DOCSLIB.ORG

South Fox Meadow Drainage Improvement Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

VILLAGE OF SCARSDALE WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK COMPREHENSIVE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SOUTH FOX MEADOW STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT In association with WESTCHESTER COUNTY FLOOD MITIGATION PROGRAM Rob DeGiorgio, P.E., CPESC, CPSWQ The Bronx River Watershed Fox Meadow Brook Bronx River Watershed Area in Westchester 48.3 square miles (30,932 acres) 15 Sub-watersheds Percent of undeveloped land in the Watershed 3.3% (0.8 acres in Fox Meadow Brook (FMB) FMB watershed) 928 acres (5.7% of watershed) Bronx River Watershed Fox Meadow Brook George Field Park High School Duck Pond Project Philosophy and Goals •Provide flood mitigation within the Fox Meadow Brook Drainage Basin. •Reduce peak run off rates in the Bronx River Watershed through dry detention storage. •Rehabilitate and preserve natural landscapes and wetlands through invasive species management and re- construction. •Improve water quality. • Petition for and obtain County grant funding to subsidize the project. Village of Scarsdale Fox Meadow Brook Watershed SR-2 BR-4 SR-3 BR-7 BR-8 SR-5 Village of Scarsdale History •In 2009 the Village completed a Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan. •Critical Bronx River sub drainage basin areas identified inclusive of Fox Meadow Brook (BR-4, BR-7, BR-8). •26 Capital Improvement Projects were identified, several of which comprise the Fox Meadow Detention Improvement Project. •Project included in Village’s Capital Budget. •Project has been reviewed by the NYS DEC. •NYS EFC has approved financing for the project granting Scarsdale a 50% subsidy for their local share of the costs. Village of Scarsdale Site Locations – 7 Segments 7 Project Segments 1. George Field Park Dry Detention Pond 2. Cambridge Road Clean, Televise, Line CMP pipe, add positive drainage 3. Cooper Green Dry Detention Pond 4. Open Stream Along Post Road De-silting/re-channelization 5. Murray Hill Dry Detention Pond 6. Gravel Parking Lot at the High School Raise the lot 7. Harcourt Woods De-silting/ re-channelization Segment No.1 - George Field Park (Overview) Post Rd 80 ft Dry Detention Basin Wetland Greendale Rd 800 ft Oxford Rd Oxford Segment No. 1 - George Field Park (Wetland) •Rehabilitated, re-constructed wetland •Enhances water quality •Improves bio-habitat •Eliminate invasive species (Japanese Knot Weed, Norway Maples…) •Dry detention – 7 acre feet of storage (2,300,000 gals) •1 to 3 feet overall depth Segment No. 1 - George Field Park (Pedestrian Bridge) •Stream bank stabilization •Passive recreation Segment No. 1 - George Field Park (Outlet) •Greendale Road side Grassy swale – water quality improvement •New trees and vegetation Segment No. 1 - George Field Park (Section View) Segment No. 2 - Cambridge Road • Cleaning, televising, and potentially lining the drain pipe from George Field Park to Cooper Green • Installing positive drainage in the low lying area WORK WILL BE COMPLETED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AND AN AGREEMENT WILL HAVE TO BE REACHED WITH THE HOME OWNER(S) Village of Scarsdale Segment No. 3 - Cooper Green Post Road Dry Detention Pond Pervious walkway / rain garden Grey Twig Dogwood New England Aster Witch Hazel Cut leaf Cone Flower Native Rain Garden Plantings Wild Beramont Switch Grass Inkberry Holly Spotted Joe-Pye Weed Cardinal Flower Great Blue Lobelia Elderberry Red Milkweed Winterberry Segment No. 3 - Cooper Green (Section View) •2,900 square feet of Rain Garden along pervious walkway •One of largest Rain Gardens proposed in the Hudson Valley •2.5 acre-feet of run off storage (815,000 gals) Segment No. 4 - Open Watercourse Re-Channelization Along Post Road • The stream will be desilted to restore the optimal geometry of the stream. • Work to be completed on private property – requires access agreements. Village of Scarsdale Segment No. 5 - Murray Hill/Post Road FLOW FROM ALONG •2.5 acre feet of storage POST ROAD (UPPER FMB) (815,000 gals) FLOW FROM MURRAY HILL ROAD •Helps eliminate bottle neck at confluence at Murray Hill/Post CONFLUENCE Road more so than reducing POINT OF FLOWS overall peak flows •Involves Land Acquisition – to be determined by Board of Trustees •Not part of the project planned for bidding in December 2011 Segment No. 6 - High School Parking Lot Flood Mitigation • Chronic flooding at High School lot. •Identified Project in