CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4Hydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementHydrology and Watershed Management Studies

Impacts of Vegetation Removal on Urban Mediterranean Stream Hydrology and Hydraulics

Open access
Eckermann, Trevor K., Hunt, Danielle S., Kinoshita, Alicia M.·2022·Hydrology
DOI 10.3390/hydrology9100170
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Given the widespread presence of non-native vegetation in urban and Mediterranean watersheds, it is important to evaluate how these sensitive ecosystems will respond to activities to manage and restore native vegetation conditions. This research focuses on Del Cerro, a tributary of the San Diego River in California, where non-native vegetation dominates the riparian zone, creating flooding and fire hazards. Field data were collected in 2018 to 2021 and consisted of water depth, streamflow, and stream temperature. Our data set also captured baseline conditions in the floodplain before and after the removal of burned non-native vegetation in November 2020. Observed changes in hydrologic and geomorphic conditions were used to parameterize and calibrate a two-dimensional hydraulic model to simulate urban floodplain hydraulics after vegetation removal. We utilized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Hydrologic Engineering Center River Assessment System (HEC-RAS) model to simulate the influence of canopy loss and vegetation disturbance and to assess the impacts of vegetation removal on stream restoration. We simulated streamflow, water depth, and flood extent for two scenarios: (1) 2019; pre-restoration where non-native vegetation dominated the riparian area, and (2) 2021; post-restoration following the removal of non-native vegetation and canopy. Flooding after restoration in 2021 was more frequent compared to 2019. We also observed similar flood extents and peak streamflow for storm events that accumulated half the amount of precipitation as pre-restoration conditions. Our results provide insight into the responses of small urban stream reaches to the removal of invasive vegetation and canopy cover.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/hydrology9100170

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent studies caution that uniform vegetation removal, when applied without accounting for bank stability and ecosystem services, may produce outcomes counter to intended adaptation goals.

    “Recent studies caution that uniform vegetation removal, when applied without accounting for bank stability and ecosystem services, may produce outcomes counter to the intended adaptation goals 17,18 .”

    From AI-driven digital twinning quantifies the trade-off between flood conveyance and riparian stability under climate extremes (2026) · cites this paper as [18]

