DOCSLIB.ORG

Significance of Ephemeral and Intermittent Streams in the Arid and Semi-Arid American Southwest

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Significance of Ephemeral and Intermittent Streams in the Arid and Semi-Arid American Southwest The Ecological and Hydrological Significance of Ephemeral and Intermittent Streams in the Arid and Semi-arid American Southwest R E S E A R C H A N D D E V E L O P M E N T EPA/600/R-08/134 ARS/233046 November 2008 www.epa.gov The Ecological and Hydrological Significance of Ephemeral and Intermittent Streams in the Arid and Semi-arid American Southwest by Lainie R. Levick, David C. Goodrich, Mariano Hernandez USDA-ARS Southwest Watershed Research Center Tucson, Arizona Julia Fonseca Pima County Office of Conservation Science and Environmental Policy Tucson, Arizona Darius J. Semmens USGS – Rocky Mountain Geographic Science Center Denver, Colorado Juliet Stromberg, Melanie Tluczek Arizona State University Tempe, Arizona Robert A. Leidy, Melissa Scianni USEPA, Office of Water, Region IX San Francisco, California D. Phillip Guertin University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona William G. Kepner USEPA, ORD, NERL Las Vegas, Nevada The information in this report has been funded wholly by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under an interagency assistance agreement (DW12922094) to the USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Southwest Watershed Research Center. It has been subjected to both agencies peer and administrative review processes and has been approved for publication. Although this work was reviewed by EPA and approved for publication, it may not necessarily reflect official Agency policy. Mention of trade names and commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development i Washington, DC 20460 5765leb08 Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge the following people for their valuable comments and review that significantly improved the quality, value, and accuracy of this document: Dave Bertelsen (University of Arizona Herbarium), Trevor Hare (Sky Island Alliance), Jim Leenhouts (USGS), Kathleen Lohse (University of Arizona), Waite Osterkamp (USGS), Sam Rector (Arizona Department of Environmental Quality), Phil Rosen (University of Arizona), Marty Tuegel (U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service), Dale Turner (The Nature Conservancy), and Wilson Yee (USEPA). Unless noted otherwise, all photographs are © Lainie Levick. Suggested citation: Levick, L., J. Fonseca, D. Goodrich, M. Hernandez, D. Semmens, J. Stromberg, R. Leidy, M. Scianni, D. P. Guertin, M. Tluczek, and W. Kepner. 2008. The Ecological and Hydrological Significance of Ephemeral and Intermittent Streams in the Arid and Semi-arid American Southwest. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and USDA/ARS Southwest Watershed Research Center, EPA/600/R-08/134, ARS/233046, 116 pp. ii Abstract This report represents a state-of-the-art synthesis of current knowledge of the ecology and hydrology of ephemeral (dry washes) and intermittent streams in the American Southwest, and may have important bearing on establishing nexus to traditional navigable waters (TNW) and defining connectivity relative to the Clean Water Act. Ephemeral and intermittent streams make up approximately 59% of all streams in the United States (excluding Alaska), and over 81% in the arid and semi-arid Southwest (Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, Colorado and California) according to the U.S. Geological Survey National Hydrography Dataset. They are often the headwaters or major tributaries of perennial streams in the Southwest. This comprehensive review of the present scientific understanding of the ecology and hydrology of ephemeral and intermittent streams will help place them in a watershed context, thereby highlighting their importance in maintaining water quality, overall watershed function or health, and provisioning of the essential human and biological requirements of clean water. Ephemeral and intermittent streams provide the same ecological and hydrological functions as perennial streams by moving water, nutrients, and sediment throughout the watershed. When functioning properly, these streams provide landscape hydrologic connections; stream energy dissipation during high-water flows to reduce erosion and improve water quality; surface and subsurface water storage and exchange; ground-water recharge and discharge; sediment transport, storage, and deposition to aid in floodplain maintenance and development; nutrient storage and cycling; wildlife habitat and migration corridors; support for vegetation communities to help stabilize stream banks and provide wildlife services; and water supply and water-quality filtering. They provide a wide array of ecological functions including forage, cover, nesting, and movement corridors for wildlife. Because of the relatively higher moisture content in arid and semi-arid region streams, vegetation and wildlife abundance and diversity in and near them is proportionally higher than in the surrounding uplands. In the rapidly developing southwest, land management decisions must employ a watershed-scale approach that addresses overall watershed function