Streamflow response to increasing precipitation extremes altered by forest management

Kelly, C. N., et al., 2016. Geophysical Research Letters

Original research (primary data)
View External Publication Link

Abstract

Increases in extreme precipitation events of floods and droughts are expected to occur worldwide. The increase in extreme events will result in changes in streamflow that are expected to affect water availability for human consumption and aquatic ecosystem function. We present an analysis that may greatly improve current streamflow models by quantifying the impact of the interaction between forest management and precipitation. We use daily long-term data from paired watersheds that have undergone forest harvest or species conversion. We find that interactive effects of climate change, represented by changes in observed precipitation trends, and forest management regime, significantly alter expected streamflow most often during extreme events, ranging from a decrease of 59% to an increase of 40% in streamflow, depending upon management. Our results suggest that vegetation might be managed to compensate for hydrologic responses due to climate change to help mitigate effects of extreme changes in precipitation.

Case studies

Basic information

  • Case ID: INT-097-3
  • Intervention type: Created habitats
  • Intervention description:

    two watersheds that were converted from mixed hardwoods to monocultures of eastern white pine (Pinus strobus) (WS1 and WS17), initially harvested in 1942 and 1941, respectively. [i.e. they were first clearcut and then replanted with pine]

  • Landscape/sea scape ecosystem management: Yes
  • Climate change impacts Effect of Nbs on CCI Effect measures
    Reduced water availability  No effect difference in stream flow compared to unmanaged control under different precipitation regimes
    Freshwater flooding  Positive difference in streamflow between managed and unmanaged at different levels of precipitation
  • Approach implemented in the field: Yes
  • Specific location:

    The Coweeta basin is located in the southern Appalachian Mountains, USA - watersheds 1 and 17

  • Country: United States of America
  • Habitat/Biome type: Created forest |
  • Issue specific term: Not applicable

Evidence

  • Notes on intervention effectivness: effectiveness compared to a control unmanaged watershed key figure of effectiveness is Fig. 3 - assessed from significance of the red line (interaction between management and precipitation) for periods of low flows, if the redline is below zero then negative effect on water supply. if above 0 then positive for periods of high flows, if redline is below zero then positive effect and if above then negative
  • Is the assessment original?: Yes
  • Broadtype of intervention considered: Another NbS
  • Compare effectivness?: No
  • Compared to the non-NBS approach: Not applicable
  • Report greenhouse gas mitigation?: No
  • Impacts on GHG: Not applicable
  • Assess outcomes of the intervention on natural ecosystems: No
  • Impacts for the ecosystem: Not reported
  • Ecosystem measures:
  • Assess outcomes of the intervention on people: No
  • Impacts for people: Not reported
  • People measures:
  • Considers economic costs: No
  • Economic appraisal conducted: No
  • Economic appraisal described:
  • Economic costs of alternative considered: No
  • Compared to an alternative: Not reported

Evaluation methodology

  • Type of data: Quantitative
  • Is it experimental: Yes
  • Experimental evalution done: In-situ/field
  • Non-experimental evalution done: Not applicable
  • Study is systematic:

Basic information

  • Case ID: INT-097-2
  • Intervention type: Management
  • Intervention description:

    forest management: forests clear cut and natural regeneration allowed to occur

  • Landscape/sea scape ecosystem management: Yes
  • Climate change impacts Effect of Nbs on CCI Effect measures
    Reduced water availability  Negative Difference in stream flow compared to unmanaged control under different precipitation regimes
    Freshwater flooding  Positive difference in streamflow between managed and unmanaged at different levels of precipitation
  • Approach implemented in the field: Yes
  • Specific location:

    The Coweeta basin is located in the southern Appalachian Mountains, USA

  • Country: United States of America
  • Habitat/Biome type: Temperate forests |
  • Issue specific term: Not applicable

Evidence

  • Notes on intervention effectivness: effectiveness compared to a control unmanaged watershed key figure of effectiveness is Fig. 3 - assessed from significance of the red line (interaction between management and precipitation) for periods of low flows, if the redline is below zero then negative effect on water supply. if above 0 then positive for periods of high flows, if redline is below zero then positive effect and if above then negative
  • Is the assessment original?: Yes
  • Broadtype of intervention considered: Another NbS
  • Compare effectivness?: No
  • Compared to the non-NBS approach: Not applicable
  • Report greenhouse gas mitigation?: No
  • Impacts on GHG: Not applicable
  • Assess outcomes of the intervention on natural ecosystems: No
  • Impacts for the ecosystem: Not reported
  • Ecosystem measures:
  • Assess outcomes of the intervention on people: No
  • Impacts for people: Not reported
  • People measures:
  • Considers economic costs: No
  • Economic appraisal conducted: No
  • Economic appraisal described:
  • Economic costs of alternative considered: No
  • Compared to an alternative: Not reported

Evaluation methodology

  • Type of data: Quantitative
  • Is it experimental: Yes
  • Experimental evalution done: In-situ/field
  • Non-experimental evalution done: Not applicable
  • Study is systematic:

Basic information

  • Case ID: INT-097-1
  • Intervention type: Management
  • Intervention description:

    forest management: forests clear cut and natural regeneration allowed to occur

  • Landscape/sea scape ecosystem management: Yes
  • Climate change impacts Effect of Nbs on CCI Effect measures
    Reduced water availability  Positive difference in stream flow compared to unmanaged control under different precipitation regimes
    Freshwater flooding  Negative difference in streamflow between managed and unmanaged at different levels of precipitation
  • Approach implemented in the field: Yes
  • Specific location:

    The Coweeta basin is located in the southern Appalachian Mountains, USA

  • Country: United States of America
  • Habitat/Biome type: Montane/Alpine |
  • Issue specific term: Not applicable

Evidence

  • Notes on intervention effectivness: effectiveness compared to a control unmanaged watershed key figure of effectiveness is Fig. 3 - assessed from significance of the red line (interaction between management and precipitation) for periods of low flows, if the redline is below zero then negative effect on water supply. if above 0 then positive for periods of high flows, if redline is below zero then positive effect and if above then negative
  • Is the assessment original?: Yes
  • Broadtype of intervention considered: Another NbS
  • Compare effectivness?: No
  • Compared to the non-NBS approach: Not applicable
  • Report greenhouse gas mitigation?: No
  • Impacts on GHG: Not applicable
  • Assess outcomes of the intervention on natural ecosystems: No
  • Impacts for the ecosystem: Not reported
  • Ecosystem measures:
  • Assess outcomes of the intervention on people: No
  • Impacts for people: Not reported
  • People measures:
  • Considers economic costs: No
  • Economic appraisal conducted: No
  • Economic appraisal described:
  • Economic costs of alternative considered: No
  • Compared to an alternative: Not reported

Evaluation methodology

  • Type of data: Quantitative
  • Is it experimental: Yes
  • Experimental evalution done: In-situ/field
  • Non-experimental evalution done: Not applicable
  • Study is systematic: