2011
DOI: 10.3133/sir20115095
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development of a precipitation-runoff model to simulate unregulated streamflow in the South Fork Flathead River Basin, Montana

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
6
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
6
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Water use effects are not simulated in PRMS, and low streamflows are often not well simulated because of the simple linear reservoir representation of base flow that is used by PRMS. The mean percent differences and range of differences in this study are similar to the differences found in other calibrated PRMS models developed in complex terrain where the data were used to assess hydrologic change and to represent hydrologic conditions in unmeasured watersheds when comparative data were not available (Koczot, 2005;Chase, 2011). The aggregated monthly differences (figs.…”
Section: Selection and Evaluation Of Small-area Modelssupporting
confidence: 76%
“…Water use effects are not simulated in PRMS, and low streamflows are often not well simulated because of the simple linear reservoir representation of base flow that is used by PRMS. The mean percent differences and range of differences in this study are similar to the differences found in other calibrated PRMS models developed in complex terrain where the data were used to assess hydrologic change and to represent hydrologic conditions in unmeasured watersheds when comparative data were not available (Koczot, 2005;Chase, 2011). The aggregated monthly differences (figs.…”
Section: Selection and Evaluation Of Small-area Modelssupporting
confidence: 76%
“…of runoff per unit area of watershed, which indicates that the variation in mean streamflows around the State was also well simulated. The mean percent differences and ranges of differences in this study are similar to the differences found in other calibrated PRMS models developed for complex terrain where the data were used to assess hydrologic change and to represent hydrologic conditions when comparative data were not available (Koczot, 2005;Chase, 2011). The simulated monthly mean streamflows for the period of record for all the calibration streamgages plotted in relation to the measured monthly mean streamflows are shown in figure 3.…”
Section: Evaluation Of the New Hampshire Prms Modelsupporting
confidence: 62%
“…The range of errors and NSE statistics exhibited are within those documented for monthly mean streamflow in other USGS PRMS studies designed to simulate streamflow in ungaged rivers as part of water resource planning efforts (Chase, 2011) and in PRMS studies designed to simulate streamflow in other regional and local areas (Viger and others, 2010;Dudley and Nielsen, 2011;LaFontaine and others, 2013). However, the errors indicate that the daily streamflows need to be used with more caution than the monthly streamflows, particularly in regions of higher elevations in the State and near the dataset boundary.…”
Section: Evaluation Of the New Hampshire Prms Modelmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…At USGS streamflow-gaging station 12362500, the basin has a drainage area of 4,307 km 2 . The basin was simulated with the PRMS model by Chase (2011). The PRMS application for this basin contains 106 HRUs with elevations that range from 1,045 to 2,078 meters (table 1).…”
Section: Precipitation Runoff Modeling System Projections For South Fmentioning
confidence: 99%