EFFECTS OF WILDFIRE ON THE

HYDROLOGY OF CAPULIN AND RITO DE

LOS FRIJOLES CANYONS, BANDELIER

NATIONAL MONUMENT, NEW MEXICO

Prepared in cooperation with the

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Water-Resources Investigations Report 02-4152
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Water-Resources Investigations Report 02-4152

EFFECTS OF WILDFIRE ON THE

HYDROLOGY OF CAPULIN AND RITO DE

LOS FRIJOLES CANYONS, BANDELIER

NATIONAL MONUMENT, NEW MEXICO

Prepared in cooperation with the

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

By Jack E. Veenhuis

Albuquerque, New Mexico

2002
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

GALE A. NORTON, Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Charles G. Groat, Director

The use of firm, trade, and brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does

not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey.

For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased

U.S. Geological Survey

Information Services

Box 25286

Denver, CO 80225-0286

District Chief

U.S. Geological Survey

Water Resources Division

5338 Montgomery Blvd. NE, Suite 400

Albuquerque, NM 87109-1311

from:

Information regarding research and data-collection programs of the U.S. Geological Survey is ava

on the Internet via the World Wide Web. You may connect to the home page for the New Mexico D

Office using the URL http://nm.water.usgs.gov.
iii

CONTENTS

P

Abstract.................................................................................................................................................................................. 

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................... 

Purpose and scope ....................................................................................................................................................... 

Description of study area............................................................................................................................................. 

Methods of study ......................................................................................................................................................... 

Acknowledgments ....................................................................................................................................................... 

Effects of wildfire on hydrology............................................................................................................................................ 

Pre-fire hydrologic analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 

Rainfall .............................................................................................................................................................. 

Runoff................................................................................................................................................................ 

Suspended sediment .......................................................................................................................................... 

Post-fire hydrologic analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 

Rainfall .............................................................................................................................................................. 

Next Generation Radar rainfall.......................................................................................................................... 

Runoff—historical data ..................................................................................................................................... 

Runoff—current data......................................................................................................................................... 

Suspended sediment .......................................................................................................................................... 

Channel cross sections and stream gradient ...................................................................................................... 

Summary................................................................................................................................................................................ 

References ............................................................................................................................................................................. 

FIGURES

1. Map showing location of Bandelier National Monument, extent of 1977 La Mesa fire, and extent of

1996 Dome fire................................................................................................................................................... 

2. Map showing Capulin Canyon watershed and location of partial-record station, crest-stage gages, and

rain gages............................................................................................................................................................ 

3-7. Graphs showing:

3. Average monthly precipitation at National Weather Service rain gages at Bandelier National Monument

(NWS-1) and Los Alamos (NWS-2), 1931-76............................................................................................ 

4. Peak flow for Rito de los Frijoles, 1964-69 and 1977-98 ................................................................................. 

5. Peak flows recorded at the National Park Service streamflow-gaging station in Capulin Canyon,

1985 through 1995....................................................................................................................................... 

6. Annual peak flows at the Bland Canyon crest-stage gage near Cochiti Pueblo, 1962-98 ................................ 

7. Estimated flood-frequency magnitudes using regression equations that apply to drainage areas less than

10 square miles in Capulin Canyon and nearby watersheds........................................................................ 

8. Map showing physiographic regions used in flood-frequency analysis for New Mexico ....................................... 

9. Graph showing estimated flood-frequency magnitudes using regression equations developed for

physiographic region 6 in Capulin Canyon and nearby watersheds................................................................... 

10. Graph showing maximum observed peak flow in relation to drainage area for physiographic region 6

in Capulin Canyon.............................................................................................................................................. 

11. Box plots showing suspended-sediment concentrations in samples collected in Rito de los Frijoles

Canyon by calendar year .................................................................................................................................... 

12-14. Graphs showing:

12. Monthly precipitation at the Capulin Canyon Upper Basin rain gage, 1996-98, compared with average

monthly precipitation at the NWS Los Alamos National Laboratory rain gage, 1931-76 .......................... 
iv

13. Monthly precipitation at the Capulin Canyon Ranger Cabin rain gage, 1996-98, compared with

average monthly precipitation at the NWS Bandelier National Monument rain gage, 1931-76 .....

14. Maximum 60-minute rainfall at the Capulin Canyon Upper Basin rain gage and the Capulin Canyon

at Ranger Cabin rain gage, 1997-98.................................................................................................

15. Map showing NEXRAD radar 1-hour rainfall intensity for storm of June 26, 1996 ...................................

16-28. Graphs showing

16. Number of peak flows greater than 19 cubic feet per second in Rito de los Frijoles Canyon by

calendar year, 1977-98 .....................................................................................................................

17. Annual peak flow for Capulin Canyon in Bandelier National Monument............................................

18. Peak flows at Capulin Canyon above Ranger Cabin compared to maximum 60-minute rainfall

recorded at Capulin Canyon Upper Basin rain gage, Bandelier National Monument, 1996-98......

19. Annual peak flows in Frijoles Canyon and Capulin Canyon.................................................................

20. Peak flows in Frijoles Canyon after the 1977 La Mesa wildfire and in Capulin Canyon after the 1996

Dome wildfire...................................................................................................................................

21. Maximum post-fire flood magnitudes for Frijoles and Capulin Canyons and flood magnitudes for

physiographic regions 5 and 6 in New Mexico compared to drainage area.....................................

22. Instantaneous suspended-sediment concentration compared to flow in Rito de los Frijoles, 1977-95,

after the 1977 La Mesa wildfire .......................................................................................................

23. Instantaneous suspended-sediment load compared to flow for 1977, Rito de los Frijoles....................

24. Instantaneous suspended-sediment load compared to flow for 1993-95, Rito de los Frijoles ..............

25. Changes in monumented cross section at Capulin Canyon above Ranger Cabin crest-stage gage,

July 11, 1996, to August 19, 1998 ...................................................................................................

26. Changes in monumented cross section at Capulin Canyon below Ranger Cabin crest-stage gage,

July 10, 1996, to November 20, 1998 ..............................................................................................

27. Changes in monumented cross section at Capulin Canyon below Painted Cave crest-stage gage,

July 9, 1996, to November 20, 1998 ................................................................................................

28. Stream profile and valley slope at partial-record gage Capulin Canyon at Ranger Cabin ....................

TABLES

1. Burn intensities for major recent wildfires in Bandelier National Monument .............................................

2. Selected basin characteristics of Capulin Canyon, Rito de los Frijoles Canyon, and Bland Canyon used

in peak-flow estimation...........................................................................................................................

3. Peak flow at Rito de los Frijoles Canyon in Bandelier National Monument, 1964-98 ................................

4. Peak flow at National Park Service gaging station in Capulin Canyon in Bandelier National Monument..

5. Estimated pre-fire peak flows in Capulin Canyon ........................................................................................

6. Summary of monthly precipitation data collected at rain gages in and near Capulin Canyon, 1996-98 .....

7. Maximum rainfall recorded in Capulin Canyon, 1996-98............................................................................

8. Peak flood-stage data and associated peak flows in Capulin Canyon, 1996-98 ...........................................

9. Regression equations relating suspended-sediment load to flow for Rito de los Frijoles Canyon,

1977 and 1993-95 ...................................................................................................................................

CONVERSION FACTORS

Sea level: In this report, "sea level" refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929—a geodetic datum derived

from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of the United States and Canada, formerly called Sea Level

Datum of 1929.

Multiply By To obtain

inch 25.40 millimeter

foot 0.3048 meter

mile 1.609 kilometer

acre 0.004047 square kilometer

acre-inch 102.75 cubic meter

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer

cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second

cubic foot per second per acre-inch 0.0002756 cubic meter per second per acre-inch

foot per mile 0.1894 meter per kilometer
1

ABSTRACT

In June of 1977, the La Mesa wildfire burned

15,270 acres in and around Frijoles Canyon in

Bandelier National Monument and the adjacent Santa

Fe National Forest, New Mexico. The Dome wildfire in

April of 1996 in Bandelier National Monument burned

16,516 acres in Capulin Canyon and the surrounding

Dome Wilderness area. Both watersheds are

characterized by abundant and extensive archeological

sites that could be affected by increased runoff and

accelerated rates of erosion, which typically occur after

a wildfire. The U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation

with the National Park Service monitored the wildfires'

effects on streamflow in both canyons.

The magnitude of large stormflows increased

dramatically after these wildfires; peak flows at the

most downstream streamflow-gaging station in Frijoles

and Capulin Canyons increased to about 160 times the

maximum recorded flood prior to the fire. Maximum

peak flow was 3,030 cubic feet per second at the gaging

station in Frijoles Canyon (drainage area equals 18.1

square miles) and 3,630 cubic feet per second at the

most downstream crest-stage gage in Capulin Canyon

(drainage area equals 14.1 square miles). The pre-fire

maximum peak flow recorded in these two canyons

was 19 and an estimated 25 cubic feet per second,

respectively. As vegetation reestablished itself during

the second year, the post-fire annual maximum peak

flow decreased to about 10 to 15 times the pre-fire

annual maximum peak flow. During the third year,

maximum annual peak flows decreased to about three

to five times the pre-fire maximum peak flow. In the 22

years since the La Mesa wildfire, flood magnitudes

have not completely returned to pre-fire size.

Post-fire flood magnitudes in Frijoles and

Capulin Canyons do not exceed the maximum floods

per drainage area for physiographic regions 5 and 6 in

New Mexico. For a burned watershed, however, the

peak flows that occur after a wildfire are several orders

of magnitude larger than normal forested watershed

peak flows.

The frequency of larger stormflows also

increased in response to the effects of the wildfires 

both canyons. In Frijoles Canyon, the number of pe

stormflows greater than the pre-fire maximum flow 

19 cubic feet per second was 15 in 1977, 9 in 1978, 

5 in 1979, which is about the magnitude of the

maximum pre-fire peak flow in both canyons. Agai

the hydrologic effects of a wildfire seem to be mor

pronounced for the 3 years following the date of th

fire. Likewise, larger peakflows occurred more

frequently in Capulin Canyon for the first 3 years a

the 1996 wildfire.

Median suspended-sediment concentrations 

samples collected in Frijoles Canyon in 1977 were

1,330 milligrams per liter; median concentrations w

16 milligrams per liter after the watershed stabilized 

1993-95. The annual load calculated from regressio

equations for load compared to flow for the first ye

after the wildfire was 220 times the annual load for 

post-recovery period.

To convey the increased frequency and

magnitude of average flows in Capulin Canyon afte

the 1996 Dome wildfire, the stream channel in Capu

Canyon increased in flow capacity by widening and

downcutting. As Capulin Canyon peak flows have

decreased in both magnitude and frequency with

vegetative recovery, the stream channel also has slow

begun to readjust. The channel at the most downstre

crest-stage gage, which has the shallowest initial val

slope, is showing the first signs of aggradation.