and water quality. Ephemeral and intermittent stream systems comprise a large portion of southwestern watersheds, and contribute to the hydrological, biogeochemical, and ecological health of a watershed. Given their importance and vast extent, it is concluded that an individual ephemeral or intermittent stream segment should not be examined in isolation. Consideration of the cumulative impacts from anthropogenic uses on these streams is critical in watershed-based assessments and land management decisions to maintain overall watershed health and water quality. iii iv Table of Contents Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................ii Abstract......................................................................................................................................iii Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................v List of Tables............................................................................................................................vii List of Figures..........................................................................................................................viii 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................1 2. Location of Ephemeral and Intermittent Streams...................................................................2 3. Definitions ..............................................................................................................................6 4. The Watershed Context ..........................................................................................................7 5. Characteristics, Functions, and Ecosystem Significance .......................................................9 a. Hydrologic Features .........................................................................................................13 i. Variability of arid and semi-arid region flows and floods ............................................15 ii. Types of arid and semi-arid region floods....................................................................17 iii. Transmission losses.....................................................................................................18 iv. Ground-water recharge................................................................................................22 v. Landscape and hydrologic connections........................................................................24 vi. Energy dissipation .......................................................................................................26 vii. Sediment mobilization, storage, transport, and deposition ........................................26 b. Geomorphic Characteristics .............................................................................................28 i. Channel-forming processes ...........................................................................................31 ii. Geomorphic response to land management..................................................................34 iii. Map scale in determining channel network and stream order.....................................35 c. Biogeochemical Functions ...............................................................................................36 i. Cycling of elements and compounds.............................................................................36 ii. Detention of imported elements and compounds.........................................................37 iii. Particulate detention....................................................................................................38 iv. Organic carbon export .................................................................................................39 d. Plant Community Support ................................................................................................40 i. Physiognomy, density, and species composition. .........................................................41 ii. Primary productivity and plant water sources..............................................................43 iii. Temporal and spatial patterns of species diversity......................................................44 iv. Influences of vegetation on ecosystem processes. ......................................................45 v. Vegetation and channel morphology............................................................................46
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nutrients and Herbivores Impact Grassland Stability Across Multiple
