (HUCs) Tesselation of true, adjoint catchments ? Watershed HUCs/WBDReach Contributing Areas (RCAs) Grain (Resolution) Process/Functional Zonal Accumulate Up/down (net.)

River continuum concept (Vannote et al. 1980)

Watershed - Stream Overlapping watersheds Tesselation – catchments accumulate downstream Stand-alone watershed Watershed-based analyses (HUCs) Tesselation of true, adjoint catchments ? Watershed HUCs/WBDReach Contributing Areas (RCAs) Grain (Resolution) Process/Functional Zonal Accumulate Up/down (net.)

Upper and lower Colorado Basin Flows to downstream HUCs

Watershed - Stream Overlapping watersheds Accumulate downstream FLOWS (and SPARROW) Stand-alone watershed Watershed-based analyses (HUCs) Tesselation of true, adjoint catchments ? Watershed HUCs/WBDReach Contributing Areas (RCAs) Grain (Resolution) Process/Functional Zonal Accumulate Up/down (net.)

Reach Contributing Areas (RCAs) Automated delineation Inputs: Inputs: stream network (from USGS NHD 1:100K) stream network (from USGS NHD 1:100K) topography (USGS NED, 30 m or 90 m) topography (USGS NED, 30 m or 90 m) Process: Process: “Grow” contributing area away from reach segment until ridgeline “Grow” contributing area away from reach segment until ridgeline Uses WATERSHED command Uses WATERSHED command “true” catchments “adjoint” catchments Reaches (segments)

RCA example US ERF1.2 & 1 km DEM: 60,833 RCAs US ERF1.2 & 1 km DEM: 60,833 RCAs

Reaches are linked to catchments 1 to 1 relationship 1 to 1 relationship Properties of the watershed can be linked to network for accumulation operation Properties of the watershed can be linked to network for accumulation operation

Watershed - Stream Hydrologic distance: - Instream - Up vs. down? Overlapping watersheds Accumulate downstream FLOWS (and SPARROW) Stand-alone watershed Watershed-based analyses (HUCs) Tesselation of true, adjoint catchments ? Watershed HUCs/WBDReach Contributing Areas (RCAs) Grain (Resolution) Process/Functional Zonal Accumulate Up/down (net.)

Types of Distance As the crow flies As the crow flies As the seed floats (A  B) As the seed floats (A  B) As the fish swims (C  D) As the fish swims (C  D) Upstream length (B up) Upstream length (B up) Network (dams, fragmentation) Network (dams, fragmentation)

Upstream 66 km Downstream 298 km Mainstem Upstream 37 km Network 16 km (down) 6 km (up)

Watershed - Stream Hydrologic distance: - Instream - Up vs. down? FLOWS Overlapping watersheds Accumulate downstream FLOWS (and SPARROW) Stand-alone watershed Watershed-based analyses (HUCs) Tesselation of true, adjoint catchments ? Watershed HUCs/WBDReach Contributing Areas (RCAs) Grain (Resolution) Process/Functional Zonal Accumulate Up/down (net.)

RCAs are linked together – but spatial configuration within an RCA? 1. Ignore variability2. Buffer streams3. Buffer outlet

2 major hydro. processes w/in RCA 1. Overland (hillslope): Distance (A to A’) 2. Instream flow: Distance (A’ to O)

Flow distance: overland + instream Hydro-conditioned DEM (e.g., EDNA) Hydro-conditioned DEM (e.g., EDNA) FLOWDIRECTION FLOWDIRECTION FLOWLENGTH FLOWLENGTH

Flow distance: overland Hydro-conditioned DEM (e.g., EDNA) Hydro-conditioned DEM (e.g., EDNA) Burn stream into FLOWDIRECTION Burn stream into FLOWDIRECTION FLOWLENGTH FLOWLENGTH

Flow distance: instream Hydro-conditioned DEM (e.g., EDNA) Hydro-conditioned DEM (e.g., EDNA) FLOWDIRECTION FLOWDIRECTION FLOWLENGTH from outline – overland FLOWLENGTH FLOWLENGTH from outline – overland FLOWLENGTH

Summary RCAs networked together + w/in RCA distances RCAs networked together + w/in RCA distances Practical framework for flexible, functional-based applications Practical framework for flexible, functional-based applicationsPlans Use cost-weighting for w/in RCA distances Use cost-weighting for w/in RCA distances FLOWS tools: Fall 2004 FLOWS tools: Fall 2004 Watershed True watersheds True watersheds(HCAs) By attribute By attribute By outlet pointBy outlet point By closest contributionBy closest contribution Area Area % % Discharge Discharge

Thanks! Comments? Questions? Comments? Questions? Funding/Disclaimer: The work reported here was developed under the STAR Research Assistance Agreement CR awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to Colorado State University. This presentation has not been formally reviewed by EPA. The views expressed here are solely those of the presenter and STARMAP, the Program (s)he represents. EPA does not endorse any products or commercial services mentioned in this presentation. Funding/Disclaimer: The work reported here was developed under the STAR Research Assistance Agreement CR awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to Colorado State University. This presentation has not been formally reviewed by EPA. The views expressed here are solely those of the presenter and STARMAP, the Program (s)he represents. EPA does not endorse any products or commercial services mentioned in this presentation. STARMAP: STARMAP: RWTools: RWTools: Funding/Disclaimer: The work reported here was developed under the STAR Research Assistance Agreement CR awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to Colorado State University. This presentation has not been formally reviewed by EPA. The views expressed here are solely those of the presenter and STARMAP, the Program (s)he represents. EPA does not endorse any products or commercial services mentioned in this presentation. This research is funded by U.S.EPA – Science To Achieve Results (STAR) Program Cooperative Agreement # CR Funding/Disclaimer: The work reported here was developed under the STAR Research Assistance Agreement CR awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to Colorado State University. This presentation has not been formally reviewed by EPA. The views expressed here are solely those of the presenter and STARMAP, the Program (s)he represents. EPA does not endorse any products or commercial services mentioned in this presentation. This research is funded by U.S.EPA – Science To Achieve Results (STAR) Program Cooperative Agreement # CR Funding/Disclaimer: The work reported here was developed under the STAR Research Assistance Agreement CR awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to Colorado State University. This presentation has not been formally reviewed by EPA. The views expressed here are solely those of the presenter and STARMAP, the Program (s)he represents. EPA does not endorse any products or commercial services mentioned in this presentation. This research is funded by U.S.EPA – Science To Achieve Results (STAR) Program Cooperative Agreement # CR This research is funded by U.S.EPA – Science To Achieve Results (STAR) Program Cooperative Agreement # CR This research is funded by U.S.EPA – Science To Achieve Results (STAR) Program Cooperative Agreement # CR CR