INTRODUCTION

 In April of 1996, the Dome wildfire burned

16,516 acres in Bandelier National Monument and 

adjacent Dome Wilderness part of the Santa Fe

National Forest (fig. 1). Because of concern about

destruction of the extensive archeological artifacts 

resources within the monument from increased run

and possible increased sedimentation after the wildfi

a rehabilitation plan was developed. The Dome Fir

Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation Plan (BAE

EFFECTS OF WILDFIRE ON THE HYDROLOGY OF

CAPULIN AND RITO DE LOS FRIJOLES CANYONS,

BANDELIER NATIONAL MONUMENT, NEW MEXICO

By Jack E. Veenhuis
2

Plan, 1996) recommended hydrologic monitoring and a

hydrologic hazards assessment. In response to this

concern, the National Park Service (NPS), in

cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),

conducted a study to estimate and document the

flooding hazard after the Dome wildfire that burned in

and near Bandelier National Monument in 1996. The

assessment of potential hydrologic hazards in Capulin

Canyon was based, in part, on analysis of the

streamflow-gaging station record for Frijoles Canyon

and the effect of the 1977 La Mesa wildfire on the

hydrology of that canyon. This summary report was

funded by the Interagency Joint Fire Science Program

with cooperative funding from the USGS. A

comparison of the burn intensity for these two major

wildfires in Bandelier National Monument is presented

in table 1.

Historically, hydrologic changes after the

Yellowstone National Park fires in 1992 and hydrologic

changes in post-fire areas have been observed but never

documented for wildfires in New Mexico, Wyoming,

California, Idaho, Montana, and Arizona. In 1996, the

Hondo fire in the Carson National Forest near Taos,

New Mexico; the Buffalo Creek fire in the Pike

National Forest near Denver, Colorado; a fire in the

Jicarilla Apache Reservation, New Mexico; and a fire

in Mesa Verde National Monument all caused large

increases in the magnitude of peak flows. After each of

these fires, the frequency of peak flows increased;

sediment transport had substantial increases and

channel geometry changed.

Purpose and Scope

This report summarizes the effects of the 1977

La Mesa wildfire on the hydrology of Frijoles Canyon

and the 1996 Dome wildfire on the hydrology of

Capulin Canyon in and near Bandelier Natio

Monument for 2 1/2 years after the fire (July 

November 1998). Pre- and post-hydrologic 

for each canyon are compared and discussed

Description of Study Area

The study area is located in and near B

National Monument and includes parts of Fr

Canyon and Capulin Canyon (fig. 1) in the n

central part of New Mexico. Streamflow for 

watersheds originates at higher elevations ne

rim of the Jemez Mountains and is in an eas

direction, eventually entering the Rio Grand

Methods of Study

The USGS installed five tipping-buck

gages (WRD-1, WRD-2, WRD-3, GD-1, an

within the Capulin Canyon watershed in Jul

August of 1996 to record 5- or 15-minute rai

rain gages were monitored and operated unt

November and December 1998. The locatio

rain gages is shown in figure 2, and the site n

numbers are listed in table 2. One rain gage 

was located at the ranger cabin (Capulin Ca

Ranger Cabin - 083133655), a second rain g

(WRD-3) was located at the Dome fire towe

Fire Tower - 354527106221630) and was us

rainfall alert gage, and the third rain gage (W

was located on a burned, east-facing western 

upper Capulin Canyon (Capulin Canyon Upp

354700106244630) (fig. 2). As part of a geo

hazard assessment conducted by the USGS, 

hazard researchers installed and operated tw

additional recording rain gages (GD-1 and G

Table 1. Burn intensities for major recent wildfires in Bandelier National Monument

[--, no data]

Name of

fire area

(fig. 1)

Location

of fire

Total

acres

burned High Moderate

Low to

moderate Low

Low t

unburn

La Mesa Frijoles

Canyon

15,270 5,209

(33 percent)

-- 8,941

(57 percent)

-- 1,570

(10 perc

Dome Capulin

Canyon

16,516 114

(1 percent)

2,203

(13 percent)

-- 1,725

(10 percent)

12,47

(76 perc

Burn intensities, in acres
LA MESA

FIRE AREA, 1977

SANTA FE CO SANTA FE COUNTY

LOS ALAMOS COUNTY

A

M S N LOS LA

O

C

OU TY

35°

50 ́

LOS ALAMOS

SANDOVAL COUNTY

SAN

ILDEFONSO

RESERVATION

106° 20 ́

WHITE

ROCK

R O GRA DE

I

N

501

501

LOS AL MOS CO A

Ancho Canyon

0 2 4 MILES

0 2 4 KILOMETERS

a

n

C pulin Ca yon

SANDOVAL COUNTY

BANDELIER

NATIONAL

MONUMENT

BANDELIER

NATIONAL

MONUMENT

35°

45 ́

106° 25 ́ 106° 15 ́

Santa Fe

National Forest

DOME FIRE

AREA

1996

4 Rito de

los Frijoles

LOS ALAMOS

BANDELIER

NEW MEXICO

Figure 1. Location of Bandelier National Monument, extent of 1977 La Mesa fire, and

 extent of 1996 Dome fire.

Santa Fe

National Forest

Santa Fe

National Forest

DOME

WILDERNESS JEMEZ

MO

TAI

S

UN

N

3
Canyon

Peralta

R. 2W. R. 1W. R. 1 E.

T.

17

N.

18

T.

19

N.

SANTA FE CO

SANTA FE COUNTY

LOS ALAMOS COUNTY

S AM T LO AL OS COUN Y

LOS AL MOS CO A

LOS ALAMOS

SANDOVAL COUNTY

SAN

ILDEFONSO

RESERVATION

WHITE

ROCK

R

R O G A DE

I

N

501

501

0 2 4 MILES

0 2 4 KILOMETERS

Capu in Canyon

l

Alamo Canyon

SANDOVAL COUNTY

BANDELIER

NATIONAL

MONUMENT

106° 25 ́

35°

45 ́

35°

50 ́

35°

40 ́

Santa Fe

National Forest

4 Rito de

los Frijoles

Figure 2. Capulin Canyon watershed and location of partial-record station, crest-stage gages, 

and rain gages. Names and numbers of stations and rain gages are listed in table 2.

Bandelier National

Monument

BANDELIER BOUNDARY

CONTINUOUS-RECORD STREAMFLOW-GAGING STATION

PARTIAL-RECORD STREAMFLOW-GAGING STATION

EXPLANATION

CREST-STAGE GAGE

RAIN GAGE

 NWS--NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE GAGE

 NPS--NATIONAL PARK SERVICE GAGE

 WRD--U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GAGE 

 GD--U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GAGE

RITO DE LOS

FRIJOLES IN

BANDELIER

NATIONAL

MONUMENT

08313350

08313400

BLAND CANYON

NEAR COCHITI PUEBLO

NWS-3

COCHITI LAKE DAM

NWS-4

JEMEZ SPRINGS

35°46’, 106°41’

WEST 15 MILES

APPROX.

NWS-5

WOLF CANYON,

35°57’, 106°45

NORTHWEST

20 MILES

APPROX.

WRD-1

CAPULIN CANYON

UPPER BASIN

354700106244630

Canyon

Cochiti

C iquit

h

o

o

Ri

B

and l

Creek

NPS-1

FRIJOLES

FIRE TOWER

NPS-2

PONDEROSA

CAMPGROUND

NWS-1

BANDELIER

NATIONAL PARK

HEADQUARTERS

NWS-2

LOS ALAMOS

NATIONAL

LABORATORY

RAIN GAGE

AT AIRPORT

106 106° 15 ́ ° 20 ́

WRD-3

DOME FIRE TOWER

354527106221630

CAPULIN CANYON

BELOW PAINTED CAVE

08313368

CAPULIN CANYON

ABOVE RANGER CABIN

08313365

GD-1

GD-2

CAPULIN CANYON

BELOW RANGER CABIN

08313366

COCHITI PUEBLO

 SOUTH 3 MILES

WRD-2

CAPULIN CANYON

AT RANGER CABIN

083133655

4
5

the north-facing slope of Capulin Canyon from August

1996 to December 1998 (fig. 2) (William Ellis, U.S.

Geological Survey, written commun., 1998). The

rainfall data collected are available in daily totals and

in shorter durations in USGS files. Daily rainfall data

are available from the USGS Automated Data

Processing System (ADAPS) database.

The NPS operates two daily rain gages: one on

the south-facing slope of Frijoles Canyon at the Frijoles

Fire Tower (NPS-1) and one at the Ponderosa

Campground (NPS-2) (fig. 2). A National Weather

Service (NWS) observer rain gage (NWS-1) collected

rainfall at the National Park Headquarters in Bandelier

National Monument from 1931 to 1976, and a rain

gage at Los Alamos National Laboratory (NWS-2) has

been in operation since 1931 (fig. 2). In addition, NWS

observer rain gages are located at Jemez Springs, Wolf

Canyon, and at Cochiti Lake Dam.

A continuous-record streamflow-gaging station

(Rito de los Frijoles in Bandelier National Monument -

08313350, hereinafter referred to as Frijoles Canyon

gaging station) was established and operated by the

USGS from July 1963 to September 1969 and after the

1977 La Mesa wildfire from July 1977 until September

1982 (fig. 2; table 2). Since 1983 this gaging station has

been operated as a crest-stage gage or a continuousrecord gaging station by several different agencies.

An NPS gaging station in Capulin Canyon

collected streamflow data from 1985 until the 1-foot

concrete flume was destroyed by the first post-fire flood

on June 26, 1996.

To monitor streamflow after the 1996 Dome

wildfire, the USGS established and operated three

crest-stage gages in Capulin Canyon from July 1996

until November 1998. The three crest-stage gages are

Capulin Canyon above Ranger Cabin - 08313365;

Capulin Canyon below Ranger Cabin - 08313366; and

Capulin Canyon below Painted Cave - 08313368 (fig.

2; table 2). On June 18, 1997, a high-flow, partialrecord/continuous-record gaging station (Capulin

Canyon at Ranger Cabin - 083133655) was installed by

the USGS slightly upstream from the Capulin Canyon

below Ranger Cabin crest-stage gage and near the

discontinued NPS gaging station (fig. 2). Because of

the short distance between these two sites, the record at

the crest-stage gage and at the NPS gaging station are

considered one record. The new gaging station was

added to the network the second year of the study

because of the need to determine peak flows associated

with rainfall in Capulin Canyon. This gaging station

recorded peak stages from June 1997 until Novemb

1998. On July 15, 1997, the gaging station and rain

gage were upgraded to a satellite data collection

platform (DCP) uplink that transmits data at 4-hou

intervals. With the addition of the DCP at this site, p

flows and rainfall could be monitored remotely and

individual peaks could be related to maximum rain

for selected durations for each of the three rain gag

Slope-area and step-backwater indirect

discharge measurements were surveyed at the three

crest-stage gages and gaging station in Capulin

Canyon. At each location, a cross section was

monumented to provide a benchmark for possible

channel changes during the subsequent post-fire run

Monumented cross sections were surveyed and

referenced to cross-section end points of rebar and

other surveyed benchmarks.

