A review of the evolving perceptual model of hillslope flowpaths at the Maimai catchments, New Zealand

Abstract The Maimai catchment has been the site of ongoing hillslope research since the late 1970s. These studies have facilitated the development of a detailed perceptual model of hillslope hydrology at Maimai. This perceptual model has grown in complexity beyond analytical description; nonetheless it provides a very useful case study of hillslope hydrological processes and encapsulates much of what field hydrologists have come to recognize as the dominant hillslope runoff processes in steep, humid catchments. No single research approach has resolved the complexities of streamflow generation in this highly responsive catchment. Yet, each data set reviewed in this paper adds to the cumulative understanding of catchment behavior by providing alternative (and sometimes conflicting) interpretations of hillslope subsurface flow. Initial dye tracer studies of macropore flow provided insight into hillslope flow processes, but suffered from the limitations of a single-method approach. Subsequent water isotopic tracing studies showed clearly that stored soil water and groundwater comprised the majority of channel stormflow; notwithstanding, isotope-oriented approaches did not enable the development of a mechanistic understanding of hillslope processes. An integration of tensiometer recording and tracer techniques was required for later reconciliation of different process interpretations concerning the role of macropores and old/new water ratios. Although single throughflow pits continued to be the indicator of subsurface flow timing and magnitude for several published studies at Maimai, subsequent whole hillslope trench studies showed that flow varied widely across a slope section—making the single pit observations of the previous studies suspect. Most recent observations demonstrate that small depressions in the bedrock surface may exert a significant control on water mobility and mixing. In particular, the bedrock topography appears to determine spatially the pathway of rapid saturated subsurface water flow and tracer breakthrough at the hillslope scale. The Maimai catchments in New Zealand provide a historical perspective on the issues faced by hillslope/small catchment hydrologists since the mid 1970s and highlights the advantages of multiple repeat experiments for testing hypotheses and improving our mechanistic understanding of subsurface flow.

[1]  Abdul S. Abdul,et al.  Laboratory Studies of the Effects of the Capillary Fringe on Streamflow Generation , 1984 .

[2]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  Modeling Base Flow Soil Water Residence Times From Deuterium Concentrations , 1991 .

[3]  J. Hewlett,et al.  PREDICTING STORMFLOW AND PEAKFLOW FROM SMALL BASINS IN HUMID AREAS BY THE R-INDEX METHOD , 1977 .

[4]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  Hydrology and biogeochemistry of forested catchments , 2001 .

[5]  R. Allan Freeze,et al.  Role of subsurface flow in generating surface runoff: 2. Upstream source areas , 1972 .

[6]  R. Gillham The capillary fringe and its effect on water-table response , 1984 .

[7]  Ross Woods,et al.  The changing spatial variability of subsurface flow across a hillside , 1996 .

[8]  M. Mosley Streamflow generation in a forested watershed, New Zealand , 1979 .

[9]  F. Swanson,et al.  Hydrologic inferences from comparisons among small basin experiments , 2001 .

[10]  A. Pearce,et al.  Storm runoff generation in humid headwater catchments 1 , 1986 .

[11]  Keith Beven,et al.  Hydrological processes—Letters. Topographic controls on subsurface storm flow at the hillslope scale for two hydrologically distinct small catchmetns , 1997 .

[12]  J. McDonnell,et al.  On the future of forest hydrology and biogeochemistry , 2001 .

[13]  A. Pearce,et al.  Hydrology and related changes after harvesting native forest catchments and establishing pinus radiata plantations. Part 2. The native forest water balance and changes in streamflow after harvesting , 1994 .

[14]  Andrew J. Pearce,et al.  Storm Runoff generation in humid headwater catchments 2. A case study of hillslope and low-order stream response , 1986 .

[15]  A. J. Pearce,et al.  Hydrology and related changes after harvesting native forest catchments and establishing pinus radiata plantations. Part 1. Introduction to study , 1994 .

[16]  J. McDonnell,et al.  The influence of macropores on debris flow initiation , 1990, Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology.

[17]  J. Webster The hydrologic properties of the forest floor under beech/podocarp/hardwood forest, North Westland , 1977 .

[18]  M. Bonell,et al.  SELECTED CHALLENGES IN RUNOFF GENERATION RESEARCH IN FORESTS FROM THE HILLSLOPE TO HEADWATER DRAINAGE BASIN SCALE 1 , 1998 .

[19]  Y. Onda,et al.  The role of subsurface runoff through bedrock on storm flow generation , 2001 .

[20]  M. Sklash,et al.  The Role Of Groundwater In Storm Runoff , 1979 .

[21]  A. Pearce,et al.  Rainfall Interception In A Multi-Storied, Evergreen Mixed Forest: Estimates Using Gash's Analytical Model , 1981 .

[22]  D. Genereux,et al.  Quantifying uncertainty in tracer‐based hydrograph separations , 1998 .

[23]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  A rationale for old water discharge through macropores in a steep, humid catchment. , 1990 .

[24]  Keith Beven,et al.  Prophecy, reality and uncertainty in distributed hydrological modelling , 1993 .

[25]  J. McDonnell,et al.  Riparian zone flowpath dynamics during snowmelt in a small headwater catchment , 1999 .

[26]  R. Woods,et al.  Reply to 'Comment on "The changing spatial variability of subsurface flow across a hillside" by Ross Woods and Lindsay Rowe, by Jeffrey J. McDonnell' , 1997 .

[27]  Murugesu Sivapalan,et al.  Modeling the spatial variability of subsurface runoff using a topographic index , 1997 .

[28]  M. P. Mosley,et al.  Subsurface flow velocities through selected forest soils, South Island, New Zealand , 1982 .

[29]  J. McDonnell,et al.  A Case Study of Shallow Flow Paths in a Steep Zero-Order Basin , 1991 .

[30]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  Effect of Catchment‐Scale Subsurface Mixing on Stream Isotopic Response , 1991 .

[31]  R. Allan Freeze,et al.  Role of subsurface flow in generating surface runoff: 1. Base flow contributions to channel flow , 1972 .

[32]  S. P. Anderson,et al.  Unsaturated zone processes and the hydrologic response of a steep, unchanneled catchment , 1998 .

[33]  H. Hemond,et al.  Naturally Occurring Radon 222 as a Tracer for Streamflow Generation: Steady State Methodology and Field Example , 1990 .

[34]  J. Hewlett Factors affecting the response of small watersheds to precipitation in humid areas , 1967 .

[35]  K. Beven,et al.  A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology , 1979 .

[36]  S. P. Anderson,et al.  Hydrologic response of a steep, unchanneled valley to natural and applied rainfall , 1997 .

[37]  K. Beven,et al.  THE PREDICTION OF HILLSLOPE FLOW PATHS FOR DISTRIBUTED HYDROLOGICAL MODELLING USING DIGITAL TERRAIN MODELS , 1991 .

[38]  J. McDonnell,et al.  Quantifying contributions to storm runoff through end‐member mixing analysis and hydrologic measurements at the Panola Mountain Research Watershed (Georgia, USA) , 2001 .

[39]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  The age, origin and pathway of subsurface stormflow in a steep humid headwater catchment. , 1988 .

[40]  J. Buttle,et al.  Runoff Production in a Forested, Shallow Soil, Canadian Shield Basin , 1995 .

[41]  J. McDonnell,et al.  Flow Pathways on Steep Forested Hillslopes: the Tracer, Tensiometer and Trough Approach , 1998 .

[42]  Keith Beven,et al.  NEW METHOD DEVELOPED FOR STUDYING FLOW ON HILLSLOPES , 1996 .