Village’s Comprehensive Plan. •Beneficial re-use of excavated soils. •20,000 cubic yards of soil to be un-earthed at George Filed Park and Cooper Green •About 12,000 – 14,000 cubic yards can be beneficially re-used to raise the lot. •Saves the Project over $300,000 in disposal costs. •Saves the Project over $250,000 in imported fill costs. •Green Solution – smart planning Village of Scarsdale Harcourt Woods Re-Channelization • Restore optimal stream geometry Village of Scarsdale Project Benefits Virtually no project within the 15 Bronx River watershed sub-basins reduces existing peak flow run off rates to any appreciable extent ………..until now. Fox Meadow Brook Project Benefits George Field NOW Park Revised Flood Plain (3- 4 inches precip) Cooper Green Project Benefits – Peak Flow Reductions* Peak Flow Reductions* George Field Park Sub-basin 70% reduction in peak flows Cooper Green 58% reduction in peak flows Murray Hill Major benefit is to DELAY the peak flow to the confluence point •For 3.5 inches of rain storm event (flash events and 24 –hr sustained events) Village of Scarsdale Project Benefits – Peak Flow Reductions* FMB Bronx River Sub-basin 50% (one of fifteen Bronx River sub basins) 30% reduction 25% in peak flows 0 % Peak Runoff ReductionsRunoff Peak (%) Bronx the River To 3.5” 4.5” 5.0” 6.0” 7.0” Storm Intensity (inches) Village of Scarsdale Project Benefits •If each of the fifteen Westchester County sub- watersheds that flow to the Bronx River could reduce peak flows for a 3 to 5 inch rain event by 30%, it would result in a significant reduction in flooding impacts. Fox Meadow Brook Project Benefits •Effective in reducing flooding in flash storm events as well as sustained events. •Eliminates invasive species & deteriorated trees and vegetation. •Introduces constructed wetland to George Field Park & Rain Gardens to Cooper Green. •Improves water quality. Village of Scarsdale Estimated Construction Costs Segment No. 1. George Field Park Wetland & Dry Detention $1,300,000 2. Cambridge Road Drainage Inlets, Cleaning, Televising & Lining $ 300,000 3. Cooper Green Rain Garden & Dry Detention $ 700,000 4. Open Watercourse re-channelization along Post Road $ 150,000 6. High School Parking Lot Flood Mitigation $ 600,000 7. Harcourt Woods re-channelization $ 100,000 TOTAL $3,150,000 6. Murray Hill Dry Detention Pond $ 600,000* * CONTINGENT ON LAND ACQUISITION AND DEMOLITION (ESTIMATED AT $2M-$3M) WHICH IS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS COST ESTIMATE Village of Scarsdale Project Schedule Public Bidding December 2011 Contract (s) Award February 2012 Start of Construction March/April 2012 Substantial Completion December 2012 Growing Seasons 2012-2014 Village of Scarsdale Questions? Village of Scarsdale Sheldrake Watershed 2009 Comprehensive Plan Summary SR2 Garden Rd Cushman Rd Sheldrake Rd SR- 2 – 199 acre watershed Cushman Road Culvert Fenway West Pond 2-yr flow = 124 cfs Fenway Irrigation Pond SR-3 – 271 acre watershed Murray Hill One of the most heavily flooded 3 Pond Area SR3 sub basins in the Village Cayuga Pond Fenway Irrigation pond replaced SR4 with groundwater pond Middle School 2-yr flow = 418 cfs SR-4 – 50 acre watershed Scarsdale SR5 Medical Group Outflow to New Rochelle SR-5 – 173 acre watershed 2-yr flow = 515 cfs Sheldrake FEMA Designated Flood Zones N Fenway Golf Club Fox Cayuga Meadow Pond Heathcote Bypass Source: FEMA Issued Sheldrake Flood Maps Sheldrake Watershed Aerial Fenway West Pond Murray Hill Fenway Irrigation Ponds Pond Cayuga Pond Middle School Sheldrake – SR3 Area SR-5 Murray Hill SR-3 Ponds SR-2 Middle School Fenway Irrigation Pond Cayuga Pond SR-5 SR-4 Sheldrake – Conceptual Improvements 1 SR-5 SR-3 SR-2 Middle School 2 Fenway Irrigation Pond 1 3 Cayuga Pond 3 Segment #3 – Cayuga Pond Segment #1 – Culvert improvements Segment #2 - Murray Hill 3 Pond enlargement, de-silting, fore bay on Sheldrake, Cushman and Garden de-silting to increase storage installation and improvements to Roads, Pipe/watercourse cleaning on SRcapacity.-5 Creation of fore bay in spillway withSR control-4 gate with control Garden/Cushman/Sheldrake Roads. Pond No.1 and spillway/control outlet. Cleaning/ Improvements to Greater detention capacity at Fenway gate modification for outlet. culverts and open watercourse at West Pond to increase pond storage Cleaning of open watercourse to Catherine, Cayuga, Seneca to Middle detention capacity. Cayuga Pond. School/.Quaker Center. .
Recommended publications
  • Field Indicators of Hydric Soils

