Original article
Estimating ground-water recharge
from streamflow records
Wei-Ping Chen Cheng-Haw Lee
Abstract The purpose of this paper is to estimate
ground-water recharge based on the investigation of
the balance between ground-water recharge and
discharge from streamflow hydrographs. Two
methods of hydrograph analysis are employed in a
case study of Cho-Shui River basin, Taiwan. The first
is the recession-curve-displacement method, which
assumes the linearity of the master recession curve
while the profile of the ground-water head
distribution is nearly stable. The second method is
the base-flow-record estimation, which uses a
relatively arbitrary procedure to estimate a
continuous record of ground-water discharge
(baseflow) under the streamflow hydrograph.
Through implementing these two methods, the
annual rates of ground-water recharge and
infiltration in the area of Cho-Shui River basin are
examined as our case study. Results showed that the
discharge calculated by the method of base-flow-
record estimation is about 16% average less than the
recharge calculated by the recession-curve-
displacement method in the mountain region.
Keywords Base-flow-record Cho-Shui River
Basin Hydrograph Ground-water recharge
Recession-curve-displacement
Introduction
Estimating ground-water recharge is an important issue in neous recharge method and a constant recharge method of
hydrogeologic studies. In most cases, recharge is estimated hydrographic analysis to estimate recharge.
Received: 26 August 2001 / Accepted: 26 November 2002
Published online: 1 March 2003
Springer-Verlag 2003
W.-P. Chen C.-H. Lee (&)
Department of Resources Engineering,
National Cheng Kung University, 701 Tainan, Taiwan
E-mail: leech@mail.ncku.edu.tw
Tel.: +886-6-2757575 ext. 62833
Fax: +886-6-2380421
by multiplying the magnitude of water-level fluctuations in
wells by the specific yield of the aquifer material, or by
applying the water budget model or by the water-balance
method. For instance, Lee and others (1999) and Chen and
others (1999) estimated ground-water recharge by adopting
the water-budget model combining the rainfall data and soil
parameters with the infiltration model. Simmons and Meyer
(2000) provided a simplified model for the transient water
budget of a shallow unsaturated zone to estimate ground-
water recharge and the flux of water that may transport a
dissolved contaminant into the ground-water. Finch (1998)
used a simple water-balance model to study effects of land-
surface parameters on ground-water recharge. Lee and
others (2000) also applied the water-balance method in
conjunction with an independent estimation of recharge
from a finite-difference simulation of ground-water levels.
With the purpose of inspecting recharge, estimation of the
ground-water component of streamflow has been a re-
search focus for more than a century. Following the work
of Boussinesq (1877), numerous studies (Bevans 1986;
Moore 1992; Rutledge 1992; Rutledge and Daniel 1994;
Mau and Winter 1997) have investigated the recession of
streamflow, particularly baseflow, and have estimated the
contribution of ground-water to streamflow. In some
cases, the value of baseflow is assumed to be equal to
ground-water recharge. The primary purpose of most
research is to determine the ground-water component of
stream-flow. The study by Moore (1992) was also con-
cerned with fractured rock terrane. Nevertheless, only a
handful of researchers, including Meyboom (1961),
Rorabaugh (1964) and Rutledge (1992), have focused on
ground-water recharge through analyzing the streamflow
data. Mau and Winter (1997) have provided an instanta-
Most of the research on ground-water recharge is based on
ground-water recession data with the implementation of a
one-dimensional model of flow from ground-water to a
stream (e.g., Barnes 1939; Rorabaugh 1964). Implementing
these models requires a set of rigid, simplified assump-
tions. For instance, that the stream fully penetrates the
aquifer, the porous media is isotropic, and the aquifer is
underlain by impermeable rock. However, many natural
ground-water systems do not meet these assumptions,
particularly on a local scale. Studies pertain mainly to
basins covering many square kilometers, where the local
variability of geological materials is more likely to be
DOI 10.1007/s00254-002-0753-2 Environmental Geology (2003) 44:257265 257
 Original article
averaged. Evaluating the application of the hydrograph
analysis to small areas is ignored because the field con-
ditions do not always meet the assumptions required by
the above models. Nevertheless, estimates of recharge are
commonly required for simplified areas, and the analysis
of streamflow hydrographs provides a means to make such
estimates.
Although several methods have been used to estimate
ground-water discharge and recharge from streamflow re-
cords, the most commonly used is the base-flow-record
estimation. This method estimates a continuous or daily
record of base flow under the streamflow hydrograph. In