    Section 4.2, “Vegetation Restoration and Implications for Ecosystem Services,” says that riparian vegetation can reinforce banks, that banks may weaken without established vegetation, and that stream temperatures increased after removal. These findings support caution about unintended effects, but the paper does not specifically evaluate uniform removal or state that it defeats adaptation goals; its study focuses mainly on removing invasive vegetation. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. Myers, N.; Mittermeier, R.A.; Mittermeier, C.G.; da Fonseca, G.A.B.; Kent, J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 2000, 403, 853-858. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Beltrán, B.J.; Franklin, J.; Syphard, A.; Regan, H.M.; Flint, L.E.; Flint, A.L. Effects of climate change and urban development on the distribution and conservation of vegetation in a Mediterranean type ecosystem. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2013, 28, 1561-1589. · DOI
  3. Myers, N.; Mittermeier, R.A.; Mittermeier, C.G.; da Fonseca, G.A.B.; Kent, J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 2000, 403, 853-858. [CrossRef] [PubMed] · DOI · Paper page
  4. Beltrán, B.J.; Franklin, J.; Syphard, A.; Regan, H.M.; Flint, L.E.; Flint, A.L. Effects of climate change and urban development on the distribution and conservation of vegetation in a Mediterranean type ecosystem. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2013, 28, 1561-1589. [CrossRef] · DOI
  5. Sala, O.E.; Chapin, F.S.; Armesto, J.J.; Berlow, E.; Bloomfield, J.; Dirzo, R.; Huber-Sanwald, E.; Huenneke, L.F.; Jackson, R.B.; Kinzig, A.; et al. Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science 2000, 287, 1770-1774. [CrossRef] [PubMed] · DOI · Paper page
  6. Brown, G.W.; Krygier, J.T. Effects of clear-cutting on stream temperature. Water Resour. Res. 1970, 6, 1133-1139. [CrossRef] · DOI
  7. Beechie, T.; Imaki, H.; Greene, J.; Wade, A.; Wu, H.; Pess, G.; Roni, P.; Kimball, J.; Stanford, J.; Kiffney, P.; et al. Restoring salmon habitat for a changing climate. River Res. Appl. 2012, 29, 939-960. [CrossRef] · DOI
  8. Garner, G.; Malcolm, I.A.; Sadler, J.P.; Hannah, D.M. What causes cooling water temperature gradients in a forested stream reach? Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2014, 18, 5361-5376. [CrossRef] · DOI
  9. Rogers, J.B.; Stein, E.D.; Beck, M.W.; Ambrose, R.F. The impact of climate change induced alterations of streamflow and stream temperature on the distribution of riparian species. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0242682. [CrossRef] · DOI
  10. Schoelynck, J.; de Groote, T.; Bal, K.; Vandenbruwaene, W.; Meire, P.; Temmerman, S. Self-organised patchiness and scale- dependent bio-geomorphic feedbacks in aquatic river vegetation. Ecography 2012, 35, 760-768. [CrossRef] · DOI
  11. Mathews, L.E.H.; Kinoshita, A.M. Urban Fire Severity and Vegetation Dynamics in Southern California. Remote Sens. 2020, 13, 19. [CrossRef] · DOI
  12. White, M.D.; Greer, K.A. The effects of watershed urbanization on the stream hydrology and riparian vegetation of Los Penasquitos Creek, California. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2006, 74, 125-138. [CrossRef] · DOI
  13. Lebreton, L.C.M.; van der Zwet, J.; Damsteeg, J.-W.; Slat, B.; Andrady, A.; Reisser, J. River plastic emissions to the world's oceans. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 15611. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  14. Gandara, M.L. Evaluating the Potential Impacts of Homelessness on the Water Quality and Riparian Habitat of the Santa Ana River; Oregon State University: Corvallis, OR, USA, 2020; pp. 18-43.
  15. Giessow, J.; Casanova, J.; Leclerc, R.; MacArthur, R.; Fleming, G.; Giessow, J. Arundo Donax (Giant Reed): Distribution and Impact Report; California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC): Berkeley, CA, USA, 2011; pp. 1-240.
  16. Kiss, T.; Nagy, J.; Fehérváry, I.; Vaszkó, C. (Mis) management of floodplain vegetation: The effect of invasive species on vegetation roughness and flood levels. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 686, 931-945. [CrossRef] · DOI
  17. Douglas, I.; Alam, K.; Maghenda, M.; Mcdonnell, Y.; Mclean, L.; Campbell, J. Unjust waters: Climate change, flooding and the urban poor in Africa. Environ. Urban. 2008, 20, 187-205. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  18. Stover, J.E.; Keller, E.A.; Dudley, T.L.; Langendoen, E.J. Fluvial geomorphology, root distribution, and tensile strength of the invasive giant reed, Arundo donax and its role on stream bank stability in the Santa Clara River, Southern California. Geosciences 2018, 8, 304. [CrossRef] · DOI
  19. Perdue, R.E. Arundo donax-Source of musical reeds and industrial cellulose. Econ. Bot. 1958, 12, 368-404. [CrossRef] · DOI
  20. Coffman, G.C.; Ambrose, R.F.; Rundel, P.W. Wildfire promotes dominance of invasive giant reed (Arundo donax) in riparian ecosystems. Biol. Invasions 2010, 12, 2723-2734. [CrossRef] · DOI