The Bland Canyon near Cochiti crest-stage g

has been operated by the USGS since 1962 as part o

New Mexico flood study in Bland Canyon (fig. 2; ta

2), a parallel watershed south of Capulin Canyon. L

Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) also has been

operating 19 gaging stations (not shown on map) o

major canyons north of the Bandelier National

Monument boundary since 1992-94.

In Frijoles Canyon, the USGS collected

suspended-sediment samples of the 1977 La Mesa

post-fire runoff from 1977 to 1981. From 1993 to 19

as part of the USGS National Water-Quality

Assessment (NAWQA) program, suspended-sedim

samples from Frijoles Canyon were again collected 

analyzed.

Acknowledgments

The author acknowledges Brian Jacobs (NPS

and Craig Allen (USGS) for their continued patien

and support in this effort. Thanks are extended to t

personnel of the USGS Albuquerque Field

Headquarters for gage installation and to Todd Kel

(USGS) for his expertise in data collection and

numerous arduous hikes into remote sites in Capul

Canyon with the author to document channel chang

and record peak-flow stage. Also, thanks are extend

to Lead Hydrologic Technician David Ortiz of the

USGS Albuquerque Field Headquarters for his hel

with the interpretation of historical record charts in

Capulin Canyon.
6

Table 2. Selected watershed characteristics of Capulin Canyon, Rito de los Frijoles

Canyon, and Bland Canyon used in peak-flow estimation

[--, no data]

Station name and

number

(fig. 2) Gage type

Drainage area

(square miles)

Station

elevation (feet

above sea

level)

Period of

record

Capulin Canyon Upper

Basin (WRD-1)

354700106244630

Rain gage --- 8,280 7/96-11/98

Capulin Canyon at

Ranger Cabin

(WRD-2)

Rain gage --- 6,225 7/96-11/98

Dome Fire Tower

(WRD-3)

354527106221630

Rain gage --- 8,490 7/96-11/98

GD-1 Rain gage -- -- 8/76-11/98

GD-2 Rain gage -- -- 9/96-11/98

National Park Service Discontinued

continuous

record

8.30 6,230 4/85-6/96

Rito de los Frijoles in

Bandelier National

Monument

08313350

Continuous

record

18.1 6,035 7/63-9/69

7/77-9/82

5/93-present

Capulin Canyon

at Ranger Cabin

083133655

Partial record 8.32 6,225 4/85-11/98

Capulin Canyon

above Ranger Cabin

08313365

Crest stage 6.51 6,740 7/96-11/98

Capulin Canyon

below Ranger Cabin

08313366

Crest stage 8.36 6,170 7/96-11/98

Capulin Canyon

below Painted Cave

08313368

Crest stage 14.1 5,670 7/96-11/98

Bland Canyon near

Cochiti Pueblo

08313400

Crest stage 7.57 6,210 1962-present
7

EFFECTS OF WILDFIRE ON HYDROLOGY

Pre-Fire Hydrologic Analysis

To determine the effects of the 1996 Dome

wildfire on the hydrology of Capulin Canyon, a

discussion of the rainfall and runoff characteristics

prior to the fire is useful. By understanding the

hydrologic conditions that exist in an unburned

watershed, one can more easily understand the

differences between pre-fire and post-fire channel flow

and the reactions of channels to changes in flow

conditions. As part of the pre-fire analysis, peak-flow

records collected in Capulin Canyon from 1985 to 1996

at the NPS gaging station were analyzed.

Rainfall

Precipitation in and near Bandelier National

Monument falls as snow during the winter season, as

large-scale frontal storms with low-intensity rainfall

during the spring and fall and as very localized, highintensity thunderstorms from June through September.

Precipitation data collected at a rain gage at Bandelier

National Monument (NWS-1) and an LANL rain gage

(NWS-2) (fig. 2) probably best indicate the magnitude

and distribution of monthly rainfall in the study area

from 1931 to 1976 (fig. 3). Variation in monthly

precipitation at these two sites is similar. The

difference in elevation between the two stations

(Bandelier is 6,061 feet and LANL is 7,424 feet above

sea level, respectively) is primarily responsible for the

increased monthly precipitation at the LANL rain gage.

Annual precipitation is about 18 inches per year at Los

Alamos and 15 inches per year at Bandelier National

Monument. More than 50 percent of this precipitation

falls during June, July, August, and September. Most

annual maximum peak flows in Frijoles and Capulin

Canyons are a result of rainstorms during these 4

summer months.

Runoff

Recorded streamflows at the Frijoles Canyon

gaging station prior to the 1977 La Mesa wildfire and

at the Capulin Canyon at Ranger Cabin gaging station

(hereinafter referred to as the Capulin Canyon gaging

station) prior to the 1996 Dome wildfire are the best

indicators of pre-fire historical streamflow and also

provide estimates of annual flood magnitude. Pre-fire

peak flows in Frijoles Canyon from 1964 through 1969

are presented in table 3 and shown in figure 4. Med

annual peak flow during this pre-fire period was 5.7

ft3

/s (cubic feet per second). The maximum record

peak flow during this time was 19 ft3

/s. Pre-fire pea

flows in Capulin Canyon from 1985 through 1994 

listed in table 4 and shown in figure 5. The median 

fire peak flow was 15.2 ft3/s for these years. The pe

flow on September 3, 1988 (table 4), was slightly

greater than the maximum flow capacity of the concr

flume (22.4 ft3/s); thus, flow was estimated to be ab

25 ft3/s. Peak flows that occurred prior to the 1996

Dome wildfire in Capulin Canyon are similar in

magnitude to peak flows recorded prior to the 1977 

Mesa wildfire in Frijoles Canyon.

Another indicator of pre-fire historical

streamflow in Bandelier National Monument is dat

collected at the crest-stage gage in Bland Canyon.

Annual peak flows for this watershed are shown in

figure 6. This watershed had a maximum peak flow 

300 ft3/s and a median annual maximum flow of 35

ft3

/s from 1962 to 1998. The Bland Canyon draina

area is 7.57 square miles, less than half the drainag

area of Frijoles Canyon (18.1 square miles). Despi

the difference in drainage areas, length of records, 

management of these two watersheds, data for both

canyons give a consistent pre-fire estimate of flood

magnitudes in Bandelier National Monument.

The magnitude, frequency, and distribution o

pre-fire peak runoff can be estimated using several

techniques. The USGS developed two sets of

regression equations from annual peak-flow data

collected for 219 sites in New Mexico (Waltemeye

1996). These equations can be used to estimate floo

peak flows for ungaged streams. Selected watershe

characteristics used in the two sets of equations are

listed in table 2. The first equation, which applies t

watersheds with less than 10 square miles of

contributing drainage area, uses only drainage area 

estimate peak flows for 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, 100-, a

500-year recurrence intervals (table 5; fig. 7). The

second set of equations was developed for specific

physiographic regions in New Mexico (figs. 8 and 

For physiographic region 6, which includes Bandel

National Monument, drainage area, mean channel

elevation, and the 10-year, 24-hour rainfall (Miller 

others, 1973) were used to estimate peak flows for 

2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year recurrence

intervals (table 5). The flood-frequency magnitude
Figure 3. Average monthly precipitation at National Weather Service rain gages

 at Bandelier National Monument (NWS-1) and Los Alamos (NWS-2),

 1931-76. See figure 2 for location of rain gages.

M

O

N

T

HLY PRECIPITATIO

N,

IN IN

C

HES

MONTH

Los Alamos

Bandelier

0

2

1

3

4

J F M A M J J A S O N D

Figure 4. Peak flow for Rito de los Frijoles, 1964-69 and 1977-98.

PEA

K FLO

W, IN

C

UBIC FEET PER

SEC

O

N

D

1.0

10

100

1,000

1960 65 1970 75 1980 85 1990 95 2000

1977

LA MESA FIRE

PRE-FIRE PERIOD

POST-FIRE PERIOD

FIRE-RECOVERY PERIOD

8
9

Table 3. Peak flow at Rito de los Frijoles Canyon in Bandelier National Monument,

1964-98

Date Stage (feet) Peak flow (ft3/s)

07-26-64 1.26 2.4

04-26-65 1.45 4.0

06-18-65 1.49 19

07-31-65 .97 9.6

08-14-65 .70 5.5

04-04-66 1.07 5.1

08-09-67 1.28 6.3

04-19-68 .76 5.6

05-12-68 .80 5.5

07-31-68 .68 5.1

08-04-68 .94 8.6

08-08-68 .71 5.5

08-11-68 .95 8.8

04-11-69 .67 4.3

04-24-69 .69 4.2

09-12-69 .65 4.6

09-15-69 .64 4.5

La Mesa Fire - June 1977

07-05-77 5.02 653

07-08-77 2.67 77

07-09-77 2.77 90

07-27-77 3.88 382

07-30-77 .73 5.6

08-11-77 .65 4.6

08-12-77 3.94 386

08-12-77 1.76 24

08-16-77 2.37 50

08-16-77 .80 6.8

08-17-77 2.14 37

08-18-77 1.43 17

08-19-77 3.45 234

08-20-77 4.33 519

 [Streamflow-gaging station 08313350; ft3s, cubic feet per second; --, no data]
10

08-20-77 3.55 264

08-22-77 3.82 358

09-02-77 2.45 56

09-03-77 2.64 74

09-04-77 1.20 12

10-04-77 2.28 44

11-07-77 .94 4.8

03-01-78 .63 4.5

06-30-78 3.65 296

07-12-78 5.60 1,800

07-21-78 6.34 3,030

08-09-78 2.35 49

08-23-78 1.15 9.2

08-24-78 1.33 12

09-24-78 2.09 35

11-03-78 3.02 132

11-11-78 3.67 303

11-12-78 3.65 296

11-25-78 3.78 343

03-08-79 1.26 15

03-21-79 1.20 15

04-10-79 1.05 11

04-18-79 1.92 30

05-26-79 1.30 15

06-01-79 2.92 114

06-02-79 3.06 140

06-03-79 3.81 354

08-15-79 1.96 30

02-15-80 2.08 6.0

05-15-80 2.06 6.0

08-06-80 2.07 6.0

08-27-80 2.31 14.4

07-01-81 2.11 7.0

Table 3. Peak flow at Rito de los Frijoles Canyon in Bandelier National Monument,

1964-98--Continued

Date Stage (feet) Peak flow (ft3/s)
11

07-27-81 2.20 10

08-05-81 2.08 6.0

08-16-81 2.03 5.0

09-01-81 2.24 11

09-05-81 2.67 43

09-07-81 2.10 7.0

03-13-82 2.01 4.0

04-18-82 2.03 5.0

07-02-82 1.98 4.0

08-18-82 2.18 9.0

08-21-82 2.23 11

08-25-82 1.96 4.0

09-16-82 2.93 83

05-03-83 2.56 32

1984 2.26 12

1985 2.68 57

1986 2.56 32

1987 2.67 43

1988 2.56 32

1989 2.46 24

1990 2.15 8.0

1991 4.15 710

1992 3.44 65

1993 -- --

05-03-94 2.05 6.2

11-12-94 2.29 13

06-29-96 2.19 9.4

08-17-97 2.35 16

08-13-98 3.12 125

Table 3. Peak flow at Rito de los Frijoles Canyon in Bandelier National Monument,

