Advertisement

Sediment Delivery, Flood Control, and Physical Ecosystem Services in Southern California Chaparral Landscapes

  • Peter M. Wohlgemuth
  • Keith A. Lilley
Chapter
Part of the Springer Series on Environmental Management book series (SSEM)

Abstract

Southern California chaparral environments, with steep mountain slopes, semi-arid climate, and non-cohesive soils, are very erosive landscapes. Wildfire is the dominant ecological disturbance event in chaparral and it greatly accelerates flooding and erosion, which are directly and/or indirectly related to the loss of the protective vegetation. Since the 1920s, dams and debris basins have been constructed by public works agencies to protect the growing population and infrastructure of southern California by intercepting and impounding flows of water and debris. Dams also capture stream runoff for supplying water to downstream agriculture and urban populations. Major sediment inflows into dams and debris basins following fire can reduce capacity and threaten the ability to provide flood control and water supply. Chaparral provides physical ecosystem services that aid in flood hazard reduction, sediment retention, and the supply of water as well as protecting habitat for endangered species and soil quality.

Keywords

Chaparral Erosional processes Flood control Physical ecosystem services Sediment delivery Stormwater conservation 

References

  1. Anderson, H. W., G. B. Coleman, and P. J. Zinke. 1959. Summer slides and winter scour: dry-wet erosion in southern California mountains. Technical Paper 36. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Berkeley, California, USA.Google Scholar
  2. Barro, S. C., and S. G. Conard. 1991. Fire effects on California chaparral systems: an overview. Environment International 17:135–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Campbell, R. H. 1975. Soil slips, debris flows, and rainstorms in the Santa Monica Mountains and vicinity, southern California. Professional Paper 851. US Geological Survey, Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  4. Cannon, S. H., and J. E. Gartner. 2005. Wildfire-related debris flow from a hazards perspective. Pages 363–385 in M. Jakob, and O. Hungr, editors. Debris-flow hazards and related phenomenon. Springer Praxis Books, Berlin, Germany.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davis, F. W., E. A Keller, A. Parikh, J. L. Florsheim. 1989. Recovery of the chaparral riparian zone after wildfire. Pages 194–203 in D.L. Abell. Proceedings of the California Riparian Systems Conference: Protection, Management, and Restoration for the 1990s, Davis, California, September 22–24, 1988. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-110. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Berkeley, California, USA.Google Scholar
  6. DeBano, L. F. 1981. Water repellent soils: a state-of-the-art. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-46. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Berkeley, California, USA.Google Scholar
  7. De Graff, J. V. 1979. Initiation of shallow mass movement by vegetation-type conversion. Geology 7:426–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dunn, P. H., S. C. Barro, W. G. Wells II, M. A. Poth, P. M. Wohlgemuth, and C. G. Colver. 1988. The San Dimas Experimental Forest: 50 years of research. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-104. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Berkeley, California, USA.Google Scholar
  9. Eaton, E. C. 1932. San Gabriel project check dams: report to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors from the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. Unpublished Report.Google Scholar
  10. Florsheim, J. L., A. Chin, L. S. O’Hirok, and R. Storesund. 2015. Short-term post-wildfire dry-ravel processes in a chaparral fluvial environment. Geomorphology 252:32–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Florsheim, J. L., E. A. Keller, and D. W. Best. 1991. Fluvial sediment transport in response to moderate storm flows following chaparral wildfire, Ventura County, southern California. Geological Society of America Bulletin 103:504–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gabet, E. J. 2003a. Post-fire thin debris flows: sediment transport and numerical modelling. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 28:1341–1348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gabet, E. J. 2003b. Sediment transport by dry ravel. Journal of Geophysical Research 108:1978–2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jansson, M. B. 1988. A global survey of sediment yield. Geografiska Annaler 70:81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Keller, E. A, D. W. Valentine, and D. R. Gibbs. 1997. Hydrological response of small watersheds following the southern California Painted Cave Fire of June 1990. Hydrological Processes 11:401–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kraebel, C. J. 1934. The La Crescenta flood. American Forests 40:251–254, 286–287.Google Scholar
  17. Krammes, J. S. 1965. Seasonal debris movement from steep mountainside slopes in southern California. Pages 85–89 in Proceedings of the Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference, Jackson, Mississippi, January 28–February 1, 1963. Miscellaneous Publication 970, US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  18. Krammes, J. S., and R. M. Rice. 1963. Effect of fire on the San Dimas Experimental Forest. Pages 31–34 in Proceedings of Arizona’s 7th Annual Watershed Symposium, Phoenix, Arizona, September 18, 1963. Arizona Water Comission, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.Google Scholar
  19. Langbein, W. B., and S. A. Schumm. 1958. Yield of sediment in relation to mean annual precipitation. Transactions of the American Geophysical Union 39:1076–1084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Leopold, L. B., M. G. Wolman, and J. P. Miller. 1964. Fluvial processes in geomorphology. W.H. Freeman, San Francisco, California, USA.Google Scholar
  21. Loaiciga, H. H., D. Pedreros, and D. Roberts. 2001. Wildfire-streamflow interactions in a chaparral watershed. Advances in Environmental Research 5:295–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Los Angeles County. 1931. Comprehensive Plan for Flood Control and Water Conservation—Present Conditions and Immediate Needs. Los Angeles County Flood Control District, Los Angeles, California, USA.Google Scholar
