1969 June
Science of Master
of degree
the for requirements the
fulfillxnentof partial in
University State Oregon
to submitted
THESIS A
Harper Charles Warren
By
Watersheds Coastal of
Logging Clearcut to due
Hydrographs Storm in Changes
Harper Charles Warren for Harper J. Janet by Typed
1969 9, May
presented: is thesis Date
School Graduate of Dean
Management Forest of Department of Head
major of charge in Management Forest of Professor
APPROVED:
linear post-logging and pre- between differences from
determined was parameters hydrologic in Change
treatment. after and before control,
untreated an acres), (502 Creek Flynn to compared were
watersheds Both
burned. and clearcut was acres) (175
Branch Needle and clearcut, was acres)
(39
IV Creek Deer
study; for selected were watersheds clearcut Three
Range. Coast Oregon the in located Study Alsea
the of watersheds experimental from derived were data
hydrologic The
time-to-peak. and volume discharge,
peak height-of-rise, included considered Parameters
hydrographs. storm individual of parameters characteristic
of analysis by low stormf on logging clearcut of effect
the determime to was study this of purpose The
Krygier T. James
approved: Abstract
WATERSHEDS COASTAL OF LOGGING
CLEARCUT TO DUE HYDROGRAPHS STORM IN CHANGES
(Date)
TITLE:
(Major)
1969 9, May on presented
(Degree)
M.S.
MANAGEMENT FOREST
In
student) of (Name
the for
HARPER CHARLES WARREN
OF THESIS THE OF ABSTRACT AN
response. watershed on moval
re- vegetative of effect the and logging clearcut to
related were low stormf in changes observed The
parameters.
the of any in difference noticable a produce not
did IV) Creek (Deer watershed unburned the to Branch)
(Needle watershed burned the of Comparison
study. this
in change detecting for value of be to prove not did
parameter height-of-rise The
IV.
Creek Deer on flows
high for increased and flows low for decreased was but
Branch Needle in altered not was Time-to-peak
watershed.
this from analysis for events storm usable of lack a to
due been have may This
IV. Creek Deer from increase to
shown not was flow of Volume
Branch. Needle for increased
were flow total and flow, delayed flow, quick of meters
para- Volume
period. winter the during than period fall the
during noted were increases Larger
logging. clearcut
following IV Creek Deer and Branch Needle both from
discharge peak in found were increases Significant
position. vertical or slope in difference for test
to utilized were techniques Statistical
regressions.
completion. its for necessary encouragement
and support the provided importantly more but thesis
this of preparation the in assistance provided only
not who wife my to extended is appreciation Deep
study. this in used programs computer the of
design in assistance his for Jr. Holtje, R. Kenneth
to especially assistance, and help their for students
graduate fellow my to extended is Appreciation
thesis. this of preparation the during and research the
during both assistance and guidance advice, their for
Klingeman C. Peter and III, Brown W. George Krygier, T.
James Professors to extended is appreciation My
study. this for necessary aid financial the providing
for University State Oregon at Institute Research
Resources Water the to expressed is Gratitude
S ACKNOWLEDGMENT
56
55
Analysis Flow Low
Change Detect to Methods
Separation Hydrograph
Studies
Watershed from Change of Evidence
Movement Water Soil and Infiltration
EvapotranspiratiOn
Parameters Hydrograph and Logging Clearcut
Yield Water and Logging Clearcut
REVIEW LITERATURE
11
11
InstrumentatiOn
Treatments
EXPERIMENT OF DESIGN
37
36
36
Variation Seasonal
Position Vertical in Change
Slope in Change
Change for Tests
Relations Regression of Determination
Techniques Statistical
Reduction Data
Events of Selection
Recession
Time-To-Peak
Volume
Height-Of-Rise
Discharge Peak
Parameters of Definition
ANALYSIS DATA
40
40
39
39
39
54
53
51
51
45
41
41
41
33
31
25
22
21
19
18
9
8
7
6
6
3
2
1
Vegetation
Topography
Geology and Soils
Climate
BRANCH NEEDLE
AND IV, CREEK DEER CREEK, FLYNN OF DESCRIPTION
Scope
Objectives
INTRODUCTION
Page
CONTENTS OF TABLE
II APPENDIX
106
III APPENDIX
109
102
I
APPENDIX
Shape Hydrograph
Time-To-Peak
Volume
Height-Of-Rise
Discharge Peak
DISCUSSION
89
88
85
85
82
82
CONCLUSIONS
94
BIBLIOGRAPHY
96
.
Recession
IV Creek Deer
Branch Needle
Time-To-Peak
IV Creek Deer
Branch Needle
Flow Total
IV Creek Deer
Branch. Needle
Flow Delayed
IV Creek Deer
Branch Needle
Flow Quick
IV Creek Deer
Branch Needle
Height-Of-Rise
IV Creek Deer
Branch Needle
Discharge Peak
RESULTS
79
79
76
76
76
73
73
73
71
71
71
69
69
69
65
65
62
60
60
59
Page
analyses.
statistical in used Branch Needle for Data
analyses.
statistical in used IV Creek Deer for Data
analyses.
statistical in used Creek Flynn for Data
as (tm)
control. the against
104
position vertical for t and ), tested
Ct slope for t
r2, (n), observations of nuniber including data,
winter and fall between difference determine
to test for results statistical of III.Sumnmary
1965-68. years for variance, and
103
(tm), position
vertical for t Ct5), slope for
,
t
(n) observations of number including
r2,
IV Creek Deer for statistics of Summary II.
1957-68. years for variance, and
102
(tm), position vertical for t Ct5), slope for
(n), observations of number including
r2,Branch
Needle for statistics of Summary I
61
t
IV. Creek
Deer and Branch Needle for values maximum and
average minimum, for parameters significant
in change percentage and absolute of Summary
1.
Table
Page
TABLES OF
LIST
66
on regressed Branch Needle for Height-of-rise
post-logging.
and pre- period, winter for Creek Flynn on
regressed IV Creek Deer from discharge, Peak
66
logging.
post- and pre- period, fall for Creek Flynn on
regressed Creek.IV Deer from discharge Peak:
64
logging.
post- and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn on
regressed CreekIV Deer from discharge Peak
.
64
post-logging.
and pre- period, winter for Creek Flynn on
regressed Branch Needle from discharge Peak
63
logging.
post- and pre- period, fall for Creek Flynn on
regressed Branch Needle from discharge Peak
63
logging.
post- and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn on
regressed Branch Needle from discharge Peak
separation. hydrograph of Method
27
separation. hydrograph flow flow-delayed Quick
30
Branch. Needle on 1960,
28, October of storm for event small a of
separation flow quick illustrating Hydrograph
48
Branch. needle on 1959,
23, November of storm for event median a of
separation flow quick illustrating Hydrograph
49
Branch. Needle on 1961,
22, November of storm for event large a of
separation flow quick illustrating Hydrograph
50
4
study. Watershed
Alsea the in watersheds of map Planimetric
Page
Figure
FIGURES OF LIST
post-logging. and preperiod, full for Creek Flynn on regressed
Branch Needle from volume flow Delayed
74
post-logging. aPd preperiod, fall for Creek Flynn on regressed
Branch Needle from volume flow Delayed
74
post-logging. and preperiod, winter for Creek Flynn on regressed
Bratich Needle from volume flow Delayed
75
post-logging. and preperiod, full for Creek Flynn on regressed
IV Creek Deer from volume flow Delayed
75
72
post-logging. and
prefull for Creek Flynn on regressed
period,
IV Creek Deer from volume flow Quick
logging.
post- and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn
67
logging.
post- and pre- period, fall for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle for Height-of-rise
67
post-logging
and pre- period, winter for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle for Height-of-rise
68
logging.
post and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn
on regressed IV Creek Deer for Height-of-rise
68
post-logging. and preperiod, full for Creek Flynn on regressed
Branch Needle from volume flow Quick
70
post-logging. and preperiod, fall for Creek Flynn on regressed
Branch Needle from volume flow Quick
70
post-logging. and preperiod, winter for Creek Flynn on regr.essed
Branch Needle from volume flow Quick
72
Page
Figure
post-logging and preperiod, full for Creek Flynn on regressed
Branch Needle from volume flow Total
77
post-logging. and preperiod, fall for Creek Flynn on regressed
Branch Needle from volume flow Total
77
post-logging. and preperiod, winter for Creek Flynn on regressed
Branch Needle from volume flow Total
78
post-logging. and preperiod, full for Creek Flynn on regressed
IV Creek Deer from volume flow Total
78
logging.
post- and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle on Time-to-peak
80
logging.
post- and pre- period, fall for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle on Time-to-peak
80
logging.
post- and pre- period, winter for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle on Time-to-peak
81
logging.
post- and. pre- period, full for Creek Flynn
on regressed IV Creek Deer on Time-to-peak
81
period. fall the for relationships
post-logging and logging pre- illustrating
Creek Flynn and Branch Needle for 1967
Oct. and 1964 24, Nov. for Hydrographs
90
period. winter the for relationships
post-logging and pre-logging illustrating
Creek Flynn and Branch Needle for 1966
Dec. and 1964 6, Jan. for Hydrographs
91
period. fall the for relationships
post-logging and pre-logging illustrating
Creek Flynn and IV Creek Deer for 1967
Oct. and 1966 15, Jan. for Hydrographs
92
27,
4,
27,
Page
Figure
1967. through
1960 years Creek, Flynn and Branch Needle
for precipitation of Double-mass-analysis
105
1967. through
1960 years Creek, Flynn and Creek Deer
for precipitation of Double-mass-analysis
105
Page
Figure
both for implications has clearcutting of effect the
Thus,
operation. logging the by changed be may ditions
con- soil surface and eliminated temporarily is trees
from EvapotranspiratiOn
high. quite is clearcutting
by watershed a from runoff of volume and pattern
the altering for potential The
emphasized. be should
operation of type this of evaluation hence desirable;
economically and silviculturally both being region,
the in practice common a is logging Clearcut
literature. the in clarified not point a -- importance
considerable of be may floods on practices logging
of effect Therefore,
areas. source flood constitute
may logged watersheds the and rainfall higher of areas
in typically are lands Forested
annually. land of acres
600,000 app'roximately from timber removes Oregon,
in industry principal a Logging,
year. each watersheds
forested from removed are timber of amounts large where
Northwest the in important especially is impact This
water. and timber both of management and development
the to vital is supply water and floods on practices
logging existing of impact the of understanding An
ION INTRODUCT
WATERSHEDS COASTAL OF LOGGING
CLEARCUT TO DUE HYDROGPAPHS STORM IN CHANGES
its determine to used method the Evaluate
involved. processes physical possible
of terms in changes hydrologic any Explain
to: are objectives Secondary
peak.
time-to- volume,.and storm height-of-rise, discharge,
peak are considered Parameters
hydrographs. storm
of components principal defining parameters several
examining by sought is change of Detection
Range.
Coast Oregon's in watersheds two from events runoff
individual on logging clearcut of effect the determine
to is research this of objective primary The
Objectives
factors. hydrograph individual on changes
possible determining for basis a provided range coast the
in Study Alsea the of watersheds experimental The
significance. hydrologic of
changes into insight lend should parameters hydrograph
individual on logging clearcut of impact the of study a
reasons these For
determined. satisfactorily been not
has characteristics hydrograph storm on clearcutting
of effect The
transport. sediment of magnitude the
and habitat fish alter may parameters flow same These
criteria. design structural and augmentation supply water
2
watershed The
larger. the is acres) (175 Branch Needle
and watersheds treated two the of smaller the is
1,
Figure in delineated basin Creek Deer the of subdrainage a
acres), (39 IV Creek Deer
treatment: clearcut complete
a for selected were watersheds these of Two
hydrology. stream on logging of effect the of evaluation
precise more a gain to University State Oregon by 1964 in
subidivided was watersheds, major the of one Creek, Deer
operation. continuous in been have and Survey Geological
S.
U. the
with cooperation in University State Oregon
by 1958 in installed were watersheds major three the
of outlet the at gages stream The
watersheds. gaged
of number a includes Study Watershed Alsea The
Ocean. Pacific the from miles 10 approximately
and Oregon, Toledo, of south miles 12 about Range,
Coast Oregon the of Basin Alsea the within are watersheds
experimental the
1,
Figure in illustrated As
sheds.
water- experimental of number a on collected being data
hydrologic evaluate to formulated was study present
The
1958. in Study Watershed Alsea the of initiation
the to led Oregon of state the in resources aquatic
on logging of influence possible the about Concern
Scope
changes. hydrologic detect to ability
3
study. Watershed
Alsea the in watersheds of map Planiinetric
Boundary
1.
Figure
Watshed
Road Logging
Gage Stream
Stream
Road Service Forest
LEGEND
0
STUDY WATER5ED IAL5EIA
4
study.
under streams the on occurred that changes hydrologic
the into insight yield should which parameters flow
stream on logging of effect the to restricted been has
study This
events. storm individual from obtained as
paranteters hydrograph individual considering by evaluated
is low streamf on practices logging of effect The
acres). (502 Creek Flynn is Icontroll a as used
5
the During
months. summer the during F 500 and months
winter colder the during F 350 of averages monthly
approximate with mild generally are Temperatures
period. winter the during pecially
es- Ocean, Pacific the from in moving systems frontal
cf nuither large a of result the is climate of type
This
period. winter the during especially wide, quite
generally is extent aerial and low are intensities Storm
inches. 95 is area the for 1968 to 1959 from precipitation
annual Average
uncommon. is Snow
May. through October
of months winter the during occurring cent per 90 least
at with type precipitation principal the is Rainfall
summers. dry warm and winters wet cool produces climate
of type This
regions. coastal Oregon the of typical
climate, marine a to subjected are watersheds These
Climate
Waldport. near Bay Alsea enters
which stream a Creek, Drift to tributary are study this
in included streams three the Creek, Flynn and Creek,
Deer Branch, Needle
Range. Coast Oregon the of Basin
Alsea the within are watersheds experimental The
BRANCH NEEDLE AND
IV,
CREEK DEER CREEK, FLYNN OF DESCRIPTION
6
and respectively, thick inches 13 and 11 typically are
horizons B and A The
slopes. steep to moderate on found
are and stony, and gravelly shallow, medium-textured,
well-drained, are soils .Bohannon
type. soil Bohannon the
of up made is IV Creek Deer of cent per Ninety
type.
soil this by occupied area the of cent per 75 to 65
with Bohannon primarily is Branch Needle
Creek. Flynn on
soils the of cent per 80 to 75 up makes Slickrock
1964). Service, Conservation Soil S.
(U.
slopes moderate more the on Slickrock and slopes
steeper the on Bohannon with association, in found
generally are types two These
Slickrock. and Bohannon
are: watersheds study the for complex soil the up
making and types rock these from resulting types soil
dominant two The
origin. marine and estuarine an having
rocks sedimentary are types rock these of Both
stone.
silt- and sandstone arkosic of consisting formation
a formation, Tyee the from developed were Soils
Geology and Soils
tively.
respec- F 45° and F 75° is minimum and maximum average
period sunimer the For
F. 300 is minimum daily average
and F 45° is maximum daily average period winter
7
IV, Creek Deer
direction. southerly a in flowing
Creek Flynn and Branch Needle of streams major the with
watershed, each for dendritic is pattern Stream
cent. per 40 and 35 between area the of
portion large a with Creek Deer and Creek Flynn on steep
less are Hillsides
cent. per 70 approaching slopes
some with sided steep and narrow are Branch Needle
on Valleys
respectively. cent per 30 and cent per 34
cent, per 37 is IV Creek Deer and Creek, Flynn Branch,
Needle on slope Average
shape. in elongate is Branch
Needle while circular essentially are Creek Flynn and
IV Creek Deer
1.
Figure to reference by noted be may
watersheds three the of each of shape Relative
Topography
high. is capacity
storage water and rapid moderately is rate Percolation
inches. 55 near depth soil total a with respectively
inches 40 and inches seven often are horizons B and A The
textured. fine moderately are and cobbly, and gravelly
moderately deep, well-drained, moderately are and
slopes, undulating gentle occupy soils Slickrock
low. is
capacity storage and rapid moderately is rate colation
Per-
inches. 24 about is bedrock to depth soil total
8
growth second old year 120 approximately were stands
Douglas-fir
alder. red and Douglas-fir species; two of
combinations varying of principally consisted overstory
The
area. study whole the for cent per 90 approached
vegetation overstory condition, pre-logging the In
Vegetation
channel.
perennial of length the near probably is Creek Flynn
on used channel of length The
zero. be would length,
entire its for dry completely becomes channel the where
IV, Creek Deer for density Drainage
above. shown
than lower much be would period, summer the during dry
become channels both of portion upper the where Branch,
Needle for density drainage the used, is length stream
perennial only If
channel. perennial of length the
reflect necessarily not do given figures drainage the
therefore and channels stream many of portions ephemeral
included maps These
for Black
E.
Department. Management Forest the
P. by photographs aerial from prepared maps
from obtained was length Channel
mile. square per miles
3.07 IV, Creek Deer and mile, square per miles 3.03
Creek, Flynn area, of mile square per channel stream of
miles 5.26 is Branch Needle for density Drainage
direction. westerly a in flows however,
9
trees. by replaced be again will they and increase will
species these of depth Rooting
shrubs. and grasses,
forbs, other and Senecio including species rooted
shallow by revegetated was watershed cleared the time In
vegetation. of devoid almost was area the and removed
was IV Creek Deer and Branch Needle on vegetation
rooted deep the 1966, in treatment Following
area. whole the over understory
the up make proportions, varying in species, three These
salrnonberry. and
fern, sword vinernaple, of species
by dominated communities of consisted
watersheds,
all on treatment to prior understory, The
species. both of
stands mixed by covered was remainder The
Douglas-fir.
of stands pure in cent per 76 and alder, of stands
pure in area the of cent per two had Branch Needle
Douglas-fir. and alder of stands mixed by covered is
remainder the and alder of stands pure by covered is area
the of cent per Thirty-nine
logging. to prior IV Creek
Deer on found that to vegetation similar by covered
is Creek Flynn
alder. and Douglas-fir of stands mixed
by covered was watershed the of remainder the and alder
of stands pure by covered was IV Creek Deer of cent per
Thirty
aged. uneven were alder of stands the and timber
10
resulting yield water of increases largest The
Yield Water and Logging Clearcut
parameters. storm individual of expected be might which
response of direction to as information yields turn
in which flow, of quantity yearly on removal tative
vege- of effect to as indication an give do studies
yield water However,
stream. a of hydrology the in change
actual of determination allow which volume and peak,.
time-to- discharge, peak as such parameters, these is
It
considered. been not has studies yield water most
in parameters hydrograph individual on effect The
watersheds. to applied treatments the from
predictable simply not were they part most the for and
widely vary to treatments individual of results found
He
yield. water decreases reforestation and yield water
increases reduction forest that indicate collectively,
taken when studies, these that concluded He
yield.
water annual on alteration cover forest of effect with
dealing studies 39 of results reported (1967) Hibbert
response. low streamf of alteration in result will
manipulation vegetative that indicated have conditions
environmental all almost under studies yield Water
REVIEW LITERATURE
11
This
storage. depleted satisfy to going than rather
runoff in result periods fall and summer the during
occurring precipitation the moisture, soil on drain lower
this of because that indicates Hoover
watershed. cut
clear- the on transpiration reduced by produced moisture,
soil on drain reduced of result the could.be response
this that concluded He
flow. low
of:
periods during
fall, and sunimer late the in occurred increases largest
the that show to able was He
treatment. following year
first the cent per 52 of yield water annual in increase
an found (1944) Hoover
annually. back cut regrowth the
and 1941 in clearcut was Coweeta at
1967). (Hibbert,
.17
Watershed
1940 in response the to similar very
result a increase, cent per 46.8 a producing repeated
was treatment the 1962 In
treatment. following year
fifth the 1944, in cent per 25.7 to years succeeding in
declined flow in increase The
return. to allowed was
vegetation the and 1940 in clearcut was watershed this on
hardwood mixed The
treatment. following year first the
flow yearly in cent per 46.7 of increase an found (1956)
Kovner Coweeta, at 13 Watershed On
1969). (Krygier,
Africa East Kenya, and Oregon, in Forest mental
Experi- Andrews J. H. Virginia, West Fernow, Carolina,
North Coweeta, at located studies includes This
climates. humid in found been have removal forest from
12
flow. low
to water more contributing thus depletion, moisture soil
of reduction resulting the and transpiratiOn reduced
of result the was this Presumably
effect. greater the
producing watersheds äut heavily more the with flows low on
effect positive large a indidates study The
December.
in sometimes and November in occurred often piration
trans- summer decreased to due low streamf in Increases
storage. depleted replace to water less of requirement
the in resulting thus season growing the during
reduced was Transpiration
months. September to July
the during transpiration in decrease a by explained
be also can increase October The
months. these
during transpiration in decrease a by explained be could
increases September to July the that states Reinhart
period. October to May the during cwne increase the of
Most
1963). Trimble, and Eschner (Reinhart, cutting of
severity the to proportion in generally increase the
low, streamf in increase an produce to found was cutting
Forest
treated. area watershed total of percentages
various to subjected were others four and clearcut
was watershed One
Virginia. West in Forest Experimental
Fernow the at conducted was study similar A
back. grew
vegetation the as time with decrease to found was effect
13
and Rich 1960; (Rich, yield annual in increase an ducing
pro- Arizona, Globe, near Watershed Creek Workman the
on grass by replaced and removed was cover Forest
watershed. a from
removed is timber when expected be might that trends
showing in of!importance they:are However,
areas. moist
for previously given studies the are as study present
the to related directly as not are They
States. United
western the of climates influenced snow the and climates
dryer the in cond.ucted been have studies Several
available. was treatment following record of year
one only therefore and plantation tea a for cleared
was area The
cent. per 80 of streamflow in increase an
found (1962) Pereira Africa, East Kenya, in watershed a
of cent per 34 over bamboo of clearing Following
flows. low
sunimer increasing thus months, these during available
be would water More
levels. moisture soil higher
produce should transpiration in decrease subsequent
the and vegetation of removal the that states Rothacher
increases, flow low the to respect With
season.
growing summer the during occur area this in flows Low
watershed. clearcut a from flows low in cent per 28
to 12 of increase an reported (1965) Rothacher Oregon,
in
Forest Experimental Andrews J. H. the At
14
one only includes and above, mentioned as calibration,
of years three only represent data These
observed was
cent per 38 to cent per nine from yield total in increase
an fire, the following year the During
redesigned.
be to had experiment the and area the over burned
fire wild a however, calibration, of years three only
After
techniques. management various evaluating and
applying of purpose the for established were watersheds
These
1959). (Glendening, experienced was runoff
total in increase an fire, wild by Arizona in watersheds
3-Bar the from chaparral of removal Following
years. succeeding with
yield water in increases reduce to tends that regrowth
vegetative to primarily due treatment, following
year first the in noted be should change largest the
occur. not did or did change a if determine to
However,
sufficient really not is record available of years two
the Rich, by noted was as and inconclusive are study
this of results The
indicated. was cent per 50 almost
of increase an treatment following year second The
studies. previous of results the considering expected
be would as large as not was change the However,
change. positive small a indicated year first The
watershed. treated the on removed was timber merchantable
the of cent per 46 Approximately
1961). Reynolds,
15
and Love
area. watershed the of cent per 40 strips
in clearcut which treatment a of application following
cent per 30 of increase an found (1964) Martinelli
and (1958) Goodell conditions, climatic similar
by affected area study a Colorado, Fraser, At
season. growing the in
lowflow:later to and peak spring the to both available
water more making thus months, summer during storage
on drain less in result should transpiration reduced
that probable seems it However
cover. herbaceous and
forest both for same the was soil the of drying that and
cover" forest the of removal the by affected appreciably
was moisture for demand summer the that study this in
evidence no is "there that states He
accumulation. snow
winter the on removal forest of effect the of result
a was flow increased the that suggested Bates
melt.
snow following freshet spring the during occurred crease
in- the of part greater The
treatment. following year
first the cent per 22 almost of yield water in increase
an found Bates
1928). Henry, and (Bates Colorado in Gap
Wheel Wagon at conducted was study earliest The
states.
western the of climates influenced snow the in conducted
been have hydrology forest in experiments Numerous
experienced. was increase an that appears it
conditions these under Even
data. post-treatment of year
16
Tree Pine include examples Notable
yield. water on ment
improve- stand or afforestation, reforestation, of effect
the determine to conducted been have studies Many
increase. low streamf observed
for reasons the as given are transpiration and ception
inter-: Reduced
period. melt snow spring the during
was increase the that assume to logical be would it
snow, as primarily occurring precipitation to Due
runoff.
of distribution seasonal the for given was analysis No
type. vegetative in and elevation, distribution, and
amount precipitation type, soil in Forest Experimental
Fraser the to similar is watershed River White The
1955). (Love,
area the of cent per 30 on cent, per 80
by stand forest the reduced Beetle Spruce Englemann
of attack The
period. year five a over averaged
were Colorado, Meeker, above watershed River White
the from flows when indicated was cent per 15 of increase
an beetle, spruce Englemann of attack an Following
low. streamf for volume
increased and rate melt snow increased indicate would
This
plot. uncut the from rapidly as just disappeared
snow the plots, clearcut the on greater was snow of
accumulation the although that states Love
yield. and
accumulation snow on harvest timber of effects determine
to attempted (1948)
Dunford and Wilm and (1960) Goodell
17
and profile, soil the in stored water removing by soil,
the reaching from water preventing by cycle hydrologic
the in role important an plays Vegetation
Parameters HydrograPh and Logging Clearcut
literature. the in found is change
of indication Some
discharge. peak is exception An
considerations. theoretical from formulated be largely must
height-Ofrise, and volume, time-to-peak, discharge, peak
as such
parameters, hydrograPh in change to respect with
Hypotheses
effected. were hydrographs individual
how or time, in distributed was increase the how to
as given was indication no studies the of many in ever
How-
logging. following expected be might quantity in
increase an that indicate studies preceding the All
1953). (Rothacher,
noted was yield water total on effect no where
Hollow White is exception An
reduced. was yield water
annual i.e., logged; were that areas on experienced that
as direction opposite the in was treatment following
change the expected, be might As
1962). al, et (Harrold
Ohio in CoshoctOn and 1961), Ayer, and (Schneider
study York New Central 1961), Authority, Valley
(Tennessee Tennessee eastern in Hollow White 1955),
Authority, Valley (Tennessee Tennessee western in Branch
18
1.5 storm a while cent per 100 intercept to inches 0.5
to
0
of storm a found
(1963)
Rothacher
size. storm
on depending cent per 100 to 19 from range to found
been has Douglas-fir for interception Rainfall
1967). (Zinke, trees and shrubs
grasses, most
for inches 0.05 of average an with O.36:iñches, to 0.01
from magnitude in range to found been
for storage Interception
percentage small a be
ha's
rainfall
storms. long-duration during
niay
but events, short-duration
row-intensity, during precipitation total the of centage
per- large a for account may Interception
rainfall.
total of percentage decreasing a becomes interception
duration storm increasing for and rate, evaporation on
only dependent is interception
storage After
satisfied, is capacity
yield. storm fron abstraction an is
1967). (Leonard, storm the during storage from
it Thus
evaporated water and capacity storage of up made is and
evapotransPiration of part a is loss Interception
Evapotranspiration
tration.
infil-
and
evapotranspiration interception, include
parameters hydrograPh individual in changes cause might
which factors vegetative and physical Therefore,
soil.
the through and over travel of rate the, affecting by
19
a for use water actual the 1963),
(Penman, suggested
been has as types, vegetative all for same the
is evapotransPiration potential if Even
soil. bare a
from than greater much be generally will site vegetated
a from loss water
Therefore,
1964)
(Veihmeyer,
sands for inches eight about and clays for inches
four
depths, shallow relatively from water extracts soil
bare from evaporation that shown been has It
forest. the in found
those above considerably levels moisture soil tained
main- still
however, openings, The
forest. the from
removed moisture available all nearly with September
early in occurred depletion Maximum
limiting. became
water as decreased then and summer early in greater
was loss moisture of rate The
trees. of cleared areas
adjacent than rapidly more water lost areas forested
that found (1964) Ziemer removal, moisture soil
on trees of effect determine to study a In
stomates.
the through atmosphere the to it releases and tion,
evapora- surface by affected that below depths at soil
from water extracts system plant a of mechanism This
parameters. hydrograPh individual on influence to respect
with communities vegetative well-stocked of aspect
significant more the probably is Transpiration
rainfall. incoming of cent per 19 intercepted inches 2.0 to
20
flows peak increased logging, or building road of result
a as
When
watershed mountain a on occurs situation this
1964).
(Chow,
soil the of rate infiltration the
than greater is intensity precipitation when result will
flow Overland
percolation. and infiltration reduced to
lead can which compaction soil cause may Logging
Movement Water Soil and Infiltration
low. streamf for available water of quantity
increased an in result will species rooted shallower a
with replacement and forest a of removal that hypothesis
the to support lend would This
species. rooted shallow
a than conditions limiting under
water more remove
will it depth, greater a from water extracts species
rooted deep a Because
zone. root the in limiting
becomes water until recharge following period a for
occurs that process a is evapotransPiration potential
completed. is profile the through drainage until
only saturated is ground the event rainfall a Following
saturation. at held seldom is system root the surrounding
soil the nature In
1963). (Penman, system root
the to supplied continuously is water when plant a by
lost water of amount that as defined is potranspiratiOn
eva- potential
limiting, becomes water when moisture
available and depth rooting on dependent be will site
21
interception. and infiltration reduced of result a
be may parameters hydrograph individual in Changes
Studies Watershed from Change of Evidence
1965). (Whipkey, saturation
to prior watershed a front flow. to water permitting soil,
dry a in front wetting the along or layer, permeable
less a at develop also may table water temporary A
percolation. from
than rather displacement, pressure from is stream the
to outflow The
action. pulse a by channel stream the
to contributed is water capacity, field above are that
zones or zones, saturated these to Due
watershed. the
up further extended is area "saturated" the continues,
rainfall As
(1967). Hibbert and Hewlett by presented
concept source variable the by explained be may flow,
overland no assuming when precipitation, to watershed
a of response rapid The
1967). Hibbert, and Hewlett
1965; (Whipkey, flow subsurface of result a is flow
quick that suggests flow overland of lack The
Rothacher, 1957; (Dils, reduced not
is
1965).
infiltration floor,
forest the to disturbance no or little with logged when
or state, natural its in is floor forest the when that
evidence is there however, watersheds forested On
expected. be may volumes storm and
22
western nany in precipitation of form predominant the
is Snow
freshet. spring the during printarily occurred
increase this however, logging; following increased
were peaks factor, significant a was
watersheds.
irielt
snow When
onthe transpiration reduced removal tation
vege- bethat might cause the that states He
logging.
following cent per 114 to 69 of flow peak in increase an
found.
(1967)
Nakano
clearcutting. following cent per 20
than nore increased peaks instantaneous average found
(1952)
Maruyama
logging. following discharge peak
in increases indicated Japan in studies Two
low. streamf for available more
making logging, following vegetation by removed that
replenish to required was water Less
evapotranspiration.
reduced of result direct a were increases that
felt was It
operation. clearcutting a following season
growing the during cent per 21 increased discharge
peak found He
Virginia. West Fernow, at (1963)
Reinhart by substantiated is This
flow. of quantity
as well as flow peak of magnitude and timing alter
will removal forest following evapotranspiration reduced
to due storage in water of amount in increase The
depletion. moisture
soil in reduction resulting the with transpiration
in reduction the be to appears factor major a However,
23
This
period. melt snow or freshet spring the during occur
likely most will increases the snow winter of form the in
mostly comes precipitation the When
precipitation. of
amount and form on depends increases of timing The
Creek. Workman and Gap Wheel Wagon as
such response, less show will precipitaiton low of areas
while Kamabuti, and Fernow, Coweeta, as such moisture
abundant of areas in pronounced more are results the
that stated further (1963) al et Reinhart
low. streairif
increase will vegetation low-growing to forest mature
of conversion lands, well-watered most in that (1961),
Hibbert and Hewlett did as concluded, be must it removal
forest and reforestation both considering After
Beetle. Spruce Englemann the by
killed was timber the where experiment River White the
on increased similarly were flows Peak
higher. peak
spring the and formally than rapid more freshet spring
the during rise the found Goodell Fraser, At
logging.
following spring the in flow peak increased indicate
both 1958) (Goodell, Colorado Fraser, and 1928) Henry,
and (Bates Gap Wheel Wagon at experiments The
affects. shading and snow of deposition in changes
also and season, growing the during especially piration
trans- decreased interception, reduced to attributed
be must yield or flow peak in increase Any
watersheds.
24
explain to but change determine to only not is purpose
expressed the where one, this as such study a In
Separation Hydrograph
change. that to contribute which
parameters the isolate and identify can we until treatment
particular a to watershed a of response the predict
to possible be not will it states, (1961) Hibbert
and Hewlett As
watersheds. other to transposed be can
information this that doubtful remains it but treatment
to watershed a of response the regarding information
of accumulation large fairly a been has There
1965). (Rothacher, use water less
of result a as logging following Forest Experimental
Andrews J. H. the on increase to shown been has flow
low or flow, Sustained
vegetation. rooted shallow
the to due evapotranspiration by depleted moisture soil
of amount small the replace to sufficient is rainfall
where except expected be not would increases season,
growing or Summer,
conditions. both of combination a
to due probably are cases, most in increases, Observed
result. could runoff before requirement recharge lower
a in result would This
season. growing the during
use water lower to attributed be could or conditions
melt and accumulation snow changing to response a be could
25
A02
= N
as: such relationships by estimated be may ceases
recession direct when time The
flow. base considered
is line the below area that and flow flood or runoff
direct considered is lines separation the above area
The
2). (Figure hydrograph the of recession the sects
inter- line flow base the where point that at terminated
is flow flood
method, each In
flow. water) (ground base
from subsurface) and (surface runoff direct separate to
used traditionally are 1964) (Chow, methods Three
catagory.
each in included be to flow of amounts or rates to
as decisions arbitrary on based be must separation of
method any Therefore,
flow. base and runoff direct into
or flow water ground and subsurface surface, of parts
component its into hydrograph a divide to situation
real a in difficult is it Unfortunately
relations.
effect and cause describe to possible is it change that
of source the of knowledge a and change the of knowledge
a with Thus
1959). Brater, and (Wisler flow water
ground and flow, subsurface runoff, surface waters,
contributing the of surface the on directly cipitation
pre- of consist flow of sources The
flow. of souxce
the estimate to essential is it occurred, change this why
26
by represented is This
2.
Figure in ABC line the
peak. the after days N as such
curve recession the on point a to drawn is line straight
a
point this From
peak. the under directly point
a to hydrograPh the under storm the before exIsting
recession the extending of consists method first The
separation hydrograPh of Method
2.
Figure
Days
B
(1958).
Paulhus and Kohler Linsley, by
suggested as great, too water ground of rise the or
l.ong
excessively be not should base time total the that mind
in keeping storms, of number a of inspection visual
by N determine to better be may It
results. unrealistic
yield may manner this in determined N but formula, above
the using when case the be would as storm, to storm
from constant relatively remain should N of value The
ceases. runoff direct when peak the after days of number
the is N and miles, square in area drainage is A where
27
and Hewlett by proposed been has method Another
quickly. rather stream the
reached water ground where area an in used be probably
would
2,
Figure in ADC line by illustrated as method, This
rise. of point the to drawn then is curve arbitrary An
dt2
where i.e. zero, is slope in change the where recession
the on point that as defined is inflection't of "point
The
recession. the of inflection" of "point the below
point a to hydrograPh the under back recession water
ground the of projection involves method third The
consistently. used is method one as long as unimportant
probably is difference The
runoff. direct of volume
in appreciably differ not do methods above The
2.
This
Figure in AC line the by illustrated is
peak. the after days N point a to rise initial of
point the from line straight a uses method second A
1958). al, et (Linsley recession original
the to conform should flow base in decrease the
that however, reason, real no is There
passes. peak
the until decrease therefore should flow base and rising
is stream the as long as bank the into be should flow
that considering by method this given is Support
28
a to adapted readily be could that slope constant of
line a suggests Hewlett ideas, above the on Based
watersheds. small on hydrOgraPhs all to
applicable method universal fixed, a on classification
the base and two than rather decision arbitrary one
on separation the base to làgical seem wduld it case,
any in arbitrary is decision the Because
-flow.
base
and runoff direct into divided arbitrarily are rates
these and flows storm considered are rates what to as
made is decision A
flow. of source for classification
arbitrary an to added is flow of rate for classification
arbitrary an that is methods separation elaborate with
problem the (1967), Hibbert and Hewlett by out pointed
As
controlled. well is or delayed, is which that from
watershed
a
from quickly runs that flow separate to
analysis hydrOgraPh of purposes for however, necessary,
is It
basis. physical a on flow base from flow direct
separate to impossible almost is it reality In
hydrograPh. the on separated be can flow
this that and event, storm the during time of period
a for exists flow direct that idea the with developed
been has above described as separation HydrograPh
advantages. distinct some has but earlier, given method
line straight the of application an is method This
(1967). cunningham and Hibbert by and
(1967)
Hibbert
29
uniform. more much treatment after and before comparisons
statistical the making thus way, same the exactly
in conducted be would separation hydrOgraPh each
storm,
every on judgitient personal to subject being than Rather
procedure. separation the front bias personal removing
of advantage the have also would method This
separation hydrOgraPh flow f0w_delayed Quick
3.
Figure
Tune
Flow Delayed
Flow
Quick
avoided. thus
i5
earlier presented methods in to referred source of
idea controversial The
3). (Figure
flow" "delayed and
flow" "quick as divided thus flow the to refers Hewlett
hydrOgraPI the of limb falling the intersected it until
hour, per (csm)
mile square per second per feet cubic
0.05 of slope a at rise, initial the from projected
line a on decided he region, edmont
ApplaChian_ the in
on collected record, of years
watersheds forested small 15
water 200 about of analysis After
system. computer
30
is values annual than rather
events, storm individual
of comparison a if that apparent readily is it
this With
mind, in
relation5hiP.e5tabli5hL the of liability
re- the greater the points, of number the greater
the Instatistics,
change. a of detection for required
time the in decrease a is advantage. further. A
regime. flow the in change
actual show which parameters major are these However
study. yield annual an in determined be cannot volume
storm and discharge, peak time-to-peak, as such meters
para- Important
occurred. change this why and where
hypothesize to possible is it and hydrology, low streamf
the of change actual to as insight gain to possible
is it parameters hydrograPh individual of study By
advantages. distinct several producing instead, used
be could events
storm individual using Comparisons
-
watershed. control the to related as total yearly
expected an rather but time in point some at expected
be to flow actual the give not does flow annual for
analysis regression utilizing coniparison A
et
Reinhart, 1944; Hoover, 1956; (Kovner,
1963).
al,
change detect
to comparisons for flow annual average of use the is
studies past through running denominator common A
Change Detect to Methods
31
post- the for line regression a of Computation
years. treatment
pre-
the for line regression a of Computation
watersheds. treated and control both of peak
time-t0 and jse_in-5tage
the
steps: four of consists method
TabulatiOn
The,
error. additional
to might:lead that computations additional for need the
eliminates This
involved. are values discrete because
is limb rising the using for reason important An
rise.
of period the for time elapsed the and linib rising the
in stage in change the compared Bethlahmy
trophies.
catas unforseen from disruption without completion
to proceed will experiment an that probability increased
the is interval time shorter the to advantage important
An
idea. this utilizing watersheds of calibration
rapid of method a developed (1963) BethlahlrLy
events. storm individual utilizing
by years two or one in obtained be can observations
of nuniber sufficient a that indicate methods These
method. this using experiments watershed for duration
determining for relation a developed (1954)
Kovner
Evans and
calibration. watershed of length the determining
for method a developed
(1949)
Wilm
watersheds. two
between comparisons significant statistically make to
years few a only in obtained be may points enough used,
32
various from recession of sections together pieces method
One
curves. recession base-flow of development the
involve al et Linsley by given methods other Two
treatments. minor
of effect the detect to needed be may which but problems
engineering for necessay rarely refinement of degree
a represents method This
determined. are Kr of values
the these from and determined, are recessions runoff
surface and low interf the techniques graphical using Again
hydrograph. the under back projected is recession water
ground the methods, graphical Using
characteristic a
i-s
constant. slope
Kr where Kr of values determine
to curve depletion or recession the of plot logarithmic
semi- a uses method first The
(1958).
al et Linsley by
presented are analysis recession of methods Three
Analysis Flow Low
treatment. following data
of year one only and calibration of years 2.5 only with
change significant statistically show to able was He
streams. coastal small on building road of effects the
determine to method this applied (1968) Gilleran
slope. and magnitude
in lines regression two the of Comparison
4.
years. treatment
33
of comparison a as value much as of be would parameters
hydrOgraPh individual in change showing method A
flow. of ranges all over record continuous a is methods
two these to prerequisite A
percentage escribing
1964). (Chow, flow in change
in useful found been has analysis
double.maS5 of use Also
obtained. be could treatment
after and before both mean, yearly of estimate good
a curve duration flow term long a to extended If
time.
of percentage given a expected be could that flow of
amount the of estimate meaningful a produce could curves
These
control. the and watershed treated the between
established is comparison a Again
curves. duration
flow of use the is flow recession and discharge peak
in change the demonstrating in valuable method A
watershed. same the on compared are
periods post_treatment and pre_treatment the rather but
watersheds control and treated compare not does technique
The
treatment. of effect determine tO made comparisons and
periods post_treatment and pre- the both for manner this
in developed be could Lines
a generally but
results. Kr in change gradual
correct, strictly is q0Krt =
relation
the if paper logarithmic on line straight a form should
data plotted The
later. t time fixed some
against q0
of values plot to is curve the developing for method
second The
obtained. is curve composite a until storms
34
shape. hydrograph in changes defining by causes
to insight producing of advantage added the yields
parameters individual of study but trends same the give
will method Either
shape. hydrograph in changes actual
demonstrating of advantage added the has events storm
individual of analysis but flows, average of change
relative indicate flows yearly of analysis Regression
treatments. watershed of effects showing in flows yearly
35
Branch. Needle on obtained
results the supplementing for used were watershed
IV Creek Deer smaller the clearcutting of effects
The
watershed. study principal the as selected was
control. the to size in equal nearly more area watershed a
and record of period longer a with Branch, Needle
IV. Creek
Deer and Branch Needle both on boundaries watershed
along constructed were roads logging, to prior year
one 1965, of spring the During
treatment. of effect
determine to analysis watershed paired a in necessary
relation pre-logging the provided This
watershed.
control the Creek, Flynn to compared were treated be to
watersheds both when time of period a provided period
calibration The
1966. in removal timber following burned
was IV, Creek Deer not Branch,but Needle
operation.
logging clearcut a to subjected were watersheds both
Branch, Needle on 1966) March through 1958 (October
years eight of period calibration a and IV Creek
Deer on 1966) March through 1964 (January years two
approXimatelY of period calibration a Following
Treatments
EXPERIMENT OF DESIGN
36
during and monthly obtained been have measurements rating,
the define adequately to order In
stage. of range full
the over measurement by curve rating the develop to
necessary therefore was it and model theoretical any to
constructed not was section control The
weir. the of
upstream pond stilling a and surface concrete rounded
a with weir v-notch a of consists section control
The
(Fisher
recorder. level water n.d.) Company, Porter and
Porter and Fisher 1540 series a and n.d.) Company,
Instrument Stevens and (Leupold A-35 Stevens and Leupold
a both includes Branch Needle on Instrumentation
constructed. was values
measured these on based curve rating a Therefore
(1962).
Agriculture of Dept. S. U. the by given values
theoretical from slightly differ to found were flume
the through discharge of values Measured
watershed this on equivalent is This
csm. 180 to
second. per feet
cubic 11 exceed not does flow where watersheds small
from runoff measure to designed is flume H-type deep
foot 2.0 The
section. control the for used is
Agriculture, of Dept. S.
(U.
1962)
flume H-type an and corder
re- level water n.d.) Co., Instrument (Belfort
FW-1
Belfort a has IV Creek Deer on station gaging The
ion Instrumentat
37
section. rectangular-shaped a by
controlled are Branch Needle on stages higher the while
stage, in range entire the for v-shape a in continues
and larger is Creek Flynn for weir The
weir. section
control the of shape and size the in lies difference
primary The
Branch. Needle for above given that to
similar very is Creek Flynn on station gaging The
needed.
when adjusted been has rating The
S.
Survey. Geological
U. the by record of period the through periods storm
38
events. flood by influenced structures for considerations
design in importance its to related is Significance
significance.. practical has it because and shape
hydrOgraPh define help to both selected was discharge
curve. rating appropriate the using trace time-stage
the from converted be may It
event. storm given a during
attained flow maximum the defines jscharge
Peak
Discharg Peak
curves. rating and records stage
time- using computed were but directly obtained not were
parameters These
shape. define to selected parameters
additional two were discharge peak and
jme-5tage
Voluirte
record.
the from directly obtained easily values
discrete were parameters three These
purpose. this for
selected were height_of-rise and time-to-peak Recession,
possible. as completely as shape hydrOgraPh the define
would that parameters select to necessary was it changes
hydrologic determine to order In
event. independent an
considered was rise low streamf each study, this In
Parameters of Definition
ANALY DATA
39
treatment. particular
a for watershed control a to comparison by event, storm
particular a for yield watershed in changes quantify to
possible is it parameter volume the utilizing By
quantity.
same the of runoff faster reflect could discharge
peak in increase An
event. storm given a for flow of
quantity in increase an indicate necessarily not does
discharge peak in increase an instance, For
logging.
of effect the define quantitatively to also and shape
hydrograph define help to selected was Volume
Volume
curve. rating the of construction incorrect
to due errors contain not does it
event.
addition, In
storm particular a to response stream of analysis the
from conditions flow antecedent eliminates parameter
this Therefore
curves. rating upon dependent it is nor
event the of initiation at flow base of stage include
not does It
peak. a reaches it until event storm the
of beginning the from surface water the of elevation
in fluctuation the indicates Height-of-rise
Height-Of-Rise
40
was sample, the in event storm particular a of discharge
peak the including for consideration primary The
Events of Selection
shape. hydrograph
define helps also and watershed the on relation
storage the in change of indication an gives parameter
This
peak. the of occurrance after hours 72 and 48 24,
hydrograph the on located were points These
vegetation.
of removal following flow storage in changes define
to recession the on selected were points Three
Recession
filling.
and scour increased by changes channel produce could
result may that velocities in increase The
flow.
to resistance less and storage detention in reduction
a indicate would peak the to rise initial from interval
time shorter A
treatment. watershed to due time travel
in changes possible of indication an gives parameter
This
event. storm a to responds first stream the when
time initial an with starting peak, a reach to required
time the as defined is parameter time-to-peak The
Time-To-Peak
41
well-defined a both have to had it parameter, peak
time-to- the for considered was storm a Before
correlated. fact in were
watersheds treated and control the if expected be would
This
control. the on occurred also peaks two recession,
the intersected line flow base the before watershed
treated the on occurred peaks two When
other. the on
repeated was watershed one on peaks of number of terms
in happened what that data) experimental by justified
(and
assumed was It
hydrograph. the of recession
the intersected line flow delayed the when ceased flow
storm since problem a considered not were peaks Multiple
flows. storm in range full the cover would which selected
were storms Instead
storms. all analyze to possible not
was it involved time and labor the to Due
parameter.
volume the for considered be could watersheds both on
detected be could that hydrograph well-defined Any
trace. low streamf the on distinct be to had rise initial
the that was however, latter, the for requirement
additional An
parameter. height-of-rise the for samples
selecting in used were considerations same These
parameter. discharge peak the for
considered be to peak or rise initial sharp a possess to
have not did Hydrographs
watersheds. treated and control
both on detected be could rise low streainf same the that
42
therefore was it
hydrograPh. complex one as storm
multiple_peaked each treating by considerably improved
was correlation This
watersheds. control and treated
between obtained were correlations poor very event,
independent an as treated was each when and dáys, three
or two of interval atiflie
several When
paralTteters.
encountered were peaks
other all for sideration
con- important an were they However,
parameter. volume
the to regard with problem a not were peaks multiple
above, noted As
peaks. multiple to regard with detected
was problem a analysis, data preliminary In
above. given criteria selection
the fit they provided parameters this for utilized were
parameters other the for selected already storms
uninterrupted flow base to continued
72 least at (for
flows. storm succeeding any by hours)
practices In
that recession
a
recession, well_defined and peak
definite a possess hydrograPh the that necessary was it
considerations recession for storms selecting
W1-ien
siderations.
con-
time_to-peak for used be not could parameters
volume and height_of_rise jscharge,
peak for used peaks
broad with flows storm the of many Therefore,
peak.
sharp a possess not did which flow storm any of use
peak. well_defined a and rise initial
precluded This
43
against plotted and Branch Needle on gage rain the for
accumulated were totals precipitation Monthly
period.
experimental the during pattern precipitation in change
any detecting of purpose the with data precipitation
the on performed was analysis double-mass A
considered. not were flow zero
at starting events i.e., rise, low streamf initial the
to prior existed flow unless considered not were events
Therefore,
channel. the in flow surface produce
to necessary runoff of volume or time the determine
to impossible was it rise initial to prior exist not did
flow When
flume. the under -deposits alluvial deep very
the through occurs flow Leakage
IV. Creek Deer from
data with encountered was problem additional An
peaks. between interval tune the during flow base to
receded hydrograPh the if independent be to peaks these
for probable considered was It
independent. were
peaks the that probable was it unless hours, 48 within
occurred more or two when used was peak highest the Only
1951). Survey, Geological S. (U. independent were peaks
these whether determine to used were Survey Geological
S.
U. the by
developed criteria encountered, were peaks
multiple When
hydrograph. storm complex a of part a
considered be could it when and event independent an was
peak a when determine to criteria develop to necessary
44
by
is:
= Q
O.854H3 + 1.459112
developed as formula The
1962).
Agriculture,
of Department s. (U. service Research Agricultural the
provid one the to similar 15 and measurements field
from develOPed was formula This
Department. Management
Forest the by developed formula rating the using
reduced was IV Creek Deer on data height Gage
respectively. csm-hOur and csm
of terms in volume and discharge to function time-stage
simple a from converted were volume and discharge Peak
hour. 0.5 nearest the to recorded was hours in time and
foot o.Ol nearest the to recorded was height parameters
these For
station. gaging respective the for traces
height gage the from directly obtained were parameters
recession and time_to-peak,
height_ofse
The
Reducti Data
parameters. low f
stream- the of results analyzing when considered be must
change this indicated, is change a such If
watersheds.
the over pattern precipitation the in change a
indicate would lines these of slope in break Any
Creek.
Flynn against plotted also was Creek Deer from data
PreciPitatio
Creek. Flynn on gage rain the for values
45
IBM on placed were points jme_discharge
These
height. gage average
the for computed discharge the of cent per ten within
was value this averaged, were heights gage successive
two for discharges when that such selected were points
relation, stage_discharge non-linear the to Due
points.
these of selection the in necessary was restriction
further However
shape. hydrograPh define completely
to as so selected were points Enough
time-csIfl to reduced
coordinates.
was hydrograPh given a for
trace height gage the First
hydrograph. each under
area the integrate to method a develop to necessary was it
runoff storm particular a for volume determine To
csm. obtain to miles square in area by
divided were values cfs Again
as
Survey. the by conducted
determination, field of result the were curves
rating These
Oregon. portland, in office Survey
Geological s. u. the by supplied "shifts"
tables
and.
rating using cfs in discharge to reduced were Creek
Flynn and Branch Needle on traces height gage The
size. watershed of effect
the eliirLinates it because cfs, than desirable more
is value This
miles. square in watershed the of area
by divided is Q when csm to reduced is Discharge
feet.
in height gage the is H and cfs in discharge is Q where
46
important. is
that control the to respect with watershed treated the of
change the is it because recession the on lies point the
where difference no make should it Therefore
analyses.
statistical the all in watershed control the to compared
15
watershed treated the that remeiribered be should it
Also
flow. base and surface not and flow delayed and
quick to is study this in reference However,
Linsley.
by presented as separation line straight the using
expected be would than longer is interval time This
hydrOgraPh. the of initiation after hours 144 at recession
al et Linsley in described methods using
(1958).
(Figure flow high for line separation
the intersects
The
6)
separation, line straight a for selected be might that
location the approximates which point a at recession
the intersects line separation The
respectively.
flow high and medium, low, for lines separation present
6
and
5,
4,
Figures
locality. this to applicability its
determine to constructed lines separation the and plotted
were events flood Several
(1967).
Hibbert and Hewlett of
work the from study this in consideration for selected
was slope This
a
hour. per csm 0.05 of slope constant
using separation line straight a make to designed was
program This
volume. and separation hydrograph obtain
to developed II) (Appendix program computer a and cards
47
Figure 4.