    Nutrients and herbivores impact grassland stability across multiple spatial scales through different pathways Q. Q. Chen1, Shaopeng Wang1, Eric Seabloom2, Andrew MacDougall3, Elizabeth Borer2, Jonathan Bakker4, Ian Donohue5, Johannes Knops6, John Morgan7, Oliver Carroll3, Michael Crawley8, Miguel Bugalho9, Sally A Power3, Anu Eskelinen10, Risto Virtanen11, Anita Risch12, Martin Schuetz13, Carly Stevens14, Maria Caldeira15, Sumanta Bagchi3, Juan Alberti16, and Yann Hautier2 1Peking University 2University of Minnesota 3Affiliation not available 4University of Washington 5Trinity College Dublin 6Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University 7La Trobe University 8Imperial College 9University of Lisbon Centre for Applied Ecology Prof Baeta Neves 10German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig 11University of Oulu 12Swiss Federal Institute for Forest Snow and Landscape Research 13Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape research 14Lancaster University 15University of Lisbon 16Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras (IIMyC; UNMDP-CONICET) April 16, 2021 Abstract Nutrients and herbivores have independent effects on the temporal stability of aboveground biomass in grasslands; however, their joint effects may not be additive and may also depend on spatial scales. In an experiment adding nutrients and excluding herbivores in 34 globally distributed grasslands, we found that nutrients and herbivores mainly had additive effects. Nutrient addition consistently reduced stability at the local and larger spatial scales (aggregated local communities), while herbivore exclusion weakly reduced stability at these scales. Moreover, nutrient addition reduced stability primarily by causing changes in local community composition over time and by reducing local species richness and evenness. In contrast, herbivore exclusion weakly reduced stability at the larger scale mainly by decreasing asynchronous dynamics among local communities, but also by weakly decreasing local species richness.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 1135 Ecosystem Restoration Study
    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District Section 1135 Ecosystem Restoration Study Integrated Feasibility Report and Environmental Assessment Southern Platte Valley Denver, Colorado June 2018 South Platte River near Overland Pond Park TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1 1.1. STUDY AUTHORITY ............................................................................................ 1 1.2. STUDY SPONSOR AND CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION ................... 1 1.3. STUDY AREA AND SCOPE ................................................................................. 1 2. PURPOSE, NEED AND SIGNIFICANCE .................................................................... 3 2.1. NEED: PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIES ...................................................... 4 2.2. PURPOSE: OBJECTIVES AND CONSTRAINTS ................................................ 7 2.3. SIGNIFICANCE ...................................................................................................... 8 3. CURRENT AND FUTURE CONDITIONS ................................................................ 16 3.1. PLANNING HORIZON ........................................................................................ 16 3.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................... 16 3.3. PREVIOUS STUDIES .......................................................................................... 17 3.4. EXISTING PROJECTS
    [Show full text]
  • Intermittent Rivers and Ephemeral Streams
    Intermittent Rivers and Ephemeral Streams: A Unique Biome With Important Contributions to Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Ross Vander Vorste, University of Wisconsin La Crosse, La Crosse, WI, United States Romain Sarremejane, School of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, United Kingdom Thibault Datry, IRSTEA, UR-Riverly, Centre de Lyon-Villeurbanne, Villeurbanne, France © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. What Are Intermittent Rivers and Ephemeral Streams? 1 Hydrologically Diverse and Globally Abundant 1 Three-in-One: IRES Contribute to Lotic, Lentic, and Terrestrial Dynamics 2 Biogeochemical Dynamics in Intermittent Rivers and Ephemeral Streams 3 Biodiversity in Intermittent Rivers and Ephemeral Streams 4 From Microbes to Elephants, IRES Support High Biodiversity 4 Strategies for Persistence in IRES 6 Organization of Metacommunities Within IRES 6 Management of Intermittent Rivers and Ephemeral Streams 7 Ecosystem Services Provided by IRES 7 Protection and Management of IRES 7 Future of IRES and Global Change 7 Summary 8 References 9 Abstract The majority of flowing waterbodies throughout the world can be considered intermittent rivers or ephemeral streams (IRES) because at some point in time and space they stop flowing or dry. Despite their global abundance, less is known about this biome compared to perennial—permanently flowing—rivers. However, a recent surge in research has dramatically improved our understanding of how IRES function and what types of biodiversity and ecosystem services they support. A cycle of terrestrial-aquatic habitat conditions caused by the periodic drying and rewetting creates a high temporal dynamic in the biogeochemistry, biodiversity, and ecosystem services of IRES. Vast amounts of accumulated sediment, organic matter and organisms can be transported from IRES downstream to larger rivers or lakes, contributing to the global C cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • Jefferson County, Colorado, and Incorporated Areas
