Using daily discharge data from the US Geological Survey, we calculated 34 stream flow metrics for 150 watersheds (area<282 km2) within the Chesapeake Bay basin, and selected 17 of the metrics. We quantified the proportions of forest, agriculture, grassland, developed land, and impervious surface in each watershed. For each of the three physiographic provinces, we correlated the flow metrics with the land cover proportions to elucidate how different land cover types affect the flow regime. Higher proportions of forest increased stream flow in relatively dry winters or springs and reduced stream flow in comparatively rainy autumns. Higher forest proportions also reduced flooding, prolonged pulses of higher flow, and reduced flow variability. Higher proportions of agriculture reduced flow variability and prolonged pulses of higher flow in all physiographic provinces and reduced flooding in the highland physiographic provinces. Higher grassland proportions reduced flooding and flow variability and prolonged high flow pulses in all provinces. Higher proportions of developed land and impervious surface reduced infiltration, increased flooding and flow during high rainfall periods, intensified flow variability, and shortened high flow pulses; there are different hydrologic effects in different urbanized areas.
TIAN Di, LI Xu-yong, Donald E. WELLER, BAI Zhong-ke
. Impacts of Land Use and Impervious Surface on Stream Flow Metrics in Chesapeake Bay Watershed[J]. JOURNAL OF NATURAL RESOURCES, 2011
, 26(6)
: 1012
-1020
.
DOI: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2011.06.012
[1] David R Maidment. 水文学手册[M]. 张建云, 李纪生, 等译. 北京: 科学出版社, 2002.
[2] Poff N L, Ward J V. Implications of streamflow variability and predictability for lotic community structure, a regional analysis of streamflow patterns [J]. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 1989, 46: 1805-1818.
[3] Poff N L, Bain J D, Karr M B, et al. The natural flow regime, a paradigm for river conservation and restoration [J]. Bioscience, 1997, 47: 769-784.
[4] Bosch D D, Sullivan D G, Sheridan J M. Hydrologic impacts of land use changes in coastal plain watersheds [J]. Transactions of the ASABE, 2006, 49(2): 423-432.
[5] 陈军锋, 李秀彬. 森林植被变化对流域水文影响的争论[J]. 自然资源学报, 2001, 16(5): 474-480.
[6] UNESCO. Hydrological effects of urbanization . Studies and Reports in Hydrology 18, Paris, France, 1974.
[7] Konrad C P, Booth D B, Burges S J. Effects of urban development in the Puget Lowland, Washington, on interannual streamflow patterns: Consequences for channel form and streambed disturbance [J]. Water Resources Research, 2005, 41, W07009, doi: 10.1029/2005WR004097.
[8] Bouraoui F, Vachaud G, Chen T. Prediction of the effect of climatic changes and land use management on water resources [J]. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 1998, 23(4): 379-384.
[9] Poff N L, Brian P Bledsoe, Christopher O C. Hydrologic variation with land use across the contiguous United States: Geomorphic and ecological consequences for stream ecosystems [J]. Geomorphology, 2006, 79: 264-285
[10] Brian D Richter, Jeffrey V Baumgartner, Jennifer Powell, et al. A method for assessing hydrologic alteration within ecosystems [J]. Conservation Biology, 1996, 10(4): 1163-1174.
[11] Julian D Olden, Poff N L. Redundancy and the choice of Hydrologic indices for characterizing streamflow regimes [J]. River Research and Applications, 2003, 19: 101-121.
[12] Stephen C Sanborn, Brian P Bledose. Predicting streamflow regime metrics for ungauged streams in Colorado, Washington, and Oregon [J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2006, 325: 241-261.