5-
10
24
48
72
Hydrograph illustrating quick flow separation of a small event for storm
of October 28, 1960, on Needle Branch.
0
Time in Hours
eparation Line
Figure 5.
0
10
20
0
418
/2
Time in hours
10
144
HydrograPh illustrating quick flow separation of a median event for storm
of November 23, 1959, on Needle Branch.
2'4
'-SeparatiOfl Line
Figure 6.
20
40
60
-
80 -
4'8
12
Time in hours
96
120
144
Hydrograph illustrating quick flow separation of a large event for storm
of November 22, 1961, on Needle Branch.
2'4
Separation Line
eversal peak = 112.29
3300 CDC a of aid the with accomplished be could analysis
statistical so cards IBM on placed were recession the
on points three the and time-to-peak, volume, of-rise,
height- discharge, peak for values parameters the All
Relations Regression of Determination
Techniques Statistical
watershed.
the on water of use consumptive less indicate would flow
total in increase an while storage in held water less
indicate would flow delayed in decrease a and flow quick
in increase An
flow. of quantity and timing to as
both hydrology, stream in change regarding information
yield would values these of one any in change A
flow. base or flow direct to regard with water the of
origin distinguish to made was attempt No
of sum the is flow Total
two. these
line. separation the below
area that of consisted flow delayed while hydrograph,
the by enclosed and line the above area that of consisted
flow Quick
recession. the intersected line separation
the which at time the and rise stream initial between
interval the to equal base time a included values
three All
flow. total and flow, delayed flow, quick
-- computed were values three separation, Following
51
depen- the determine to X variable independent the using
predictor, a as regression of line the use to possible it
makes assumption This
dependent. one and independent
variable one with related, are variables two that
is r2 of use the in assumption basic The
predictor.
perfect a is line the and line regression the on lje
points all that indicates cent per 100 of value r2 An
cent. per 100 or unity approaches r2 as increases predictor
a as equation regression a of
value The
period.
calibration the during control the and watershed test the
between correlation of degree high a requires study shed
water- paired a because r2 examine to necessary was It
predictor5 as lines regression the of value the determine
to examined then were (1968), Smith and Draper after
mean) the for corrected Squares, of Sum (Total
Regression) to due Squares of (Sum = r2
as: defined
r2, determination, of coefficient the of Values
periods. post-logging and pre- the both for computed
was prediction of line A
watershed. control the to
compared as watersheds, treated the on parameter each for
equation prediction a give to designed was program This
analysis. regression linear a for computations necessary
the make to developed was program computer A
computer.
52
the gives significance of level The
respectively.
significant", "highly and "significant" as designated
are. two These
level. cent per 99 the was second the and
level cent per 95 the was first The
levels two study this In
considered. were
chosen. be must significance
of level the type this of test statistical any In
chance. by happened have could occurred that difference
the whether or different, actually were lines two these
whether determine to used were tests i.e., relationships,
post-logging and pre- the of equality statistical the
determine to used were tests statistical Further
Change for Tests
change. that of significance
the and occurred has that change the of indication an
gives lines prediction two these between difference the
of analysis An
period. post-logging the for watersheds
two same the between line prediction a of development
by followed is This
recession. and time-to-peak,
volume, height-of-rise, discharge, peak -- parameters
the of each for watershed treated the and watershed
control the between period (calibration) pre-logging
the for developed is line prediction A
analysis data the of essence the is This
study. this for
Y.
variable dent
53
b1x. + b0 = y
expression:
the in as b1 is consideration under coefficient The
parameter. each for regressibn5 and'post-logging pre-
between slope in differences compared test This
Slope in Change
values. of range full the over
same the is effect the that implies position vertical in
change a while parameter the of values, increasing with
varied treatment the of effect the that imply would
slope in change A
meaning. physical different a has each
but treatment, the of result a as change a indicate
Both
lines. prediction the of position vertical
in change and slope in change between made be should
distinction A
position. vertical in change for test a
and slope in change for test a tests; two to subjected
was treatment of result a as parameter particular
a for regression the in change indicated Any
time.
the of cent per one only rejected be will parameters
regression equal two between equality of hypothesis a
indicates level cent per 99 the example, For
sampling.
repeated in results same the obtaining of probability
54
Smith and Draper by given intercept in change for test
the of modification a is means", of "mean name the given
is which position, vertical in change for test The
equal. are
different statistically not slopes that assumption the
make to necessary was: it analysis. is
For
required.
was position vertical in change for test a different,
atjstically
be to found not were slopes If
Position vertical in Change
required. was testing further no different,
be to found were slopes the If
different. fact in
are slopes the that hypothesis alternate the of favor
in rejected is hypothesis the t, of value critical the
than greater is t of value computed the If
involved.
freedom of degrees the and selected significance of level
the on dependent is t of value critical The
t. of
value
critical the with compared be must which "t" of value
computed a yields slope in change for test The
period.
post- or
(1)
pre-logging designates
second The
2)
or
(2)
(1
logging
subscript
logging. following slope the to equal
is logging to prior slope the
is tested hypothesis The
by noted be may (1957),
i.e.,
l2'
= b11 that
iii. Appendix to reference
Lee by given as test, This
55
the of segregation seasonal A
season. particular a to
related as change determine to divided then were data
the data, available all using analysis Following
Variation Seasonal
purposes.
comparative for valuable is information Such
terms.
quantitative in change the define to order in percentage
of terms in defined further was change this techniques,
statistical the using indicated was change a If
logging.
clearcut following unchanged remained has variance
that unlikely seems It
applied. treatment drastic the
of result a as changed been has production water of
regime whole The
does This
study. this for probable seem not
accepted. be must equal are treatment after
and before variances that assumption an tests, covariance
other as well as means, adjusted of homogenity of test
the In
position. vertical in change for test to used
been have techniques covariance studies, many In
III. Appendix to reference by found
be may form final its and test this of development The
b1x. + b0 = y
expression: the in as
b,
in change the i.e.,
(1968),
56
which paranteters all to applied was It justification.
for studies previous using assumed, already separation
seasonal the of justification statistical for used was
analysis This data. the in variations seasonal for test
to data post-logging the to applied was technique same
The existed. actually difference seasonal a whether
determine to statistically contpared then were regressions
two These record. of period pre-logging winter the
only using developed was regressions of series second A
period. pre-logging the for control the on record of
period fall the and watershed treated each on record
of period fall the between developed was regression
A
period. pre-logging the in regressions winter and
fall comparing by obtained was theory physical on based
separation this for justification Statistical
season. same the for parameter same the of
regression post-logging the with compared was season
given a for parameter given a of regression logging
pre- the Thus, period. winter the as separately analyzed
were March and February January, December, above.
described techniques analytical same the using analyzed
were November and October September, of months fall The
1963). (Reinhart, period recharge fall the during occurs
often low streainf on removal vegetation of effect largest
the that indicated been has it because made was data
57
Branch. Needle and IV Creek Deer
on both basis, seasonal a on analyzed when treatment of
result a as change significant statistically a indicated
58
if significant be might non-significant found change a
while conservative, be may parameter given any in crease
in- An
conclusions. qualify will hence and watershed
Branch Needle the over precipitation less in resulted
change The
period. this through quality good of were data
the indicated records the of check A
1967. by slope
original the to back came relation the but Branch Needle
for 1966 and 1965 during occurred slope in change A
Creek. Flynn and Branch Needle between and Creek Flynn
and Creek Deer at gages rain between established was
relation cumulative The
II). and I Figures I, (Appendix
conducted was 1967 to 1960 years for data precipitation
of analysis double-mass a reason this For
watersheds.
both over patterns precipitation homogeneous of assumption
underlying an have studies watershed Comparative
time-to-peak. and volume, rise,
height-of discharge, peak in change detect to tests
subsequent all in period pre-logging the in included
then were data These
low. streamf on effect no had
building road indicated years non-treatment previous the
with year this for data the of comparison statistical
A
1965. in watersheds Branch Needle and IV Creek Deer
both on ridges the along constructed were Roads
RESULTS
59
period. winter the during than greater
consistently were period fall the during Flows
I,
(Appendix
I). Table
winter the for 0.83 and period fall the for
0.98 to data year full the for 0.80 from r2 in increase
the by indicated also was difference Seasonal
Table
I,
III)
(Appendix level cent per 95 the at significant
periods two the between difference statistical a
in reflected was This
logging. following occurred data
discharge peak winter and fall between Variation
Branch Needle
Discharge Peak
logging. clearcut by changed parameter each for
1
Table in
presented are control the of levels minimum and maximum
mean, pre-logging the at lines regression between
differences percentage statistically, shown changes
of significance practical the assess to order In
III. and II,
I,
I,
Table
Appendix in given is parameter each for analysis
statistical the of summary A
time-to-peak. and flow,
total flow, delayed flow, quick height-of-rise, discharge,
peak of sequence in presented are variables The
equation. prediction the
in parameter a as included was change precipitation the
60
3.6
4.5
3.3
1020.3
561.0
1382.9
3081.2
1693.4
4163.4
191.2
255.8
92.5
816.7
701.6
1038.4
49.2
19.4
54.5
2063.8
1133.0
578.8
449.2
15.4
18.6
10.6
30.3
19.3
44.0
7.2
4.2
6.9
205.0
120.7
198.3
62.9
44.5
66.1
241.9
40.9
243.3
3663.111550.4
4034.3 7571.6
4802.711355.4
1299.8 2622.9
1605.0 2087.9
1782.6 2478.9
2397.3 8966.9
2486.9 5495.8
41.0
36.6
56.3
35.0
89.9
28.5
263.6 328.7 27.9
81.7 311.0 127.9
270.5 225.8 21.6
12492.8 132.7 18.8
17638.2 176.8 137.7
13011.1 20.1 15.5
3422.2
4.2
26.4
5756.0 295.1 185.3
4007.8 -83.0 29.1
9368.9 120.1 16.0
11912.2 136.6 119.3
257.9 127.7
226.2 116.2
262.9 - 3.2
9.0
100.0
11.4
8.1
132.3
14.7
61.9
29.3
174.8
4.3
116.5
25.6
87.4
33.4
Percentage Change
Mm
Ave Max
2/ Full year is defined as September to April; fall is Septenther to December; winter
is December to April.
Full year
7.2
-7.3
39.8
41.5
85.9
110.7-200.3
4.2
28.6
1/ The minimum, maximum and average values used for computation were taken from the
pre-logging period.
Time-to-peak (hr.)
Deer Creek IV
Peak Discharge (csn)
Full year
Fall
Winter
Needle Branch
Peak Discharge (csm)
Full year
3.2
Fall
1.9
Winter
7.2
Quick Flow (csm-hr.)
Full year
263.0
Fall
189.9
Delayed Flow (csm-hr.)
Full year
183.2
Fall
64.6
Winter
550.5
Total Flow (csm-hr.)
Full year
350.9
Fall
253.3
Winter
865.1
Predicted Values of Parameters 1/
Minimum
Average
Maximum
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Summary of absolute and percentage change in significant variables for
miniinuxn,average and maximum values for Needle Branch and Deer Creek IV.
parametersa/
Table 1.
Branch, Needle on found was As
I). Table I, (Appendix
data
fall the for 0.97 to data year full the for 0.80 from
increased was value r2 The
separation. seasonal following
values r2 in change the by suggested also were data the
in differences Seasonal
III). Table I, (Appendix
level
cent per 95 the at significant statistically found was
period post_logging the for data winter and fall between
Difference
logging. following IV Creek Deer on data
discharge peak the in found was variation Seasonal
IV Creek Deer
1). (Table
period fall the for
as great as not was increase percentage the
9). (Figure
However,
level cent per 95 the at significant
found also was discharge peak winter in Increases
8.
Figure
in presented are period fall the for clearcutting
after and before regressions and diagrams Scatter
treatment. following level cent per 95 the at greater
significantly found were discharges peak Fall
7). (Figure
purposes comparative for given is March) to (September
year full the using logging of effect The
logging.
after and before separately compared were peaks winter
and fall indicated, was analysis seasonal a Since
62
post_logging. and pre- period, fall for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle on discharge Peak 8. Figure
csjn
discharge, Creek Flynn
120
160
80
40
0
z
r20.98
2.71X + =1.56 Y Post:
r20.95
l.45X + =0.53 Y
Pre:
/
/
I
o
/
80
/
ioggingi.
Post-
-
/
/
logging Pre-
0
/
/
120
/
/
post_logging. and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle on discharge peak
7. Figure
csm discharge, Creek Flynn
120
160
40
80
0
0
z
1)
ci)
r20.80
l.44X + =5.96 Y Post:
r1
*
1)
r20.94
l.16X + =2.10 Y
Pre:
/
"I
40
o
$1
I
/
,
logging Pre-
r4
80
/
/
post-loggingz7
0
Maxilflum(175483)
120
E
63
post-logging. and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn
on regressed IV Creek Deer from discharge Peak 10. Figure
csm Discharge-, Creek Flynn
1.0
0
1
8'
4'
a)
a)
r2=O.80
l.50X + =1.22 Y Post:
r2=0.95
l.44X + =-l0.03 Y Pre:
U
a)
a)
H
V
/
re-Logging p
In
.
C.)
.c:
I
a)
Maximum(175,222)
C.)
In
12
Post-Logging.-,.7
/
post-logging. and pre- periods, winter for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle from discharge Peak
9. Figure
csm Discharge, Creek Flynn
160
120
80
40
V
0
z
/
a)
a)
r2=0.83
l.50X + =0.54 Y Post:
V
r1
r20.94
1.12X + =2.42 Y
a)
Pre:
40-
x
/.I /
C.)
.c:
N
TO
.1-f
Pre-Logging
/
I
Post-Logging<'
80-
a)
Maximum(175,l83)
/.
C.)
/
In
120.
64
15). (Figure
winter and
14) (Figure
fall i.e., season, by analyzed when indicated change
a was
nor
13) (Figure
year fill the using analyzed
was data the when found not was change A
treatment. the
of result a as change a indicate not did Branch Needle
on parameter height-of-rise the of Analysis
Branch Needle
Height-of-Rise
1). (Table
period fall the for as great as not were
period winter the for increases percentage The
12).
(Figure level cent per 99 the at increase significant
statistically a indicated analysis period Winter
11. Figure in presented are after and before
regression and diagrams Scatter
II). Table I, (Appendix
level cent per 99 the at clearcutting after increase
significant a indicated analysis period Fall
10. Figure to reference by
noted be may data year full the for diagrams scatter
The
0.80. of value year full the to compared as
0.90 was data winter the for value r2 The
period.
winter the for much as increased not was value r2 the
65
post-logging. and pre- period, winter for Creek Flynn.
on regressed IV Creek Deer from discharge Peak 12. Figure
csm discharge, Creek Flynn
160
120
80
40
0
Q
r2=0.90
l.57X + -4.17 Y Post:
95 2=0 r
i.45X -lO.38-i- Y
Pre:
w
I.
a)
'S.
.
$x /
. t
/
C)
40
w
w
H
I.
'a
.7
/
U)
0
/
logging
80
bs
w
0
Maximum(l74,222)
U)
/
120
/
Post-logging.e'
post-logging. and pre- periods, fall for Creek Flynn
on regressed IV Creek Deer from discharge Peak 11. Figure
csm discharge, Creek Flynn
160
120
2..86X +
40
80
0
Q
I',
C)
Pre:
w
w
r2=0.97
=-l0.92 Y Post:
r20.93
l.65x + -12.53 Y
Pre-logging
-
I
40
/
H
/
Sf
'a
/
U)
80
k
logging,'
Post-
a)
/
I
o
U)
120
/
I
66
post-logging. and pre- period, fall for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle for Height-of-rise 14. Figure
1.6
feet height, Creek Flynn
1.2
0.4
0.8
z
a)
a)
r2=O.88
0.88X + =0.05 Y Post:
r2=O.93
0.79X + =0.08 Y
Pre:
*
'-I
a)
co.
(U
0
N
a)
Pre-logging
.1-)
Post-logging!,,
4-I
a)
a)
.1-)
1.2
post-logaing. and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle for Height-of-rise
13. Figure
1.6
feet height, Creek Flynn
1.2
0.8
0.4
z
r2=0.85
0.86X + =0.04 Y Post:
r20.93
0.78X + =0.08 Y
,
a)
a)
x
'-I
a)
Pre:
"jx
'-I
(U
0
Pre-logging
a)
Post-logging.
'S.
.1-)
4-I
a)
a)
.1-)
Maximum(1.78,1.65)
67
post-logging. and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn
on regressed IV Creek Deer for Height-of-rise
16. Figure
1.6
feet height, Creek Flynn
1.2
0.8
0.4
r20.85
O.89X + =0.10 Y Post:
r2=0.97
Pre:
0.91X + =0.18 Y
0
U)
U)
I
C-)
0.4
U)
U)
x
._.
H
,
S
/
0.8
U)
..-4
4.)
4-I
Pre-logging
U)
U)
Post-logging
4.)
1.2
post-logging. and pre- period, winter for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle for Height-of-rise
15. Figure
1.6
feet height, Creek Flynn
1.2
0.8
0.4
z
U)
U)
.85 r2=0
O.88X + =0.01 Y Post:
.93 r2=O
Pre:
0.77X + =0.08 Y
I-s
U)
0.4
U
U)
.1-I
0.8
x.
4.)
gging -10 Pre
4-I
Post-1ogging-.z,'
U)
U)
4.)
