Evaluation of four hydrological models for operational flood forecasting in a Canadian Prairie watershed

References

• Amirhossien, F., et al., 2015. A comparison of ANN and HSPF models for runoff simulation in Balkhichai River Watershed, Iran. American Journal of Climate Change, 4 (3), 203–279. doi:10.4236/ajcc.2015.43016
   Google Scholar
• Bergström, S., 1995. The HBV model. In: V.P. Singh, ed. Computer models of watershed hydrology. Highland Ranch, CO: Water Resources Publications, 443–476.
   Google Scholar
• Bhuiyan, H.A., et al., 2017. Application of HEC-HMS in a cold region watershed and use of RADARSAT-2 soil moisture in initializing the model. Hydrology, 4 (1), 9. doi:10.3390/hydrology4010009
   Google Scholar
• Bicknell, B.R., et al., 2005. HSPF version 12.2 user’s manual. Mountain View, California: AQUA TERRA Consultants.
   Google Scholar
• Burn, D. and Whitfield, P., 2016. Changes in floods and flood regimes in Canada. Canadian Water Resources Journal, 41 (1–2), 139–150. doi:10.1080/07011784.2015.1026844
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buttle, J.M., et al. 2016. Flood processes in Canada: regional and special aspects. Canadian Water Resources Journal, 41 (1–2), 7–30. doi:10.1080/07011784.2015.1131629
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canadian Hydraulics Centre, 2010. Green kenue reference manual. Ottawa, Ontario: National Research Council.
   Google Scholar
• Carsell, K.M., Pingel, N.D., and Ford, D.T., 2004. Quantifying the benefit of a flood warning system. Natural Hazards Review, 5 (3), 131–140. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1527-6988(2004)5:3(131)
   Google Scholar
• Chu, X. and Steinman, A., 2009. Event and continuous hydrologic modeling with HEC-HMS. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering-ASCE, 135 (1), 119–124. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2009)135:1(119)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cranmer, A.J., Kouwen, N., and Mousavi, S.F., 2001. Proving WATFLOOD: modelling the nonlinearities of hydrologic response to storm intensities. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 28 (5), 837–855. doi:10.1139/l01-049
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawford, N.H. and Linsley, R.K., 1966. Digital simulation in hydrology: stanford watershed model 4. California: Departrment of Civil Engineering, Stanford University. Technical Rep. 39.
   Google Scholar
• Cunderlik, J.M. and Simonovic, S.P., 2004. Calibration, verification and sensitivity analysis of the HEC-HMS hydrologic model. London, Ontario: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of Western Ontario. Water Resources Research Report no. 048.
   Google Scholar
• Donigian Jr., A.S., et al., 1984. Application guide for hydrological simulation program: FORTRAN (HSPF). Washington, DC: US Environmental Protection Agency, EPA.
   Google Scholar
• Dumanski, S., Pomeroy, J.W., and Westbrook, C.J., 2015. Hydrological regime changes in a Canadian Prairie basin. Hydrological Processes, 29 (18), 3893–3904. doi:10.1002/hyp.v29.18
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Environment Agency, 2003. Flood Warning Investment Strategy Appraisal Report 2003/04 to 20012/13. National Flood Warning Centre, Frimley.
   Google Scholar
• Fang, X., et al., 2007. A review of Canadian Prairie hydrology: principles, modelling and response to land use and drainage change. Saskatoon: Centre for Hydrology, University of Saskatchewan.
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, A.D., 2000. Hydrologic modeling system HEC-HMS: technical reference manual. Davis, CA: US Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center.
   Google Scholar
• Flood Recovery Task Force, 2013. Southern Alberta 2013 floods: the provincial recovery framework. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.
   Google Scholar
• Godwin, R. and Martin, F. 1975. Calculation of gross and effective drainage areas for the Prairie. Proceedings of the Canadian Hydrology Symposium. Winnipeg, Manitoba, pp 219–223.