    Field Indicators of Hydric Soils

    United States Department of Field Indicators of Agriculture Natural Resources Hydric Soils in the Conservation Service United States In cooperation with A Guide for Identifying and Delineating the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils Hydric Soils, Version 8.2, 2018 Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States A Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils Version 8.2, 2018 (Including revisions to versions 8.0 and 8.1) United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils Edited by L.M. Vasilas, Soil Scientist, NRCS, Washington, DC; G.W. Hurt, Soil Scientist, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; and J.F. Berkowitz, Soil Scientist, USACE, Vicksburg, MS ii In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.
  • WATER-QUALITY SWALES Maria Cahill, Derek C

    WATER-QUALITY SWALES Maria Cahill, Derek C

    OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION SERVICE Photo: Clean Water Services LOW-IMPACT DEVELOPMENT FACT SHEET WATER-QUALITY SWALES Maria Cahill, Derek C. Godwin, and Jenna H. Tilt most Oregon jurisdictions have moved away from grass. hink of a water-quality swale as a rain garden Design elements may vary in several aspects, including in motion: It treats runoff while simultaneously function, vegetation type, and physical setting. Tmoving it from one place to another. The terms “rain garden” and “swale” are often used Water-quality swales (WQ swales) are linear, vegetat- interchangeably, but rain gardens hold runoff and treat ed, channeled depressions in the landscape that convey it, while swales treat runoff as it is conveyed. Depending and treat runoff from a variety of surfaces. Runoff may on the design, the resulting water-quality benefits can be piped or channeled, or it may flow overland to a differ greatly, but water-quality swales generally provide swale. As water passes through the swale, some runoff lower benefit than rain gardens or stormwater planters. may infiltrate, or seep, into the soil. Not all swales are WQ swales. Conveyance swales, Maria Cahill, principal, Green Girl Land Development Solutions; such as ditches, move water from one place to another. Derek Godwin, watershed management faculty, professor, But these are likely narrow channels with no vegetation biological and ecological engineering, College of Agricultural Sciences, Oregon State University; Jenna H. Tilt, assistant and little to no water-quality benefits. WQ swales may be professor (senior research), College of Earth, Ocean, and planted either with grass or landscape plants, although Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University EM 9209 June 2018 Site conditions The channel and linear design of swales make them suitable for roadside runoff capture, although residen- tial areas with frequent, closely spaced driveway cul- verts may not be ideal locations (Barr 2001).
  • Classifying Rivers - Three Stages of River Development