  21. Minnich, R.A. Chaparral fire history in San Diego County and adjacent northern Baja California: An evaluation of natural fire regimes and the effects of suppression management. In The California Chaparral: Paradigms Reexamined; Natural History Museum: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 1989; pp. 37-47.
  22. Brooks, M.L. Alien annual grasses and fire in the Mojave Desert. Madroño 1999, 46, 13-19.
  23. Iverson, M.E.; Jackson, N.E.; Frandsen, P.; Douthit, S. The impact of Arundo donax on water resources. In Proceedings of Arundo Donax Workshop; Jackson, N.E., Frandsen, P., Douthit, S., Eds.; UCANR: Ontario, CA, USA, 1993; Volume 19.
  24. Stromberg, J.C. Restoration of riparian vegetation in the south-western United States: Importance of flow regimes and fluvial dynamism. J. Arid. Environ. 2001, 49, 17-34. [CrossRef] · DOI
  25. Tabacchi, E.; Lambs, L.; Guilloy, H.; Planty-Tabacchi, A.-M.; Muller, E.; Décamps, H. Impacts of riparian vegetation on hydrological processes. Hydrol. Process. 2000, 14, 2959-2976. [CrossRef] · DOI
  26. Bren, L.J. Riparian zone, stream, and floodplain issues: A review. J. Hydrol. 1993, 150, 277-299. [CrossRef] · DOI
  27. Alkin, Q.; Kinoshita, A.M. A Case Study of Soil Moisture and Infiltration after an Urban Fire. Fire 2020, 3, 22. [CrossRef] · DOI
  28. Stromberg, J.C.; Beauchamp, V.B.; Dixon, M.D.; Lite, S.J.; Paradzick, C. Importance of low-flow and high-flow characteristics to restoration of riparian vegetation along rivers in arid south-western United States. Freshw. Biol. 2007, 52, 651-679. [CrossRef] · DOI
  29. Cortès, M.; Llasat, M.C.; Gilabert, J.; Llasat-Botija, M.; Turco, M.; Marcos, R.; Vide, J.P.M.; Falcón, L. Towards a better understanding of the evolution of the flood risk in Mediterranean urban areas: The case of Barcelona. Nat. Hazards 2017, 93, 39-60. [CrossRef] · DOI
  30. Moriasi, D.N.; Zeckoski, R.W.; Arnold, J.G.; Baffaut, C.; Malone, R.W.; Daggupati, P.; Guzman, J.A.; Saraswat, D.; Yuan, Y.; Wilson, B.N.; et al. Hydrologic and water quality models: Key calibration and validation topics. Trans. ASABE 2015, 58, 1609-1618.
  31. David, A.; Schmalz, B. A systematic analysis of the interaction between rain-on-grid-simulations and spatial resolution in 2D hydrodynamic modeling. Water 2021, 13, 2346. [CrossRef] · DOI
  32. Berland, A.; Shiflett, S.A.; Shuster, W.D.; Garmestani, A.S.; Goddard, H.C.; Herrmann, D.L.; Hopton, M.E. The role of trees in urban stormwater management. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2017, 162, 167-177. [CrossRef] · DOI
  33. Harr, R.D.; Harper, W.C.; Krygier, J.T.; Hsieh, F.S. Changes in storm hydrographs after road building and clear-cutting in the Oregon Coast Range. Water Resour. Res. 1975, 11, 436-444. [CrossRef] · DOI
  34. Tague, C.L.; Moritz, M.; Hanan, E. The changing water cycle: The eco-hydrologic impacts of forest density reduction in Mediterranean (seasonally dry) regions. WIREs Water 2019, 6, 1-11. [CrossRef] · DOI
  35. Jones, J.A. Hydrologic processes and peak discharge response to forest removal, regrowth, and roads in 10 small experimental basins, western Cascades, Oregon. Water Resour. Res. 2000, 36, 2621-2642. [CrossRef] · DOI
  36. Dan Moore, R.; Wondzell, S.M. Physical hydrology and the effects of forest harvesting in the Pacific Northwest: A review 1. JAWRA J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 2005, 41, 763-784. [CrossRef] · DOI
  37. Karr, J.R.; Schlosser, I.J. Water Resources and the Land-Water Interface: Water resources in agricultural watersheds can be improved by effective multidisciplinary planning. Science 1978, 201, 229-234. [CrossRef] · DOI
  38. Valdecantos, A.; Baeza, M.J.; Vallejo, V.R. Vegetation Management for Promoting Ecosystem Resilience in Fire-Prone Mediter- ranean Shrublands. Restor. Ecol. 2008. [CrossRef] · DOI
  39. Broadmeadow, S.; Nisbet, T.R. The effects of riparian forest management on the freshwater environment: A literature review of best management practice. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2004, 8, 286-305. [CrossRef] · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eckermann, T. K., Hunt, D. S., & Kinoshita, A. M.
Affiliations
San Diego State University (US)
Corresponding author
Kinoshita, Alicia M.
ORCID
Kinoshita, Alicia M.
Venue
Hydrology
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-09-29
Volume
9
Issue
10
Pages
170
ISSN
2306-5338 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/hydrology9100170
OpenAlex
W4297973195
Cited by
4
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1
FWCI
0.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Hydrology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation CAREER Program (1848577, SDRG-P1-18-15)
  • San Diego River Conservancy (1848577, SDRG-P1-18-15)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Hydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Flood Risk Assessment and Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Keywords
vegetation removal, non-native plants, riparian vegetation, urban rivers, Mediterranean streams, stream restoration, floodplain hydraulics, canopy loss, river discharge, water depth, flood inundation area, HEC-RAS, San Diego River, wildfire disturbance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review