  23. Los Angeles County. 2006. Hydrology Manual. Department of Public Works, Water Resources Division, Los Angeles, California, USA.Google Scholar
  24. Minnich, R. A. 1989. Chaparral fire history in San Diego County and adjacent northern Baja California: an evaluation of natural fire regimes and the effects of suppression management. Pages 37–47 in S. C. Keeley, editor. The chaparral: paradigms reexamined. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, California, USA.Google Scholar
  25. Munns, E. N. 1919. The control of flood water in southern California. Journal of Forestry 17:423–429.Google Scholar
  26. Nasseri, I. 1988. Frequency of floods from a burned chaparral watershed. Pages 68–71 in N. Berg, editor. Proceedings of the symposium on fire and watershed management, Sacramento, California, October 26–28, 1988. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-109. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Berkeley, California, USA.Google Scholar
  27. Pase, C. P., and P. A. Ingebo. 1965. Burned chaparral to grass: early effects on water and sediment yields from two granitic soil watersheds in Arizona. Pages 8–11 in Proceedings of Arizona’s 9th Annual Watershed Symposium, Tempe, Arizona, September 22, 1965. Arizona Water Commission, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.Google Scholar
  28. Prancevic, J. P., M. P. Lamb, and B. M Fuller. 2014. Incipient sediment motion across the river to debris-flow transition. Geology 42:191–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rice, R. M. 1974. The hydrology of chaparral watersheds. Pages 27–34 in M. Rosenthal, editor. Proceedings of a symposium on Living with the Chaparral, Riverside, California, March 30–31, 1973. Sierra Club, San Francisco, California, USA.Google Scholar
  30. Rice, R. M. 1982. Sedimentation in the chaparral: how do you handle unusual events? Pages 39–49 in F. J. Swanson, R. J. Janda, T. Dunne, and D. N. Swanston, editors. Sediment budgets and routing in forested drainage basins. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-141. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Portland, Oregon, USA.Google Scholar
  31. Rice, R. M., E. S. Corbett, and R. G. Bailey. 1969. Soil slips related to vegetation, topography, and soil in southern California. Water Resources Research 5:647–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rowe, P. B., C. M. Countryman, and H. C. Storey. 1954. Hydrologic analysis used to determine effects of fire on peak discharge and erosion rates in southern California watersheds. USDA Forest Service, California Forest and Range Experiment Station, Berkeley, California, USA.Google Scholar
  33. Safford, H. D. 2007. Man and fire in southern California; doing the math. Fremontia 35:25–29.Google Scholar
  34. Scott, K. M., and R. P. Williams. 1978. Erosion and sediment yields in the Transverse Ranges, southern California. Professional Paper 1030, US Geological Survey, Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  35. Selby, M. J. 1993. Hillslope materials and processes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  36. Sinclair, J. D., and E. L. Hamilton. 1955. Streamflow reactions of a fire-damaged watershed. Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Hydraulics Division 81:1–17.Google Scholar
  37. Spotila, J. A., M. A. House, A. E. Blythe, N. A. Niemi, and G. C. Bank. 2002. Controls on the erosion and geomorphic evolution of the San Bernardino and San Gabriel Mountains, southern California. Geological Society of America, Special Papers 365:205–230.Google Scholar
  38. Sugihara, N. G., and M. G. Barbour. 2006. Fire and California vegetation. Pages 1–9 in N. G. Sugihara, J. W. van Wagtendonk, K. E. Shaffer, J. Fites-Kaufman, and A. E. Thode, editors. Fire in California’s ecosystems. University of California Press, Berkeley, California, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wells, W. G., II. 1981. Some effects of brushfires on erosion processes in coastal southern California. Pages 305–342 in T. R. H. Davies, and A. J. Pearce, editors. Proceedings of a Symposium on Erosion and Sediment Transport in Pacific Rim Steeplands, Christchurch, New Zealand, January 26–31, 1981. International Association of Hydrological Sciences Publication No. 132. Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  40. Wells, W. G., II. 1987. The effects of fire on the generation of debris flows in southern California. Geological Society of America, Reviews in Engineering Geology 7:105–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wohlgemuth, P. M. 2006. Hillslope erosion and small watershed sediment yield following a wildfire on the San Dimas Experimental Forest, southern California. Pages 41–48 in J. M. Bernard, J. W. Webb, and M. M. Garsjo, editors. Proceedings of the 8th Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference, Reno, Nevada, April 2–6, 2006, Washington, D.C., USA, Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Information, Subcommittee on Sedimentation.Google Scholar
  42. Wohlgemuth, P. M. 2015. Hillslope erosion and small watershed sediment yield before and after fire in southern California. Pages 977–986 in J. M. Bernard, M. M. Garsjo, and C. L. Hoeft, editors. Proceedings of the 3rd Joint Federal Interagency Conference (10th Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference and 5th Federal Interagency Hydrologic Modeling Conference), Reno, Nevada, April 19–23, 2015, Washington, D.C., USA, Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Information, Subcommittee on Sedimentation.Google Scholar
  43. Wohlgemuth, P. M., J. L. Beyers, C. D. Wakeman, and S. G. Conard. 1998. Effects of fire and grass seeding on soil erosion in southern California chaparral. Pages 41–51 in Grey, S., chair. Proceedings of the 19th Forest Vegetation Management conference, Redding, California, USA.Google Scholar
  44. Wohlgemuth, P. M., J. L. Beyers, and K. R. Hubbert. 2009. Rehabilitation strategies after fire: the California, USA experience. Pages 511–535 in A. Cerda, and P. R. Robichaud, editors. Fire effects on soils and restoration strategies. Science Publishers, Enfield, New Jersey, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research StationRiversideUSA
  2. 2.County of Los AngelesDepartment of Public WorksAlhambraUSA

Personalised recommendations