Hydrologic History of Miller Run Stream

Oudam Meas
Faculty Advisor: Richard D. Crago
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA
Introduction Methods
Miller Run is the stream running from Bucknell's golf course through Bucknell’s • Precipitation was obtained from the Bucknell Weather Station (BUWX), where
campus and into Limestone Run. It used to be a perennial stream, but currently it infiltration, runoff and watershed storage were calculated using the Natural
is perennial only upstream of campus and runs dry through the Bucknell campus Resources Conservation Service’s Curve Number method.
most of the summer. An honors thesis by Alison Schaffer suggested that the •The Complementary Relationship between potential and actual
possible cause of this change could be the increase in impervious area on evapotranspiration [Crago et al., 2010] was used to estimate evapotranspiration.
Bucknell’s campus. This change in the character of the stream has negative •Campus runoff was estimated by calculating separate runoff volumes from
impacts on the ecology of the stream and its usefulness to the community. In order impervious surfaces and from lawns.
to discover the reasons why the stream is running dry and how much impact
Bucknell campus has on the stream, the hydrological history of Miller Run from
the period 2003 to 2010 (April through October) was reconstructed in this study.
Hydrological history includes precipitation, evapotranspiration, infiltration,
watershed storage, runoff and stream flow.

Results: Estimated Annual Precipitation and Evapotranspiration

Table 1. Calculated evapotranspiration and Table 2. Estimated Average Lake Evaporation at Raystown Lake. NOTE:
precipitation over the period of 2003-2010
(April through October).

Year E (mm) P (mm) Annual Raystown’s Lake Evaporation (mm) Variables used are the followings:
P = Accumulated Precipitation
2003(Sept-Oct) 46 19 E = Accumulated Evapotranspiration
578
2004(April-Oct) R = Accumulated Runoff
557 963 S = Accumulated Change in Storage
2005(April-Oct) 517 463 I = Accumulated Infiltration
CN = Curve Number
2006(April-Oct) 512 547
Average evaporation rate during the growing
2007(April-Oct) 405 314 season from 2004 to 2009 makes sense in
2008(April-Oct) 468 463 comparison with the lake evaporation measured
2009(April-Oct) 489 528 using pan evaporation method at Raystown Lake.
2010(April-May) 99 123

Results: Curve Number Method: 600

500 P
2009
600
P
2009
E 500
400 E
Results show that there was less infiltration and more R 400
300 R
runoff on Bucknell’s campus with flashier stream flow S 300
Depth (mm)

200 S
Depth (mm)

hydrographs compared with the rest of the watershed 100

I 200
I
100
and that downstream had a lot less stream flow per unit 0
0
area than upstream did. -1006-Feb 28-Mar 17-May 6-Jul 25-Aug 14-Oct 3-Dec
-1006-Feb 28-Mar 17-May 6-Jul 25-Aug 14-Oct 3-Dec
-200 -200
-300 -300
-400 -400
Time (date) Time (date)

Figure 1. Accumulated P, E, R, S and I of the entire Figure 2. Accumulated P, E, R, S and I of Bucknell’s

watershed in year 2009 (CN=79.32). campus in year 2009.

Results: Streamflow 600 2009 600 P 2009

P
500 500 E
E
400 400 R
R
300 S
Depth (mm)

300
Depth (mm)

S
200 200 Stream
Stream
flow
flow
100 100

0 0
6-Feb 28-Mar 17-May 6-Jul 25-Aug 14-Oct 3-Dec 6-Feb 28-Mar 17-May 6-Jul 25-Aug 14-Oct 3-Dec
-100 -100

-200 -200
Time (date) Time (date)

Figure 3. Accumulated P, E, R, S and Stream Figure 4. Accumulated P, E, R, S and Stream flow

flow of upstream in year 2009 (CN=77.4). of downstream in year 2009 (CN=78.6).

Conclusions Future Work

• The impact of Bucknell campus on the stream does not explain the lack of base flow •Observation wells would provide hard data on groundwater storage in the
and why there would be perennial flow upstream of campus but not through campus. watershed, allowing greater precision in the water budget. This could help us
The campus most likely does make the problem worse. discern the cause of the dry stream bed in summer.
• Possible explanations for the dry channel bed in summer are the unknown subsurface
condition of the channel bed and the details of the underlying geology. There are two Citations
main alternative explanations: • Poster format taken from Dr. Cavanagh
•The stream flow might still exist during summer but it is hidden beneath the rocks. • Pan Evaporation used to estimate lake evaporation estimation at Raystown Lake
•The stream might begin to lose flow to the bedrock starting near Rt 15, because the cited from http://climate.met.psu.edu/features/other/evap/rayevap.php.
bedrock beneath the stream switches to limestone there. Sponsored by: Henry Luce Foundation