Do Polynomials Adequately Describe the Hypsometry of Monadnock Phase Watersheds?

Hypsometry has been shown to be a useful tool in geomorphic analysis of watersheds with the use of third‐degree polynomial equations to express the hypsometric curve. Despite its usefulness with watersheds in the equilibrium stage, the third‐degree polynomial has been found to be inadequate to describe the hypsometry of Monadnock phase watersheds. Three other equations — a modified third‐degree polynomial with a rational term, a sigmoidal model, and a double exponential — were used to determine hypsometric attributes of 32 Monadnock phase watersheds and compared to the third‐degree polynomial form. The three other equations were found to be better fits for Monadnock phase watersheds than the third‐degree polynomial equation, regardless of which ratio — area or elevation — was plotted as the independent variable. Due to the occasional failure of each functional form to give logical values for hypsometric attributes, the importance of using more than one form equation is discussed. After determining the best‐fit equation for each watershed, the usefulness of hypsometric attributes is discussed in relation to erosion processes within Monadnock phase watersheds.     

Estimating Watershed Level Nonagricultural Pesticide Use From Golf Courses Using Geospatial Methods1

Abstract: Limited information exists on pesticide use for nonagricultural purposes, making it difficult to estimate pesticide loadings from nonagricultural sources to surface water and to conduct environmental risk assessments. A method was developed to estimate the amount of pesticide use on recreational turf grasses, specifically golf course turf grasses, for watersheds located throughout the conterminous United States (U.S.). The approach estimates pesticide use: (1) based on the area of recreational turf grasses (used as a surrogate for turf associated with golf courses) within the watershed, which was derived from maps of land cover, and (2) from data on the location and average treatable area of golf courses. The area of golf course turf grasses determined from these two methods was used to calculate the percentage of each watershed planted in golf course turf grass (percent crop area, or PCA). Turf‐grass PCAs derived from the two methods were used with recommended application rates provided on pesticide labels to estimate total pesticide use on recreational turf within 1,606 watersheds associated with surface‐water sources of drinking water. These pesticide use estimates made from label rates and PCAs were compared to use estimates from industry sales data on the amount of each pesticide sold for use within the watershed. The PCAs derived from the land‐cover data had an average value of 0.4% of a watershed with minimum of 0.01% and a maximum of 9.8%, whereas the PCA values that are based on the number of golf courses in a watershed had an average of 0.3% of a watershed with a minimum of <0.01% and a maximum of 14.2%. Both the land‐cover method and the number of golf courses method produced similar PCA distributions, suggesting that either technique may be used to provide a PCA estimate for recreational turf. The average and maximum PCAs generally correlated to watershed size, with the highest PCAs estimated for small watersheds. Using watershed specific PCAs, combined with label rates, resulted in greater than two orders of magnitude over‐estimation of the pesticide use compared to estimates from sales data.     

FLOOD FREQUENCY CHARACTERISTICS OF SOME ARIZONA WATERSHEDS1

The flood frequency characteristics of 18 watersheds in southeastern Arizona were studied using the log-Boughton and the log-Pearson Type 3 distribution. From the flood frequency study, a generalized envelope for Q₁₀₀ for watersheds 0.01 to 4000 mi² in area has been produced for southeastern Arizona. The generalized envelope allows comparisons to be made among the relative flood characteristics of the watersheds used in the study and provides a conservative estimate of Q₁₀₀ for ungaged watersheds in the region.     

An Aquifer Classification System and Geographical Information System-Based Analysis Tool for Watershed Managers in the Western U.S.1

Payne, Scott M. and William W. Woessner, 2010. An Aquifer Classification System and Geographical Information System-Based Analysis Tool for Watershed Managers in the Western U.S. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 46(5):1003-1023. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2010.00472.x Abstract: Aquifers and groundwater systems can be classified using a variety of independent methods to characterize geologic and hydraulic properties, the degree of connection with surface water, and geochemical conditions. In light of a growing global demand for water, an approach for classifying groundwater systems at the watershed scale is needed. A comprehensive classification system is proposed that combines recognized methods and new approaches. The purpose of classification is to provide groundwater professionals, policy makers, and watershed managers with a widely applicable and repeatable system that reduces sometimes cumbersome complex databases and analyzes to straightforward terminology and graphical representations. The proposed classification system uses basin geology, aquifer productivity, water quality, and the degree of groundwater/surface water connection as classification criteria. The approach is based on literature values, reference databases, and fundamental hydrologic and hydrogeologic principles. The proposed classification system treats dataset completeness as a variable and includes a tiered assessment protocol that depends on the quality and quantity of data. In addition, it assembles and catalogs groundwater information using a consistent set of nomenclature. It is designed to analyze and display results using Geographical Information System mapping tools.