1964-98--Continued

Date Stage (feet) Peak flow (ft3/s)
12

Table 4. Peak flow at National Park Service gaging station in Capulin Canyon in

Bandelier National Monument

Date Time Peak flow

08-12-85 23:50 14

08-13-85 22:00 21*

No data for 1986

07-12-87 16:00 2.5

08-10-87 23:50 2.6*

07-05-88 13:00 7.3

09-03-88 -- > 22.4*

09-12-88 13:00 11

09-12-88 23:00 8.3

07-12-89 00:00 2.2

07-15-89 13:00 3.8*

07-22-89 23:30 2.6

07-24-89 1:00 2.6

11-02-89 10:15 1.3

11-02-89 24:00 1.3

08-15-90 4:00 1.1

09-17-90 3:00 1.3

09-28-90 23:45 1.7*

11-17-90 20:30 2.1

07-04-91 4:20 2.0

07-23-91 12:00 4.8

09-16-91 20:00 13

09-17-91 12:30 20*

09-20-91 16:00 9.4

09-22-91 18:00 13

04-14-92 24:00 17

[--, no data; >, greater than; peak flow in cubic feet per second]
13

* Peak flow for water year.

** Peak flow from slope-area indirect discharge measurement at Capulin Canyon below Ranger

Cabin crest-stage gage.

*** Peak flow at U.S Geological Survey streamflow-gaging station partial-record gage (Capulin Canyon at Ran

Cabin).

04-28-92 8:00 19*

05-23-92 2:00 1.6

05-26-92 17:00 1.9

05-30-92 12:00 2.0

07-26-92 9:00 1.4

08-15-92 10:30 2.2

08-20-93 9:00 2.4

08-26-93 12:00 1.9

08-28-93 2:00 2.5*

07-17-94 3:50 1.5

07-28-94 23:00 1.6

08-13-94 9:00 15*

No data for 1995 --

Dome Fire - April 1996

06-26-96 20:30 2,700**

09-03-97 270***

08-11-98 75***

Table 4. Peak flow at National Park Service gaging station in Capulin Canyon in

Bandelier National Monument--Concluded

Date Time Peak flow
Figure 5. Peak flows recorded at the National Park Service streamflow-gaging station in

 Capulin Canyon, 1985 through 1995 (Brian Jacobs, National Park Service,

 written commun., 1997). See figure 2 for location of gaging station.

1

10

100

1,000

1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999

PEA

K FLO

W, IN

C

UBIC FEET PER

SEC

O

N

D

PRE-FIRE

FIRE RECOVERY

Figure 6. Annual peak flows at the Bland Canyon crest-stage gage near

 Cochiti Pueblo, 1962-98. See figure 2 for location of gage.

A

N

N

U

AL P

E

A

K FLO

W,

IN

C

U

BIC FE

E

T

P

E

R

S

E

C

O

N

D

WATER YEAR

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

300

200

100

0

14
10,000

8,000

9,000

6,000

7,000

5,000

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

500

300

200

100

50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2

ANNUAL EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY, IN PERCENT

(RECURRENCE INTERVAL, IN YEARS, IS THE RECIPROCAL)

PEA

K FLO

W, IN

C

UBIC FEET PER

SEC

O

N

D

Figure 7. Estimated flood-frequency magnitudes using regression equations (Waltemeyer, 1996)

 that apply to drainage areas less than 10 square miles in Capulin Canyon and nearby

 watersheds. See figure 2 for location of stations.

CAPULIN CANYON ABOVE RANGER CABIN (08313365)

CAPULIN CANYON BELOW RANGER CABIN (08313366)

CAPULIN CANYON BELOW PAINTED CAVE (08313368)

RITO DE LOS FRIJOLES IN BANDELIER NATIONAL 

 MONUMENT (08313350)

BLAND CANYON NEAR COCHITI PUEBLO (08313400)

15
20 40 60 80 100 MILES

0 20 40 60 80 100 KILOMETERS

0

Figure 8. Physiographic regions used in flood-frequency analysis for New Mexico

 (from Waltemeyer, 1996).

EXPLANATION

(1)-Northeast plains region

(2)-Northwest plateau region

(3)-Southeast mountain region

(4)-Southeast plains region

STREAMFLOW-GAGING STATION (used in Waltemeyer analysis)

(5)-Northern mountain region

(8)-Southwest mountain region

(7)-Southwest desert region

(6)-Central mountain valley region

(3)PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGION BOUNDARY AND NUMBER

37°

109°

103°

32°

(2)

(5)

(1)

(4)

(6)

(3)

(8)

(7)

Pe

c

os

iv r R

e

Juan

an S

r Rive

R

oi

Gr

na

de

COLORADO

MEXICO

IZ

A

R

O

N

A

T

E

X

A

S

TEXAS

OKLA

285

U.S. Geological Survey base

10

25

40

NEW MEXICO

Bandelier

National

Monument

16

25

40
10,000

8,000

9,000

6,000

7,000

5,000

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

500

300

200

100

50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2

Figure 9. Estimated flood-frequency magnitudes using regression equations developed for

 physiographic region 6 (Waltemeyer, 1996) in Capulin Canyon and nearby watersheds.

 See figure 2 for location of stations.

ANNUAL EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY, IN PERCENT

(RECURRENCE INTERVAL, IN YEARS, IS THE RECIPROCAL)

PEA

K FLO

W, IN

C

UBIC FEET PER

SEC

O

N

D

CAPULIN CANYON ABOVE RANGER CABIN (08313365)

CAPULIN CANYON BELOW RANGER CABIN (08313366)

CAPULIN CANYON BELOW PAINTED CAVE (08313368)

RITO DE LOS FRIJOLES IN BANDELIER NATIONAL 

 MONUMENT (08313350)

BLAND CANYON NEAR COCHITI PUEBLO (08313400)

17
18

estimated using the first set of equations (contributing

drainage area less than 10 square miles) for Capulin

Canyon, Frijoles Canyon, and Bland Canyon are shown

in figure 7. Pre-fire floods estimated using the

equations for physiographic region 6 for the three

Capulin Canyon crest-stage gages and the Frijoles

Canyon and Bland Canyon gaging stations are shown

in figure 9.

Waltemeyer (1996) used maximum floods that

occurred in all nearby watersheds to estimate peak

flows for ungaged watersheds for a given drainage area

(Waltemeyer, 1996). As part of that study, maximum

known floods were compared to drainage area for each

watershed. Upper envelope curves were developed for

the same regions of New Mexico for which the

regression equations apply (fig. 10). A frequently

referenced graphical estimate of maximum floods

developed by Crippen and Bue (1977) is also

presented. Both envelope curves show projections that

represent the maximum observed flood for the drainage

areas of the monitoring sites in Capulin Canyon.

Annual flow records for Capulin, Frijoles, and

Bland Canyons also provide a good indication of the

magnitude of pre-fire peak flows, as well as t

during which flood hazards are most likely. 

peak flows recorded at the Frijoles Canyon g

station for 1963-69 and 1977-98 and peak fl

Los Alamos gaging stations for 1994-98 (Sh

others, 1998, 1999) indicate about 75 percen

peak flows occurring during June, July, Aug

September. The increased flood hazard attes

high rainfall intensity frequently occurring th

year. Thirty-three percent of annual peak flo

recorded at the Frijoles Canyon and Los Ala

gaging stations occurred in August when ab

percent of total annual rain typically falls. Th

is highlighted when a watershed is affected b

intense rainfall on exposed soil can generate 

peak flows. For the 25 percent of the years w

thunderstorms do not occur in an individual 

the annual peaks result from snowmelt in Ma

and (or) May and an occasional storm that p

New Mexico from a remnant hurricane in th

Mexico.

1Drainage area less than 10 square miles.

2Drainage area greater than 10 square miles.

Table 5. Estimated pre-fire peak flows in Capulin Canyon

[See figure 2 for location of sites]

1

Capulin

Canyon above

Ranger Cabin

(08313365)

1

Capulin

Canyon below

Ranger Cabin

(08313366)

2

Capulin

Canyon below

Painted Cave

(08313368)

2

Rito de los

Frijoles in

Bandelier

National

Monument

(08313350)

1

Bland

near 

Pu

(083

Regression

equation

number 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 

2 year 222 112 245 168 300 289 331 248 222 

5 year 534 318 593 456 738 736 820 655 569 

10 year 837 559 932 783 1,167 1,232 1,299 1,116 893 

25 year 1,348 1,002 1,504 1,365 1,893 2,080 2,113 1,917 1,440 

50 year 1,840 1,464 2,059 1,956 2,605 2,920 2,926 2,726 1,969 

100 year 2,438 2,090 2,736 2,744 3,479 4,014 3,903 3,795 2,613 

500 year 4,173 4,195 4,693 5,290 6,000 7,407 6,748 7,205 4,479 
19

Suspended Sediment

Suspended-sediment samples were not collected

in Frijoles Canyon prior to the La Mesa wildfire in

1977. The distribution of suspended-sediment

concentrations in 22 samples collected during the

NAWQA study are represented by boxplots in figure

11. During 1993-95, concentrations ranged from 6 to

44 mg/L (milligrams per liter) with a median of 16

mg/L. The NAWQA study was considered to have been

conducted long enough after the 1977 La Mesa wildfire

to be representative of suspended-sediment

concentrations from a stable, unburned watershed in

this type of geologic setting. Streamflow during sample

collection ranged from 0.26 to 8.4 ft3

/s, with a median

flow of 1.4 ft3/s.

Post-Fire Hydrologic Analysis

Wildfire affects the magnitude of floodflows, the

frequency of large flows, and the sediment transport of

an affected watershed. Wildfire may also affect local

rainfall patterns; however, this study makes no attempt

to investigate pre- and post-fire rainfall patterns

because rainfall in burned areas was collected only

after the fire. Rainfall near Bandelier is extremely

variable and may not show significant differences

between pre-fire and post-fire conditions.

Rainfall

Monthly summaries of precipitation data

collected at USGS gages and average monthly

precipitation (1931-76) collected at NWS rain gages in

and near Capulin Canyon during 1996-98 are listed in

table 6. Monthly precipitation data collected at the

Upper Basin rain gage (WRD-1) compared with

monthly average precipitation data collected at the

LANL rain gage (NWS-2) are shown in figure 12.