    Classifying Rivers - Three Stages of River Development

    Classifying Rivers - Three Stages of River Development River Characteristics - Sediment Transport - River Velocity - Terminology The illustrations below represent the 3 general classifications into which rivers are placed according to specific characteristics. These categories are: Youthful, Mature and Old Age. A Rejuvenated River, one with a gradient that is raised by the earth's movement, can be an old age river that returns to a Youthful State, and which repeats the cycle of stages once again. A brief overview of each stage of river development begins after the images. A list of pertinent vocabulary appears at the bottom of this document. You may wish to consult it so that you will be aware of terminology used in the descriptive text that follows. Characteristics found in the 3 Stages of River Development: L. Immoor 2006 Geoteach.com 1 Youthful River: Perhaps the most dynamic of all rivers is a Youthful River. Rafters seeking an exciting ride will surely gravitate towards a young river for their recreational thrills. Characteristically youthful rivers are found at higher elevations, in mountainous areas, where the slope of the land is steeper. Water that flows over such a landscape will flow very fast. Youthful rivers can be a tributary of a larger and older river, hundreds of miles away and, in fact, they may be close to the headwaters (the beginning) of that larger river. Upon observation of a Youthful River, here is what one might see: 1. The river flowing down a steep gradient (slope). 2. The channel is deeper than it is wide and V-shaped due to downcutting rather than lateral (side-to-side) erosion.
  • Natural Vegetation of the Carolinas: Classification and Description of Plant Communities of the Lumber (Little Pee Dee) and Waccamaw Rivers

    Natural Vegetation of the Carolinas: Classification and Description of Plant Communities of the Lumber (Little Pee Dee) and Waccamaw Rivers

    Natural vegetation of the Carolinas: Classification and Description of Plant Communities of the Lumber (Little Pee Dee) and Waccamaw Rivers A report prepared for the Ecosystem Enhancement Program, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources in partial fulfillments of contract D07042. By M. Forbes Boyle, Robert K. Peet, Thomas R. Wentworth, Michael P. Schafale, and Michael Lee Carolina Vegetation Survey Curriculum in Ecology, CB#3275 University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, NC 27599‐3275 Version 1. May 19, 2009 1 INTRODUCTION The riverine and associated vegetation of the Waccamaw, Lumber, and Little Pee Rivers of North and South Carolina are ecologically significant and floristically unique components of the southeastern Atlantic Coastal Plain. Stretching from northern Scotland County, NC to western Brunswick County, NC, the Lumber and northern Waccamaw Rivers influence a vast amount of landscape in the southeastern corner of NC. Not far south across the interstate border, the Lumber River meets the Little Pee Dee River, influencing a large portion of western Horry County and southern Marion County, SC before flowing into the Great Pee Dee River. The Waccamaw River, an oddity among Atlantic Coastal Plain rivers in that its significant flow direction is southwest rather that southeast, influences a significant portion of the eastern Horry and eastern Georgetown Counties, SC before draining into Winyah Bay along with the Great Pee Dee and several other SC blackwater rivers. The Waccamaw River originates from Lake Waccamaw in Columbus County, NC and flows ~225 km parallel to the ocean before abrubtly turning southeast in Georgetown County, SC and dumping into Winyah Bay.
  • Topic: Drainage Basins As Open Systems 3.1.1.2 Runoff, Hydrographs & Changes in the Water Cycle Over Time

    Topic: Drainage Basins As Open Systems 3.1.1.2 Runoff, Hydrographs & Changes in the Water Cycle Over Time

    Topic: Drainage basins as open systems 3.1.1.2 Runoff, hydrographs & changes in the water cycle over time What you need to know How runoff varies within the water cycle. How to analyse a flood hydrograph How the water cycle changes over time Introduction: Runoff (the flow of water over the Earth’s surface) can vary depending upon a range of physical and human factors. These include: • Time of year. • Storm conditions. • Vegetation cover. • Soil saturation levels. • Topography & relief. • Agricultural land use. • Urban land use. Physical factors affecting runoff: Time of year In temperate climates, where seasonal change is evident, runoff levels can vary greatly throughout the year. In summer, runoff levels can be low due to a reduction in rainfall. Soil saturation levels will be low and therefore any rainfall at this point can easily infiltrate into the ground. However, intense baking of the soil by the sun can lead to the soil becoming effectively impermeable and summer storms can lead to high levels of runoff as the rain is unable to soak in. This can lead to flash flooSAMPLEds. In winter, precipitation may be in the form of snow and the water may be stored on the ground due to low temperatures. Warmer temperatures in spring may lead to snowmelt and this can lead to the soil reaching field capacity quickly. Further meltwater will therefore run over the surface. © Tutor2u Limited 2016 www.tutor2u.net Topic: Drainage basins as open systems 3.1.1.2 Runoff, hydrographs & changes in the water cycle over time Storm conditions Intense storms with heavy rainfall can lead to soils quickly becoming saturated.
  • Data Collection Requirements and Procedures for Mapping Wetland, Deepwater, and Related Habitats of the United States (Version 3)