    VOLUME 1 OF 8 JEFFERSON COUNTY, Jefferson County COLORADO AND INCORPORATED AREAS Community Community Name Number ARVADA , CITY OF 085072 BOW MAR, TOWN OF * 080232 EDGEWATER, CITY OF 080089 GOLDEN, CITY OF 080090 JEFFERSON COUNTY 080087 (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) LAKESIDE , TOWN OF * 080311 LAKEWOOD, CITY OF 085075 MORRISON, TOWN OF 080092 MOUNTAIN VIEW, TOWN OF* 080254 WESTMINSTER, CITY OF 080008 WHEAT RIDGE , CITY OF 085079 *NO SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS IDENTIFIED REVISED DECEMBER 20, 2019 Federal Emergency Management Agency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 08059CV001D NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study may not contain all data available within the repository. It is advisable to contact the community repository for any additional data. Part or all of this Flood Insurance Study may be revised and republished at any time. In addition, part of this Flood Insurance Study may be revised by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the Flood Insurance Study. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the user to consult with community officials and to check the community repository to obtain the most current Flood Insurance Study components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: June 17, 2003 Revised FIS Dates: February 5, 2014 January 20, 2016 December 20, 2019 i TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME 1 – December
    [Show full text]
  • Riparian Buffer
    Riparian Buffer A Technical Primer on Assessing Potential Water Quality Improvements for the Quantifying Benefits of Miyun Reservoir in Beijing, China Watershed Interventions September 2016 Prepared by: “Andrew” Feng Fang, Ph.D. Work supported by: Mark S. Kieser 536 E. Michigan Ave, Suite 300 Kalamazoo, MI 49007 USA The China Mega-City Water Fund (CMWF) was launched in August of 2015 in cooperation with the Beijing Forestry Society (BFS), China Biodiversity Conservation and Green Development Foundation (CBCGDF), International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and Forest Trends. Once fully operating, the CMWF will identify, fund, and help implement watershed improvement projects (“interventions”) to benefit water quality and water quantity in the Miyun Reservoir. The City of Beijing relies in part on this reservoir as a critical drinking water supply. A notable challenge facing the CMWF, and other water funds throughout the world, is the ability to reasonably estimate water quality and/or water quantity benefits associated with specific interventions. Recent 2016 efforts have established an operating framework for the CMWF that will evaluate various watershed interventions in the context of relatively simple, established performance metrics for water quality and water quantity benefits. Coupled with projected costs for such interventions, the CMWF will be able to assess, compare and optimize benefits associated with its investments in watershed improvements with this framework. This Technical Primer1 represents an initial examination of quantification methods that the CMWF and others may use to reliably estimate water resource benefits derived from particular land management interventions in the watershed of the Miyun Reservoir. This approach relies upon existing studies from both the Miyun Reservoir watershed and other basins in China.
    [Show full text]
  • Iron Canyon Watershed.···,· "'
    Preface This Watershed Analysis is presented as ·part of the Aquatic Conservation Str:9-tegy adopted for the President's Plan (Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and.Bureau ofLand Management Planning Documents within the R'ang'e of the Northern Spotted Owl, including Standards and Guidelines for Management of Habitat for Late-Succ~ssional ,and Old-Growth Related Species). .,'.. ·:., ·.. ·. .•.·.· . Announcements were published in local newspapers in ReddinP; and ~~.ni.them Si~,kjyou C,ounty inviting public input to this analysis. Open Houses were held ill Reddirig,' 11c.Cloud ahd,Big ·J3end,"\vhere resource specialists presented information on existing conditions and manag~ment direction for National Forestlands within the Iron Canyon Watershed.···,· "': The Iron Canyon Watershed Analysis was prepared with input and irivolvement from the following resource specialists: · ' · ..., .. o - . Charles Miller Forester/Team Leader . .i McCloud Ranger District Nancy Hutchins · Wildlife Biologist· : · · : · Shasta Lake Ranger District Bill Brock Fisheries Biologist .U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service Becky May Fire Management Officer · Shasta I:.ake Ranger District Rhonda Posey · · Ecologist Shasta Lake Ranger District Chuck McDonald SilViculturist Mount Shasta Ranger District Abel Jasso Geologist Shasta take Ranger District Ken Lanspa Soil Scientist Shasta,-.. Trinity National Forests Norman Braithwaite Hydrologist ·North State Resources Joe Zustak · .. Fisheries Biologist . · Shasta Lake Ranger District JeffHuhtala Engineering Technician. · Moimt Shasta Ranger District Paula ·crumpton . .. Wildlife Biologist/Teairi Cmich . ··shasta-Tpnity National Forests Dave Simons Writer/Editor McCloud Ranger District Additional input was provided by: Elaine Sundahl Archaeologist . Shasta Lake Ranger District Mary Ellen Grigsby Recreation Specialist · ·· ·shaSta Lak~ Ranger District Jonna Cooper · · Geographic Inforrilati9n:Systems McCloud Ra~gerDistrict · .
