Watershed Hydrology

Semester Project

Sean Mullin
Catchment A
ENVL 3434-001

Catchment description and map:

 The total watershed area of the Morses Mill watershed is 4722.8 acres,

with Stocktons campus being completely within it. 865.8 acres are occupied

by wetlands, 582.8 acres are utilized for agricultural purposes, forests

occupy 2685.8 acres, 1234.4 acres are urban, 82.6 acres are taken up by

water, and 40.4 acres are barren. This watershed is in a Warm, Moist,

Temperate Climate zone and experiences average temperatures ranging

from 29 Fahrenheit in January to 81 Fahrenheit in July. The record high

temperature is 102 in August of 1983 and the record low temperature is -3

in January of 1994. Annual average precipitation is 41.73 inches, with March

and August being the wettest months of the year, and the average snowfall

is 17 inches. The record high precipitation is about 4.75 inches in July and

the record low precipitation is about .68 inches in January.

Our groups specific catchment was Location A, which has a total area

of 68.31 acres. Of this 68.31 acres, 33.43 acres (48.94%) are forest, 11.14

acres (16.31%) are urban, and the other 23.74 acres (34.75%) is all

wetlands. When water leaves campus, it flows from Morses Mill Stream to

Nacote Creek, and then onward to the Mullica River where it eventually

reaches the Atlantic Ocean.

The following map shows our catchment area (grey) in comparison to

the total Morse Mill watershed area (aqua).

Water Budget Description and Calculations:

INPUTS+OUTPUTS=STREAMFLOW(DISCHARGE)

The water budget consists of 3 major components, each with their own

sub-categories that influence them. Inputs add water to the equation and

are occurrences such as precipitation, groundwater flow in, man-made

additions, stemflow, and throughfall. Outputs take water out of the equation,

and the most common examples are surface runoff, evapotranspiration and

groundwater flow out. Our specific catchment area is influenced by

precipitation, canopy interception, throughfall, stemflow, groundwater flow

in/out, and evapotranspiration. Precipitation, throughfall, stemflow, and

groundwater in are all inputs, while canopy interception, groundwater out,

and evapotranspiration are outputs. Our catchment has canopy interception,

stemflow, and evapotranspiration because it is in and surrounded by a

coniferous forest, a coniferous canopy, and ground vegetation. Inputs in our

catchment area were calculated by measuring the amount of precipitation

over a certain time period. We placed 4 buckets in different locations around

the area and recorded how much precipitation each bucket collected over

the course of a week. In bucket 1, we found 2.7 inches of water, bucket 2

had 3.1 inches, and buckets 3 and 4 washed away due to a heavy storm.

Potential evapotranspiration was then calculated using Thornthwaites

equation.

Storm Hydrograph and Interpretation:

Storm flow is the total amount of discharge that is caused by a storm

and can be seen and graphed using a storm hydrograph. Storm hydrographs

are a useful tool in a hydrologists arsenal and show base flow, rise time, lag

time, peak discharge, falling time, and end in base flow. When these parts

are graphed together, a clear representation of what happened in the

watershed during a storm is shown. These graphs are useful in determining

the impact a storm has on a watershed and can also be used to show how

different geographical factors influence a watersheds reaction to a storm.

Storm response is substantially faster and more violent in urban areas vs.

forested areas. Urban areas have increased surface runoff and a lack of
infiltration due to paved surfaces and impermeable surfaces which do not

allow surface water to reach the soil and infiltrate efficiently. These factors

lead to a storm that would be considered flashy where damaging flash

floods are common. On the other hand, storm response is slower and less

violent in forested areas, where infiltration is high and surface runoff is low.

These storms have a calmer, less damaging effect on the watershed.

Here is our catchments storm hydrograph:

Here is the Lake Fred Hydrograph:

 Discharge vs Date and Time
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1 LEVEL
Discharge
0

Date and Time

Our storm hydrograph turned out well and has a few very distinct

parts. Our rise time was approximately 3 hours, peak stage height was .07

meters, and total storm duration was about 87 hours. Base flow looked to be

about .0415 cfs. The Lake Fred Hydrograph in comparison had a lower base

flow, but a longer storm duration, a longer rise time, and a longer fall time.

Also, the Lake Fred hydrograph showed smaller storm spikes with one large

one towards the end. Our catchment was mostly forested and some factors

that affected our streams storm response was the infiltration rates of the

soil, the lack of paved surfaces to create runoff, and the small size of our

stream in general. These factors combined make for a non-violent or flashy

storm.

