Checking for missing content type metadata ...

Checking for non-preferred file/folder path names (may take a long time depending on the number of files/folders) ...

Natural Functional Flow Predictions for the Great Salt Lake Basin


Authors:
Owners: This resource does not have an owner who is an active HydroShare user. Contact CUAHSI (help@cuahsi.org) for information on this resource.
Type: Resource
Storage: The size of this resource is 43.7 MB
Created: Aug 27, 2026 at 3:45 p.m. (UTC)
Last updated: Aug 27, 2026 at 10:43 p.m. (UTC)
Citation: See how to cite this resource
Sharing Status: Public
Views: 59
Downloads: 33
+1 Votes: Be the first one to 
 this.
Comments: No comments (yet)

Abstract

As Utah pursues an integrated Great Salt Lake (GSL) Basin planning strategy, estimates of environmental water demands are needed not only at gaged sites but across the many ungaged and non-reference stream reaches where flow targets may be set. This report provides this information by estimating reference-condition functional flows throughout the GSL Basin stream network. Functional flows are discrete seasonal components of the annual hydrograph (winter low flow, high flow ascension, peak, and recession, and summer low flow) with documented ecological, geomorphic, and/or biogeochemical importance. Lane et al. (2026) proposed a functional flows framework for GSL Basin’s rivers and a ‘calculator’ for quantifying the annual functional flow metrics at reference-condition streamgages, incorporating input from stakeholders representing a diverse array of federal, state, and local organizations and agencies. This report applies the functional flows conceptual model and calculator to generate natural functional flow predictions across the basin. Collectively, the functional flows framework, calculator, natural functional flow predictions, and associated tools are intended to help maximize the ecosystem benefits of water delivered as part of Great Salt Lake recovery efforts.

In this study, we applied a machine-learning approach to predict the interannual ranges of 18 functional flow metrics across the GSL basin stream network. Random forest models were trained on 2,540 gage-years of streamflows from 180 minimally disturbed reference gages across Utah, the Bear River Basin, and the Middle Rockies ecoregion, using publicly available geospatial and climate predictors. Model performance was evaluated with leave-one-out cross-validation, and a regionalized quantile-mapping correction was applied to address the range-compression bias inherent to ensemble tree models. Seventeen of the 18 flow metrics achieved good or better performance, with the models relying on physically meaningful predictors— groundwater recharge for magnitude metrics, air temperature for timing, and baseflow index for rates of change—lending confidence to the approach. The resulting functional flow metric predictions span ~2,500 stream segments (a 4,561-km network) and are delivered in a publicly accessible geodatabase.

These natural functional flow predictions represent the seasonal and interannual streamflow ranges that would have supported native river ecosystems in the absence of major impairments. The predictions provide the best estimate of natural flows for GSL Basin streams available at this time. They also serve as consistent, broadly applicable environmental flow targets that can help characterize and quantify how much water is needed for water quality and environment – one of many elements being considered as part of the GSL Basin Integrated Plan. However, specific water management decisions remain with local resource managers and should incorporate site-specific refinement of flow targets where data/resources permit. More broadly, the ecological management goals identified by stakeholders through the functional flows framework process can help with setting and modeling water resource system performance measures (WRe and USBR 2024).

Subject Keywords

Coverage

Spatial

Coordinate System/Geographic Projection:
WGS 84 EPSG:4326
Coordinate Units:
Decimal degrees
Place/Area Name:
Great Salt Lake Basin
North Latitude
42.1759°
East Longitude
-110.1379°
South Latitude
38.0959°
West Longitude
-114.3347°

Content

Related Resources

The content of this resource is similar to Lane, B., M. Stamp, S. E. Null, P. Thompson, J. Ostermiller, F. Nusrat, N. Patterson, M. Witte, B. Neilson, M. Baker. 2026. “A Functional Flows Framework for the Terminal Great Salt Lake Basin: Can We Have Our Lake and Drink It Too?.” River Research and Applications 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.70179 . https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rra.70179

Credits

Funding Agencies

This resource was created using funding from the following sources:
Agency Name Award Title Award Number
Utah Division of Water Resources None None

Contributors

People or Organizations that contributed technically, materially, financially, or provided general support for the creation of the resource's content but are not considered authors.

Name Organization Address Phone Author Identifiers
Theodore Grantham University of California Berkeley
Daren Carlisle U.S. Geological Survey

How to Cite

Lane, B., Stamp, M., Nusrat, F., Null, S., Oman, T., Thompson, P., Ostermiller, J., Patterson, N., Witte, M., Baker, M. (2026). Natural Functional Flow Predictions for the Great Salt Lake Basin, HydroShare, http://www.hydroshare.org/resource/a573526e3007489c8abcd1e494c3ea67

This resource is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
CC-BY

Comments

There are currently no comments

New Comment

required