Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2163
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2163
23 Nov 2023
 | 23 Nov 2023
Status: this preprint is open for discussion.

Post-wildfire sediment source and transport modeling, empirical observations, and applied mitigation: an Arizona USA case study

Edward Robert Schenk, Alex Wood, Allen Haden, Gabriel Baca, Jake Fleishman, and Joe Loverich

Abstract. Post-wildfire floods are receiving greater attention as wildland-urban interfaces become more common and as catastrophic wildfires have increased in frequency. Sediment sourcing, transport, and deposition in the post-fire environment receive attention due to the severity of risk caused by debris flows and concentrated sediment flood flows. This study provides a series of sediment model predictions based on MUSLE and the WARSSS suite of models that included: ERMIT, BANCS, and FLOWSED/POWERSED for the 2019 Museum Fire (809 Ha of steep slope Pinus ponderosa forest in the Spruce Wash watershed). A comparison is provided for the internet-based WEPPcloud post-fire sediment model. Empirical evidence from four floods in 2021 indicated 9,900 Mg of sediment yield to city of Flagstaff neighborhoods, the WEPP model estimated 3870 Mg/year, MUSLE predicted 4860 Mg/year (based on the four events), and the WARSSS suite of models predicted 4630 Mg/year. Both WEPP and WARSSS estimated more sediment yield from channels than hillslope (51 %/49 % and 60 %/40 % respectively) though the spatial patterns differ between the models. Sediment mitigation structures, or “work areas”, are discussed as real-world applications of sediment forecasting for reducing downstream impacts. Continued revisions of sediment forecasts, based on case studies such as this one, can provide managers and policy makers with tools for risk mitigation and emergency management.

Edward Robert Schenk, Alex Wood, Allen Haden, Gabriel Baca, Jake Fleishman, and Joe Loverich

Status: open (until 28 Feb 2024)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2163', Anonymous Referee #1, 19 Dec 2023 reply
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Edward Schenk, 18 Jan 2024 reply
  • CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2163', Rebecca Beers, 11 Jan 2024 reply
    • AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Edward Schenk, 18 Jan 2024 reply
Edward Robert Schenk, Alex Wood, Allen Haden, Gabriel Baca, Jake Fleishman, and Joe Loverich
Edward Robert Schenk, Alex Wood, Allen Haden, Gabriel Baca, Jake Fleishman, and Joe Loverich

Viewed

Total article views: 233 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
160 59 14 233 4 2
  • HTML: 160
  • PDF: 59
  • XML: 14
  • Total: 233
  • BibTeX: 4
  • EndNote: 2
Views and downloads (calculated since 23 Nov 2023)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 23 Nov 2023)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 232 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 232 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 26 Feb 2024
Download
Short summary
Post-wildfire flooding and debris is dangerous and damaging. This study used three different sediment models to predict post-wildfire sediment sources and transport amounts downstream of the 2019 Museum Fire in northern Arizona, USA. The predictions were compared with real-world measurements of sediment that was cleaned out of the city of Flagstaff after four large floods in 2021. Results provide avenues for continued model refinement and an example of potential mitigation strategies.