Precipitation data collected at the ranger cabin (WRD2) compared with monthly average precipitation data

collected at the National Park Headquarters (NWS-1)

are shown in figure 13. Monthly precipitation was

greater at WRD-1 than the monthly average at NWS-2

for 18 of 27 months (table 6). During the first year after

the 1996 Dome wildfire, monthly precipitation at

WRD-1 was greater than the long-term average; most

precipitation was rainfall during the fall and spring,

which aided in revegetation of the burned Capulin

watershed (fig. 12). The rain gage at WRD-2 recorded

greater monthly precipitation than the average monthly

precipitation at NWS-1 at Bandelier National

Monument for 11 of 27 months (no data are available

for 7 months at this rain gage) of data collection (ta

6; fig. 13).

A maximum 24-hour rainfall of 2.89 inches w

recorded at the WRD-1 rain gage on September 2, 19

(table 7). The rain gage at WRD-2 recorded a

maximum daily rainfall of 1.53 inches on July 31,

1996. A maximum daily rainfall can occur almost

anytime during the year, but because fall and sprin

storms typically have less intense rainfall, these stor

rarely cause the annual peak flow in a watershed.

Rainfall in the spring and fall usually infiltrates into 

ground, thus producing less runoff. Infiltration help

accelerate the process of revegetation and subsequen

speed up the runoff abatement process in a burned

watershed.

 The maximum 15-, 30-, 60-, 180-, and 1,440

minute (24-hour) rainfall for days with greater than

0.25 inch from 1996 to 1998, the date of occurrenc

and an estimate of the recurrence interval are listed 

table 7 for the WRD-1, WRD-2, and WRD-3 rain

gages. Because of the localized nature of rainfall, t

limited number of rain gages within the Capulin

watershed, and correlation between maximum rain

for the listed durations and the resultant crest-stage

gage, flood peaks are difficult to interpret. Rain gag

outside the Capulin Canyon boundaries had such

minimal correlation to summer peak flows that the d

are of little or no use in interpreting rainfall/peak-fl

relations.

The peak runoff recorded at the three crest-st

gages in Capulin Canyon was most highly correlate

the 60-minute maximum rainfall, particularly at the

WRD-1 rain gage. The maximum 60-minute rainfa

for the 27 months of data collection at this rain gag

and the WRD-2 rain gage for all storms with greate

than 0.25 inch of rain is shown in figure 14.

Next Generation Radar Rainfall

Next Generation Radar (Nexrad) rainfall ima

in and near Bandelier National Monument recorded 

the Albuquerque area NWS site (on the west mesa 

Albuquerque; not shown on map) were used to estim

total rainfall and maximum rainfall intensity for th

first large storm (June 26, 1996) after the wildfire (

15). Maximum 24-hour rainfall for this storm was 2

inches, whereas the 60-minute maximum rainfall w

about 1.75 inches. The NWS-2 rain gage recorded 1

inches of rain for this storm (National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration, 1996a,b); Nexrad

estimated about 1.52 inches at this rain gage.
Figure 10. Maximum observed peak flow in relation to drainage area for physiographic region 6

 in Capulin Canyon (modified from Waltemeyer, 1996). See figure 2 for location of

 crest-stage gages.

1,000

100

0.01 0.1 1.0 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000

10,000

100,000

1,000,000

ENVELOPE CURVE FOR CENTRAL MOUNTAIN VALLEY REGION

 (physiographic region 6)

MAXIMUM FLOW

ENVELOPE CURVE FOR PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGION 14 

 (from Crippen and Bue, 1977)

M

A

XIM

U

M

OBSER

VED PEA

K FLO

W,

IN

C

UBIC FEET PER

SEC

O

N

D

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES

Capulin Canyon crest-stage gages

EXPLANATION

Capulin Canyon above Ranger Cabin (08313365)

Capulin Canyon below Ranger Cabin (08313366)

Capulin Canyon below Painted Cave (08313368)

100,000

10,000

1,000

100

10

1

1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1993 1994 1995

S

U

SPEN

DED-SEDIMEN

T

C

O

N

CEN

T

R

ATIO

N,

IN

MILLIG

R

A

M

S PER LITER

Figure 11. Suspended-sediment concentrations in samples collected 

 in Rito de los Frijoles Canyon by calendar year.

Median value

75th percentile

25th percentile

Outlier data value less 

than or equal to 3 times

the interquartile range 

outside the quartile

Data value less than or 

equal to 1.5 times the

interquartile range 

outside the quartile

Data value more than 

or equal to 1.5 times 

the interquartile range 

outside the quartile

Interquartile range

EXPLANATION

196

10

4

6

18 21

12

12

1,340

20
Figure 12. Monthly precipitation at the Capulin Canyon Upper Basin rain gage, 1996-98, 

 compared with average monthly precipitation at the NWS Los Alamos National

 Laboratory rain gage, 1931-76 ( National Weather Service data). See figure 2 

 for location of rain gages.

PRECIPITATION ABOVE AVERAGE

PRECIPITATION BELOW AVERAGE

CAPULIN CANYON UPPER BASIN RAIN GAGE (WRD-1)

LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY (LANL)

 RAIN GAGE (NWS-2)

EXPLANATION

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

RAINFALL, IN INCHES

1996 1997 1998

J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O

MISSING DATA

Figure 13. Monthly precipitation at the Capulin Canyon Ranger Cabin rain gage, 1996-98, compared

 with average monthly precipitation at the NWS Bandelier National Monument rain

 gage, 1931-76 (National Weather Service data). See figure 2 for location of rain gages.

CAPULIN CANYON AT RANGER CABIN

 MONTHLY PRECIPITATION (WRD-2)

 (1996-98)

BANDELIER HEADQUARTERS RAIN GAGE 

 (NWS-1) AVERAGE MONTHLY PRECIPITATION

 (1931-76)

PRECIPITATION ABOVE AVERAGE

PRECIPITATION BELOW AVERAGE

EXPLANATION

RAINFALL, IN INCHES

1998

0

1

2

3

4

MISSING DATA

1996 1997

J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O

21
22

Table 6. Summary of monthly precipitation data collected at rain gages in and near

 Capulin Canyon, 1996-98

[Rainfall in inches. NWS, National Weather Service; LANL, Los Alamos National Laboratory; see

figure 2 for location of rain gages; --, no data]

Date

(month

and year)

Bandelier

Park

Headquarters

average

(NWS-1)

LANL

average

(NWS-2)

Capulin

Canyon

at

Ranger

Cabin

(WRD-2)

Capulin

Canyon

Upper

Basin

(WRD-1)

Dome

Fire

Tower

(WRD-3) GD-1 GD-2

08-1996 2.76 3.78 2.01 3.47 -- -- --

09-1996 1.73 2.00 1.76 4.58 -- 1.97 --

10-1996 1.41 1.46 4.08 4.72 -- 4.32 4.32

11-1996 .74 .93 .37 .95 0.22 .27 --

12-1996 .95 .95 -- .54 -- .23 --

01-1997 .79 .83 -- 2.05 .26 .19 --

02-1997 .78 .74 -- 1.27 .31 .51 --

03-1997 .91 1.07 .82 .97 .74 1.08 .59

04-1997 .76 .96 2.35 2.98 1.12 2.18 2.20

05-1997 1.18 1.35 -- 1.65 .80 1.37 1.52

06-1997 1.04 1.37 -- 2.60 2.14 3.01 3.06

07-1997 2.46 2.96 1.56 3.59 1.31 -- 1.67

08-1997 2.76 3.78 3.89 3.88 4.80 4.92 --

09-1997 1.73 2.00 -- 5.85 5.03 4.57 --

10-1997 1.41 1.46 -- .87 -- .70 --

11-1997 .74 .93 2.69 1.70 -- 1.46 --

12-1997 .95 .95 1.02 1.98 -- .08 --

01-1998 .79 .83 .69 .26 -- .11 --

02-1998 .78 .74 .39 .84 -- .30 --

03-1998 .91 1.07 1.65 2.48 -- 1.52 --

04-1998 .76 .96 .81 1.25 -- .55 --

05-1998 1.18 1.35 .00 .06 -- .01 --

06-1998 1.04 1.37 .42 .33 -- .43 --

07-1998 2.46 2.96 2.92 4.10 4.44 2.86 --

08-1998 2.76 3.78 3.81 3.59 3.37 3.41 --

09-1998 1.73 2.00 .79 .96 .74 .70 --

10-1998 1.41 1.46 3.92 4.74 2.60 4.22 --

Average precipitation Monthly precipitation
23

Table 7. Maximum rainfall recorded in Capulin Canyon, 1996-98

[Rainfall in inches. <, less than; --, no data]

Rainfall duration 1996 1997 1998

Capulin Canyon Upper Basin rain gage (WRD-1)

15 minute 0.72 10 year

7-27-96

0.78 10 year

8-6-97

0.60 5 year

8-11-98

30 minute .75 2 year

7-27-96

.91 5 year

8-6-97

1.05 10 year

8-11-98

60 minute 1.43 25 year

9-2-96

.94 2 year

8-6-97

1.09 5 year

8-11-98

180 minute 2.22 25 year

9-2-96

1.13 2 year

9-7-97

1.09 2 year

8-11-98

1,440 minute

(24 hour)

2.89

9-2-96

1.30

9-7-97

1.19

8-11-98

Capulin Canyon at Ranger Cabin rain gage (WRD-2)

15 minute 0.33 <2 year

7-31-96

0.49 2 year

8-2-97

0.51 2 year

8-13-98

30 minute .44 <2 year

7-31-96

.60 2 year

8-2-97

.72 2 year

8-13-98

60 minute .81 2 year

7-31-96

.68 <2 year

8-2-97

.89 2 year

8-13-98

180 minute 1.07 2 year

7-31-96

.68 <2 year

8-2-97

.96 2 year

8-13-98

1,440 minute

(24 hour)

1.53

7-31-96

.69

8-2-97

1.33

10-31-98

Dome Fire Tower rain gage (WRD-3)

15 minute -- -- 0.79 10 year

8-6-97

0.69 5 year

7-27-98

30 minute -- -- .90 5 year

8-6-97

1.03 10 year

7-27-98

60 minute -- -- .91 2 year

8-6-97

1.25 10 year

7-27-98

180 minute -- -- 1.12 2 year

9-7-97

1.41 5 year

7-27-98

1,440 minute

(24 hour)

-- -- 1.12

9-7-97

1.48

7-27-98
24

Nexrad-estimated rainfall for the West Mesa is

fairly close to the measured amount. Nexrad represents

spatially distributed rainfall cells; the three Capulin

Canyon rain gages represent point rainfall. For this

reason, the intensity of the June 26, 1996, storm was

probably less than the 1.43-inch, 60-minute rainfall

that was recorded at WRD-1 on September 2, 1996

(table 7). The estimated 60-minute maximum rainfall

of about 1.35 inches would translate into the 2,820-,

2,700-, and 3,630-ft3/s peak flows recorded in Capulin

Canyon for June 26, 1996.