other words, it requires an extended period of recording to
estimate the long-term ground-water discharge, in addition
by a variety of manual methods (Horton 1933; Barnes 1939;
Olmsted and Hely 1962; Dzhamalov 1973; Zektser 1977) or
automated methods (Rutledge 1992; Mau and Winter 1997)
in the research for the base-flow-record estimation.
An alternative to base-flow-record estimation is the re-
cession-curve-displacement method. This procedure is
often referred to as the Rorabaugh method, and consists of
a set of calculations that estimate the total recharge for
each streamflow peak (Rorabaugh 1964; Daniel 1976;
Rutledge and Daniel 1994). This method has been manu-
ally conducted by several researchers (e.g., Bevans 1986).
The pertinence of this method is its theoretical foundation
compared with the base-flow-record estimation as it
actually includes ground-water variables. However, the
disadvantage of the recession-curve-displacement method
is the heavy burden of calculations required to estimate
recharge for each recharge event.
To increase the speed of analysis and reduce the subjec-
tivity inherent in the manual analysis, Rutledge (1993)
proposed several computer programs, RECESS, RORA,
and PART, and additional newer versions (Rutledge 1998,
2000). The research in this paper was done using the
programs described above.
The purpose of this paper is (1) to investigate the balance
between ground-water recharge and discharge; (2) to
demonstrate the use of the two methods, the recession-
curve-displacement and base-flow-record estimation, to
analyze streamflow records; and (3) to evaluate the propri-
ety of estimating recharge based on the existing streamflow
data for an extensive data set at Cho-Shui River, Taiwan.
Methodology
The recession-curve-displacement method
Rutledge and Daniel (1994) used Rorabaughs method,
and improved and automated the recession-curve-dis-
placement method. The method is designed to analyze
flow systems driven by area diffuse-recharge where the
stream can be considered as the sink (discharge bound-
ary) of the ground-water flow system. Recharge is con-
sidered to be approximately concurrent with the peaks in
streamflow. This method is only applicable to streamflow
records of catchments where regulation and diversion of
flow are considered to be negligible. To express recharge
258 Environmental Geology (2003) 44:257265
in units of specific discharge (such as inches per year),
the area considered is assumed to be equal to the
drainage area of the surface-water system. The size of the
drainage area is determined to satisfy the condition that
the time base of the surface runoff exceeds the time in-
crement of the data. The upper limit for the size of the
drainage area may depend on the degree of uniformity
in the weather systems, or the accuracy of the time base
of the surface runoff.
The recession-curve-displacement method is based on the
upward shift in the recession curve of ground-water
discharge that occurs as a result of recharge. Only the
parts of the streamflow hydrograph that measure this
upward shift are considered to be total ground-water
discharge. Flow as total ground-water discharge (while
surface runoff is negligible) can be based on antecedent
recession. Linsley and others (1982) proposed the
empirical relation that
N A0:2 1
This relation gives the time base of surface runoff (N [d])
as a function of the drainage area (A) upstream from a
stream-flow-gaging station, in square miles. The time base
of surface runoff is the number of days after a peak in the
hydrograph of streamflow where the component of flow
attributed to surface runoff (including the bulk of inter-
flow) is considered negligible. An area of the streamflow
hydrograph, thus, may be considered as total ground-
water discharge, if it is preceded by a period of recession
equal to or greater than N.
Rorabaugh (1964) expressed ground-water discharge to a
stream as a complex function of time after recharge.
However, he finds that the function can be approximated
after critical time by a simpler equation.
0:2a2 S
Tc 2
TR
where Tc = critical time, a = the average distance from the
stream to the hydrologic divide, S = the storage coefficient,
and TR = transmissivity.
A formulation that gives the critical time as a function of
the recession index (K) can be obtained by combining
Eq. (3) with the following equation from Rorabaugh and
Simons (1966):
0:933a2 S
K 3
TR
By solving and substituting a2 S=TR into Eq. (3), Tc can
be expressed as:
Tc 0:2144K 4
Estimation of the mean ground-water recharge
The recession-curve-displacement method is based on the
upward shift in the streamflow recession curve that takes
place as a result of a recharge event. A recharge event
would increase the total potential ground-water discharge,
V. V is the total volume of water that drains from the
system if it is allowed for with infinite time without further
recharge. Meyboom (1961) expressed V in the following
 Original article