    Data Collection Requirements and Procedures for Mapping Wetland, Deepwater, and Related Habitats of the United States (Version 3)

    Data Collection Requirements and Procedures for Mapping Wetland, Deepwater, and Related Habitats of the United States (version 3) U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE - ECOLOGICAL SERVICES DIVISION OF BUDGET AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT BRANCH OF GEOSPATIAL MAPPING AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT FALLS CHURCH, VA 2204 REVISED JULY 2020 1 Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the following individuals for their support and contributions: Bill Kirchner, USFWS, Region 1, Portland, OR; Elaine Blok, USFWS, Region 8, Portland, OR Brian Huberty, USFWS, Region 3, Twin Cities, MN; Ralph Tiner, USFWS, Region 5, Hadley, MA: Kevin Bon, USFWS, Region 6, Denver, CO; Jerry Tande, USFWS, Region 7, Anchorage, AK; Julie Michaelson, USFWS, Region 7, Anchorage, AK; Norm Mangrum, USFWS, St. Petersburg, FL; Dennis Fowler, USFWS, St. Petersburg, FL; Jim Terry, USFWS, St. Petersburg, FL; Martin Kodis, USFWS, Chief - Branch of Resources and Mapping Support, Washington, D.C. and David J. Stout, USFWS, Chief - Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation, Washington, D.C. Peer review was provided by the following subject matter experts: Dr. Shawna Dark and Danielle Bram, California State University - Northridge. Robb Macleod, Ducks Unlimited, Great Lakes and Atlantic Regional Office, Ann Arbor, MI; Michael Kjellson, Dept. Wildlife and Fisheries, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD; and Deborah (Jane) Awl, Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, TN. This document may be referenced as: Dahl, T.E., J. Dick, J. Swords, and B.O. Wilen. 2020. Data Collection Requirements and Procedures for Mapping Wetland, Deepwater and Related Habitats of the United States. Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation (version 3), National Wetlands Inventory, Madison, WI. 91 p.
  • National Wetlands Inventory

    National Wetlands Inventory

    3/23/2016 Wetlands Mapper National Wetlands Inventory Ecological Services ES Home About Us Species Wildlife and Habitat Conservation Development and Energy FWS Regions Library Newsroom NWI Menu Wetlands Mapper NWI Home The Wetlands Mapper integrates digital map data with other resource information to produce timely and relevant management and decision support tools. We recommend looking at the following prior to launching a map: Wetlands Data » Please read the Disclaimer, Data Limitations, Exclusions and Precautions, and Status and Trends » the Wetlands Geodatabase User Caution. Wetlands Layer » Refer to the following links for documentation and answers to frequently asked New: Wetland Mapping questions: Other Topics » Projects Mapper! Wetlands Mapper Documentation and Instructions Manual (PDF) Frequently Asked Questions: Wetlands Mapper (PDF) Click below to open the Mapper. National Wetlands Frequently Asked Questions web page Printing maps with the Wetlands Inventory Mapper (PDF) Mapper Introduction Contact Information » VIDEO: How to find and use the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service's Wetlands Mapper Help and Contacts Click Here to Open the Wetlands Mapper* (data last modified on October 1, 2015; best viewed by maximizing your browser window) To beta test our new HTML5 (non­Flash) mapper on your desktop, click here (FAQs). Frequently Asked Please note: Questions When in the wetlands mapper, you can change major geographic regions by using the "Zoom to: select" pull down menu located at the upper right side corner. For help with the new mobile mapper location function, please read this FAQ. Adobe Flash™ is required to access the Wetlands Mapper. Please visit the Adobe Flash Player website (http://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/) to download the latest version of the player.
  • Destin Harbor, Joe's Bayou, and Indian Bayou Water Quality