1.2
Maximum(1.78,l.6S)
68
full the to compared as period fall the for separation
data following 0.91 to 0.87 from r2 in increase the by
suggested also was data the in variation Seasonal
level. cent per 95 the at significant
season. by
analysis year full The
Figure
found were year full- the increases:for
in presented
5:
analyzed and divided therefore were data The
seasonal in difference some of 055ibility
17.
response.
the indicated
regression the of end low the at data of scatter the ever,
How
III). Table I, (Appendix
winterperi0d5 and fall
between difference significant 5atjstically a indicate
not did Branch Needle for analysis flow Quick
Branch Needle
Flow Quick
separation.
seasonal permit to parameter this for data sufficient
not was There
16). (Figure
analysis year full the for
significant be to found not was periods post_logging and
pre_lOggi between lines regression in change small The
on learcUttjng
height_of-rise.
of effect any indicate
to failed IV Creek Deer for data of Analysis
IV Creek Deer
69
post-logging. and pre- period, fall for Creek Flynn on
regressed Branch Needle from voluirie flow Quick 18. Figure
8000
csrn-hour volume, Creek Flynn
6000
4000
2000
0
+
l.06X
+
2.29X
.91 r20
=358.62 Y Post:
r2=O.98
.147.89 Y
Pre:.
200
*
/
a,
in4 gg lo
Pre-logging
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
Post4000
6000
post-logging. and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn on
regressed Branch Needle from volume flow Quick 17. Figure
8000
+
l.O1X
+
l.02X
csm-hour volume, Creek Flynn
6000
2000
4000
0
.87 r2=0
=538.39 Y Post:
I
r20.97Y Pre:
/
/
200:
=223.04
,
>Pre-l0gging
4000
/
/
/
C.)
U)
post-logging-
0
6000
19455) Maxiinuln(86S7
70
the by indicated also were differences Seasonal
level.
cent per 95 the at significant periods two the between
difference statistical a in reflected was This
period.
pre_logging the during observed was seasons winter
and fall the between flow delayed in difference A
Branch Needle
Flow Delayed
separation.
seasonal of effect the consider to possible not
was it period, fall the during events storm usable of
lack a to Due
20. Figure in presented is relation This
analyzed. was record of period full the when IV Creek
Deer for found not was flow quick in change A
IV Creek Deer
1). (Table
period winter the for than period
fall the for larger much were increases percentage
19). (Figure period winter the for discernable were
changes No
level. cent per 99 the at significant
found was increase This
18). (Figure period fall
the for indicated was volume flow quick in increase
an season, by data the of separation Following
I).
Table
i,
(Appendix year
71
post_logging. and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn on
regressed IV Creek Deer from volume flow Quick 20. Figure
csm-hOur volume, Creek Flynn
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
'
r20.96
0.98X + =383.96 Y Post:
r20.97
l.14X + -35.12
Y
//
Pre:
/
logging
Post-
Pre-logging
/ I.
,
C)
U)
/
/
,
6000Maxjml(8657,1O435)
'4
post_logging. and pre- period, winter for Creek Flynn on
19. Figure
regressed Branch Needle from volume flow Quick
csm-hour volume, Creek Flynn
I
8000
I
6000
I
4000
I
I
2000
0
I
z
U)
U)
r20.84
l.03X + =469.87 Y Post:
r2=0.96
0.99X + =295.67 Y Pre:
,.
H
-
/
U)
2000.
C)
0
/
logging Pre-
H
/
x
4000/
C)
/
logging, Post-
/
0
/
/
/
6000-
MaximUm(8657,9455)
72
the for 0.87 from r2 in increase the by indicated
is data flow total the in difference seasonal A
Branch Needle
Flow Total
separation. seasonal
of effect the consider to possible not was it period,
fall the during events storm usable of lack a to Due
24. Figure in presented are data these for gressions
Re-
analyzed. were data year full the when IV Creek
Deer on indicated not was flow delayed in change A
IV Creek Deer
1). (Table period fall the during than
period winter the during smaller were increases Percentage
23)
(Figure level cent per 95 the at significant
found was volume flow delayed winter in Increases
22). Figure I, Table I, (Appendix
level cent per 99
the at significant increase an indicated analysis
period fall The
21). (Figure
purposes comparative
for given is year full the over logging of Effect
0.85.
at remained however period winter The
period. fall the
for 0.90 to year full the for 0.85 from r2 in increase
73
post_logging. and pre- period, fall for Creek Flynn on
regressed Branch Needle from volume flow Delayed 22. Figure
csm-hOUr volume, Creek Flynn
4000
3000
2000
.1000
0
r20.90
2.80X + =170.81 Y Post:
r20.98
l.03X + =33.38 Y
x
Pre:
1000
/
I
/
I
G)
/
Pre-logging
I
logging 2000
_.I Post-
0
a
/
/
/
/
I
14
I
3000
S
post_logging. and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn on
regressed Branch Needle from volume flow Delayed 21. Figure
csm-hour volume, Creek Flynn
4000
3000
2000
1000
G)
.85 r2=0
0.98X + =161.49 Y Post:
r2=0.83
Pre:
0.74X + =160.78 Y
a)
/
Ix xx,_. /
'0
H
G)
.
x
1000
x
,
2000
,
re-logging
'C,
a
0
Post-1Ogging,,'
0
3000
,
74
post-logging. and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn on
regressed IV Creek Deer from volume flow Delayed 24. Figure
4000
csm-hour volume, Creek Flynn
3000
2000
1000
0
Q
0.57X
0.31x
r2=0.70
=-83.89 y Post:
r2=0.37
=l,2.48 y
Pre:
Pre-logging
I
*
a)
.
C-)
a)
a)
-
1000
Post-logging...----
0
H
E
2000
a)
0
U)
0
3000
Post-logging. and pre- period, winter for Creek Flynn on
regressed Branch Needle from volume flow Delayed 23. Figure
4000
l.34X
0.66X
csm-hour volume, Creek Flynn
2000
1000
3000
=0.85 r
Y2=-450.70 Post:
r2=0.66
=282.97 Y
Pre:
//
1.
.
0
0
//
z
a)
a,
. j3'1%
rc
H
a)
1000-
,'
4
/,
// .
Pre-logging
/
/Ix
/ ii
2000.
//
/Post-logging..o,
%.
//
//
0
U)
3000
75
by analyzed was data the when found not was change A
Branch. Needle on relation time_to-Peak the in treatment
of result a as change notable no was There
Branch Needle
Peak - Time-To
separation. seasonal
of effect the consider to possible not was it
period,
fall the during events storm usable of lack a to Due
28).
(Figure analyzed was record full-year the when IV Creek
Deer for found not was flow total in change A
IV Creek Deer
1). (Table
period fall the for greater found were
however increases percentage
I). Table
I,
(Appendix
level cent per 95 the at period winter the and
level cent per 99 the at signficant was increase period
fall The
logging. of result a as occurred had flow
total in change a
,
periods winter and fall to according
analyzed and separated were data the When
purposes. comparative for presented is
25) (Figure
analysis year full The
27). and
26,
25,
(Figures period winter the for 0.83 to dropped value r2
The
period. fall the for 0.90 to analysis year full
76
post_logging. and pre- period, fall for Creek Flynn on
regressed Branch Needle from volume flow Total 26. Figure
csm-hOur volume, Creek Flynn
16000
12000
8000
4000
0
r20.90
2.43X + =531.17 Y Post:
r20.99
l.05X =179.64+ Y
I'
.Pre:
I
4000
1
/
0
I
/
.1
0
/
/
-s.-Pre-logging
8000
1
logging"
Post//
12000
post_logging. and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn on
25. Figure
regressed Branch Needle from volume flow Total
csm-hour volume, Creek Flynn
16000
12000
8000
4000
z
.
87 r2=0
0.98X + =747.94 Y Post:
=0.98 r
0.94X + Y2=284.96 Pre:
a)
It,
a)
'z
./
4000
/
logginp Post8000
,
,
/
U
,
-Pre-logging
/
Cl)
"
0
12000
/
77
post-logging. and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn on
28. Figure
regressed IV Creek Deer from volume flow Total
16000
csm-hour volume, Creek Flynn
12000
8000
4000
.90
0
ci)
ci)
r20
0.8OX + =265.39 Y Post:
r20.99
0.95X + =-532.92 Y
C)
Pre:
ci)
400a
'Pre-Logging
Loggi,ng
Post-
1-4
8000
,
,
U
C')
,
,
,
,
f
,
0
12000
post-logging. and pre- period, winter for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle from volume flow Total
27. Figure
16000
csm-hour volume, Creek Flynn
8000
4000
12000
0
0
.83 r2=0
l.05X + =427.30 Y Post:
0.92 r2=
0.92X + =329.67 y
Pre:
,
,
4000.
.
x
x
/ Post-loggin',-.
8000.
/
Pre-logging
/
,/
,'
,
//
78
presentations. tabular or
graphical the in included been not has parameter recession
the coefficients, correlation in range wide this of cause
Be-
0.8. to 0.2 from -ranged values r2 The
control.
the and watersheds treated the between correlations
low very showed event each of peak the following hours
72 and 48
24, using flow recession of Analysis
ion Recess
periods. winter and fall into
data the divide to possible not was it period, fall the
during storms of number insufficient an to Due
I). (Table
treatment
following increased time-to-peak maximum and decreased,
time-.toPeak minimum increased, time-to-peak Average
II). Table i, (Appendix
level cent per 95 the at
significant found was change This
32). (Figure
record
year full the for analyzed was data the when IV Creek
Deer on indicated was time-to-Peak in change A
IV Creek Deer
31).
30,
29,
(Figures year full
the for analyzed when indicated change a was nor season
79
post_logging. and pre- periods fall for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle on Time-tO-Peak 30. Figure
hours time, Creek Flynn
80
60
40
20
0
r2l.00
l.05X + -l.13 Y Post:
.80 r2=0
Pre:
0.87X + =1.79 Y
20
Pre-loggiflg
(j
U
/
/
//
40
a)
0
/
loin.ç/ Post-
60
/
post_logging. and pre- periods full for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle on Time-to-Peak 29. Figure
hours time, Creek Flynn
80
60
40
20
=0.98 r
O.98X + y2=-l.11 Post:
r2=O.87
Pre:
0.91X + =1.63 Y
x
z
a)
a)
a.
r4
a)
20
x
S
(j
0
A
40
a)
'pre-logging
post-logging
0
(a
60
80
post_logging. and pre- period, full for Creek Flynn
on regressed iv Creek Deer on Time-to-peak
32. Figure
hours time, Creek Flynn
80
60
40
r20.97
=:-3.23 Y
20
I.
l..65X + =-22.98 Y Post:
r2=0.94
+l.lOX
//
//
Pre:
0
ft
20
$4
0)
a)
/
/
/
logging Pre-
40
/
/
0
U)
logging Post
.
60
/
/
post_logging. and pre- period, winter for Creek Flynn
on regressed Branch Needle on Time-to-peak 31. Figure
hours time, Creek Flynn
80
40
60
20
0
r2=0.96
l.00X + =-2.59 Y Post:
.97 r2=0
O.97X + =-0.85 Y Pre:
z
a)
a)
r1
a)
20
$4
('j
U
4-)
Pre-logging
40
E
a)
x
0
post-logging
x
$4
U)
60
g
81
similar a on than level higher a at remain to soil
the in level moisture the cause should transpiration
evapO reduced because period recharge fall the during
occur should watershed clearcut a from flow in creases
in- larger the that indicated They
Ziemer (1963),
soil on
others. and (1964)
Reinhart by reported as storage, moisture
evapotran5Piratio of role the by for accounted
be can discharge peak in variation Seasonal
Dischar9 Peak
burning.
and removal forest of result a as occurred has relations
runoff in change a demonstrate changes, hydrograPh by
reflected as
hydrolOgy stream in changes These
only. iv
Creek Deer on flows high for increased and flows low for
decreased were relations Time_to-peak
IV.
Creek Deer for
not but Branch Needle for increased were flow total and
flow, delayed flow, quick of parameters Volume
logging.
clearcut following iv Creek Deer and Branch Needle
both on found were discharge peak of increases study
this In
shape. hydrograPh of changes by manifested
be should relations runoff in changes that indicated
have removal forest with concerned studies Past
DISCUSSIO!
82
appreciable before satisfied be must surfaces leaf on
Storage
periods, winter and fall the for both piration
evapOtrans total of part as role a has Interception
storage. on effect major a produce to insufficient
are storms1 between intervals the because fall the during
as period winter the for great as be not would effect
The
watershed.. clearcut the from larger be should flows
peak Therefore,
storms. between evapotransPiration to
watersheds unforested than water less cycle may watersheds
cutover period, this During
March. through December
of months the included study this in period" "winter The
period. winter full the for wetness of level same the at
remain not does watershed the drainage subsurface and
evapotran5Pirat]0 of Because
season. growing summer the to
compared as less is rate the however period, winter the
during watershed forested a from occur does transpiration
Evapo-
above. presented process evapotraflsPiratiofl
the by explained be can peaks winter in Increases
1)
(Table period fall
the during indicated were increases larger much however,
winter; and fall both in increased were discharges
studies. previous the of conclusions and results
Peak
the substantiate study this of findings The
area.
clearcut the on storage depleted satisfy to required water
of reduction a in result would This
area. forested
83
significant is flows average in increase large The
difference. appreciable an make to
seem not did Branch Needle on treatment the of part a was
burning that fact The
:the of were
streams. both for magnitude same
csm, of terms in discharge peak of Increases
di5cernabl not were discharge peak to respect with IV
Creek Deer and Branch Needle between Differences
1967). andLetey, Krammes
Osborn, (DeBanO, California southern in soils some on layer
surface hydrophobic a of formation the to due burning
following decrease to shown been also has Infiltration
soil. surface of pores of clogging cause can which
soils exposed on impact drop rain to due be also may
infiltration Decreased
increase. to tends runoff surface
and decrease to tends infiltration occurs compaction As
removal. tree and felling tree constructi0n, road from
result may compaction Soil
soil. the of characteristics
percolation and infiltration in change a is removal forest
following flow increased in result might that changes,
vegetative than other factor, ntributing
Another
storms. duration short for
even minor probably is increase total the on effect the
but expected be can interception reduced from Increase
duration. storm increasing with diminishes however
effect This
ground. the reach will water of amounts
84
even volumes, winter than more increased were volumes
flow quick fall that suggest to evidence is There
Volume
valueless. variable this rendered
sections, both or one of time over changes as well
as watersheds, between sections control in Differences
change. of detection for value of it make to study
this in involved factors many too are there However,
construction. table rating to due error from free
comparison of means a offer should variable This
analysis.
discharge peak the of results the considering expected
be would as logging clearcut of result a as increase
not did hydrograph flood the of Height-of-rise
Height-Of-Rise
caution.
with made be should interpretation and scattered widely
more be to tend observations where is this however,
12), through 7 (Figures
As
diagrams scatter the in noted
importance. greater of be would expected flows peak
maximum the design, to respect With
design. structural
to be would it than interval time given a over flow
of quantity total to importance greater of be would This
frequency. greatest the with recur flows these because
85
less to due however, fall the during as winter the during
great as be not would effect The
logging. following
depletion moisture soil in reduction resulting the and
evapotran5Pirat0 reduced to related is parameters volume
these. in increases for explanation possible A
flow.
total and flow, delayed flow, quick parameters; volume
three all for period winter the than increases larger
much indicated Branch Needle for period fall The
change. a detect to
data insufficient been have may there because watershed
the of response true a is this that certainty with stated
be cannot It
parameters. volume the of any in change
a indicate not did analysis IV Creek Deer The
noted.
been have would difference a relation regression the
of end upper the at points included had data the if that
possibility strong a is There
data. winter of range full
the from difference significant a show to weight enough
carry not do therefore and relation the of end low the
at lie all points these unfortunately
treatment. before
relation fall the or relation winter the either than
response greater much a indicate 18) (Figure logging
following storms fall three for analysis regression
the in points The
indicated. not was data winter and
fall between difference significant statistically a though
86
flow-.
base or stress moisture
soil rainfall, last since time as such conditions,
moisture antecedent on based be might separation
5tisfactOry more A
study. this in used as separation
seasonal a on only based one than better be would
conditions antecedent on based procedure separation
data a studies future for that indicates conditions
antecedent to due response in variation This
storms.
subsequent between dryness of degrees varying reach may
watershed the when period winter the during maximum
a at is conditions antecedent in
Variation
response.
watershed on conditions antecedent of effect the reflects
period winter the during data of variation higher The
logging. following even area, the of
characteristic rates infiltration high the to due however,
factor, large a be to thought not is This
operation.
logging the during compaction soil of result a as
decreased been have may rates percolation and infiltration
both discharge, peak under discussed As
relations.
percolation and infiltration the in alterations the
are volume in increases the of part a caused have may
which considerations vegetative than other Factors
period.
winter the during storms between depletion moisture soil
87
building road of effect the of study a in (1968) Gilleran
by found results the with agree parameter this to respect
with study this from result The
increased. is centration
con- of time the however, events, large For
events.
small for concentration of time shorter a therefore and
time, shorter a in runoff for water niora of availability
the in result could process This
storage. moisture
soil fill to required time the increases conductivity and
infiltration reduced because is This
greater. is area
logged the on infiltration when reached is time in point
a and area
uncut the on readily more filled is soil
the in storage continues, rainfall As
operation. logging
the from resulting compaction to due areas forested
similar on those than lower both are area clearcut
the on conductivity hydraulic and infiltration Initially,
soil. the of conductivity hydraulic and infiltration
in changes by explained be may phenomenon observed
The
This
storage. detention in changes indicate would
question. in watershed the from runoff the of time
travel in changes reflect must time-to-peak in change Any
flows. high for increased and flows low for decreased was
rise initial the following peak flood a reach to required
time the IV, Creek Deer on logging Following
-Peak Time-To
88
occurring storms actual for response in change The
effect. logging clearcut of indicative is figures both
in Branch Needle of response in difference The
34.
and
33 Figures comparing by noted be may storms periOd fall
the of response greater The
and storms) (fall
storms). 34(winter Figure
33 Figure in compared are storms
these
by produced Branch Needle and Creek Flynn of hydrograPhs
The
control. the Creek, Flynn on peaks equal produced
that selected were Storms
35). through 33 (Figures
basin each for period post-logging the during storm
winter and fall a with compared were period logging
pre- the in storm winter a and storm fall a example,
For
logging. following hydrograPhs with logging
to prior hydrograPhs of comparison by illustrated be can
changes These
Branch. Needle on logging clearcut following
increased all have flow total and flow, delayed
flow, quick discharge, peak that variables individual
of analysis the by demonstrated been has It
Shape HydrograPh
IV.