expression on the basis of a linear relation between the

logarithm of ground-water discharge and time:

Q
K
V 5
2:3026
where V is total potential ground-water discharge (L3), and
Q is ground-water discharge at the initial time (L3/T).
By combining the principle of superposition, Rorabaugh
(1964) and Rutledge and Daniel (1994) have shown that
the total potential ground-water discharge to the stream at
a critical time after a peak in streamflow is equal to about
one-half of the total volume of water that recharges the
ground-water system during the peak period. Thus, total
recharge can be calculated by the following equation:

2Q2  Q1 K
R 6
2:3026
where R is the total volume of recharge due to the event
(L3), and Q1 is the ground-water discharge at the critical
time extrapolated from the pre-event streamflow recession
(L3/T). Q2 is the ground-water discharge at the critical time
extrapolated from the post-event streamflow recession
(L3/T).
The recession-curve-displacement method, which consists
of the following steps, and most of them referred to by
Rutledge (1993), is shown in Fig. 1. The steps are:
1. The determination of the recession index (K) from the
hydrograph during prolonged periods of negligible
recharge.
2. The calculation of the critical time (Tc) from Eq. (4).
3. The use of the critical time to determine the time on the
hydrograph to which streamflow recessions will be
extrapolated.
4. The determination of the hypothetical ground-water Fig. 1
discharge to the stream at the critical time by Procedure for use of the recession-curve-displacement method to
extrapolation of the pre-event recession curve. estimate ground-water recharge in response to a recharge event (after
5. The determination of the hypothetical ground-water Rutledge (1993)
discharge to the stream at the critical time by
extrapolation of the post-event recession curve. continuous recession. Therefore, it illustrates that reces-
6. The application of Eq. (6). Steps 1 and 2 only need to be sion occurs during a period when direct surface runoff is
conducted once for a given streamflow gaging station ; greater than any such time period in the original data.
other steps are conducted once for each peak. In order to construct the MRC, it is assumed that the
Figure 1 shows an example for applying these procedures. non-linearity of the MRC is slight compared with the
The position of the post-event recession curve should be non-linearity of streamflow recession, the surface (direct)
identified soon after surface runoff ceases to minimize the runoff is significant, or that the profile of the ground-water
effects and the riparian evapotranspiration are minimized head distribution is not yet stable. Therefore, it is possible
to obtain the total ground-water recharge. to extract segments of continuous recession from the re-
cord and to select near-linear parts of each segment as
Determination of the recession slope an indicator of the MRC. For mathematical convenience,
To determinate the recession slope, the matching strip Rutledge (1993) assumed that the recession index (K),
chart method is employed for the assembly of the master which is the time per log cycle of streamflow recession,
recession curve (MRC; Nathan and McMahon 1990). The varies linearly with the logarithm of flow (log Q). Because
MRC represents the recession behaviors of streamflow the actual relationship may be more complex for a given
when all flows are from ground-water discharge, when no stream, it opens up an opportunity for analyzers to test the
ground-water recharge occurs, and when the profile of the validity of this assumption.
ground-water head distribution is nearly stable. The MRC Basic steps to determine the MRC are suggested by Rutl-
is usually assembled from numerous intervals of the edge (1993). First, locate periods of streamflow recession

Environmental Geology (2003) 44:257265 259

 Original article

and select nearly linear segments. Second, for each seg-

ment, determine the best linear equation for time as a
function of log Q, and extract a coefficient (K) from this
equation as the recession index of the segment. Third,
determine the best linear equation for K as a function of
log Q.