    Destin Harbor, Joe's Bayou, and Indian Bayou Water Quality

    FLORIDA RECIPIENT City of Destin, Florida Destin Harbor, Joe’s Bayou, and Indian AMOUNT $3,593,600 Bayou Water Quality Improvement LEVERAGE This project includes six projects in three focal areas included in the City of Destin’s $50,000 Master Stormwater Management plan to improve surface water quality in Destin LOCATION Harbor, Joe’s Bayou, and Indian Bayou that directly feed into the southwestern Okaloosa County, Florida portion of Choctawhatchee Bay. As part of the project, the City of Destin will establish roadside swale systems to provide treatment for shallow aquifer recharge ANNOUNCEMENT DATE November 2014 prior to discharge, construct exfiltration systems to provide stormwater treatment, and repair poorly performing culverts. Choctawhatchee Bay is a 27-mile-long estuary that PROGRESS UPDATE supports diverse aquatic and wetland habitats. No new or significant work to report. (April 2015) Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) habitat decline is a significant limiting factor for the overall productivity of the Choctawhatchee Bay, and efforts to improve water quality through the reduction of sediment input into the bay is anticipated to improve the viability of SAV in the western portions of the bay. Seagrass beds in Choctawhatchee Bay support diverse populations of fish and invertebrates, including many recreational and commercial species such as shrimp, eastern oysters, spotted seatrout, gulf menhaden, red drum, blue crab, gulf flounder and mullet. This work is complementary to additional stormwater treatment projects being supported through other oil spill settlement funds. The Gulf Environmental Benefit This suite of Fund, administered by the projects will National Fish and Wildlife complete the Foundation (NFWF), supports actions identified projects to remedy harm and in the City of eliminate or reduce the risk of Destin’s Master harm to Gulf Coast natural Stormwater resources affected by the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
  • River Network Rearrangements in Amazonia Shake Biogeography and Civil Security

    River Network Rearrangements in Amazonia Shake Biogeography and Civil Security

    Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 10 September 2018 doi:10.20944/preprints201809.0168.v1 River Network Rearrangements in Amazonia Shake Biogeography and Civil Security Authors K Ruokolainen1,2*, G Massaine Moulatlet2,3, G Zuquim2, C Hoorn3,4, H Tuomisto2 Affiliations 1 Department of Geography and Geology, University of Turku, 20014 Turku, Finland. 2 Department of Biology, University of Turku, 20014 Turku, Finland. 3 Universidad Regional Amazónica IKIAM, km 7 Via Muyuna, Parroquia Muyuna, Tena, Napo, Ecuador. 4 Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, P.O. Box 94248, 1090 GE Amsterdam, The Netherlands. *Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] Key words: avulsion, civil defence, dispersal barrier, flood, Rio Madeira, rain forest, species distribution Abstract The scene for regional biogeography and human settlements in Central Amazonia is set by the river network, which presumably consolidated in the Pliocene. However, we present geomorphological and sediment chronological data showing that the river network has been anything but stable. Even during the last 50 kyr, the tributary relationships have repeatedly changed for four major rivers, together corresponding to one third of the discharge of the Amazon. The latest major river capture event converted the Japurá from a tributary of the Rio Negro to a tributary of the Amazon only 1000 years ago. Such broad-scale lability implies that rivers cannot have been as efficient biogeographical dispersal barriers as has generally been assumed, but that their effects on human societies can have been even more profound. Climate change and deforestation scenarios predict increasing water levels during peak floods, which will likely increase the risk of future river avulsions.
  • Drainagebasin Characteristics