Creek Deer from
differ that characteristics soil and size watershed to
related be may it but apparent readily not is reason
The
Branch. Needle on altered not was Time-to-peak
watersheds. experimental same these on
89
Figure 33.
2O
40-
6O
8ct
I
:
,
I
I
I
I
,-
I
t
2
Time in days
lynn Creek
eedle Branch
4
Pre-logging
5
6
HydrOgraPhS of Nov. 24, 1964 and Oct. 27, 1967 for Needle Branch and
relationships for
Flynn Creek illustrating pre-logging and post-logging
the fall period.
I
I
IIIj
II
SII
I
S
I'
I
Figure 34.
20
40
60
80
-
1
'4
I'
I,
p
'i
"It'
.
'S
- --
I
--
4
Pre-logging
I- -- - - - -. -. - .- -
-
post-logging
I--
Time in days
- '. S - -
i'
Needle Branch
IiydrograPhs of Jan. 6, 1964 and Dec. 4, 1966 for Needle Branch and
Flynn Creek illustrating pre-logging and post-logging relationships
for the winter period.
7
I
I
I
0
Figure 35.
20
40
60
80
1
Deer Creek IV
Time in days
4
Pre-logging
Flynn Creek
HydrograPhs of Jan. 15, 1966 and Oct. 27, 1967 for Deer creek IV and
Flynn Creek illustrating pre_logging and post_logging relationships
for the fall period.
I
I'
6
figures. the in shown days
six of period whole the almost for Creek Flynn of that
above remains recession flow base the however, logging
following
Creek. Flynn on that with coincident almost
or below is logging to prior Branch Needle for recession
flow base the figures both In
on based is statement This
34. and 33 Figures
logging. of result a as
increased have to appears also recession flow Base
storms. duration shorter the for
cent per 200 by decreased time_to-peak where analysis
parameter preceding the in found as result
This
IV.
sante
the is
Creek Deer on shorter much is time-to-peak the
lines, dashed two the by illustrated
logging, Following
time. in point same the nearly very at occurs peak
storm the period1 pre_logging the representing storm
the For
figure. this in noted be also may parameter
time_to-Peak the in change The
significantlY. increase
to shown both are volume and discharge peak
35. Figure
in presented is period fall the during IV Creek Deer on
93
flows. high for increased and flows minimum
for decreased was Time-to-peak
Branch. Needle on not
but IV Creek Deer on altered was Time-to-peak
watershed. this from analysis for events storm
usable of lack
toa
from increase
to.
due been have may This
IV. Creek Deer
shown not was flow of Volume
period. fall the during
occurring increases largest the with flow, total and
flow, delayed flow, quick in changes in reflected was This
Branch. Needle from increased was flow of Volume
watershed. unburned
the IV, Creek Deer to compared when difference noticable
a produce not did Branch Needle on Burning
watersheds. both for magnitude
similar of were Increases
period. fall the during
occurring increases largest the IV, Creek Deer and Branch
Needle both from increased was discharge Peak
are: changes these from
drawn Conclusions
time-to-peak. and volume, discharge,
peak by defined as shape hydrograph of alteration
in reflected are changes These
logging. clearcut
of result a as Oregon in streams coastal small of
hydrology the in change a indicated has study This
CONCLUSIONS
94
change. significant
hydrologically detect to ability its demonstrated
has study this in used analysis of method The
year. of time on than rather
conditions
antecedent on based procedure separation data a for
need is there type this of studies future In
involved.
are time with relation discharge stage constant a lacking
controls channel if questionable be may change detecting
for parameter height-of-rise the of use The
95
Report) Annual 1959
Station.
Experiment Range and Forest Mountain Rocky Service.
Forest S. (U.
13-16. p.
Colorado. Collins, Ft.
In:
Arizona. in research management Watershed
type. chaparral the in Research
E. C. Glendening,
1959.
leaves. nunth. 51
University.
State Oregon Corvallis,
thesis. Master's
oadbuilding. of effects detect to streams
coastal of calibration Rapid 1968. J. Dennis Gilleran,
p. 6
Pennsylvania. Warminster,
recorder. level tape punched 1542 model for
Company. Porter and Fisher
n.d.
bulletin Instruction
p. 407
Wiley. John York, New analysis.1968.
Smith. H. and R. N. Draper,
regression Applied
p. 40
Station. Experiment Forest Southeastern Service,
Forest S. U. C. N. Asheville, Laboratory.
E. Robert Dils,
Hydrologic Coweeta the to guide A 1957.
PSW-43) Paper Research
Station. Experiment Range and Forest Southwest
p. 13
Berkeley.
Pacific Service. Forest S. (U.
agents:
problem. the of knowledge current Our
Jr. Letey,
1967.
wetting and wettability Soil
John and Kraxnlnes S. J. Osborn, F. J. F., L. DeBanO,
paging. Various McGraw-Hill. York, New
Ven-Te. Chow,
hydrology. applied of Handbook 1964.
38-42. 8(3): Hydrology
Scientific of Association International the
of Bulletin
studies. hydrologic for watersheds
1963.
Nedavia. Bethlahmy,
of calibration Rapid
p. 9 Maryland,
Baltimore,
recorder. level liquid portable
n.d.
Company. Instrument Belfort
for book Instrument
30)
Supplement Westher
(Monthly p. 79 C. D. Washington,
Colorado.
Gap, Wheel Wagon at experiment streamfioW
1928.
Henry. J. A. and G. C. Bates,
and Forest
IOGRAPHY IBL B
96
106-110. p. 1956,
Foresters, American of Society the of Proceedings.
regrowth. natural and cutting forest following
L. J. Kovner,
yields water and EvapotranspiratiOn 1956.
p.
25:969-975 Union Geophysical merican
the of Transaction
water-yields. upon vegetation
D. M. Hoover,
forest of removal of Effect
1944.
725-736. p. Pergamon. York, New
1965. Sept. Pennsylvania, Park, University
seminar, science advanced Foundation Science
National a of Proceedings Lull. W. Howard and
Sopper E. William by ed. hydrology, Forest In:
application. and opportunities processing data
low Streamf
1967.
Cunningham. G. B. and R. A. Hibbert,
Pergamon. York, New
1965.
527-543. p.
Sept. Pennsylvania, Park, University seminar,
science advanced Foundation Science National a of
Lull. W. Howard and Sopper E. William
proceedings
In:
by ed. hydrology, Forest
yield. water
on effects treatment Forest 1967.
R. Alden Hibbert,
275-290. p. Pergamon. York, New 1965.
Sept. Pennsylvania, Park, University seminar,
science advanced Foundation Science National
a of proceedings
Lull. W. Howard and Sopper
areas.
E. William by ed. hydrology, Forest
In:
humid in precipitation to watersheds small of
response the affecting Factors 1967.
6(3):l-17. Hydrology Scientific
of Association International the of Bulletin
cutting. forest of types several after yield water in
Increases 1961.
Hibbert. R. Alden and D. John Hewlett,
Agriculture. of Dept. S.
1256) Bulletin Technical
p. 194 C. D. Washington,
(U.
Ohio. Coshocton,
at watershed small of hydrology the on treatment
al. et L. L. Harrold,
and use land of Influence 1962.
36) No. Paper Station
Station. Experiment Range and Forest Mountain
p. 12
Rocky Service. Forest S. (U.
Colorado.
Collins, Ft. watershed. Colorado a from yield
years first
water on
harvest
timber
of
effect
C. Bertram Goodell,
the on report preliminary A 1958.
97
conditions forest of changes of Effects
1967.
H.
NakamO,
53) Bulletin
Station.
p. 44
Japan.
Experiment Forest (Government
MegUrO, Kamabuti. at low streamf upon influences
forest of Experiment 1952. Inose. T. and I. Maruyama,
P14-36)
Note Station. Experiment Forest Mountain Rocky
p. 7
Service. Forest S. (U.
colorado.
collins,
zones.
Ft.
and
Rocky
subalpine
alpine
Mountain
Jr. M., Martinelli,
the in management Watershed 1964.
58:272-275. Forestry of Journal
Forest. Experimental Fraser the on research
Watershed 1960. Goodell. c. B. and D. L. Love,
36:113-118. Union
Geophysical American the of Transactions Beetle.
Spruce Englemann the by pine & spruce of killing
D. L. Love,
the on low streamf on The.effect 1955.
p. 340
McGraw-Hill.
1958.
York, New
engineers. for Hydrology
Paulhus. H. L. Joseph and Kohler A. Max K., Ray Linsley,
Ann
p.
658
Arbor,
Edwards.
Michigan,
R. c. Jerome Li,
inference. Statistical
1964.
p. 8
Oregon.
portland, A35. type recorder, level water
company. Instrunient Stevens and LeupOld
Stevens
n.d.
131-136. p. Pergamon., York, New
1965.
Sept. Pennsylvania, park, University seminar,
science advanced Foundation Science National a of
proceedings Lull. W. Howard and Sopper E. William
by
In:
ed.
hydrologY
Forest
interception.
E. Raymond Leonard,
of theory Mathematical 1967.
p. 17
Management. Forest of
Dept. university, State Oregon Oregon, corvallis,
manuscript. Unpublished management. land from flows
T. J. Krygier,
peak and yield water in changes 1969.
35:608-612. Union Geophysical
xnerican the of Transactions
experiments.
watershed of duration minimum the determining
Evens. c. T. and L. J. Kovner,
for method A 1954.
98
9:423-429. science Forest
forest. Douglas-fir
1963.
a under precipitation Net
51:731-738. Forestry
of Journal
low. streamf & runoff forest, of
character in progress of years 15
management:
Jack. Rothacher,
watershed Hollow White 1953.
65) Paper
Station. Experiment Range and Forest Mountain
p. 18
Rocky Service. Forest S. (U.
Colorado.
Collins, Ft. watershed. experimental Creek
Workman The 1961.
Reynolds. G. H. and R. Lowell Rich,
12-15. p.
Department.
Land State [TucsOnl
1960. Sept. Symposium,
Watershed Arizona Annual Fourth the of proceedings
problems mangement water related and watershed
In:
and
water on
yields
removal
sedimentation.
tree forest of effects preliminary 1960.
Lowell. Rich,
NE-l) Paper Research
Station.
Experiment Forest Northeastern Service. Forest
p. 79
S. (U.
Pennsylvania. Darby, Upper
virginia. West of mountains the in practices
forest four of streamflow on Effect
1963.
Jr. Trimble, R. G. and Eschner R. A. G., K. Reinhart,
39:933-936. Union Geophysical
American the of Transactions
watersheds. forested
1958.
G. K. Reinhart,
small five of Calibration
vol.
East
p. 131
27.
issue) (Special
Journal. Forestry and Agricultural African
use land
areas.
in
catchment
African
South
C. H. Pereira,
1962.
in changes of effects Hydrologic
p.
124
Gilbert.
LampOrt
England,
Reading,
J. H. Penman,
hydrology. and vegetation 1963.
551-564. p.
Pergalflon. York, New
1965. Sept. Pennsylvania,
Park, university seminar, science advanced
Foundation Science National a of proceedings
and Sopper E. William by ed.
Lull. W.
Howard
Japan. in watersheds small
hydrology Forest In:
of runoff direct and flow, peak yield, water on
99
l0(2):74-85. Hydrology Scientific of
Association International the of Bulletin slopes.
Z. R. Whipkey,
forested from low stormf Subsurface 1965.
11-33. to 1-11
McGraw-Hill. York, New
Chow. Te yen by ed. hydrology, applied of Handbook
EvapotransPiration. 1964. J. Frank veihméyer,
In:
leaves.
Oregon. Corvallis, draft. 2nd
nunth. 730
Service.
Forest S. U. and Management Soil of Bureau 5.
U. University, State Oregon with cooperation in
prepared Oregon. area Alsea survey, vegetation
and Soil
1964.
Service. Conservation Soil S. U.
p. 70
C. D.
Washington, supply. water surface of reports annual
for
of
for Instructions
manuscript
preparation
Survey. Geological S. U.
Division. Resource Water 1951.
224) Handbook (Agriculture
p.
C. D.
214
hydrology.
Washington,
agricultural
1962.
in research for manual Field
Service.
Research Agricultural Agriculture. of Dept. S. U.
p. 104
Tennessee. Knoxville,
1935-58. Watershed, Hollow White of characters
hydrologic upon influences improvement cover Forest
1961.
Branch. Data Hydraulics Planning,
Control Water Division Authority. valley Tennessee
86)
(Technology
Monograph
p. 95
Tennessee. Knoxville,
watershed.
branch Tree Pine the of hydrology the upon
control erosion and reforestation of Influences
1955.
Branch. Data Hydrologic Planning,
Control Water Division Authority. valley Tennessee
1602) Paper Water-Supply
p. 61 C. D. Washington,
Survey. Geological S. (U.
York. New Central in low streaimf on reforestation
Ayer. R. G. and J. W. Schneider,
of Effect
1961.
1:124-34. Research Resources Water Oregon. of
Range Cascade the of slope western the on sheds
Jack. Rothacher,
water- small from low Streamf
1965.
100
Pergamon. York, New
137-160. p.
1965. Sept. Pennsylvania, Park, University seminar,
science advanced Foundation Science National a of
Lull. W. Howard and Sopper E. William
proceedings
States.
by ed. hydrology, Forest In:
United
the
J. Paul Zinke,
in studies interception Forest
1967.
69:615-620. 1, part
Research, Geophysical of Journal Nevada. Sierra
in forests of logging after time to related as
R. R. Ziemer,
1964.
trends evapotransPiration SunIner
2d
Hydrology.
p. 408
1959.
Wiley. John York, New ed.
Brater. F. E. and 0. C. Wisler,
968)
Bulletin Technical Agriculture. of Dept. S. (U.
p. 43 C. D. Washington,
forest. Pine Lodgepole a
from low streamf for available water on cutting
timber of Effect 1948.
Dunford. G. E. and G. H. Wilm,
30:272-278. Union Geophysical
American the of Transactions calibrated. be
C. H. Wilm,
1949.
watersheds experimental should long How
101
I XIaN2ddV
1/
/
3/
4/
.83
.98
.66
32
14
18
32
14
18
47
44
99
32
14
18
87
.80
.97
.98
.98
.99
.97
.98
.96
48
44
.93
.93
.93
100
9
.95
.94
15
8
26
3
9
12
3
9
12
9
3
12
15
8
26
17
29
0.94
2.49*
-.78
.41
.96
.28
.89
1.50
.98
-.57
3.31**
.48
2.45*
43.25
29.84
11.36
167701.38
156814 .57
136602.07
90450.10
7201.80
137965.04
2.60**
1.25
377**
154601.96
51023.91
243787.94
.01
.01
.01
67.84
34.04
81.68
2.17*1"
.77
.05
0.80
3.14**
1.00
1.71
3.22**
2.41*
2.29*
.31
.08
1.26
.90
1.31
6.58**
2.68**
1.00
87
.90
.83
.85
.90
.85
87
.91
.84
.85
.88
.85
.98
.83
0.80
t5 is the computed t value for change in slope.
tm is the computed t value for change in vertical position.
* significance at the 95 per cent level.
** significance at the 99 per cent level
Full year
Fall
Winter
Time-to-peak (hr. )
Full year
Fall
Winter
Total flow (csm-hr.)
Full year
Fall
Winter
Quick flow(csm-hr. )
Full year
Fall
Winter
Delayed flow(csm-hr.)
Full year
Fall
Winter
Height-of-riSe (ft .)
Full year
Fall
Winter
Peak discharge (csm)
101
44
49
0
t)
6.15
.64
5.42
639901.05
228660.69
728108.73
105526.96
26247.63
83189.56
339439.81
96718.09
408288.95
.01
.02
.01
188.77
14.59
165.09
Summary of statistics for Needle Branch including number of observations(n),
r2, t fOr slope(t ),, t for vertical position(t ),, and variance, for years
m
1957-68.
Pre -10
Pos t-1q
Var i ance
Parameter
n
r
r
n
Pre-logging Post-logging
t
tm2/
Table I.
1/
2/
3/
47
.37
.99
10
10
.94
.97
10
10
.97
10
9
7
7
7
9
17
3
.93
.95
3
18
20
0.95
n
21
r2
.97
.90
.70
.96
.85
.97
.90
0.80
r2
1.07
-1.27
2.93*Y
1 . 21
.33
- .96
1.07
-2.03
2. 65* *
*/
443**
3. 27*
tm2/
- .14
.67
0.32
1.85
tsi/
t5 is the computed t value for change in slope
tm is the computed t value for change in vertical position
** significance at the 99 per cent level
* significance at the 95 per cent level
Full year
Time-to-peak (hr.)
Full year
Quick flow(csm-hr.)
Full year
Delayed flow (csm-l.)
Full year
Total year (csm-hr.
Full year
Height-of-rise (ft..)
Peak discharge(csm)
Full year
Fall
Winter
n
32.25
.01
175881.88
136708.99
289518.50
165.46
55.04
191.78
Pre-logging
0
10.76
.02
282816.72
81836.73
67750.74
170.89
51.55
92.59
Logging
Post -
of statistics for Deer Creek IV including number of observations
(n), r2, t for slope(t5), t for vertical position(t)i and variance,
for years 1965-68.
Pre-log Post-log
Variance
Suiniflar
Parameter
Table II.