   Google Scholar
• Golmohammadi, G., et al., 2014. Evaluating three hydrological distributed watershed models: MIKE-SHE, APEX, SWAT. Hydrology, 1 (1), 20–39. doi:10.3390/hydrology1010020
   Google Scholar
• Granger, R.G., Gray, D.M., and Dyck, G.E., 1984. Snowmelt infiltration to frozen prairie soils. Canadian Journal of Earth Science, 21 (6), 669–677. doi:10.1139/e84-073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, D.M., 1970. Handbook on the principles of hydrology. Port Washington, New York: Water Information Center Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, D.M. and Landine, P.G., 1988. An energy-budget snowmelt model for the Canadian Prairies. Canadian Journal of Earth Science, 25 (8), 1292–1303. doi:10.1139/e88-124
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, D.M., et al., 2001. Estimating areal snowmelt infiltration into frozen soils. Hydrological Processes, 15 (16), 3095–3111. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grillakis, M.G., Tsanis, I.K., and Koutroulis, A.G., 2010. Application of the HBV hydrological model in a flash flood case in Slovenia. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 10 (12), 2713–2715. doi:10.5194/nhess-10-2713-2010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta, H.V., Sorooshian, S., and Yapo, P.O., 1998. Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: multiple and noncommensurable measures of information. Water Resour Research, 34 (4), 751–763. doi:10.1029/97WR03495
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, M.J., 2001. How well does your model fit the data? Journal of Hydroinformatics, 3 (1), 49–55.
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton, A.S., Hutchinson, D.G., and Moore, R.D., 2000. Estimating winter streamflow using conceptual streamflow model. Journal of Cold Regions Engineering, 14 (4), 158–175. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0887-381X(2000)14:4(158)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayashi, M., van der Kamp, G., and Schmidt, R., 2003. Focused infiltration of snowmelt water in partially frozen soil under small depressions. Journal of Hydrology, 270 (3–4), 214–229. doi:10.1016/S0022-1694(02)00287-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hundecha, Y. and Bárdossy, A., 2004. Modeling of the effect of land use changes on the runoff generation of a river basin through parameter regionalization of a watershed model. Journal of Hydrology, 292 (1–4), 281–295. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jakob, M. and Church, M., 2011. The trouble with floods. Canadian Water Resources Journal, 36 (4), 287–292. doi:10.4296/cwrj3604928
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenkinson, R.W., 2009. Surface water quality modelling considering Riparian wetlands. Thesis (PhD). University of Waterloo.
   Google Scholar
• Jost, G., et al., 2012. Quantifying the contribution of glacier runoff to streamflow in the upper Columbia river basin, Canada. Hydrology and Earth Systems. Sciences, 16 (3), 849–860. doi:10.5194/hess-16-849-2012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kouwen, N., 1973. Watershed modeling using a square grid technique. Proceedings of First Canadian Hydraulics Conference, CSCE Edmonton, pp. 418–434.
   Google Scholar
• Kouwen, N., 1988. WATFLOOD: a micro-computer based flood forecasting system based on real-time weather radar. Canadian Water Resources Journal, 13 (1), 62–77. doi:10.4296/cwrj1301062
   Google Scholar
• Kouwen, N., 2016. WATFLOOD™/CHARM Canadian hydrological and routing model. User’s manual. Waterloo: University of Waterloo.
   Google Scholar
• Kouwen, N., et al., 1993. Grouped response units for distributed hydrologic modeling. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management-ASCE, 119 (3), 289–305. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(1993)119:3(289)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krause, P., Boyle, D.P., and Bäse, F., 2005. Comparison of different efficiency criteria for hydrological model assessment. Advances in Geoscience, 5, 89–97. doi:10.5194/adgeo-5-89-2005
   Google Scholar
• Lindström, G., et al., 1997. Development and test of the distributed HBV-96 hydrological model. Journal of Hydrology, 201 (1–4), 272–288. doi:10.1016/S0022-1694(97)00041-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacLean, A., 2005. Statistical Evaluation of WATFLOOD. Waterloo: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo.
   Google Scholar
• Mahat, V. and Anderson, A., 2013. Impacts of climate and catastrophic forest changes on streamflow and water balance in a mountainous headwater stream in Southern Alberta. Hydrology and Earth Systems. Sciences, 17, 4941–4956. doi:10.5194/hess-17-4941-2013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manitoba Infrastructure and Transportation, 2013. Manitoba 2011 Flood Review Task Force Report. Winnipeg: Report to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation.