The method of base-flow-record estimation

Various techniques have been used to estimate ground-
water discharge under the streamflow hydrograph. Most of
these techniques involve a considerable degree of subjec-
tivity in their application. Horton (1933) described a
method of shifting a horizontally normal depletion
curve across a hydrograph. It is noted that segments of
the hydrograph that coincide with this curve represent
periods of streamflow and are equal to ground-water dis-
charge. Thus, estimating ground-water discharge during
periods of surface runoff can be done by simply con-
necting the points where the hydrograph departs from the
normal depletion curve. Barnes (1939) separated surface
flow, storm seepage, and base flow by assigning a distinct
depletion factor to each part. Kulandaiswamy and See-
tharaman (1969) pointed out that, in Barnes method, it
may not be reliable to separate streamflow into three parts
and, consequently, they separated the hydrograph into Fig. 2
direct runoff and base flow. In some applications, inves- Flow diagram showing the procedure of streamflow partitioning.
Base flow is considered to be the ground-water discharge
tigators have used the characteristic curves of ground-
water discharge in conjunction with records of precipita-
tion, snowfall, temperature, and ground-water levels water discharge during the period of surface runoff.
(Olmsted and Hely 1962). Rutledge (1992) developed this method based on the
In many cases, the methods of streamflow separation can antecedent streamflow recession.
be illustrated by two steps: (1) locating periods of negli-Figure 2 shows a flow diagram of the steps analyzed by the
gible surface runoff and designating an equal relation method of base-flow-record estimation. The requirement
between ground-water discharge and streamflow, and (2) of the antecedent recession is met for the day in question if
interpolating ground-water discharge between these peri- the part of the daily mean streamflow record includes all
ods. The decision that surface runoff is negligible can be days that precede the day in question by N days or less,
based on antecedent recession. Linsley and others (1982) and the streamflow on each of these days is greater than or
equal to the streamflow on the day that follows where N is
used the empirical relation of Eq. (1). For a given day, the
requirement of the antecedent recession is met if recessionthe time base of the surface runoff.
has been continuous for N days or more. Other investi- The steps for this method are as follows (see Fig. 2). First,
gators use the linearity of recession on the graph of a one-dimensional array of the daily mean streamflow data
logarithm of streamflow as a function of time, and as an is filled. This array searches for days that fit the require-
indicator of the equal relationship between ground-water ment of the antecedent recession. On each of these days,
discharge and streamflow (Ineson and Downing 1964). ground-water discharge is designated equal to streamflow,
There are many methods used to execute step 2 (e.g., as long as it is not followed by a daily decline of more than
Nathan and McMahon 1990). Some are based on the 0.1 log cycle. According to Barnes (1939), a daily decline of
assumption that the ground-water discharge peak is more than 0.1 log cycle could indicate interflow (storm
concurrent with that of streamflow. Some are based on the flow), or surface flow. The array is searched again, and is
assumption that the recession of ground-water discharge determined by linear interpolation of the ground-water
continues after surface runoff begins. In a sense, the discharge for the remaining days. For some streamflow
response of ground-water discharge is delayed relative to records, this interpolation can cause the calculated
surface runoff. Other methods involve a simple linear ground-water discharge to exceed streamflow for a few
interpolation to estimate ground-water discharge between days on the record. The last step of the procedure is to
the beginning and the end of surface runoff. correct this error.
The entire procedure is executed three times for three
Estimation of mean ground-water discharge values of N: once for the time base of the surface runoff,
The base-flow-record estimation explained here is a form which is the largest integer less than the result of Eq. (1);
of streamflow partitioning. The principles of this method the other times are for each of the next two largest inte-
are as follows: (1) daily data for streamflow are required gers. A second-order polynomial expression for ground-
and (2) a linear interpolation is used to estimate ground- water discharge as a function of the time base of the

260 Environmental Geology (2003) 44:257265


surface runoff is constructed by using three sets of data for
ground-water discharge and a time base of surface runoff.
Consequently, ground-water discharge for the exact result
of Eq. (1) is calculated by using a polynomial expression.
Case study
Background of the study area
The area of Cho-Shui River basin is 4,693 km2, and the
length of the river is about 186.4 km. It is the second
largest basin in Taiwan and is situated within latitudes
23
28)24
10 and longitudes 120
13)121
20. This area is
located within the central region of Taiwan. As shown in
Fig. 3, the Cho-Shui River basin is surrounded by the
natural geographical boundaries of Taiwan Strait in the
west, the Central Mountain Ridge in the east, Wu River in
the north, and Pei-Kang River in the south. The annual
rainfall in this area is around 2,460 mm, and 78% occurs
from May to October. The annual runoff in the river is
about 6.08 billion tons (Hydrological Year Book of Taiwan
2000). This basin is undeveloped due to a low population
concentration and a lack of industrial development. The
water quality of the river system is pristine. The utilization Records of daily flow were used to estimate ground-water
Fig. 3
Location map of the streamflow gaging stations in Cho-Shui River
basin
Table 1
List of analyzed stream flow gauging stations
Cho-Shui River basin
Station map number Station name Latitude
1 Wu-Chieh 23
55
2 Ching-Yun 23
48
3 Yanhsing Bridge 23
47
4 Shui-Li 23
50
5 Nei-Mao-Pu 23
41
6 Tung-Tou 23
38
7 Chunyun Bridge 23
47
8 Ziu-Chian Bridge 23
50
Original article
of the water resource is mainly for irrigation of rice crops
in the downstream region. The total irrigated land is
approximately 100,000 ha. There is a subsidence problem
near the coastal area due an excessive pumping for illegal
pisciculture. Pumping ground-water for irrigation in the
Cho-Shui River basin has induced land subsidence. This
has caused serious problems, including seawater intrusion
and soil salinization. Therefore, ground-water resources
management has been an important issue in this area. To
achieve this objective, a ground-water recharge estimation
in this area is indispensable.
Complete and consecutive daily mean streamflow records
of eight streamflow gauging stations in Cho-Shui River
basin were chosen to determine the ground-water recharge
in this area. These eight stations are (1) Wu-Chieh, (2)
Ching-Yun, (3) Yanhsing Bridge, (4) Shui-Li, (5) Nei-Mao-
Pu, (6) Tung-Tou, (7) Chunyun Bridge, and (8) Ziu-Chian
Bridge. The data obtained from these stations are shown in
Table 1, including the station map number, the station
name, latitude, longitude, the drainage area, and the
analyzed time period. The positions of the eight stations
are shown in Fig. 3.
Results and discussion
recharge and discharge. Results were determined from the
complete and consecutive daily flow data, which used the
two methods explained in the previous discussion.
Estimation of recharge by the recession-
curve-displacement method
The master recession curve, the MRC, was applied to
represent the behavior of the streamflow recession in the
recession-curve-displacement method. For this purpose,
the MRCs, with a recession index K of eight stations, was
obtained. Mountainous areas commonly have frequent
precipitation; therefore, streams draining basins such as
those upstream of Cho-Shui River do not have frequent or
long ground-water recessions.
After the recession index is determined, ground-water
recharge was estimated by the recession-curve-displace-
ment method. The results for the eight stations are shown
in Table 2, including the station map number, the station
name, the drainage area, the analyzed time period, the
recession index, depths of annual infiltration, and the
Longitude Drainage area Time period analyzed
(km2)
121
03 501.26 19611969
120
57 1,526.26 19351961
120
51 2,090.62 19871992
120
52 55.46 19741978
120
50 367.4 19721992
120
39 259.2 19561992
120
37 2,906.32 19851992
120
23 2,988.88 19861992
Environmental Geology (2003) 44:257265 261
 Original article