Runoff—Historical Data

Continuous streamflow data recorded at the

Frijoles Canyon gaging station after the La Mesa

wildfire in 1977 shows the effects of the wildfire on the

watershed. Peak flows increased as well as the

magnitude and frequency of larger peak flows. Peak

flow in Frijoles Canyon increased from a maximum of

19 ft3/s for 6 years of record (1964-69) prior to the La

Mesa wildfire to 3,030 ft3

/s in July 1978, the second

summer season and about 1 year after the fire (table 3).

Two years after the wildfire, peak flows were less than

354 ft3/s. Flood magnitudes decreased substantially

from July 1977 to June 1979. Even after 197

however, plant evapotranspiration and interc

rainfall by vegetation were still less than duri

conditions, which effectively doubled the ma

post-fire mean annual flows. In the 22 years 

La Mesa wildfire, flood magnitudes have no

completely returned to pre-fire magnitudes.

As discussed previously, a particular s

affect only a small part of a watershed becau

for most summer thunderstorms is localized

five peak flows recorded from 1963 to 1998 

Canyon showed no correlation to daily rainf

collected from four NWS rain gages in the su

Jemez Mountains (fig. 2). Seventeen peak fl

Frijoles Canyon, however, did significantly 

(0.875) to rainfall collected at the NWS-1 ra

which was located in Frijoles Canyon in Ba

National Monument when the gaging station 

operation from 1964 to 1969. Again, rainfal

useful for peak-flow estimation only if the d

collected in the same canyon that recorded t

data. For example, data collected from a rain 

located in the next canyon are of little or no 

estimating the magnitude or the date of the p
WHITE ROCK

COCHITI

LOS

ALAMOS

ESPAÑOLA

BANDELIER

NATIONAL

MONUMENT

BOUNDARY

Figure 15. Nexrad radar 1-hour rainfall intensity for storm of June 26, 1996 (from the National Weather Serv

106° 45 ́ 106° 30 ́ 106° 15 ́

35°

45 ́

36°

00 ́ C e re k

la a

C r

Santa

Caldera

i R o

d

G

n

e

ra

B and

l

Cre ke

JemezSprings

e

r

J

mez R vi

e

JEMEZ RESERVATION

o e

Rit d

x

apu i

C

l n

C na yon

Y

T

N

U

O

CLA

V

O

D

N

A

S

Y

T

N

U

O

C EF AT

N

A

S

RIO ARRIBA COUNTY

SANDOVAL COUNTY

0

0

l s

j e ol

o

Fri

s

25
26

This inability to estimate is a result of localized

thunderstorms and long, narrow canyons in which

storm runoff is divided between two or more canyons.

Annual peak flow from 1962 to 1998 at the Bland

Canyon crest-stage gage was not correlated to rainfall

data collected at any surrounding rain gages.

A paleoflood survey of Capulin Canyon in July

1996 suggests that large peak flows occurred in the

past. Depending on the elevation of the base level of the

flood channel at the time of the flood, this analysis

estimated a paleoflood magnitude of 9,000 to 10,500

ft3/s for Capulin Canyon (Joseph P. Capesius and

Robert D. Jarrett, U.S. Geological Survey, written

commun., 1996). This estimation closely agrees with

the maximum observed flood for a watershed of this

drainage area in physiographic region 6 in Waltemeyer

(1996). The analysis also indicates that peak flows of

significantly greater magnitude occurred in Capulin

Canyon prior to 1996; whether these large peak flows

were a result of historical wildfires or other

catastrophic events is unknown.

The number of peak flows in Frijoles Canyon

greater than a pre-fire peak flow of 19 ft3

/s was 15 in

1977, 9 in 1978, and 5 in 1979 (fig. 16; table 

these recorded peak flows, seven were greate

ft3/s in 1977 and again in 1978 and three we

than 100 ft3/s in 1979 (table 3). Similar to pre

flows, most of the larger peak flows occurre

July, August, and September; however, four p

greater than 100 ft3/s occurred in November 

were associated with remnants of a Gulf of M

hurricane. The number of larger than norma

flows seems to be most pronounced for 3 yea

fire.

Runoff—Current Data

Peak-flow data recorded in 1996 at th

Capulin Canyon crest-stage gages (fig. 2; tab

more than a 100-fold increase in annual pea

happened in Frijoles Canyon after the La Me

in 1977, the magnitude and frequency of flo

increased in Capulin Canyon during the pos

period and did not stabilize until watershed 

was reestablished.

Figure 16. Number of peak flows greater than 19 cubic feet per second in 

 Rito de los Frijoles by calendar year, 1977-98.

0

5

10

1965 70 75 80 85 90 1995

15

NUMBER OF PEAK FLOWS

GREATER THAN 20 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

CALENDAR YEAR
27

On June 26, 1996, less than 2 months after the

Dome wildfire, the first large flood occurred in Capulin

Canyon. A step-backwater analysis and slope-area of

flood magnitude determined peak flows of 2,820 ft3/s at

the Capulin Canyon above Ranger Cabin, 2,700 ft3/s at

the Capulin Canyon below Ranger Cabin, and 3,630

ft3/s at Capulin Canyon below Painted Cave crest-stage

gages. Large peak flows continued to occur during July,

August, and September 1996. Peak flows in Capulin

Canyon during the second summer of monitoring

(1997) substantially decreased in comparison with

peak flows in 1996. The peak flood stages and

associated peak flows recorded by the three crest-stage

gages for 1996-98 and by the Capulin Canyon gaging

station for 1997-98 are listed in table 8.

The peak flow recorded at the Capulin Canyon

above Ranger Cabin crest-stage gage between August

22 and September 30, 1996 (3,020 ft3

/s), was larger

than the peak recorded June 26 (2,820 ft3/s) at this site

(table 8). The larger peak flow was probably a result of

the September 2, 1996, storm that was localized in the

upper part of Capulin Canyon. The flow was attenuated

by extreme channel roughness, debris, and fallen trees,

which substantially reduced the peak at the two

downstream crest-stage gages. The June 26, 1996, peak

flow also decreased from 2,820 ft3/s at Capulin Canyon

above Ranger Cabin to 2,700 ft3

/s at Capulin Canyon

below Ranger Cabin because of the decrease in channel

slope and the channel roughness. During the June 26,

1996, flood a tributary channel near the ranger cabin

had no substantial runoff, indicating that this storm was

centered near the upper part of the canyon. The

increase in flow from 2,700 ft3

/s to 3,630 ft3/s suggests

that the upper parts of two smaller tributary watersheds

in the lower part of Capulin Canyon also had

substantial rainfall that supplemented the main channel

flow and resulted in the increased peak. Rainfall data

were not collected for the first large flood in June 1996.

The Frijoles Canyon gaging station recorded a peak

less than 1.5 ft3

/s on June 26, 1996; an LANL gaging

station in nearby Ancho Canyon recorded no flow

(Shaull and others, 1996b); and the Bland Canyon

crest-stage gage recorded a peak flow less than the

annual peak flow of 175 ft3

/s in 1996. The differences

in peak flows among these local drainages demonstrate

the areal variation of thunderstorms over parallel

watersheds.

At all four crest-stage gages in Capulin, 1997

peak flows decreased to less than 400 ft3

/s (table 8)

despite some fairly large rainfalls within the watershed.

The reestablishment of vegetation in the Capulin

Canyon watershed during the first year after the Do

wildfire is probably responsible for much of the

decrease in peak flow. In 1997, Capulin Canyon ab

Ranger Cabin had an annual peak of 310 ft3

/s (Orti

and others, 1998), about 20 times the average annu

peak flow but still a substantial decrease from the 3,0

ft3/s in 1996 (table 7). Capulin Canyon below Rang

Cabin had no high-water marks that year, which

confirmed that the annual flood peak at this site wa

less than 300 ft3/s. A high-water mark at Capulin

Canyon below Painted Cave indicated an annual pe

flow of 380 ft3/s, which is about 10 percent of the p

flow of the 1996 monitoring season.

The gaging station at Ranger Cabin provided 

opportunity to remotely monitor the rainfall and pe

runoff subsequent to June 18, 1997, using a satellit

link. A peak flow of 70 ft3/s was recorded on Augus

90 ft3/s on August 22; 270 ft3

/s on September 3; and 

ft3

/s on September 7, 1997. Three of these dates

(August 6 and September 3 and 7) coincided with t

maximum rainfall for the 1-hour-duration rainfalls

recorded at the upper basin rain gage. The rain gag

the ranger cabin did not record high-intensity rainf

on August 22, 1997; however, rain gages GD-1 and

GD-2 each recorded about one-half inch of rainfall 

3 successive days, August 21-23, 1997 (William El

written commun., 1998). Even though the ranger ca

rainfall gage did not record high-intensity rainfall f

that period, the high-water mark for the 1977 calen

year (7.07 feet), based on a debris line, closely agr

with the peak stage marks on the recorder (7.20 fee

The annual maximum peak flow at the ranger cabin 

was less than 300 ft3/s, and the data for Capulin

Canyon below Ranger Cabin crest-stage gage

corroborated this flow. The smallest peak flow that 

gaging station at the ranger cabin could detect was 

ft3/s on June 18, 1997, at the time of installation. T

occurred because the orifice needed to be mounted

above the channel bottom in such a way to protect 

from heavy debris during flow events. Minimum

recordable flow increased to about 100 ft3

/s after th

channel cross section was downcut after summer

stormflow. The Frijoles Canyon gaging station

recorded an annual peak flow of 16.0 ft3

/s on Augu

17, 1997, and the Bland Canyon crest-stage gage h

an annual peak flow of 139 ft3

/s on April 24, 1997,

further demonstrating the areal variation in rainfall

(Ortiz and others, 1998) and resultant annual maxim

peak flow.
28

Table 8. Peak flood-stage data and associated peak flows in Capulin Canyon,

 1996-98

Crest-stage gage

and partial-record

gaging station Period of record

Stage recorded

(feet)

Associated

peak flow (ft3/s)

Capulin Canyon

above Ranger

Cabin (08313365)

06-26-1996 14.69

15.24

2,820

07-10-1996 13.33 1,440

07-11-1996 to

07-18-1996

12.20 630

07-18-1996 to

08-22-1996

<11.21 <250

08-22-1996 to

09-30-1996

13.66

12.28

*3,020

*1,640

09-30-1996 to

12-20-1996

<11.21 *<860

12-20-1996 to

05-27-1997

<9.85 <300

05-27-1996 to

08-26-1997

8.96 160

08-26-1997 to

10-01-1997

9.52 310

10-01-1997 to

11-20-1998

8.30 100

Capulin Canyon at

Ranger Cabin

 (083133655)

08-06-1997 6.56 70

08-22-1997 6.59 90

09-03-1997 7.20 270

09-07-1997 6.56 70

10-01-1997 to

07-01-1998

<6.56 <70

07-01-1998 to

08-19-1998

6.075 100

08-19-1998 to

11-20-1998

<6.56 <70

[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; <, less than; * indicates the maximum rainfall for the same period of

record that peak flow was recorded]
29

*Peak flow estimated from rating 2, which was created after partial resurvey on 09-30-1996 and 12-20-1996

(monumented section only) for the upper two sites and on 10-07-1996 for the lower site.

