1 / 20

Charles Andrew Cole - Penn State University Chris Cirmo - SUNY, Cortland

USING HYDROLOGY TO COMPARE A REGIONAL HYDROGEOMORPHIC (HGM) CLASSIFICATION ACROSS A LATITUDINAL GRADIENT OF THE APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS. Charles Andrew Cole - Penn State University Chris Cirmo - SUNY, Cortland Denise Wardrop - Penn State University Robert P. Brooks - Penn State University

stevie
Download Presentation

Charles Andrew Cole - Penn State University Chris Cirmo - SUNY, Cortland

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. USING HYDROLOGY TO COMPARE A REGIONAL HYDROGEOMORPHIC (HGM)CLASSIFICATION ACROSS A LATITUDINAL GRADIENT OF THE APPALACHIANMOUNTAINS Charles Andrew Cole - Penn State University Chris Cirmo - SUNY, Cortland Denise Wardrop - Penn State University Robert P. Brooks - Penn State University Jessica Peterson – Penn State University

  2. Riparian Depressions NY PA VA

  3. 1997 HGM key for the Ridge and Valley • A quick means of identifying HGM subclass • A direct way into the assessment of function • May or may not work anywhere else along the Appalachian Mountains • Objective: Use hydrology to assess HGM key north and south along Appalachian Mountains

  4. Hydrogeomorphology Depression Slope Floodplain Fringing Flats Impoundment

  5. Group of natural wetlands w/in a region ‘Pristine’ to disturbed Used to develop range of expected conditions Problems include: Lack of good data Hard to get good data Need landscape component Relationship between functions and values? Reference Wetlands

  6. Riparian Depression • Adjacent to streams • Surface outlet with unidirectional flow • No water from overbank flooding • Soils saturated, rarely flooded • Low energy systems • PEM, PSS, PFO

  7. Slope • On topographic gradient • Surface and groundwater • Saturated, rarely inundated • Low energy systems • PEM, PSS, PFO

  8. Headwater floodplain • Adjacent to 1st, 2nd order streams • Not much overbank flooding. Overland flow, groundwater • Saturation. Often dry • Low to high energy • Frequently PFO, PSS

  9. Hydrology RDS WL40’s and Ecotones

  10. Headwater floodplains Slopes 1=PA 2=NY – AD 3=NY – Cat 4=VA Riparian depressions

  11. Median depth (cm) – headwater floodplain PA NY-A NY-C VA (Kruskal Wallis H=5501.1, df=3, p<0.000)

  12. Median depth (cm) – slope PA NY-A NY-C VA (Kruskal Wallis H=20425.21, df = 3,P< 0.001)

  13. Median depth (cm) – riparian depression VA PA NY-A NY-C (Kruskal Wallis H=2688.20, df=3, p<0.001)

  14. Headwater floodplain Slope Riparian depression

  15. Wet and dry periods – by HGM subclass

  16. And the reason is….

  17. Credit: David Westphalen/Painet Inc.

  18. New York wetlands were substantially impacted by beaver • Hard to find any site that was not modified by a beaver • Really altered the duration of wet periods (though not dry periods) • Reduced fluctuations

  19. We will need to revamp the HGM classification • Works well south … other locations depend on beavers?

More Related