Environmental Setting of the Morgan Creek Basin, Maryland, 2002-04

Hancock, T. C.; Brayton, Michael J.

doi:10.3133/ofr20061151

Cited by 13 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overland runoff of precipitation and occasional snowmelt contributes a small part (generally less than 25 percent in most areas) of streamflow on the peninsula. The majority of streamflow is generated by water that infiltrates through the soil to the water table and flows through groundwater to discharge areas in streams (Cushing and others, 1973;Hancock and Brayton, 2006;Sanford and others, 2012 Most groundwater flows to nearby streams through the uppermost few meters of a shallow, surficial unconfined aquifer system that is generally less than 30 m thick (Sanford and others, 2012 Hydrogeomorphic regions by Bachman and others, 1998 Coastal Plain Upland: Located along the major drainage divides in areas with low relief and shallowly incised stream valleys. Poorly drained forested areas containing wetlands are interspersed with moderately well-to well-drained agricultural areas.…”

Section: Climate and Hydrologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Seepage face Böhlke and Denver, 1995;Bachman and others, 2002;Ator, Denver, and Brayton, 2005;Hancock and Brayton, 2006;Domagalski and others, 2008;Denver and others, 2010. Figure 30. Idealized summary of hydrologic conditions and the potential for denitrification in groundwater in various hydrogeologic settings on the Eastern Shore.…”

Section: Denitrification Occurs Along Flow Paths At the Base Of The Amentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In watersheds of the Morgan Creek and the Corsica River tributaries, however, some streams have incised completely through the surficial aquifer into an underlying fine-grained deposit, and much of the discharging groundwater is forced through shallow anoxic sediments ( fig. 30-1b) or through seeps to the flood plain, where denitrification can occur (Hancock and Brayton, 2006) (see Chapter 3) ( fig. 30-1c).…”

Section: Phosphorusmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Understanding nutrients in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and implications for management and restoration: The Eastern Shore

Ator¹,

Denver²

2015

Circular

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

), onlineFor more information on the USGS-the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprodTo order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. SEE CHAPTER 2The Eastern Shore ( fig. 1) includes only a small part of the Chesapeake Bay watershed, but contributes disproportionately large loads of the excess nitrogen and phosphorus that have contributed to ecological and economic degradation of the bay in recent decades. Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuary in the United States and a vital ecological and economic resource. The bay and its tributaries have been degraded in recent decades by excessive nitrogen and phosphorus in the water column, however, which cause harmful algal blooms and decreased water clarity, submerged aquatic vegetation, and dissolved oxygen. The disproportionately large nitrogen and phosphorus yields from the Eastern Shore to Chesapeake Bay are attributable to human land-use practices as well as natural hydrogeologic and soil conditions. Applications of nitrogen and phosphorus compounds to the Eastern Shore from human activities are intensive. Also, hydrogeologic and soil conditions promote the movement of these compounds from application areas on the landscape to groundwater and (or) surface waters, and the proximity of much of the Eastern Shore to tidal waters limits opportunities for natural removal of these compounds in the landscape. The Eastern Shore only includes 7 percent of the Chesapeake Bay watershed, but receives nearly twice as much nitrogen and phosphorus applications (per area) as the remainder of the watershed and yields greater nitrogen and phosphorus, on average, to the bay ( fig. 2). SOURCE INPUTS TO THE EASTERN SHORE Sources of Nitrogen and Phosphorus on the Eastern Shore SEE CHAPTER 3Agricultural operations contribute the vast majority of nitrogen and phosphorus to the landscape on the Eastern Shore. Land use in the area has been primarily agricultural for several hundred years. Nitrogen and phosphorus applications in support of agriculture increased substantially during the second half of the last century, however, but have since stabilized or decreased ( fig. 3). More than 90 percent of nitrogen and phosphorus reaching the land in the Eastern Shore is applied as part of inorganic fertilizers or manure, or (for nitrogen) fixed directly from the atmosphere in cropland ( fig. 4). Nonagricultural sources such as atmospheric deposition, septic systems, sewage treatment plants, or other urban sources...

show abstract

Section: Climate and Hydrologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Denitrification Occurs Along Flow Paths At the Base Of The Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Phosphorusmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Understanding nutrients in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and implications for management and restoration: The Eastern Shore

Ator¹,

Denver²

2015

Circular

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Site descriptions and environmental settings for the study areas have been reported previously (Frederick and others, 2006;Gronberg and Kratzer, 2006;Hancock and Brayton, 2006;Lathrop, 2006;Payne and others, 2007;Capel and others, 2008b).…”

Section: Study Sites and Environmental Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discrete and continuous water-quality data and hydrologic parameters from seven agricultural watersheds in the United States, 2002-09

McCarthy¹,

Lampe²,

Capel³

2011

Data Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparison of high‐resolution specific conductance‐based end‐member mixing analysis and a graphical method for baseflow separation of four streams in hydrologically challenging agricultural watersheds

Kronholm

Capel

2014

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantifying the relative contributions of different sources of water to a stream hydrograph is important for understanding the hydrology and water quality dynamics of a given watershed. To compare the performance of two methods of hydrograph separation, a graphical program [baseflow index (BFI)] and an end‐member mixing analysis that used high‐resolution specific conductance measurements (SC‐EMMA) were used to estimate daily and average long‐term slowflow additions of water to four small, primarily agricultural streams with different dominant sources of water (natural groundwater, overland flow, subsurface drain outflow, and groundwater from irrigation). Because the result of hydrograph separation by SC‐EMMA is strongly related to the choice of slowflow and fastflow end‐member values, a sensitivity analysis was conducted based on the various approaches reported in the literature to inform the selection of end‐members. There were substantial discrepancies among the BFI and SC‐EMMA, and neither method produced reasonable results for all four streams. Streams that had a small difference in the SC of slowflow compared with fastflow or did not have a monotonic relationship between streamflow and stream SC posed a challenge to the SC‐EMMA method. The utility of the graphical BFI program was limited in the stream that had only gradual changes in streamflow. The results of this comparison suggest that the two methods may be quantifying different sources of water. Even though both methods are easy to apply, they should be applied with consideration of the streamflow and/or SC characteristics of a stream, especially where anthropogenic water sources (irrigation and subsurface drainage) are present. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Environmental Setting of the Morgan Creek Basin, Maryland, 2002-04

Cited by 13 publications

References 4 publications

Understanding nutrients in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and implications for management and restoration: The Eastern Shore

Understanding nutrients in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and implications for management and restoration: The Eastern Shore

Discrete and continuous water-quality data and hydrologic parameters from seven agricultural watersheds in the United States, 2002-09

A comparison of high‐resolution specific conductance‐based end‐member mixing analysis and a graphical method for baseflow separation of four streams in hydrologically challenging agricultural watersheds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About