   Google Scholar
• Moriasi, D.N., et al., 2007. Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, 50 (3), 885–900.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mousavi, S.J., et al., 2012. Uncertainty-based automatic calibration of HEC-HMS model using sequential uncertainty fitting approach. Journal of Hydroinformatics, 14 (2), 286–309. doi:10.2166/hydro.2011.071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muhammad, A., et al., 2016. Parameter and model structure uncertainty in stream flow simulation of upper Assiniboine river basin through soil water assessment tool (SWAT) and NAM model. Vienna: EGU General Assembly.
   Google Scholar
• Nash, J.E. and Sutcliffe, J.V., 1970. River flow forecasting through conceptual models part-I: a discussion of principles. Journal of Hydrology, 10 (3), 282–290. doi:10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6
   Google Scholar
• Neff, T.A., 1996. Mesoscale water balance of the boreal forest using operational evapotranspiration approaches in a distributed hydrologic model. Thesis (PhD). University of Waterloo.
   Google Scholar
• Pappenberger, F., et al., 2015. The monetary benefit of early flood warnings in Europe. Environmental Science and Policy, 51, 278–291. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2015.04.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, D.J., Tunstall, S., and Wilson, T., 2005. Socio-economic benefits of flood forecasting and warning. International conference on innovation advances and implementation of flood forecasting technology, 17-19 October 2005, Tromsø, Norway.
   Google Scholar
• Penning-Rowsell, E.C., et al., 2000. The benefits of flood warnings: real but elusive, and politically significant. Water and Environment Journal, 14 (1), 7–14. doi:10.1111/wej.2000.14.issue-1
   Google Scholar
• Philip, J.R., 1954. An infiltration equation with physical significance. Soil Sciences Journal, 77 (2), 153–158. doi:10.1097/00010694-195402000-00009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pomeroy, J.W., De Boer, D., and Martz, L.W., 2005. Hydrology and Water Resources of Saskatchewan, Center for Hydrology Report #1. Saskatoon: Centre for Hydrology, University of Saskatchewan.
   Google Scholar
• Pomeroy, J.W., et al., 2007. The cold regions hydrological model: a platform for basing process representation and model structure on physical evidence. Hydrological Processes, 21 (19), 2650–2667. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pomeroy, J.W., et al., 1998. An evaluation of snow accumulation and ablation processes for land surface modelling. Hydrological Processes, 12 (15), 2339–2367. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pomeroy, J.W., Stewart, R.E., and Whitfield, P.H., 2016. The 2013 flood event in the South Saskatchewan and Elk River basins: causes, assessment and damages. Canadian Water Resources Journal, 41 (1–2), 105–117. doi:10.1080/07011784.2015.1089190
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Upper Assiniboine River Basin Study, 2000. Study Report Prepared at the Conclusion of the Upper Assiniboine River Basin Study Agreement Signed in October 1996 by the Governments of Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Canada.
   Google Scholar
• USACE-HEC, 2015. Hydrologic modeling system (HEC-HMS), application guide, version 4.0. Davis, CA: US Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center.
   Google Scholar
• USACE-HEC, 2016. Hydrologic modeling system HEC-HMS, user’s manual, version 4.2. Davis, CA: US Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center.
   Google Scholar
• USGS, 1997. Water resources applications software, summary of hydrological simulation program—fortran (HSPF). Reston, VA: US Geological Survey.
   Google Scholar
• WaterSMART, A., 2013. The 2013 great Alberta flood: actions to mitigate, manage and control future floods. Calgary: Alberta WaterSMART, Water Management Solutions.
   Google Scholar
• Wieprecht, S., Tolossa, H.G., and Yang, C.T., 2013. A neuro-fuzzy-based modelling approach for sediment transport computation. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 58 (3), 587–599. doi:10.1080/02626667.2012.755264
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zegre, N.P., 2008. Local and downstream effects of contemporary forest harvesting on streamflow and sediment yield. Dissertation (PhD). Oregon State University.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, X. and Lindström, G., 1997. Development of an automatic calibration scheme for the HBV hydrological model. Hydrological Processes, 11 (12), 1671–1682. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, L. and Gray, D.M., 1997. A parametric expression for estimating infiltration into frozen soils. Hydrological Processes, 11 (13), 1761–1775. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar