ABSTRACT:

This data set contains measurements for discharge in cfs and cms, stream temperature in °C , dissolved oxygen (DO) in mg/L and %/L, total dissolved solids (TDS) in µs/cm, pebble count, and geomorphic condition, at sites in the Weber River Basin and Bear River Basin. Discharge was measured using a Marsh McBurney hand-held flowmeter. DO, TDS, and stream temperature were measured using a YSI Pro 2030 water quality probe. Pebble count was conducted using a modified Wolman procedure where a random pebble is picked up every step diagonally across a stream in a zig-zag pattern until at least 100 pebbles are measured. The pebble is then measured to obtain size and recorded. Geomorphic condition was assessed visually by taking note of conditions such as stream complexity (presence or lack of pools, riffles, meandering thalweg etc.), percent shade on stream, flow and depth variability, bank stability, access to floodplain, wood recruitment, unnatural barriers and condition and quantity of riparian vegetation. Based on the these conditions, a classification of excellent, good, moderate, or poor was assigned. Atmospheric pressure, wind speed and air temperature were measured with a Kestrel handheld weather meter, cloud cover was assessed visually. A site key in addition to the date, time and location (latitude/longitude and UTM) is included. Not all sites have values for discharge and pebble count due to hazardous conditions.

ABSTRACT:

In-stream barriers, such as dams, culverts and diversions alter hydrologic processes and aquatic habitat. Removing uneconomical and aging in-stream barriers to improve stream habitat is increasingly used in river restoration. Previous barrier removal projects focused on score-and-rank techniques, ignoring cumulative change and spatial structure of barrier networks. Likewise, most water supply models prioritize either human water uses or aquatic habitat, failing to incorporate both human and environmental water use benefits. In this study, a dual objective optimization model prioritized removing in-stream barriers to maximize aquatic habitat connectivity for trout, using streamflow, temperature, channel gradient, and geomorphic condition as indicators of aquatic habitat suitability. Water scarcity costs are minimized using agricultural and urban economic penalty functions, and a budget constraint monetizes costs of removing small barriers like culverts and diversions. The optimization model is applied to a case study in Utah’s Weber River Basin to prioritize removing barriers most beneficial to aquatic habitat connectivity for Bonneville cutthroat trout, while maintaining human water uses. Solutions to the dual objective problem quantify and graphically show tradeoffs between connected quality-weighted habitat for Bonneville cutthroat trout and economic water uses. Removing 54 in-stream barriers reconnects about 160 km of quality-weighted habitat and costs approximately $10 M, after which point the cost effectiveness of removing barriers to connect river habitat decreases. The set of barriers prioritized for removal varied monthly depending on limiting habitat conditions for Bonneville cutthroat trout. This research helps prioritize barrier removals and future restoration project decisions within the Weber Basin. The modeling approach expands current barrier removal optimization methods by explicitly including both economic and environmental water uses and is generalizable to other basins.

ABSTRACT:

Notebooks used for the homework 2 exercises for the CUAHSI Virtual University snow module

ABSTRACT:

This resource includes static environmental data collected for the sensor and sampling locations in the Gibson Jack Watershed located near Pocatello, ID. Gibson Jack Creek (outlet location: 42.7853, -112.4446) drains 1620 ha of the US Forest Service Research Natural Area within the Caribou National Forest. Predominantly forested with deciduous trees, sub-apline fir, Douglas fir, and with woody shrubs, sagebrush, and grasses, Gibson Jack spans an elevation range of 1555-2130 m, and has an mean annual temperature and precipitation of 6.5°C and 614.5 mm/yr, respectively. Gibson Jack spans the rain to snow transition with rainfall occurring at the lower elevations and snowfall at the upper elevations. Gibson Jack Creek drains to the Portnuef River and is heavily recreated by the local community.

Further information for all data fields can be found in the "Data Types" tab of this file. In short, this resource contains data for sites across a suite of sensor types, denoted by the sublocation field. These sublocations include:
- "SW" -- a site where regular surface water sampling occured, and contained a stilling well to record stream water level

This resource was created using geospatial analyses using publicly available topographic data (Digital Elevation Models, DEMs from the USGS National Map Downloader v2.0; https://apps.nationalmap.gov/downloader/).
Site locations GPS coordinates were collected using a eMLID Reach RX multi-band RTK rover.
Elevation was extracted from a DEM. All additional environmental data were derived from this DEM using whitebox functions for topographic and stream network analysis (Wu & Brown, 2022) in R version 4.4.0 (R Core Team, 2024).

Approach 1 site is GSS01
Approach 2 sites indicated by GPZ
Approach 3 sites are listed as GBJ or STIC

ABSTRACT:

Johnston Draw is a 1.8-km2 watershed in southwestern Idaho, USA (outlet location: 43.1226, -116.776) located within the Reynolds Creek Critical Zone Observatory in western Idaho, a research center with cattle grazing. Elevation ranges from approximately 1490m to 1850m. The mean annual precipitation in the watershed is 550 mm/yr with rainfall occurring at the lower elevations and snowfall, resulting in large drifts, at the higher elevations (Godsey et al., 2018). Mean annual temperatures range from 8.9C at the bottom of watershed and 4.7C near the top.

Citations:

Bilbrey, E.M. 2024. Quantifying Dissolved Organic Carbon Patterns and the Impact of Stream Network Connectivity on Export From Semi-Arid Intermittent Watersheds. Idaho State University. https://www.proquest.com/docview/3079012638/abstract/4FAB29E7230542A8PQ/1.
Godsey, S.E., Marks, D., Kormos, P.R., Seyfried, M.S., Enslin, C.L., Winstral, A.H., McNamara, J.P., Link, T.E. 2018. Eleven years of mountain weather, snow, soil moisture and streamflow data from the rain–snow transition zone—The Johnston draw catchment, Reynolds Creek Experimental Watershed and Critical Zone Observatory, USA. Earth Systems Science Data Vol. 10: 1207-1216.

Further information for all data fields can be found in the "Data Types" tab of this file. In short, this resource contains data for sites across a suite of sensor types, denoted by the sublocation field. These sublocations include:
- "SW" -- a site where regular surface water sampling occured, and contained a stilling well to record stream water level

This resource was created using geospatial analyses using publicly available topographic data (Digital Elevation Models, DEMs from the USGS National Map Downloader v2.0; https://apps.nationalmap.gov/downloader/).
Site locations GPS coordinates were collected using a eMLID Reach RX multi-band RTK rover.
Elevation was extracted from a DEM. All additional environmental data were derived from this DEM using whitebox functions for topographic and stream network analysis (Wu & Brown, 2022) in R version 4.4.0 (R Core Team, 2024).

Approach 1 site is JSS01
Approach 2 sites indicated by JPZ (Pressure Transducers)
Additional sites (STICS) indicated by JDR

ABSTRACT:

Johnston Draw is a 1.8-km2 watershed in southwestern Idaho, USA (outlet location: 43.1226, -116.776) located within the Reynolds Creek Critical Zone Observatory in western Idaho, a research center with cattle grazing. Elevation ranges from approximately 1490m to 1850m. The mean annual precipitation in the watershed is 550 mm/yr with rainfall occurring at the lower elevations and snowfall, resulting in large drifts, at the higher elevations (Godsey et al., 2018). Mean annual temperatures range from 8.9C at the bottom of watershed and 4.7C near the top.

These data were collected in support of the sampling goals of the Aquatic Intermittency effects on Microbiomes in Streams (AIMS) Project. These sensors were set to collect temperature and conductivity data every 15 minutes. Each .csv file is associated with a single site for a single year.

Naming convention
Guide to interpreting file names using STIC_MW_JDR_JDR28_HS_.2023csv as an example:
- "STIC_MW_JDR_" = same for all sites, indicating it is STIC data from the Mountian West region and the Johnston Draw watershed.
- "JDR28" = site code, corresponding to the location of the STIC within the watershed
- "HS" = sublocation, corresponding to the placement of the STIC at that site. All data in this resource was collected from sensors with a "HS" sublocation, meaning the STIC was placed at a high spot in the stream thalweg, and a wet reading is interpreted as an indicator of flowing surface water connection within the stream network.
- "2023" = year of STIC data included in file.

Methodological details:
STIC sensors were deployed in 2021 following the methods described here: http://www.hydroshare.org/resource/c82a87a6c63445029d35131260241386
STIC sensors were calibrated following the methods described here: http://www.hydroshare.org/resource/9f2027c779d64149be32bdb9eede54f2
A detailed description of the processing and classification workflow is available in Zipper et al: https://eartharxiv.org/repository/view/4909/

Due to data logger errors, maintenance, etc. there are not data for all sites at all timesteps.

Further information for all data fields can be found in the "Data Types" tab of this ReadME. Sensors recorded relative conductivity (here, condUncal) and used in conjunction with multi-point lab calibration curves to calculate wetdry and SpC fields. The lowest point on the standard curve was water with an SpC of 0, which represented the lowest possible condUncal that would yield a "wet" value. This zero was used as a threshold, and wetdry was calculated such that anything below this threshold was "dry" (wetdry = 0) and anything above was "wet" (wetdry = 1). Additionally, the rest of the standard curve was used to build a relationship between condUncal and SpC, and this linear model was applied to the condUncal to calculate SpC.

