pumping should have affected low flows for all months of the year, but factors other than precipitation did not cause significant trends in low flows for January, February, March, and May. Most of the local pumping near the river was during the spring and summer, and this seasonal pumping probably caused some decreases in summer low flows. These conclusions are for trends from 1913 to 2002, and regional pumping in the United States and Mexico could affect streamflow at Charleston in the future, because regional groundwater pumping often has a delayed effect on streamflows.

No abstract

Water‐resource managers need to forecast streamflow in the Lower Colorado River Basin to plan for water‐resource projects and to operate reservoirs for water supply. Statistical forecasts of streamflow based on historical records of streamflow can be useful, but statistical assumptions, such as stationarity of flows, need to be evaluated. This study evaluated the relation between climatic fluctuations and stationarity and developed regression equations to forecast streamflow by using climatic fluctuations as explanatory variables. Climatic fluctuations were represented by the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), and Southern Oscillation Index (SOI). Historical streamflow within the 25‐ to 30‐year positive or negative phases of AMO or PDO was generally stationary. Monotonic trends in annual mean flows were tested at the 21 sites evaluated in this study; 76% of the sites had no significant trends within phases of AMO and 86% of the sites had no significant trends within phases of PDO. As climatic phases shifted in signs, however, many sites had nonstationary flows; 67% of the sites had significant changes in annual mean flow as AMO shifted in signs. The regression equations developed in this study to forecast streamflow incorporate these shifts in climate and streamflow, thus that source of nonstationarity is accounted for. The R2 value of regression equations that forecast individual years of annual flow for the central part of the study area ranged from 0.28 to 0.49 and averaged 0.39. AMO was the most significant variable, and a combination of indices from both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans explained much more variation in flows than only the Pacific Ocean indices. The average R2 value for equations with PDO and SOI was 0.15.

No abstract

No abstract