LONG-TERM GEOMORPHIC MONITORING OF STREAM SYSTEMS INTO THE 21st CENTURY – UNDERSTANDING THE CAUSES AND LINKS AMONG ALTERED CLIMATE, LAND USE, FLOODS, AND FLUVIAL ADJUSTMENTS ACROSS DIVERSE LANDSCAPES

Leopold’s (1962) goals in proposing the international Vigil Network was to provide a modest but powerful and accessible means of recording and interpreting geomorphic, hydrologic, and biological changes associated with climate and land-use changes across diverse landscapes throughout the world. Through voluntary efforts, the Vigil Network contained about 80 sites in the 1990s, mainly in the U.S. Much of the geomorphic data stored in the Vigil Network was repeat channel cross sections and other geomorphic measurements such as erosion pins. Over the last 20+ years, the network has been maintained by Waite Osterkamp and William Emmett (both now formerly retired from the U.S. Geological Survey) and currently is housed at the U.S. Geological Survey’s Arizona Water Science Center. With little or no funding for maintenance or outreach, additions to the network have been minimal. At the same time, the number of USGS streamgages with referenced channel cross sections has grown exponentially because of widespread development of hydraulic geometry regional curves. Repeat channel cross sections at streamgages are especially powerful because they have associated hydrologic records and a wealth of drainage basin characteristics readily available through existing programs. Unfortunately, no widely available database exists for storage and archiving stream morphology data, and career’s worth of channel cross section data, such as Stafford Happ’s and James Knox’s in the Driftless Area reside in field books, file cabinets, desktop computers, and paper reports. In the spring of 2011, the first national stream morphology database workshop was held by the Advisory Council on Water Information, Subcommittee on Sedimentation. At the workshop fluvial geomorphologists and database designers explored the scope, scale, and costs of developing a national stream morphology database. The attendees confirmed the need for a national stream morphology database and discussed issues concerning scale and data model, scope, funding, and administration. Next steps are to develop a set of recommendations on how to proceed toward the conceptualization and development of a national stream morphology database. These efforts compliment proposals of regional stream geomorphology networks related to climate change.