    [Show full text]
  • LOMR)? for a One-Year Premium Refund
    the Arroyo Chico and Tucson Arroyo a FIRM. You may view this tutorial at: Property owners whose buildings have been watercourses. http://www.fema.gov/media- removed from an SFHA and are now located in library/assets/documents/7984 a Zone X or a Shaded Zone X may be eligible What is a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR)? for a one-year premium refund. Your lender When does a LOMR change a FIRM? must provide you with a letter agreeing to A LOMR is an official revision to the Flood remove the requirement for flood insurance. If Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) issued by the LOMRs become effective once the statutory your lender refuses to send you a letter stating Federal Emergency Management Agency Technical Appeal Period is over. The that they will not require flood insurance, you (FEMA). LOMRs reflect changes to the 100- effective date is listed on the LOMR cover will not be eligible for a refund. If you do not year floodplains or Special Flood Hazard letter. have a lender, you will not be eligible for a Areas (SFHA) shown on the FIRMs. In rare refund. To learn if you are eligible, please situations, LOMRs also modify the 500-year Can I drop my flood insurance if my follow these steps: floodplain boundaries. Changes may include residence or business is removed from ARROYO CHICO FLOODPLAIN modifications to Base Flood Elevations, the floodplain by a LOMR? 1. View the revised flood maps to REMAPPING floodplain widths, and floodways. The determine if your property has been re- QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS LOMRs are issued after a floodplain has The Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 mapped to a Zone X or Shaded Zone been remapped due to a major flood event, and the National Flood Insurance Reform Act X.
    [Show full text]
  • Menindee Lakes, the Lower Darling River and Darling Anabranch)
    THE LIVING MURRAY Information Paper No. 10 IPTLM0010 Health of the River Murray Menindee Lakes, the Lower Darling River and Darling Anabranch) Contents Environmental assets within the river zone Current condition of environmental assets Reasons why some environmental assets have declined in value What can be done to restore environmental values? Existing environmental flows initiatives The system-wide perspective References Introductory Note Please note: The contents of this publication do not purport to represent the position of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission. The intention of this paper is to inform discussion for the improvement of the management of the Basin’s natural resources. 2 Environmental assets within the river zone The lower Darling River system is located at the downstream end of the River Murray system in NSW and is marked by Wentworth to the south and Menindee to the north. It encompasses the Menindee Lakes system, the Darling River below Menindee and the Great Anabranch of the Darling River (referred to hereafter as the Darling Anabranch) and associated lakes. These are iconic riverine and lake systems within the Murray-Darling Basin. In addition, a vital tributary and operating system feeds the lower River Murray. The climate of the area is semi-arid with an annual average rainfall of 200 mm at Menindee (Auld and Denham 2001) and a high potential annual evaporation of 2,335 mm (Westbrooke et al. 2001). It is hot in summer (5–46oC) and mild to cold in winter (-5–26oC). In particular, the lower Darling River system is characterised by clusters of large floodplain lakes, 103 to 15,900 ha in size, located at Menindee and along the Darling Anabranch.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimation of the Base Flow Recession Constant Under Human Interference Brian F
    WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, VOL. 49, 7366–7379, doi:10.1002/wrcr.20532, 2013 Estimation of the base flow recession constant under human interference Brian F. Thomas,1 Richard M. Vogel,2 Charles N. Kroll,3 and James S. Famiglietti1,4,5 Received 28 January 2013; revised 27 August 2013; accepted 13 September 2013; published 15 November 2013. [1] The base flow recession constant, Kb, is used to characterize the interaction of groundwater and surface water systems. Estimation of Kb is critical in many studies including rainfall-runoff modeling, estimation of low flow statistics at ungaged locations, and base flow separation methods. The performance of several estimators of Kb are compared, including several new approaches which account for the impact of human withdrawals. A traditional semilog estimation approach adapted to incorporate the influence of human withdrawals was preferred over other derivative-based estimators. Human withdrawals are shown to have a significant impact on the estimation of base flow recessions, even when withdrawals are relatively small. Regional regression models are developed to relate seasonal estimates of Kb to physical, climatic, and anthropogenic characteristics of stream-aquifer systems. Among the factors considered for explaining the behavior of Kb, both drainage density and human withdrawals have significant and similar explanatory power. We document the importance of incorporating human withdrawals into models of the base flow recession response of a watershed and the systemic downward bias associated with estimates of Kb obtained without consideration of human withdrawals. Citation: Thomas, B. F., R. M. Vogel, C. N. Kroll, and J. S. Famiglietti (2013), Estimation of the base flow recession constant under human interference, Water Resour.