The qual_rating flags are (Details in Zipper et al):
Excellent: STIC was (1) calibrated prior to deployment, and (2) stayed operational throughout 95% of the download period, and (3) was not displaced from streambed (i.e., the external electrodes were within 1 cm from stream bed at the time of download indicating minimal erosion/deposition), and (4) data from sensor roughly agree with field observations of wet/dry (i.e., >1000 Lux sensor reading on day of removal corresponds to field observations of water at STIC).
Good: (1) STIC stayed operational throughout the entire download period, and (2) the external electrodes were within 1 cm from stream bed at the time of download, and (3) data from sensor roughly agree with field observations of wet/dry, but (4) the STIC was not calibrated prior to deployment.
Fair: (1) STIC stayed operational throughout 75% or more of the download period, and (2) data roughly agree with field observations, and/or (3) the external electrodes were between 1-3 cm from streambed at the time of download.
Poor: (1) STIC stayed operational throughout less than 75% of the download period, and/or (2) the external electrodes were >3 cm from streambed at the time of download, and/or (3) data does NOT agree with field observations.
The QAQC flags are denoted as follows; if multiple flags were generated, they were concatenated:
NA : no flags, data passes checks
C : calibration curve yielded a negative value for SpC, changed to a value of 0 manually
O : SpC value is higher than the highest measured Calibration point, and is therefore off the calibration curve
D : wetdry reading flagged as a potential anomaly (i.e., short period of dry surrounded by long period of wet, calculated using a moving window z-score of condUncal values)
T : wetdry reading interpreted from temperature data

ABSTRACT:

Located near Pocatello, ID, Gibson Jack Creek (outlet location: 42.7853, -112.4446) drains 1620 ha of the US Forest Service Research Natural Area within the Caribou National Forest. Predominantly forested with deciduous trees, sub-apline fir, Douglas fir, and with woody shrubs, sagebrush, and grasses, Gibson Jack spans an elevation range of 1555-2130 m, and has an mean annual temperature and precipitation of 6.5°C and 614.5 mm/yr, respectively. Gibson Jack spans the rain to snow transition with rainfall occurring at the lower elevations and snowfall at the upper elevations. Gibson Jack Creek drains to the Portnuef River and is heavily recreated by the local community.

These data were collected in support of the sampling goals of the Aquatic Intermittency effects on Microbiomes in Streams (AIMS) Project. These sensors were set to collect temperature and conductivity data every 15 minutes. Each .csv file is associated with a single site for a single year.

Naming convention
Guide to interpreting file names using STIC_MW_GBJ_STIC65_HS_2024.csv as an example:
- "STIC_MW_GBJ_" = same for all sites, indicating it is STIC data from the Mountian West region and the Gibson Jack watershed.
- "STIC65" = site code, corresponding to the location of the STIC within the watershed
- "HS" = sublocation, corresponding to the placement of the STIC at that site. All data in this resource was collected from sensors with a "HS" sublocation, meaning the STIC was placed at a high spot in the stream thalweg, and a wet reading is interpreted as an indicator of flowing surface water connection within the stream network.
- "2024" = year of STIC data included in file.

Methodological details:
STIC sensors were deployed in 2021 following the methods described here: http://www.hydroshare.org/resource/c82a87a6c63445029d35131260241386
STIC sensors were calibrated following the methods described here: http://www.hydroshare.org/resource/9f2027c779d64149be32bdb9eede54f2
A detailed description of the processing and classification workflow is available in Zipper et al: https://eartharxiv.org/repository/view/4909/

Due to data logger errors, maintenance, etc. there are not data for all sites at all timesteps.

Further information for all data fields can be found in the "Data Types" tab of this ReadME. Sensors recorded relative conductivity (here, condUncal) and used in conjunction with multi-point lab calibration curves to calculate wetdry and SpC fields. The lowest point on the standard curve was water with an SpC of 0, which represented the lowest possible condUncal that would yield a "wet" value. This zero was used as a threshold, and wetdry was calculated such that anything below this threshold was "dry" (wetdry = 0) and anything above was "wet" (wetdry = 1). Additionally, the rest of the standard curve was used to build a relationship between condUncal and SpC, and this linear model was applied to the condUncal to calculate SpC.

The qual_rating flags are (Details in Zipper et al):
Excellent: STIC was (1) calibrated prior to deployment, and (2) stayed operational throughout 95% of the download period, and (3) was not displaced from streambed (i.e., the external electrodes were within 1 cm from stream bed at the time of download indicating minimal erosion/deposition), and (4) data from sensor roughly agree with field observations of wet/dry (i.e., >1000 Lux sensor reading on day of removal corresponds to field observations of water at STIC).
Good: (1) STIC stayed operational throughout the entire download period, and (2) the external electrodes were within 1 cm from stream bed at the time of download, and (3) data from sensor roughly agree with field observations of wet/dry, but (4) the STIC was not calibrated prior to deployment.
Fair: (1) STIC stayed operational throughout 75% or more of the download period, and (2) data roughly agree with field observations, and/or (3) the external electrodes were between 1-3 cm from streambed at the time of download.
Poor: (1) STIC stayed operational throughout less than 75% of the download period, and/or (2) the external electrodes were >3 cm from streambed at the time of download, and/or (3) data does NOT agree with field observations.
The QAQC flags are denoted as follows; if multiple flags were generated, they were concatenated:
NA : no flags, data passes checks
C : calibration curve yielded a negative value for SpC, changed to a value of 0 manually
O : SpC value is higher than the highest measured Calibration point, and is therefore off the calibration curve
D : wetdry reading flagged as a potential anomaly (i.e., short period of dry surrounded by long period of wet, calculated using a moving window z-score of condUncal values)
T : wetdry reading interpreted from temperature data