Delayed Flow
Total Flow
Needle Branch
Needle Branch
1/
2/
3/
4/
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Post
Pre
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Period
17/3
16/3
18/14
9/3
18/14
9/3
18/14
9/3
49/44
17/9
t/
0.95/0.93
0.93/0.97
0.98/0.99
0.83/0.90
0.66/0.98
0.85/0.90
0.96/0.98
0.84/0.91
0.83/0.98
0.24
2.22*
2.30*
1.01
2.21*!!
0.89
0.81
0.89
3.lO**
0.87/0.95 4.88**Y
n
r2
Winter/Fall Winter/Fall
t5 is the computed t value for change in slope
t is the computed t value for change in vertical position
*
significance at the 99 per cent level
* significance at the 95 per cent level
Peak Discharge
Quick Flow
Needle Branch
Deer Cresk IV
Peak Discharge
Needle Branch
.
Variable
0.33
1.21
1.51
-0.13
0.97
tmi/
Summary of statistical results for test to determine difference between
fall and winter data, including number of observations(n), r2, t for
slope(t5), and t for vertical position(tm), as tested against the control.
Watershed
Table III.
1967.
through 1960 years Creek, Flynn and Creek
Deer for precipitation of
II. Figure
in.x102 preciPitat]0n? accuxnulat1e Creek Flynn
9
8
67
5
4
3
2
/
1
0
r4
.10
0
U)Ii
C.'
U)U)
rl
op
C.'
'0
r4/
-i
r-4
'0
r
rl
(o
4
C.'
'0
m
C.'r4.
.
r4.
C.'
to
.
('ix
C.'
4)r4
0
rl
to
u
Cs1
U)
'0
'0
1967. through 1960 years Creek, Flynn and Branch
Needle for precipitation of
in.x102
9
Figure
I.
precipitation? accumulative Creek Flynn
8
7
6
5
3
4
1
2
O__.
1-
'
0
r4/
r4'
rt
-,
r4
rdQ)
r40
44)(
4)
CS1
A
mi
0
-
5
c'I.f
'i
i>4
r4r4
6
tot
'
-4.
Lfl
o
4X4
7
,.'
//..
105
II XIQcH
65-72
51-64
49-56
44-48
3
39-4
34-38
27-33
22-26
16-21
13-15
10-12
9 76 413
Column
flow Total
flow Delayed
flow Quick
hours +.72 Peak
hours 48 + Peak
hours 24 + Peak
Discharge Peak
6-80 7
5 72-7
67-71
3-66 6
58-62
53-57
49-53
5-48 4
4 40-4
36-39
31-35
27-30
22-26
18-21
13-17
9-12
7-
Column
Descriptio
1-
6
4
Time-to-peak
Year
Day
Month
Number watershed
Number Storm
8
Height-Ofrise
2
5-
3-
Cards Parameter
Discharge
Time
Discharge
Time
Discharge
Time
Discharge
Time
Discharge
Time
Discharge
Time
Discharge
Time
csm) (in Discharge
hours) 2400 to (0 Time
Day
Month
Year
Branch Needle = 5
IV Creek Deer = 4
Creek Flynn = 1
Number Watershed
Description
Cards Hydrograph
programs. computer
following the with conjunction in used be must format
This
below. presented format the using cards IBM on
placed were parameters and hydrograPhs for Data
106
l
jitiiII0
ç1.0.j. *% lb
11
l0
1I
SI t*t
Oh
005
ib*.('J ii. II,. Iii
l.I5
Lit
0001
1.31
1V1)0 1I1).. Ipl tVliLlSO
(V I)1 I 1 lIbl(t ;0I SOIlS
11l0151155 SI
hI
let Sil
041
51l OIl
11.1
Oid'Il0 111)0 00.LLb
10110
u0
001
1.1.1 Cal
111)01011 141155 051
ll
I..Il
1.11 SIt
1.1.1
tl
LS
l0il
ibi00I
lI.il,tI(.t,h405 ILii
111
1.1 ill
0&ih) aOl
1S.l.l'I1 l4
OØl.Otlib0l11 001
1001 5i3 iiOl100b) L IS
r*tIOlIIVt1
I.t.t DLI
0001
0..IL)l:
501
101
101 iS ISO
00.110:3 OIl
1111
DS.l0 101 toO
itO
101
e'li 1151 10 0(51
31.113 0111.55131
dlS000Ui
i1 iIVl'.
0030 10
00i L
0035 LI
LI
4lb13l)Sihu1
p
DO
1j,10l1L10004 11
1i,.l01)L'005i dl
It
L 35iL.0utl0S
Slid 4: S.,Ij..lOI)L101.i
.0IiLIll1iOh
bi
LL*.0Otl14 05
0114
0310)50
.31)11 10
,40351L
11 IV) 41110
101
1i.50l'i
01
i.0lIL0).5 'C
501435 0545 15S13 i1l,lj..tlL101:i
00
ii
l.l310Vi1115 0154) 55id
00051 III lU
I
1L5 V1 iLlSO
500 II 10151155
115 LVI 51 iSO
10 Il' iiI
i)0liLid0
10141 IS.
i(t 101
l)o 11 III. I0l.tOtiLiSO
OIl
'SI -1
10 II,101t0)iLlS
i1 1101
00%
1.11 eu
VI .1 IS
gii.St 1,,03 IV. i..li Oil
iC1l0 lVt 1,151105 041
Ii
ii.
i
I(1l0 lV)
$01050 ..I1',4i5
:s I,
5li.5Zll03IlIbJhii
i.t.t
t1ll'5" lit
151011 1004 l0
10t051003 i.tI0Iil
1.101
it It) ('1.0003 i,.It,lil
00.11013 itt
00.ILb) Oil
i..rla.1rl)N
..t.r Oil 30
etl LIt 00
01tO &It too
0.3
il0.ILb.) ill
t.ll
0(50
Oct IL 00
OIL
1.1.r Ill LO
00
ll ill
itt .1)
00it00dLl9ilil0)il 1S1
ist(5ui i0(.ilitPllil
l.Il VOl
i..v.Ilo0V00
out
00
0.1
111l101 10131i5 I 141
o.i,.r.Ile
Iot.001 lUIJli5It
1.151 VOl
IblIlOdL
lb. 1.1)01 11.1..ljLiSO
Ik3$ll 11101.4 15
i.u3003 NOSO00S - 031133005 0113 3115 i 000 .0)0155 - 0.11
I,. 1)0 t01 11iLu15
it
I11101005
i.b,.i Ill
1l111 l50110L0 II.Ll,Iil
15w
SO,.ivelliLi'5
t.,il,.bDi
I.5,l$L.11C3l1011110
1t311).
111IV 10110
III Il
101
1)41 501
lit
NliL151d3I i
ie4.lS3 life
.1l.100 1l110L500 - (55)504 11
01)1.00.4 Li
1,..0llL0li Si
Is
IL00.i VS
-
dl
1Q1I1I).jj Ci
- 00945 )
- l.hl1VU - .LI.Lflj,5,30dISV550I501
CL
05
111 514
tLV (51315513 0111151541
II
i5.01i.z.oi.e.i.LI.LIVQIILVS.i 'I
IO,li
11P,,0I
:10140)OSILISS_i II
IVO u1a:.'o
3511
4511
,0105.tjS,oi.,Th10lli5lLVb5tJ dl
ous,.sen:,500uh3'
l,ILI.,I,flhILIhUl4 U
11111 3015 MII0I?flUAK
b,11'I b101i151
UI
(51 i( t.II,.1111,) IlS
il..1111.S1i I
100V1 : IlISIhSUIlO
bL lb. 110
w
b5t%IIlIl0j)u1 51*
S 011155510
l.I1).41 11%
ill.11111 I,.bt11I
i%0tJ51 I
,.Ii'n,d3S 041rJ10UA, V..i .051.5*
ijxvdaS HdIDOUAH iO WVDOd
LOT
IIzsacIv
4L IV
II jINV') UL I
r.'e097
)I.OIjMI lUll)
i jlj
Ill I .v..3.'*(ue11l;j
i.a:i*1711'*
LII W
I...
&
IvlIIV)iIld'
Pb
.1 .1
Ij,i'IlIiIIOP It
11',U*SC,(tLII'LUII'ItI ..L
L171*111h/ I %).$*.1J71174
.1) 41
Ia#.I.1
0q1.117..h/111Ih11171.41
I. 4*1.1 t*..Z,,
,*IhI.CI#11011fl1111 1
IOiJV.I 111.1
711.1.1 (I.I41*1'.IOL
77111.1 ,V.IL.01r7*.L
1.11/I
III
UI)
DlilI*4OIM40*L
41.111. 101 IOtA
Qj3/L111..4 uI
In
I4IL'.b.j 11%
4I
1
I/JIM:,. lwLtnIp.n:ns'I%.ILvne..i
I,IIlI4
Mj I Ii
I/bjJ3WW'.J
1.J1)L
Z'14ILd))MJIII WI I.VJ
..nI
.01//I 4'IaU77M L4'0Ij'Jl
..j
111
l0(.(s'.L
Qz//W.11'.V.. Lh),64d.'IIruJli"l
Il.IM:J
MI(U.I
,..':.,..l(,Ll
IlflI')I'Il(.l
elI
ullUnru? ILl £ JUU/IL7Mg
£7111.4 uvi
3.
(UL1IJ'.V III 1*1711/ di I *1411
117*1.4 I.(
L4101IS
**I*I7I 40*. 01 17
WII&l11M.i Lfl
0*14
ZOO
.1114.1
Z/ (1141y 113*111.00II
III
I,jIbb.I*.L.L0
,aus.IIs.I'.,I.)11IM/lbbdb011U
lIZ.,.I,lO,9),I,_Z*I1_II/b4I1i0IILShl7I41
II. 111u1
I..L.IIb)/I1SS.Ihl1t1
Ij..I.IIi*vI.
I4*.1.III.lIlIUh4Ml.I1*. 141110*1011*7
1307.11341
I(Pb,.%.I.7%,_II.l,1IP*.&I4IUSiIlZIII04
4110*11*4*1116
iISLll*
7
.1*166
11.411
01.111
I.W.l397:ucL..'.lL,'.l.Il7.I0.
II
,e;c,,,uv'.:a 'LI
I/III IL
1/eUIOLM I
4*1J11)4l*.l.i e%
1*4*1*1.4 4fl
,*LLILVIIM4 III
MVH,.
41 LI LI
S
MlC) 1.1
II
II
j.16Lu103 VI
)8Jl.l*LUY*.l0i 011
I,. 17,13111 Il*E1IIYllI-i
II
(,.4IIM LI IIIIII,07(Ia7'.M.j
Ifl
((11701701 LI
11
LI 7L I IC l)V&104111
IL LU
0.07.
.11
4)111,4:3 NLII*.4d7j..l110IIV11Mj
11171*1.4 III
I#lij!(0i4'*1I7I
IUnj'z'.I4l,.'e'.illUu
Iv lb
UVMI.1
LVeI.4j
Ir'Il7'U110 IL
£LeLlIrp),L9..1..IIII IL
IlJjJlll1lI!b1laXtl1$iUP1tS'e33Illbl11l1I
'II '..,.I'lL4'I.
,,.aIrw.Ie:..'lI. 141*1.
L*4101'$OI IL LU
I.)
llI7..WL1 III
If'3)VPbI,.l IL
Iii).l.l07IILV1*W..i 141
I41)1..*,11171404 101
(lI's0l Ill IL Ifl
IiIiO,l4'1*.17L30014
114*1u11 I
*1'
410111103 II
11171*104 LII
117141
1L IL 4,.*:NI.I
(003 INIL
LU
1.41111*
701
141
IWlIj'IOI'l7Ij'7(I'jIuV*11711171*l04
407700 IL 100011IL7014 'UI
I,1111097,Ij
'i'll
'1711
Ill
0.1161141*5
*341.1131.7
.00.10011
Li 10*
I*7'I,1*lOlj.UllLUII1
101
9'io 10*177101 *10*
100I4*!1b0141J1*01i'111'1i141I1'1i17*
1,11 II'
111197111110 07
(U
IlIIV
01.101
Iv 01 1(1
031.11111
1*111111 II
1*0*1*11.4 lv
1.*I1.i(ISIU
111171971i1110
II.'IIvv,) LI 01
(117%' ;,*11Iul
IO2M'mIIM Wl11*dlY.11*7,ll
71 *011*' 17141110
ii It'I IIi1.I10
404/510411
I071*.I 11110 17
N' 170*jlI .1 LI
101v11I7)i1I10
£011*1LL1 *11*11 %VI4jlI0*
I7*1*IilhjUSIlIl*l' *7*41(10
)71
l341LLIflS3I
NL/l..111541*ldIIlLLI
INLIII.-LOIoIOI
1911
l*016117111I0) /011
1131.7. IV.A30l,j5
*1*1*101 III
(N1/Z..110*4141)S) / *11*4*0 0.0
9)11*1 I
A'
Ill I
I.1061I11 17141110
WL*OI%9711L110
111/111,4113*1
111/11114113*!
410111103 VI
111 I.019*IILISO
011IVOl1I74L1I0
L0*111111011 17144100
IIQ%1%7IiLlR
-
I.. ir. I S 5*15 11411*1*115
NP,*161110I *7141110
4.1 Ir.l ,,.ow,41d..mc
IN Ill Ir.l*,.o1*14111..I,s
1111*IUIIUI III £1110
4*1*111103 17
It1)ipL,.oS.LMI15
00W
1r910. ((117
I
C'II.UI(r'LSII4I 1
IZ,19,IILIIA II
l,.111111ej11)jI Pb
ISI'l.0(NIlM*IlIIIMlI111*.Th.I
(7 04 01
*57*11
11110)01.1 II 01
19.181(10 04
II
I
(cI'l.7I.'p,e4IIcII.11 IIIIi..7N01
1*111*1* I4I.l,'IIV *1.11.11*111
I
OI**uII*PI...IIllIvliI
1*I)103I.I S 01
I9ZI'I,IlLIIN
I
04 LI
119,,(EUI.IIIILISM Iv
.111' *11,1 lv
(Ill' (II
01 LI 01
U,'!,
lv'I,'E.Itr'
11.110711.1 17 00
I511 III LI 09
I44I1I7Iil10 (*7
IS
(11I'I.1111I11*I.IIl4,7h7I I11,I'I,11L110
47 L LI
1*431*1
LI
4101L7L3 II
(0I(.(II)3117)'IIII..,01I.I*43.r)I7(.O,IIjvlu
I 'LI I*b.*03 I I' 111131
L117(171j1110 Ill
III.
0' 01
41.1971i1110 LI
.1 II
1001t.')U!aW
LOS' Ill II 01 1*
1.1I.*10l.1*d*4. I
4V LU
0lNlCA10ItONflSs*IpWlflAflI01.a,'..WIeltflL.
I*4(0eP.IL
41110 LI
II1(I -s
.l
'S*6'pI (*1171,1
(-(,Jle7il
nob_Ill I 00
ICLI'I,141110 IL
ov -1 01
*'l.1' IN
Il'%v1j1110 II
-I LI
1741'IvIiLI.I VI
:100141), 10*1
lI)j07I*'ISlI).*VNI'I7%l.'.UII.l,IlL(,1I7
l .1 .1
161197)41101 11
SISA'IVMV MOISS UX
U0d WVIOtd
801
2
(nSSX)
=
(X2)
Var(b0)
as: defined be may b0 for variance The
intercept.
the defining coefficient regression the is b0 where
b Var + b01 Var
t=
b02 - b01
(A-2)
as: stated be may (1968),
Smith and Draper by
given as positiOns vertical in change for test The
position Vertical in Change for Test
period. post_logging
or pre_lOgging designates
(x
2)
or
(1
subscript second The
or x, of squares of sum the SSX observations,
of number the n squares, of sum residual the SS Res
slope, defining coefficient regression the is b1 where
ssx2)
(SSX
+
1
(1
4 - n2 +
SS2) Res + SSi Res
)
b11b12
as: stated be may
(1957)
t=
Lee by given as test This
Slope in Change for Test
TESTS STATISTICAL
109
the to reduces equation the intercept, the at
be would which (A-6), equation in
to allowed is x0 If
0
ase
of value the
the
assuitLe
equation. this of modification
a be to seen be may intercept in change for test The
)
2
j(sSX2)
x0) -
(x
+
4)
- n2 + (.'l
(n1(SSX2)
Re5SS2)((Xj + (Re5SS1
x0) -
022
6) (A-
t=
1-b 0 b
becomes:
then position vertical in difference for test The
- 12
(A-5)
Xn
or populations both of average the be to selected was x0
case this In
conducted. be to is test the which at x of
value any is x0 and x of values individual equals x1 where
)
4) (A-
(nSSX
-
xo)2)52
= means) of (mean Var
becomes: then means of mean the for
populations. both of mean the near tested
variance The
was displacement vertical in change the result, a As
mean. the at contained is however, sample, the about
intercept. the at lines regression
information Most
two between difference the for test a is This
defined. previouslY as are
2
and
1
subscripts the and x,
where
SSX, and regression the about variance the is 2
110
analysis.
the in use for satisfactory not was event particular
that for value that of quality the that indicates
it
Instead,
value. a of lack the indicate not does
event storm given any for parameter given a for blank A
recession. the intersects line separation the point
the to rise initial the from interval the as defined is
time where event storm each for runoff of volume the to
corresponds This
csm-hr. in expressed are eight and
seven six, colunn5 in volume of values The
study. the in
used parameters the of values the give eight through three
columns and event, the of date the gives two Column
watersheds. three all on event given a for same the
is number This
number. event the is one column tables,
three all In
Branch. Needle for data the VI Table
and IV, Creek Deer for data V Table Creek, Flynn for data
VI. and V IV, Tables in presented is
gives IV Table
analysis all for used data all of listing complete A
Study in Used Data
(A-2). equation of form original
111
32.25
71.81
2047.71
1274.S
6178.64
1374.11
35994
430.44
689.37
554.86
429.66
786.97
1333.03
1278.00
2611.03
71.95
77.78
149.71
977.15
2231.97
3159.23
9591.24
145.60
267.56
1702.50
585.22
5482.62
2309.34
739.56
35.19
2133.46
91.61
1269.58
2299.07
794.62
2151.63
1307.00
b94.5
1935.72
2657.28
1430.90
8798.19
1878.67
3140.91
1387.51
1387.01
54.70
80.84
36.98
47.81
21.93
9.56
40.93
5.9
1.4)
l.2
1121.32
1191.89
38.43
33.40
82.88
43.99
7.78
437
26.32
15.63
3780.12
1724.12
121.96
6432.01
1254.82
18.74
4,74
52.28
59.1
2.03
7.45
6.12
2.94
5.70
2.10
10.00
36,98
30.80
59.92
81.86
7.11
27.54
31.48
22.82
2.94
4.26
2.7
357.31
758.92
194.92
1.36
3.43
2.36
21.04
11.98
54,51
40.04
10.15
6.04
12.42
11.21
4,46
3.70
4.72
8.76
5.73
16.96
3,40
3.29
3.81
23.91
6,qr
39.38
53.80
67.88
40.04
4130.93
209Q.55
I.4
CSu-HRI
FLOW
TOTAL
(CSM-MR)
DELAYED
(CSMHWI
FLOW
QUICK
(CSM)
DISCMAP6E
PEAK
1.12
.36
.84
.41
.38
1.11
.70
.30
.26
.24
1.57.
