1. Hydrologic Analysis for NPS 319 and CMI Grants Dave Fongers, HSU, MDEQ, 517-373-0210, fongersd@michigan.gov Hydrologic Analysis for NPS 319 and CMI Grants

3. Definitions Hydrology: the occurrence, distribution, and movement of water both on and under the earth's surface. Stream Morphology: the form and structure of a stream (sinuosity, profile, and cross- sectional dimensions). Morphologic Stability: no net change in channel shape, which occurs only if the channel-forming flow is also stable. A stable stream will have natural erosion. Hydrologic changes can cause a stream to be unstable for 60 years or more.

4. Channel-Forming Flow is the flood discharge that causes the channel to assume its existing shape. Extreme flood flows generally have little effect on channel morphology because they are so rare. More frequent flows, those that recur about every 1.5 to 2-years, are generally the dominant channel-forming flows in stable, natural streams (Schueler, 1987 and Rosgen, 1996).

5. Increase Flow or Slope Increase Sediment, Erosion Water can carry 64 times larger particles if the velocity is doubled.

6. Hager Creek Instability is indicated by extensive, excessive erosion, especially along straight reaches.

7. Down-cuts are good indicators of instability. Hager Creek

8. A more typical down-cut. Hager Creek

10. A.Help identify the cause(s) of streambank erosion B.Facilitate the selection and design of suitable stabilization BMPs C.Understand and plan for future hydrologic change D.Help define critical areas for the Watershed Management Plan Goals of NPS Hydrologic Analysis

11. A.Help identify the cause(s) of streambank erosion B.Facilitate the selection and design of suitable stabilization BMPs C.Understand and plan for future hydrologic change D.Help define critical areas for the Watershed Management Plan Goals of NPS Hydrologic Analysis

12. A. ID erosion causes Blakeslee Creek Land Use Change

13. Predicted 50 percent chance (2-year) flow from calibrated model. Pre-developmentPost-development Blakeslee Creek A. ID erosion causes 70% increase in peak flow, 170% increase in runoff volume, former instantaneous peak flow now lasts ~4 hours

14. Blakeslee Creek Instability is indicated by extensive, excessive erosion, especially along straight reaches.

15. Gage Analysis A. ID erosion causes 4712 cfs 67% (1.5-year), 6368 cfs 50% (2-year), 10397 cfs 10% (10-year) Gage Analysis

16. A. ID erosion causes

17. Sometimes the cause of the erosion is obvious. Pine River Cause A. ID erosion causes Livestock

18. A. ID erosion causes Foot Traffic

19. This erosion may be caused by flow diverting around debris or ice piling against the former bridge supports. Nearby streambanks are stable. Bear Creek A. ID erosion causes Flow Obstructions

20. A. ID erosion causes Natural Erosion

21. A.Help identify the cause(s) of streambank erosion B.Facilitate the selection and design of suitable stabilization BMPs C.Understand and plan for future hydrologic change D.Help define critical areas for the Watershed Management Plan Goals of NPS Hydrologic Analysis

22. Fleming’s/River Rouge This CMI-funded detention pond’s drainage area is nearly fully developed. Based on the grantee’s hydrologic analysis, the 2-year event release rate is 0.018 cfs/acre. B. BMP design

23. This erosion started 80 years ago when fourteen miles of natural stream was diverted to a three-mile long, straight channel. The hydrologic study provided design flows. East Branch AuGres River A. ID erosion causes

24. Hager Creek Hydrologic analysis provided design flows. Hydraulic analysis verified the effect of the proposed channel changes. B. BMP design

25. A.Help identify the cause(s) of streambank erosion B.Facilitate the selection and design of suitable stabilization BMPs C.Understand and plan for future hydrologic change D.Help define critical areas for the Watershed Management Plan Goals of NPS Hydrologic Analysis

26. Black River C. Plan for future changes

27. Black River, 4% storm C. Plan for future changes

28. Sand Creek C. Plan for future changes

29. Sand Creek C. Plan for future changes

30. Sand Creek C. Plan for future changes

31. Sand Creek C. Plan for future changes

32. Sand Creek C. Plan for future changes

33. Watershed Yield, area-weighted average (cfs/acre) 2-year25-year Cedar Creek0.0040.03 Black River0.0060.03 Gun River0.0090.04 Pigeon River0.0100.05 Bear Creek, Muskegon 0.0100.07 Coldwater River0.0150.05 Sand Creek0.0210.09 Mitchell Creek0.0220.14 Ryerson Creek0.029NA Bear Creek, Kent0.0370.15 0.13 0.05 C. Plan for future changes

34. From Gun River Hydrologic and Hydraulic Study, Appendix 6 C. Plan for future changes

35. From Gun River Hydrologic and Hydraulic Study, Appendix 6 C. Plan for future changes Soil Group Detention Requirements Release Rate (cfs per impervious acre) Volume (cubic feet per impervious acre) A0.0263,000 B0.0344,000 C0.0515,800 D0.0595,800 A or B soilinfltrate C or D soil 0.05 cfs per impervious acre release rate 5,800 cubic feet of detention storage per impervious acre

36. A.Help identify the cause(s) of streambank erosion B.Facilitate the selection and design of suitable stabilization BMPs C.Understand and plan for future hydrologic change D.Help define critical areas for the Watershed Management Plan Goals of NPS Hydrologic Analysis

37. D. Define critical areas Subbasin Wetland Rank Agricultural Rank Yield (cfs/acre) Rank % Change Runoff Volume Rank Total Runoff Volume Rank Total Ranking BC1114219 BC22344114 BC2T3433215 BC33323415 BC44332618 BC4Tn4321212 BC4Ts3322313 CR1111137 CR22122411 Excerpt from Coldwater River Watershed Management Plan, Tables 13 & 14 Total Rank5-1011-1314-1516+ PriorityVery LowLowHighVery High