Capulin Canyon

below Ranger

Cabin (08313366)

06-26-1996 8.80

9.30

2,700

07-10-1996 to

07-18-1996

6.614 740

07-18-1996 to

08-22-1996

4.625 250

08-22-1996 to

09-30-1996

7.080 *1,110

09-30-1996 to

12-20-1996

<4.625 *<350

12-20-1996 to

05-27-1997

<4.625 <300

05-27-1997 to

07-29-1997

<4.625 <300

07-29-1997 to

10-01-1997

<4.625 <300

Capulin Canyon

below Painted Cave

(08313368)

06-26-1996 7.80

7.90

3,630

07-09-1996 to

07-18-1996

5.34 540

07-18-1996 to

08-22-1996

<4.46 <310

08-22-1996 to

10-07-1996

5.24 *860

10-08-1996 to

12-20-1996

-- --

10-07-1996 to

10-09-1997

4.21 380

10-09-1997 to

11-20-1998

2.29 150

Table 8. Peak flood-stage data and associated peak flows in Capulin Canyon,

 1996-98--Concluded

Crest-stage gage

and partial-record

gaging station Period of record

Stage recorded

(feet)

Associated

peak flow (ft3

/s)
30

By 1998, annual peak flow in Capulin Canyon

had decreased to less than 160 ft3/s (fig. 17). The peak

flow in relation to the maximum 60-minute rainfall

intensity is shown in figure 18. Although rainfall is

only from the upper basin rain gage, peak flows

substantially decreased from storms of similar intensity

as the watershed recovered from 1996 to 1998.

Annual peak flows for Frijoles Canyon after the

1977 La Mesa wildfire and for Capulin Canyon after

the 1996 Dome wildfire were larger in magnitude and

frequency for about 30 months after the fire (fig. 19).

The magnitude of peak flows for both canyons, in

comparison to the number of years before and after the

date of the wildfires, is shown in figure 20. The

magnitude of large stormflows increased dramatically

after the wildfire; peak flows at the most downstream

gage in each of these two watersheds increased to about

160 times the maximum-recorded flood prior to the

fire. As vegetation reestablished itself during the

second year, the annual maximum peak flow was

reduced to about 10 to 15 times the pre-fire annual

maximum peak flow. During the third year, maximum

annual peak flows were reduced to about three to five

times the pre-fire maximum peak flow. Annual peak

flows in response to the 1977 La Mesa and 1996 Dome

wildfires appear quite similar.

Maximum flood magnitudes plotted against

drainage area for regions 5 and 6 (Waltemeyer, 1996)

are shown in figure 21. The maximum post-fire floods

for Frijoles and the three Capulin crest-stage gages are

also plotted for comparison. Even though maximum

post-fire floods in these two canyons are several orders

of magnitude larger than pre-fire flows, they 

appear to be larger than what previously has 

measured for similar drainage areas in these 

regions. When these large floods occur in w

that lack effective vegetative cover, the size o

for a given drainage area is more a function 

maximum rainfall intensity. Whether any of 

maximum floods listed in Waltemeyer (1996

to post-fire watershed conditions is unknown

Suspended Sediment

Suspended-sediment concentrations in 

collected after the 1977 La Mesa wildfire in 

discharge are shown in figure 22. The annua

distribution of suspended-sediment concentr

represented by the boxplots in figure 10. Me

suspended-sediment concentrations were ab

mg/L in samples collected in 1977 compare

mg/L in samples collected in 1993-95 (conc

in 1977 samples were about 80 times those i

samples). The substantial increase in dischar

year after a wildfire and the gradual decreas

discharge for about 3 years after the fire caus

response in suspended-sediment concentrati

suspended-sediment samples collected in 19

averaged about 10 times the concentrations i

collected in 1980 and 1981. This increase in

concentrations in the 16 to 18 years after the 

from the concentrations 3 and 4 years after t

probably due to the channel returning to a p

sediment-supply equilibrium.

Table 9. Regression equations relating suspended-sediment load to flow for Rito de los Frijoles 

1977 and 1993-95

[S, standard error, Adj R2, adjusted regression; Q, range of flow; <, less than or equal to]

Sampling

period Regression equation

1977 Instantaneous suspended-sediment load = 0.597 Q 2.11 for suspendedsediment samples

S = 0.345 Adj R2 = 95.8 0.70 < Q < 433.0

1993-95 Instantaneous suspended-sediment load = 0.041 Q 1.12 for suspendedsediment samples

S = 0.204 Adj R2 = 75.6 0.26 < Q < 8.40
Figure 17. Annual peak flow for Capulin Canyon in Bandelier National Monument.

 See figure 2 for location of stations.

A

N

N

U

AL PEA

K FLO

W,

IN

C

UBIC FEET PER

SEC

O

N

D

WATER YEAR

CAPULIN CANYON AT RANGER CABIN (083133655)

CAPULIN CANYON ABOVE RANGER CABIN (08313365)

CAPULIN CANYON BELOW PAINTED CAVE (08313368)

1985 1990 1995 1998

1.0

2,500

10

100

1,000

EXPLANATION

Figure 18. Peak flows at Capulin Canyon above Ranger Cabin (08313365)

 compared to maximum 60-minute rainfall recorded at Capulin

 Canyon Upper Basin rain gage (WRD-1), Bandelier National

 Monument, 1996-98. See figure 2 for location of rain gage.

+

+

X

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5

100

1,000

PEA

K FLO

W,

IN

C

U

BIC FEET PER

SEC

O

N

D

MAXIMUM 60-MINUTE RAINFALL, IN INCHES

10-4-1996

9-2-1996

9-3-1997

8-6-1997

8-11-1998

31
Figure 19. Annual peak flows in Frijoles Canyon and Capulin Canyon. Water year is from 

 October 1 to September 30 of the next calendar year. See figure 2 for location 

 of stations.

CAPULIN CANYON, 1966 Dome wildfire in Capulin Canyon,

 Capulin Canyon at Ranger Cabin streamflow-gaging station (083133655)

FRIJOLES CANYON, 1977 La Mesa wildfire in Frijoles Canyon, Rito de los Frijoles 

in Bandelier National Monument streamflow-gaging station (08313350)

EXPLANATION

A

N

N

U

AL P

E

A

K FLO

W,

IN

C

U

BIC FE

E

T

P

E

R

S

E

C

O

N

D

WATER YEAR

1960

1.0

10

100

1,000

65 1970 75 85 95

1977

LA MESA FIRE

1996

DOME

FIRE

1980 1990 2000

1,000

100

10

1.0

P

E

A

K FLO

W, IN

C

U

BIC FE

E

T

P

E

R

S

E

C

O

N

D

Figure 20. Peak flows in Frijoles Canyon after the 1977 La Mesa wildfire and

 in Capulin Canyon after the 1996 Dome wildfire.

-10 0 10 20

Frijoles Canyon

Capulin Canyon

YEARS FROM FIRE DATE

32
Figure 21. Maximum post-fire flood magnitudes for Frijoles and Capulin Canyons and flood 

 magnitudes for physiographic regions 5 and 6 in New Mexico compared to 

 drainage area (data for regions 5 and 6 from Waltemeyer, 1996). See figure 2 for

 location of gaging stations and crest-stage gages and figure 8 for location of

 physiographic regions 5 and 6.

DRAINAGE AREA , IN SQUARE MILES

M

A

XIM

U

M

P

O

S

T-FIR

E FLO

O

D

M

A

G

NIT

U

D

E,

IN

C

U

BIC FE

E

T

P

E

R

S

E

C

O

N

D

10

0.1 1.0 10

100

100

1,000

1,000

10,000

10,000

100,000

1,000,000

PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGION 5

PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGION 6

MAXIMUM FLOWS FOR FRIJOLES CANYON

MAXIMUM FLOWS FOR CAPULIN CANYON

*

*

*

*

*

*

08313365

083133655

08313368

08313350

S

U

SPEN

DED-SEDIMEN

T

C

O

N

CEN

T

R

ATIO

N,

IN

MILLIG

R

A

M

S PER LITER

STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

100,000

0.1 1.0

1.0

10

10

100

100

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1993

1994

1995

1,000

1,000

10,000

Figure 22. Instantaneous suspended-sediment concentration compared to flow

 in Rito de los Frijoles, 1977-95, after the 1977 La Mesa wildfire.

EXPLANATION

33
34

Suspended-sediment load in relation to

discharge is shown in figures 23 and 24. The regression

equations determined for the 1977 sampling year and

for the 1993-95 La Mesa post-fire recovery period in

Frijoles Canyon are listed in table 9. The relation

between suspended-sediment load and discharge was

used with mean daily discharge to calculate annual

suspended-sediment load. Using these regression

equations, 20 tons per year of suspended sediment was

transported past the Frijoles Canyon gaging station

during the post-fire recovery period in 1993-95. The

first year after the wildfire, about 4,400 tons of

suspended sediment were transported past the Frijoles

Canyon gaging station by the increased magnitude and

frequency of flows. Thus, the first year after the

wildfire, sediment transport was about 220 times

annual suspended-sediment load for a recovered

watershed.

Channel Cross Sections and Stream Gradient

Because of the increased magnitude, frequency,

and duration of flow and the resultant substantial

increase in suspended-sediment loads during the 1996

summer months, the main flow channel of Capulin

Creek in Capulin Canyon adjusted to the increase in

runoff by increasing in size both laterally and by

downcutting. The mean channel width provides a better

estimate of mean annual flow and floods of all

recurrence intervals than does drainage area, mean

channel slope, and precipitation as used in the

Waltemeyer (1996) regression equations (Scott and

Kunkler, 1976).

Cross sections at the three crest-stage gages and

the partial-record gage were resurveyed six times

during the 2 1/2-year study. The final survey

measurements of the cross sections were superimposed

over the initial survey measurements (figs. 25-27). The

differences between measurements in the cross

sections were then translated upstream and

downstream from the crest-stage gage, and the stagedischarge ratings were recalculated for each site.

The Capulin Canyon above Ranger Cabin cross

section was surveyed just after the initial flood on July

11, 1996. A resurvey on August 19, 1998, is plotted at

the same scale in figure 25 to observe channel changes

over about a 2-year period. The cross sections at

Capulin Canyon below Ranger Cabin are plotted in

figure 26 for the July 10, 1996, and November 20,

1998, surveys, detailing changes for the duration of the

study. Initial cross sections on July 9, 1996, at Capulin

Canyon below Painted Cave and a resurvey on

November 20, 1998, are plotted in figure 27 showing

changes over the study period. For all three c

gage cross sections, the water level of the in

fire (June 26, 1996) flood is shown.