1.16
.80
.25
1.03
.48
.39
.58
1.30
1.78
.12
.67
.73
35
.76
.41
.54
.30
.32
1.33
.28
1.02
.47
.92
1.08
.27
.41
.49
.27
.55
.44
.78
46
.38
.47
.39
.26
19
.60
.30
.26
.21
.42
.4
20.5
81.0
20.0
17.5
41.0
13.5
16.0
4.0
10.5
22.5
81.5
31.5
26.0
9.5
5.0
27.0
35.0
27.0
33.5
9.5
78.5
23.5
5.0
79.5
13.0
22.0
7.0
6.0
47.0
22.0
-.
:
84 74
1
1
F,E.4
1
84 19
84 11
64
63
I
6? 70
4
17
10
6
19
2?
3
27
23
12
10
9
89
I
-
-
:3-
-
II
11
10-
84
61
82
1
80
59
SR
ci
58
sc
84
83
87
51
2
2
12
48
7
11
11
48
10
44
41
10
10
10
31 8
21 4
41
40
13 3
1
3
2
13
38
61 10 2
41
61
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
29
6
17
15
10
1
1
li
32
II
II
II
31
3n
28 10
28 10
23 10
11 10
q
28
7
26
25
'4
23
60 7 9
60 23 8
31 3
5
9
60
60
60
60
60
60
7
3
2
2
1
8
1
18
22
21
20
19
q
i
59 15 12
59 23 11
59 20 II
39
14.0
35,3
12.5
10.5
3.5
89
59
59
59
39
59
38
58
88
38
87
68
I
21 12
63 7
11
63 2? 10
83 20 10
63 22
15.83 9
61 30
23-67
62- 7
62 2 6
82 27- 4
62
3
62
2
62
82
61
61
81
81
61
61
61
81
61
61
61
61
17.0
20.0
30.5
10.5
43.0
16.0
33.5
17.0
26.0
30.0
8.0
5.0
15.0
24.5
68.0
36.0
21.5
13.0
63.5
11.0
29.0
31.S
3.5
18.5
22.5
43,0
50.0
40.0
1.04
.53
.52
.24
.13
.88
1.28
.89
.69
IA
c
14
s9 18 11
9
19 10
39 II 10
10
20.0
27.0
26.5
39.0
10.0
.34
(FWET)
RISE
OF HEIGHT
i
12
8
26 9
19 9
4
9
4 6
3
10
A
7
9
27
9
6
1
1
4
3
20 11
14 II
18 10
1
IC
I
(HOURSI
PFAK
TO TIME
DATE
FVF.NT
ANALYSES STATISTICAL. TN USEO CREFK FLYNN FOP DATA TV.
TAPL
112
6%6%9
91002
IC%C%
9L'09%%
81'%ECt
O906
6E92%Z
E1250%
CSS6t
2sb9Z
566929
WE22t%
16b062
69'%%
25L9
Q0%
q9U
64,96L
96U80'
pi6LL9%
t9'299%
L%195
,'L992
95%9L
9q9E%
çl'059
9qULb%
90L5
'02
S
ZL
£2.
otc%
lbSS
g2%9
LV
6E
95'
2E9%S%
ZE6OZZ
9EtIl
69'5Lt
t0L99l
0%9Z
SCOE
%L,66%
C66C0L
L6'096
996%1%
£t669
St'L90%
£t'1692
00E69
9666
ZVOE0E
99l%
99052
II6C
2E1599
29L9%
61P91%
2Z'5905
9%'CEL
tdHW53
M1i
s3lFlD
.
092
OE
ç9
o
O'9
O52
09Z
CS'
OU
%6'bE
o'9
029
02E
CS
OE6L
gOtZ
59
0909
g%ZE
9U99
1601
SCZ
115
20 9
%S
p5
o9C
09
92
59C
1p21
092
91'
0
5't
O1
tt'%
91
O'LZ
599
592
ç%C
E9
LVI
ZZ
91' 1
1p0 %
0C92
)193d
g9
99
99
99
99
9
2
52
92 C
91 C
61 2
99E
.99
19
19
19
2
%
6
CE 2%
2%
C
12 01
19 92 01.
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
99
22
12
1%
£
Cl
SI
1%
Cl
62
12
£1
5
Cl
01
0%
0%
01
9
C
2
2
1
%
%
%
2%
21
21
999
1
9
S9 12 2%
92 21
S9 9
9 22 U
0C
59%
21
21
9 1
9
59
9
ç9
59
59
59
S9
59
59
59
21
C
12
c
61
1
92
52
11
9
C
1%
L 34lI
LHDl34
OU
*2%
12%
92%
52%
92%
22%
12%
*11
11%
911
£11
011
60%
80%
101
.50%
90%
£01
0%
101
00%
*6
86
96
Sb
96
26
16
19
ot
C
£9
1
1
2%
1
9
99 62 2
9 92 1
tSdflH)
1133i)
3Slb
06
69
11
01
9
1
1
1
9 U 21
9
99 92 1%
1%
9 2
9 DC 6
592
90
9E
26 9
9? 15
tbS3)
39VH3SlO
%
99 1% 1%
99 12 01
99
999%t
99 6 C
99 6% 1
9 51 1
99S
065
OEE
61'
99
I
9E2C
9
99
00E
90t6
26Z
6W.01
20S9
o25
592
22 I
6LL
2Z
£6L%
09E
çSC
s95
5L2
OWE
gt2C
96 91
OS'91 I
9b 9S
03A%30
oU
0E
5L
O%E
o%5
ç29
ipbt
ç11E
6L2E
EL E
9
£955
t5L951
92 12
99 6
l
9552%9
£SbZ
9CO2
2009
1996%
L59299
£VL69'
5C509
66' 195
1L01
92269
Z%OL
6
0%
9ç.qU ZELZCC
2E299%
OSS0ZE
IbHS3
11LL
08
61
81
LI
1
91
91
£1
EL
IL
01
b3UMflN
1N3A
3190
U3IINlLt3 Al
1iL
815.10
949.49
2807.65
4320.61
51,27
581.87
286.80
547.28
699.44
11134.14
118,7w
287.30
1431.55
1060.54
5204.29
4631.34
529.89
411.94
3657.23
1200,08
1452,25
3927.67
6S3,71
2161.58
964.16
189.22
5442,27
1068.90
1186.06
301.92
450.22
3470.23
1665.47
2311.47
(CSHHR)
FLCW
TCTAL
(CSM-HB)
FLDW
DELAYED
2284.17
1361.54
1861.26
4418,11
879.68
1509.85
2475,42
3127.34
788,15
3774,14
3570.80
168.51
10434.70
260.48
530.60
1991.95
3371.12
(CSH.HR)
FLC
GUICK
17.36
30.08
99.42
50.51
39.48
17.92
49.44
79.35
63.29
33.31
67.09
124.35
24.20
18,50
60,83
33,31
65.81
17.92
62.05
5.35
160,39
28.54
44.2
80.30
101.09
18.50
6.53
8.95
7,18
-
47.5
9,5
18,5
16.0
.64
1.01
1,06
57.5
.49
.21
1,24
.81
.74
.69
1.27
.56
.91
1.09
.41
48,S
28.0
34,5
21.0
26.S
SO,0
S7.S
44.0
28.5
68 28
68 16
68 19
68 3
68 9
67 23
67 3
7
27
67 15
3
3
2
2
1
12
12
10
3
67 17 2
67 29 1
67 27 1
67 13 1
67 S
1
66 13 12
66 6 12
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
65
65
65
4
12-
14 11
11 11
16 3
3
9
15
1
1
3
1
5
27 12
24 12
4
12
65 22 11
65 12 11
.30
13.?1
1.34
2.76
222.07
29.10
16.80
14.19
42.12
57.26
12A.27
45.29
.51
.68
1.30
(FEET)
(CSM)
DISCHARGE
PEAK
F
RISE
HEIGHT
45.0
20.0
21.0
20.0
87.0
65 1
3
65 28 1
2S 1
65
65
65
65
64
64
64
64
11 1
6
1
3
1
24 11
24 1
19 1
17 1
12q
128
127
126
12S
124
122
121
114
113
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
100
99
97
96
95
94
93
92
90
8
84
83
82
81
80
79
76
69
68
67
(HCURS)
NUMBER
EVENT
PEAK
T TIME
ANALYSES STATISTICAL TN USED TV CREEK DEER
DATE
FR
DATA V. TABLE
114
79,68
170.28
1973.98
1246.76
6235.81
3619.50
54558
538.05
1157.69
871.14
506,46
1221.49
1186.09
2840.22
67.38
119.53
170,85
2353.37
2459.1?
9005.11
209.8?
490.87
1336.50
594,9
5030.42
3194.25
612.36
33.35
2103.60
103.16
1099.17
3166.60
905.30
2330.69
1148.11
3011.58
948,68
2197.41
3446.50
6033.30
2491.82
3833.88
1861.41
1423.39
44.63
106.44
40.96
85.95
12.44
61,45
6.95
0
.23
2061.43
1491.24
12.41
3693.92
2599.29
2$l.05
6545.99
1584.52
112.15
1654.13
721.03
619.64
326.16
4261.83
2432.15
90,60
(CSM.HR
FLCW
DELAYED
(CSM.HR)
FLCW
QUICK
3,41
3$,71
107.90.
5$.16
9.88
4,39
25.15
20.04
25.53
25.05
4,54
63.10
112.29
12.44
10.11
4,54
10.17
3.29
13.82
45.1Z
33,36
64.01
102.7$
6.80
45,72
43,52
43,52
30.14
4,32
5,49
2.52
2.05
3,40
2.45
19.53
13.82
10,96
40.96
12.44
6.58
15.73
20.30
5,34
5.16
7.90
13.73
-
.31
.91
.54
.93
.28
.3S
.62
16
32
.42
,9
1,18
.
.
.14
.2$
.82
.44
38
.39
.24
.96
1,65
.18
,63
.13
,3$
.80
.45
.59
.33
,43
.36
1.14
.32
1.00
34
.80
1.02
.33
.45
.37
.32
.41
.30
.62
.50
.45
.35
.36
.28
.27
.60
.24
.27
.30
.36
.84
.56
26.44
6.58
6.04
49
9,8
4.64
5.85
70.96
77.91
51.21
.37
(CSM)
LFEET)
DISCHARGE
PEAK
19.0
82,0
i.5
11.5
38,5
12.5
17.0
5.0
iO.5
22.5
19.0
29.5
25.5
9.5
4.5
29.0
29.5
17.5
31.0
10.5
71.5
z3,5
4.0
28.5
13.5
21.5
6.0
55.0
44.0
18.0
15.5
16.0
26.0
9.5
42.0
16.5
39.5
18.0
26,0
28.5
8.0
5.0
15.5
23.0
67.0
61.0
19.0
14.0
51.0
12.0
29.0
22.0
4.0
18.0
25.0
26.0
23.0
14.5
34.5
16.3
9,0
3,0
22.0
39.0
52.0
39.0
3.8
11.0
.56
.27
.23
.80
1.01
.70
.30
.84
12.01
2.60
(CSMHR
FLCW
TCTAL
64 24 1
64 19 1
64
11
1
64 6 1
64 1
1
63 21 12
63 7
11
63 22 10
63 20 10
92263
91563
69
68
67
66
65
64
61
62
60
63 30 3
62 25 11
62 20 11
62 1 10
6
57
36
53
262
62
62
62
62
27
4
11
10
4
3
2
2
662 .2
61 19 12
61 22 11
61 3
11
61 27 10
61 23 10
61 12 10
61 10 10
61 31 $
61 21 4
61 13 3
61 1
3
61 13 2
61 10 2
61 29 1
61 6 1
60 17 11
11
11
60
60
60
60
15
10
2$
2$
60 23
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
10
10
10
11 10
7
9
23 $
31 3
5 3
9 2
7
2
1$ 1
60 $
1
15 12
59
59
39
59
59
23
20
18
19
11
11
11
10
59 11 10
39 S 10
59 26 9
59 19 9
9
439
439
.6
59 9 3
59 27 1
59 9
58
58
58
38
20
1
11
14 11
1$ 10
7
5;
so
49
48
47
4
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
is
17
16
15
14
13
12
10
9
8
7
6
3
4
3
2
10
(HCURS)
PEAK
TD TIME
RISE
CF HEIGHT
NUNRER
EVENT
DATE
ANALYSES STATISTICAL IN USED RRANCM NEEDLE R
DATA VI.
TARL!
115
2718.46
793.11
823.97
1623.01
6289.04
2476.92
1302.07
1746.36
6372.63
3260.93
3070.56
1314.37
799.04
3370.39
1681.81
.
.
795,75
1325.47
615,03
773.38
1836.17
11291.40
324,17
40.86
631.66
99.08
371.15
608,03
1134.75
1862.59
1338.30.
2499,00
1799,86
3826.09
3863.28
5437,40
342,50
960.00
2455,68
5031.37
1231.15
2638.89
1959.78
717.06
5997.80
1386.12
1314,00
4218.06
91.74
350,84
.
239.09
.
25.iS
12.07
19.53
32.92
92.17
34.66
40,60
24.50
70.22
89.26
13.91
13.17
8.67
.
.
2173,41
7499.57
2904,06
4038.02
869.06
1387.74
2595.89
617.30
2487.79
3364.28
3637.54
727.84
226.88
307.49
58.22
9455.23
158.34
529.72
1392.00
2827.89
5326.16
1435.89
4,R6
19.53
18.29
89,24
24.51
14.96
72.79
109.73
24.31
22.A4
54.R6
34.40
83.95
25.05
68.76
21.58
3.73
18.00
106.44
78.27
104.97
11.34
32.55
42.43
21.38
12.44
6,22
12.87
16.46
13.35
1.57
4.R3
13.35
10.73
183.00
32.53
13.16
23.66
23.66
126.19
55.96
62.91
2.62
3.33
1.21
49.01
7,3
61.S
(CSH-HR
(C5M-P$R)
(CSM-HR)
LCW
QUICK
LCW
DELAYED
FLOW
TCT*L
(CSHI
DISCHARGE
PEAK
.39
.56
.18
.28
1.23
.41
24,5
10,3
36.0
23.0
22.5
47.0
30.0
43.5
41.5
21.0
39,3
23.5
49.5
37.0
.88
.53
.40
.50
8.0
.78
.62
.60
.97
,24
.34
.43
,33
.78
.57
1.02
.16
.38
.64
1.16
1.04
.26
.88
.70
1.01
.31
32
.14
.72
.39
.21
.33
.59
.84
.28
.63
62
.36
1.16
.73
.13
.21
.34
1.26
1.13
.31
.27
.41
22
.56
.30
,57
(FEET)
RISE
HEIGHT
2.0
6.0
4.0
7.5
11,0
23.0
22,5
19.0
17,3
34.0
60.0
8,5
26.3
63.0
43.5
3.0
38.0
9,0
13.0
20,5
4.0
31.5
27.0
13.5
6.0
4,5
18.5
33.5
36.5
33.3
24.0
33.0
27.0
39.0
32.0
28.0
14.0
24.3
3.5
43.0
13.5
43.0
68 2 6
68 23 3
68 28 3
68
68
68
68
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
16
19
3
3
2
2
9 1
23 12
10
10
10
10
10
10
4
3
27
24
22
12
3
21
11
3
67 13
67 15
67 17
67 13
67 29
67 27
2
2
1
1
67 13 1
5
1
13 12
67
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
65
66
66
66
6 12
4
12
14 11
11 11
21 10
11 4
16 3
9 3
3
1
27 12
19
15
5
1
1
1
65 24 12
65 4 12
65 1 12
65 22 11
65 12 11
65 3 11
63 27
65 5
63 19
65 1
65 28
65 25
65 11
65 6
65 3
64 22
64 24
64 1
64 4
64 2
64 30
64 11
64 29
64 26
131
110
129
128
127
126
125
124
122
121
120
19
118
17
116
I1
114
113
112
ll
110
09
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
101
100
99
95
94
98
97
96
93
92
91
81
1
90
89
88
87
86
83
84
83
82
1
10
10
4
3
1
1
1
12
11
12
11
11
9
3
2
1
(HOURS)
PEAK
T TIME
DATE
CCNTINII(D
tf!
80
79
78
76
77
75
74
73
72
71
To
NUMPER
EVENT
TARLE
116