    [Show full text]
  • Georgia Water Quality
    GEORGIA SURFACE WATER AND GROUNDWATER QUALITY MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT STRATEGY Okefenokee Swamp, Georgia PHOTO: Kathy Methier Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division Watershed Protection Branch 2 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive Suite 1152, East Tower Atlanta, GA 30334 GEORGIA SURFACE WATER AND GROUND WATER QUALITY MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT STRATEGY 2015 Update PREFACE The Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GAEPD) of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) developed this document entitled “Georgia Surface Water and Groundwater Quality Monitoring and Assessment Strategy”. As a part of the State’s Water Quality Management Program, this report focuses on the GAEPD’s water quality monitoring efforts to address key elements identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) monitoring strategy guidance entitled “Elements of a State Monitoring and Assessment Program, March 2003”. This report updates the State’s water quality monitoring strategy as required by the USEPA’s regulations addressing water management plans of the Clean Water Act, Section 106(e)(1). Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division Watershed Protection Branch 2 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive Suite 1152, East Tower Atlanta, GA 30334 GEORGIA SURFACE WATER AND GROUND WATER QUALITY MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT STRATEGY 2015 Update TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems Author(S): C
    Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems Author(s): C. S. Holling Reviewed work(s): Source: Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, Vol. 4 (1973), pp. 1-23 Published by: Annual Reviews Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2096802 . Accessed: 08/01/2013 19:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded on Tue, 8 Jan 2013 19:27:43 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Copyright 1973. All rights reserved RESILIENCE AND STABILITY + 4050 OF ECOLOGICALSYSTEMS C. S. Holling Instituteof ResourceEcology, University of BritishColumbia, Vancouver, Canada INTRODUCTION Individualsdie, populationsdisappear, and speciesbecome extinct. That is one view of the world.But anotherview of the worldconcentrates not so much on presence or absenceas upon the numbersof organismsand the degreeof constancyof their numbers.These are two verydifferent ways of viewingthe behaviorof systemsand the usefulnessof the view dependsvery much on the propertiesof the system concerned. If we are examining a particular device designed by the engineer to perform specific tasks under a rather narrow range of predictable external condi- tions, we are likely to be more concerned with consistent nonvariable performance in which slight departuresfrom the performance goal are immediately counteracted.
    [Show full text]
  • Drainage Net
    Drainage Net GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL f APER 282-A Ephemeral Streams Hydraulic Factors and Their Relation to the Drainage Net By LUNA B. LEOPOLD and JOHN P. MILLER PHYSIOGRAPHIC AND HYDRAULIC STUDIES OF RIVERS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 282-A UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1956 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR CECIL D. ANDRUS, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY H. William Menard, Director Fin* printing 19M Second printing 1K9 Third printing 1MB For sale by the Branch of Distribution, U.S. Geological Survey, 1200 South Eads Street, Arlington, VA 22202 CONTENTS Page Page Symbols. __________________________________________ iv Equations relating hydraulic and physiographic Abstract. __________________________________________ 1 factors....________-_______.__-____--__---_-_ 19 Introduction and acknowledgments ___________________ 1 Some relations of hydraulic and physiographic factors to Geographic setting and basic measurements ____________ 2 the longitudinal profile.___________________________ 24 Measurement of hydraulic variables in ephemeral streams, 4 Channel roughness and particle size.______________ 24 General features of flow _________________________ 4 Effect of change of particle size and velocity on Problems of measurement._______________________ 6 stream gradient.____.__._____-_______-____--__ 26 Changes of width, depth, velocity, and load at indi­ Equilibrium in ephemeral streams _____________________ 28 vidual channel cross sections ___________________ 7 Mutual adjustment of hydraulic factors._____.._._
    [Show full text]