 The changes in stream channel cross-

surveys after the Dome wildfire, between 19

1997 at the three crest-stage gages, were a g

indicator of initial recovery in the Capulin w

At Capulin Canyon above Ranger Cabin, the 

channel continued to downcut in 1997, but a

reduced rate as compared immediately after 

wildfire in 1996 (fig. 24). Measurements of th

in 1997 at Capulin Canyon below Ranger Cab

change enough to warrant a recalculation of 

from the initial survey in 1996. The stream c

Capulin Canyon below Painted Cave initiall

and then began to aggrade as sediment trans

from upstream settled out in channel reaches 

slope and discharge lessened. The decrease 

downcutting in the upper reach and the depo

the lower reach in 1997 are indicative of a s

channel that is readjusting to smaller magni

less frequent peak flows.

Downcutting of the channel at Capuli

at Ranger Cabin was also observed. An accu

of sediment from June to July 1996 had redu

channel capacity at Capulin Canyon at Rang

and the first large flows in August 1996 trans

accumulated sediment downstream. The cha

original channel profile at the gaging station 

in figure 28.

As the Capulin Canyon peak flows red

in magnitude and frequency in response to v

recovery, the stream channels have slowly b

recover as well. The channel at the most dow

gage, which has the shallowest initial valley 

showing the first signs of aggradation.

SUMMARY

In June of 1977, the La Mesa wildfire 

15,270 acres in and around Frijoles Canyon 

Bandelier National Monument and the adjac

Fe National Forest, New Mexico. The Dome 

April of 1996 in Bandelier National Monum

16,516 acres in Capulin Canyon and the sur

Dome Wilderness area. Both canyons are cha

by extensive archeological resources that co

affected by increased runoff and accelerated 

sedimentation after a wildfire. The USGS in

cooperation with the NPS monitored the wil

effects on streamflow in both canyons.
Figure 23. Instantaneous suspended-sediment load compared to

 flow for 1977, Rito de los Frijoles.

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+ +

+

+

+

+ +

+

+

+

+

+ +

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+ +

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

2.11

Sediment load = 0.597Q

FLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

S

U

S

P

E

N

D

E

D-S

E

DIM

E

N

T LO

A

D,

IN

T

O

N

S

P

E

R

D

AY

1

1.0

0.1

0.01

10

10

100

100

1,000

1,000

10,000

100,000

1,000,000

Figure 24. Instantaneous suspended-sediment load compared to

 flow for 1993-95, Rito de los Frijoles.

1.12

Sediment load = 0.041Q

S

U

S

P

E

N

D

E

D-S

E

DIM

E

N

T LO

A

D,

IN

T

O

N

S

P

E

R

D

AY

FLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

1 10

1.00

0.10

0.01

35

0.005

0.2
Figure 25. Changes in monumented cross section at Capulin Canyon above Ranger Cabin

 crest-stage gage (08313365), July 11, 1996, to August 19, 1998. See

 figure 2 for location of gage.

0 50 100

6,765

6,760

6,755

6,750

DISTANCE, IN FEET

ELE

V

ATIO

N, IN FE

E

T

A

B

O

V

E

S

E

A LE

V

EL

150

WATER LEVEL 6-26-1996 FLOOD

INITIAL CROSS-SECTION SURVEY 7-11-1996

FINAL SURVEY 8-19-1998

0 50 100

DISTANCE, IN FEET

ELE

V

ATIO

N, IN FE

E

T

A

B

O

V

E

S

E

A LE

V

EL

6,170

6,175

6,180

6,185

Figure 26. Changes in monumented cross section at Capulin Canyon below Ranger Cabin

 crest-stage gage (08313366), July 10, 1996, to November 20, 1998. See

 figure 2 for location of gage.

WATER LEVEL 6-26-1996 FLOOD

INITIAL CROSS-SECTION SURVEY 7-10-1996

FINAL SURVEY 11-20-1998

36
DISTANCE, IN FEET

WATER LEVEL 6-26-1996 FLOOD

ELEV

ATIO

N, IN FEET

ABO

VE SEA LEVEL

0 100

5,670

5,675

5,680

5,685

200 300 400

INITIAL CROSS-SECTION SURVEY 7-09-1996

FINAL SURVEY 11-20-1998

Figure 27. Changes in monumented cross section at Capulin Canyon below Painted Cave

 crest-stage gage (08313368), July 9, 1996, to November 20, 1998. See

 figure 2 for location of gage.

6,750

6,740

0 100 200 300

UPSTREAM DISTANCE, IN FEET

6,730

May 1999 profile

Partial-record gage

NPS gage

Original profile

surveyed July 1996

1

2

3

4

5

6

+

+

+

+

+

+

Figure 28. Stream profile and valley slope at partial-record gage Capulin Canyon

 at Ranger Cabin (083133655). See figure 2 for location of station.

ELE

V

ATIO

N, IN FE

E

T

A

B

O

V

E

S

E

A LE

V

EL

37
38

A continuous-record gaging station was operated

by the USGS in Frijoles Canyon from July 1963 to

September 1969 and again from July 1977 until

September 1982. Since 1983, that gage has been

operated by several different agencies. The USGS

operated three crest-stage gages in Capulin Canyon

from July 1996 until November 1998. A partial-record

gage was installed in June 1997, which recorded peak

stages until November 1998 and transmitted that data

by satellite for flood documentation. The NPS operated

a streamflow-recording gage just upstream from the

site of the partial-record gage from 1985 until 1996.

This gage was destroyed by post-fire runoff events.

The magnitude of large stormflows increased

dramatically after the wildfire; peak flows at the most

downstream gage in each of these two watersheds

increased to about 160 times the maximum-recorded

flood prior to the fire. Maximum peak flow was 3,030

ft3/s at the Frijoles Canyon gage (drainage area equals

18.1 square miles) and 3,630 ft3

/s at the most

downstream crest-stage gage in Capulin Canyon

(drainage area equals 14.1 square miles). The pre-fire

maximum peak flow recorded at these two sites was 19

and an estimated 25 ft3

/s, respectively. As vegetation

reestablished itself in the second year, the annual

maximum peak flow was reduced to about 10 to 15

times the pre-fire annual maximum peak flow. During

the third year, maximum annual peak flows were

reduced to about three to five times the pre-fire

maximum peak flow. In the 22 years since the La Mesa

wildfire, flood magnitudes have not completely

returned to pre-fire magnitudes.

Post-fire flood magnitudes in Frijoles and

Capulin Canyons do not exceed the maximum floods

per drainage area for physiographic regions 5 and 6

(two of the northern flood regions of New Mexico).

This suggests that although post-fire flood magnitudes

can be much larger than normal flood magnitudes for a

given watershed, the Bandelier post-fire floods still do

not exceed maximum floods per drainage area envelope

curves for these regions.

The frequency of larger stormflows also

increased in response to the effects of the wildfires in

both canyons. In Frijoles Canyon, the number of peak

stormflows greater than the pre-fire maximum flow of

19 ft3/s is 15, 9, and 5 for the 3 post-fire runoff years

(1977-79). Again, the hydrologic effects of the wildfire

seem to be most pronounced for the 3 water years

following the fire. Likewise, larger stormflows were

more frequent in Capulin Canyon for the fir

after the 1996 wildfire.

Median suspended-sediment concentr

collected at Frijoles Canyon the year of the 

wildfire were about 80 times those collected 

watershed had stabilized in 1993-95. The an

calculated from a regression of load against fl

year after the wildfire was 220 times the annu

the post-fire recovery period.

To convey the increased frequency an

magnitude of average flows in Capulin Cany

stream channel in Capulin Canyon increased 

capacity by lateral widening and downcuttin

Capulin Canyon peak flows reduced both in m

and frequency in response to vegetative reco

stream channels have slowly begun to recov

The channel at the most downstream gage, w

the shallowest initial valley slope, is showin

signs of aggradation.

REFERENCES

Allen, C.D., ed., 1996 fire effects in southwester

Proceedings of the Second La Mesa Fire Sy

USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain For

Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Co

Crippen, J.R., and Bue, C.D., 1977, Maximum flo

the conterminous United States: U.S. Geolo

Survey Water-Supply Paper 1887, 52 p.

Dempster, G.R., 1981, Peak flow file, chapter 1, 

WATSTORE user’s guide: U.S. Geological 

Open-File Report 79-1336-1, v. 4, p. A-4, B

Foxx, T.S., ed., 1984, La Mesa Fire Symposium, L

National Laboratory, Los Alamos, N. Mex.

Fulford, J.M., 1994, Users guide to SAC, A com

program for computing discharge by slope 

method: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

360.

Miller, J.F., Frederick, R.H., and Tracey, R.J., 19

Precipitation-frequency atlas of the Western 

States, volume IV—New Mexico: National 

and Atmospheric Administration NOAA A

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrati

Climate data for New Mexico: v. 104, no. 0

June 1996.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrati

Climate data for New Mexico: v. 100, no. 0

September 1996.

Ortiz, David, Lange, Kathy, and Beal, Linda, 19

resources data, New Mexico, water year 19

Geological Survey Water-Data Report NM-
39

Scott, A.G., and Kunkler, J.L., 1976, Flood discharges of

streams in New Mexico as related to channel geometry:

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 76-414, 29 p.

Shaull, D.A., Alexander, M.R., and Reynolds, R.P., 1996a,

Surface water data at Los Alamos National Laboratory,

1995 water year: LA-13177-PR Progress Report,

August 1996.

Shaull, D.A., Alexander, M.R., Reynolds, R.P., and McLean,

C.T., 1996b, Surface water data at Los Alamos National

Laboratory, 1996 water year: LA-13234-PR Progress

Report, November 1996.

Shaull, D.A., Alexander, M.R., Reynolds, R.P., and McLean,

C.T., 1998, Surface water data at Los Alamos National

Laboratory, 1997 water year: Los Alamos National

Laboratory LA-13403-PR Progress Report, January

1998.

Shaull, D.A., Alexander, M.R., Reynolds, R.P., McLean,

C.T., and Romero, R.P., 1999, Surface water data at Los

Alamos National Laboratory, 1998 water year: Los

Alamos National Laboratory LA-13551-PR Progress

Report, February 1999.

Shearman, J.O., 1990, Users manual for WSPRO - A

computer model for water surface profile computations:

Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of

Transportation, Publication no. FHWA-IP-89-027,

September 1990.

United States Department of Interior, National Park Service,

Bandelier National Monument, 1996 Dome Fire,

Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation (BAER) Plan:

U. S. Department of the Interior, Baer Team, variously

paged.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1965-70, Water-resources data,

New Mexico, Part I, Surface water records, water years

1964-69: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Data Reports

(published annually).

———1978-83, Water-resources data, New Mexico, water

years 1977-82: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Data

Reports NM-77-1, NM-78-1, NM-79-1, NM-80-1,

NM-81-1, and NM-82-1 (published annually).

Waltemeyer, S.D., 1996, Analysis of the magnitude and

frequency of peak discharge and maximum observed

peak discharge in New Mexico: U.S. Geological Survey

Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4112, 79 p.