    Drainagebasin Characteristics

    350 TRANSACTIONS, AMERICAN GEOPHYSICAL UNION DRAINAGE-BASIN CHARACTERISTICS Robert E. Horton Factors descriptive of a drainage-basin as related to its hydrology may be classi­ fied broadly as s (1) Morphologic—These factors depend only on the topography of the land forms of which the drainage-basin is composed and on the form and extent of the stream-system or drainage-net within It. (2) Soil factors—This group includes factors descriptive of the materials form­ ing the groundwork of the drainage-basin, including all those physical properties in­ volved in the moisture-relations of soils. (3) Geologic-structural factors—These factors relate to the depths and charac­ teristics of the underlying rocks and the nature of the geologic structures in so far as they are related to ground-water conditions or otherwise to the hydrology of the drainage-basin. (4) Vegetational factors—These are factors which depend wholly or in part on the vegetation, natural or cultivated, growing within the drainage-basin. (5) Climatic-hydrologic factors--Climatic factors include: Temperature, humid­ ity, rainfall, and evaporation, but as humidity, rainfall, and evaporation may also be considered as hydrologic, the two groups of factors have been combined. Hydrologic factors relate specially to conditions dependent on the operation of the hydrologic cycle, particularly with reference to runoff and ground-water. One of the central problems of hydrology is the correlation of the hydrologic characteristics of a drainage-basin with its morphology, soils, and vegetation. The problem is obviously complex. In some cases, as, for example, with reference to geologic structure, it is obviously difficult, if not impossible, to express the characteristics of the drainage-basin in simple, numerical terms.
  • Age, Extent and Carbon Storage of the Central Congo Basin Peatland Complex Greta C

    Age, Extent and Carbon Storage of the Central Congo Basin Peatland Complex Greta C

    LETTER doi:10.1038/nature21048 Age, extent and carbon storage of the central Congo Basin peatland complex Greta C. Dargie1,2*, Simon L. Lewis1,2*, Ian T. Lawson3, Edward T. A. Mitchard4, Susan E. Page5, Yannick E. Bocko6 & Suspense A. Ifo6 Peatlands are carbon-rich ecosystems that cover just three per We combined a digital elevation model (DEM; from the Shuttle cent of Earth’s land surface1, but store one-third of soil carbon2. Radar Topography Mission, SRTM) to exclude high ground and Peat soils are formed by the build-up of partially decomposed steep slopes, radar backscatter (from the Advanced Land Observation organic matter under waterlogged anoxic conditions. Most peat is Satellite Phased Array type L-band Synthetic Aperture Radar, found in cool climatic regions where unimpeded decomposition ALOS PALSAR) to detect standing surface water under forest, and is slower, but deposits are also found under some tropical swamp optical data (from Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper, ETM+ ) to forests2,3. Here we present field measurements from one of the categorize likely swamp vegetation, to identify areas to prospect for world’s most extensive regions of swamp forest, the Cuvette peat (Extended Data Table 1). We identified nine transects (2.5–20 km Centrale depression in the central Congo Basin4. We find extensive long) within an approximately 40,000 km2 area of northern Republic peat deposits beneath the swamp forest vegetation (peat defined of the Congo (ROC), each traversing more than one vegetation type as material with an organic matter content of at least 65 per cent within waterlogged regions, and collectively spanning the range of non- to a depth of at least 0.3 metres).
  • The Development of International Water Resources : the "Drainage Basin Approach"

    The Development of International Water Resources : the "Drainage Basin Approach"

    THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL WATER RESOURCES : THE "DRAINAGE BASIN APPROACH" C. B. BOURNE* Vancouver With the growth of modern technology, states sharing a drainage basin could affect each other far more seriously than ever before by the utilization of its waters in their territories. This fact has inevitably influenced the evolution of legal rules for solving inter- national water conflicts. As the interdependence of co-basin states became clearer, the inadequacy of the old theories, particularly the theory of territorial sovereignty that a state may do as it pleases with the water in its territory without any legal responsi- bility for the injury it may inflict on neighbouring states, was recognized. A new theory that would take account of this inter- dependence was therefore sought, and soon the notions of com- munity and of good neighbourship were being advocated as the proper foundation for the rules of international water law. An early manifestation of this new theory was an emphasis on the drainage basin. Before long the basin was being spoken of as a unit which should form the basis for planning the develop ment of international water resources. This emphasis is under- standable. For the effects of a work on an international river in one state are usually more noticeable in co-basin states within the drainage basin than outside it, even though its effects outside the basin may in fact be serious. It is one thing, however, to assert that international law, recognizing the interdependence of co-basin states, imposes an obligation on them to take heed of the injury their utilizations of water may inflict on each other; it is another to claim that inter- *C.