Channel Morphology:
 To measure our catchments morphology, we got real down and dirty

with the stream. We used the surveying equipment from the lab to take 10

measurements across the width of the stream, and recorded the

measurements height on the tall measurement stick. There were many

other measurements taken including bankfull width, bankfull height, wetted

perimeter, the width of the stream, water depth, floodprone area, and

velocity. We measured bankfull width by placing the long measuring tape

from bank to bank, and reeled it in tight enough to get an accurate

measurement. To get wetted perimeter, we layed the measuring tape across

the bottom of the stream so that we could see where the measuring tape

came out of the water on both sides, and recorded the measurement. For

the stream width, we were just measuring how wide the water was in the
banks, so we used our trusty measuring tape and stretched across the

surface of the water until it hit the banks at both sides, recording the length

on the tape. When we got to bankfull height, we measured from the streams

lowest point to the top of the bank, using lanky Brock and a measuring tape.

Water depth was measured using a small ruler because our stream was very

shallow, making this one pretty easy. Floodprone area was measured by

once again stretching the long measuring tape across the channel from the

two highest points, where there were large mounds/banks keeping the

stream contained. Measuring velocity was pretty tricky for us because our

stream was very slow moving, but we placed 3 ping pong balls in the stream

at separate times and recorded how long it took each ball to travel 1 meter.

Data

Velocity:

Ball 1: 154 seconds / 1 m = .0065 m/s

Ball 2: 166 seconds / 1 m = .0060 m/s
Ball 3: 178 seconds / 1 m = .0056 m/s

Basic Measurements:

Characteristic Measurement (ft)

Bankfull Width 10.44 ft

 Bankfull Height 1.32 ft

Wetted Perimeter 3.1 ft

Stream Width 1.3 ft

Water Depth .19 ft

Floodprone Area 16.8 ft

Calculations:

Entrenchment ratio 16.8/10.44 = 1.609

Width : Depth ratio 10.44/.19 = 54.947

Survey Equipment Measurements:

Measurement # Measurement (ft)

0 0.41
1 0.42
2 0.42
3 0.36
4 0.3
5 0.29
6 0.35
7 0.34
8 0.28
9 0.38
 Survey Data Line Plot
0.5

0.4

0.3
Feet
Stream Height (ft) 0.2

0.1

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Measurement #

Channel Morphology (continued):

After taking the necessary measurements, we calculated the

Entrenchment ratio of our stream to be 1.609 and the W/D ratio to be

54.947. Rosgens chart classifies our stream as moderately entrenched 1.4-

2.2 which I agree with, and our calculated W/D ratio fell into the category

below which was Moderate W/D of >12. Knowing that our stream was not

very sinuous, had an extremely low slope, and was comprised mostly of

small gravel, sand, silt, and clay, I found our stream to be best classified as a

B5c. This is how I navigated the chart:

Single-Thread Channels Moderately Entrenched (1.4-2.2)

Moderate W/D ratio (>12) Moderate Sinuosity (>1.2) Stream

Type B Slope Range (<.02) Sand =

 B5c

Having a B5c stream classification means a few things. The first is that

our stream is moderately entrenched, which means that the stream is not

very deep and it does not often flood into the floodprone area due to banks

on either side. Also, it has a very low slope, translating to a low water

velocity which corresponds with a meandering/sinuous stream. Finally, the

classification shows that this stream is mostly sand or silt which is fairly

accurate. This was the closest match I could find because in some portions,

our stream bed had small pebbles on top of an organic material/sand/silt

mixture.

Base Flow Discharge Measurement:

Factors that influence base flow are land usage, runoff, precipitation,

and stream order. If a watershed has a high level of impermeable surfaces,

runoff increases and base flow can be affected by the increase in runoff.

More precipitation would also mean a higher base flow, and a higher order

stream would experience a higher base flow as well. In our stream, base

flow was found using the storm hydrograph. We found our base flow to be

about .04 cfs, which is so low because our catchment had such a small

stream. Our method of finding discharge by looking at the hydrograph I feel

was the best we could do with a stream the size of ours. The stream had a
low velocity so using the precise equipment to measure flow and then

looking at the hydrograph best suited our catchment.

2 /3 1/3
Mannings equation: V= Rh S
V=(.247/3.1)^(2/3) x (2)^(1/3)
V=.1852 x 1.26
V=.233 ft/s

Management Recommendation:

I feel our sub-catchment is fairly healthy and is definitely man-made,

but it is sustaining itself just fine. There are no signs of violent floods or the

water overflowing its banks and the discharge seems consistent with a

forested catchment. To protect our water, I would suggest trying to find a

way to steer the surface runoff from Vera King Farris away from the stream.

The roads runoff can pollute the water and add to the chances of violent

flooding. Overall though, I would say our stream and catchment are in good

condition and are far from any real danger.