Geology topics

Research about Cedar River Basin

Source-linked reports with geographic coverage including Cedar River Basin.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2018

Transport of nitrogen and phosphorus in the Cedar River Basin, Iowa and Minnesota, 2000–15

Nitrate concentrations in the Cedar River in Iowa and Minnesota have increased from an average of less than 1.0 milligram per liter in the early 1900s to more than 5.0 milligrams per liter in the 2000s and have resulted in periodic water-quality impairment of the river. Spatial differences and temporal changes in nitrogen and phosphorus transport in the Cedar River Basin are described for the period from 2000 to 2015. Data used to estimate nitrogen and phosphorus transport were collected by the U.S. Geological Survey as part of six base-flow synoptic studies and by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Iowa Department of Natural Resources as part of their long-term stream and river monitoring programs. The Cedar River transported an annual average of 53,100 tons of total nitrogen and 2,510 tons of total phosphorus during 2000–15. Three subbasins yielded an annual average of more than 30 pounds per acre (lb/acre) of nitrogen to the Cedar River, whereas two subbasins yielded an annual average of less than 20 lb/acre of nitrogen. The average annual total phosphorus yield from the Little Cedar River subbasin (0.35 lb/acre) was only about 16 percent of the yield from the greatest total phosphorus yielding Lower Cedar River subbasin (more than 1.0 lb/acre). The annual total nitrogen and total phosphorus loads did not change significantly during the study. The relation between annual stream runoff and annual total nitrogen and total phosphorus yields was not spatially uniform across the Cedar River Basin. The Beaver Creek, Black Hawk Creek, and Wolf Creek subbasins yielded the most, and the Main Stem Middle Cedar River, the Lower Cedar River, and the Little Cedar River subbasins yielded the least amount of nitrogen for a given amount of runoff. The Lower Cedar River and Wolf Creek subbasins yielded the most and the West Fork Cedar River and the Little Cedar River subbasins yielded the least phosphorus for a given amount of runoff. The results of this study describe nutrient transport during 2000–15 that can be used to evaluate future progress of nutrient reduction strategies in the Cedar River Basin.

Iowa, Minnesota↗

USGS2013

Comparison between two statistically based methods, and two physically based models developed to compute daily mean streamflow at ungaged locations in the Cedar River Basin, Iowa

A variety of individuals from water resource managers to recreational users need streamflow information for planning and decisionmaking at locations where there are no streamgages. To address this problem, two statistically based methods, the Flow Duration Curve Transfer method and the Flow Anywhere method, were developed for statewide application and the two physically based models, the Precipitation Runoff Modeling-System and the Soil and Water Assessment Tool, were only developed for application for the Cedar River Basin. Observed and estimated streamflows for the two methods and models were compared for goodness of fit at 13 streamgages modeled in the Cedar River Basin by using the Nash-Sutcliffe and the percent-bias efficiency values. Based on median and mean Nash-Sutcliffe values for the 13 streamgages the Precipitation Runoff Modeling-System and Soil and Water Assessment Tool models appear to have performed similarly and better than Flow Duration Curve Transfer and Flow Anywhere methods. Based on median and mean percent bias values, the Soil and Water Assessment Tool model appears to have generally overestimated daily mean streamflows, whereas the Precipitation Runoff Modeling-System model and statistical methods appear to have underestimated daily mean streamflows. The Flow Duration Curve Transfer method produced the lowest median and mean percent bias values and appears to perform better than the other models.

Iowa↗

USGS2012

Simulation of daily streamflows at gaged and ungaged locations within the Cedar River Basin, Iowa, using a Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System model

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, conducted a study to examine techniques for estimation of daily streamflows using hydrological models and statistical methods. This report focuses on the use of a hydrologic model, the U.S. Geological Survey's Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System, to estimate daily streamflows at gaged and ungaged locations. The Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System is a modular, physically based, distributed-parameter modeling system developed to evaluate the impacts of various combinations of precipitation, climate, and land use on surface-water runoff and general basin hydrology. The Cedar River Basin was selected to construct a Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System model that simulates the period from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2010. The calibration period was from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2004, and the validation periods were from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2010 and January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2010. A Geographic Information System tool was used to delineate the Cedar River Basin and subbasins for the Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System model and to derive parameters based on the physical geographical features. Calibration of the Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System model was completed using a U.S. Geological Survey calibration software tool. The main objective of the calibration was to match the daily streamflow simulated by the Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System model with streamflow measured at U.S. Geological Survey streamflow gages. The Cedar River Basin daily streamflow model performed with a Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency ranged from 0.82 to 0.33 during the calibration period, and a Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency ranged from 0.77 to -0.04 during the validation period. The Cedar River Basin model is meeting the criteria of greater than 0.50 Nash-Sutcliffe and is a good fit for streamflow conditions for the calibration period at all but one location, Austin, Minnesota. The Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System model accurately simulated streamflow at four of six uncalibrated sites within the basin. Overall, there was good agreement between simulated and measured seasonal and annual volumes throughout the basin for calibration and validation sites. The calibration period ranged from 0.2 to 20.8 percent difference, and the validation period ranged from 0.0 to 19.5 percent difference across all seasons and total annual runoff. The Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System model tended to underestimate lower streamflows compared to the observed streamflow values. This is an indication that the Precipitation-Runoff Modeling model needs more detailed groundwater and storage information to properly model the low-flow conditions in the Cedar River Basin.

Iowa↗

USGS1979

Flood profiles along the Cedar River, King County, Washington

Flood profiles on the Cedar River, King County, Wash., were developed from 21.1 to 33.65 miles upstream from the mouth for the flood of December 3-4, 1975, and for a 100-year flood. Estimated water-surface elevations during a 100-year flood indicate virtually all the flow would be contained in the river channel. Since 1914, Cedar River flows have been affected by impoundment and release of storage from Chester Morse Lake at river mile 35.6, and since 1901 by diversion for water supply at river mile 21.6. Flood-frequency analysis, based on 62 years of regulated flows (period 1915-76), indicate the 100-year flood would have a discharge of 8,600 cubic feet per second at river mile 23.4 and 6,870 cubic feet per second at river mile 33.2. The highest flood since regulation began occurred December 3 and 4, 1975, and was 7,930 cubic feet per second at river mile 23.4 and 6,860 cubic feet per second at river mile 33.2. Recurrence interval of this flood is about 70 years at river mile 23.4 and about 100 years at mile 33.2 under present conditions of storage and regulation.

Washington↗