annual ground-water recharge. The annual ground-water
recharge was obtained from Eq. (7):
RgwA h
A 7 spiration, and QL is the leakage to a deeper aquifer.
3
where RgwA is the annual ground-water recharge L =yr ,
h is the depth of annual infiltration L=yr , and A is the
drainage area L2 .
Estimation of discharge by conducting
the base-flow-record estimation
The method of the base-flow-record estimation aims to
separate the base flow from the streamflow hydrograph in
order to evaluate the discharge drained from the ground-
water to streams. The method is based on the assumption
that base flow (ground-water discharge) is equal to
streamflow on days that fit a requirement of antecedent
recession. For those days that do not fit this requirement,
this method calculates the base flow by linear interpola-
tion, and separates the streamflow hydrography into two
parts: the base flow and surface runoff. The affected time
of surface runoff at the recession period is calculated from
Eq. (1).
Detailed steps for the base-flow-record estimation are
presented in Fig. 2. Figure 4ac, respectively, shows three
hydrographs from three stations that indicate streamflow
partitioning for the drainage area and the time base of
surface runoff. In Fig. 4, ground-water discharge is equal
to streamflow when the curves coincide.
Table 3 shows the results obtained from the above eight
stations calculated by this method. Included are the station
map number, the station name, the drainage area, the
analyzed time period, the time base of surface runoff, the
baseflow index, depths of annual infiltration, and the
annual ground-water recharge. The annual ground-water
recharge can be obtained from Eq. (7). The baseflow index
can be obtained from Eq. (8):
mean base f low
Base f low index
100% 8 obtained by Mau and Winter (1997), we conclude that
mean stream f low
Comparison of ground-water recharge and discharge
In this study, only the following water balance equation
was considered:
DS QR  QB  QE  QL 9 uted this 10% loss, relative to recharge, to riparian
Where DS is the change of ground-water storage, QR is
ground-water recharge, QB is baseflow, QE is evapotran-
The two methods were constructed into a simplified
model. There were some basic assumptions in this model:
(1) surface runoff and base flow were the two main com-
ponents of streamflow, interflow was not considered; (2)
the ground-water table was invariable DS 0; natural
factors such as evapotranspiration, precipitation, and
human-induced factors do not aect the water level; (3) the
evapotranspiration of the saturated zone is close to zero
QE 0; and (4) the aquifer is underlain by impermeable
materialQL 0; its side boundaries are vertical and have
no flow crossing them.
With these assumptions, the above can be simplified to,
QR QB 10
where QR can be obtained from the recession-curve-
displacement method, and QB can be obtained from the
base-flow-record estimation.
In this model, baseflow of streams was considered to be
equivalent to ground-water recharge; therefore, it is of
interest to compare recharge and baseflow for the Cho-
Shui River basin. Table 4 shows the comparison between
the recession-curve-displacement method and those from
the base-flow-record estimation. Comparison of the
methods for estimating recharge with those for deter-
mining the baseflow component of streamflow indicate
that estimates of baseflow were less than the estimates of
recharge. Baseflow determined by the base-flow-record
estimation was on average ~16% less than ground-water
recharge for all stations, regardless that the recession-
curve-displacement method was used to calculate
recharge.
The results show that there was 16% difference between
ground-water recharge and baseflow in the mountain area
of Cho-Shui River basin. Compared with the value of 25%
baseflow is not a good surrogate for recharge for small
mountain basins. Furthermore, Rutledge and Daniel
(1994) also point out that, on an annual basis, baseflow
was about 10% less than recharge for the large basins in
the Appalachian Mountain and the Piedmont area of the
eastern United States. Rutledge and Daniel (1994) attrib-

Table 2
Result determined from the recession-curve-displacement method

Station Station name Drainage Time period Recession index Depths of annual Annual ground-
map number area analyzed (days/log cycle) infiltration water recharge
(km2) (cm/year) (billion tons)

1 Wu-Chieh 501.26 19351961 30.9 212.7 1.07

2 Ching-Yun 1,526.26 19611969 24.4 85.6 1.31
3 Yanhsing Bridge 2,090.62 19871992 43.7 111.9 2.34
4 Shui-Li 55.46 19741978 20.9 112.7 0.06
5 Nei-Mao-Pu 367.4 19721992 14.3 149.5 0.55
6 Tung-Tou 259.2 19561992 34.1 154.2 0.4
7 Chunyun Bridge 2,906.32 19851992 22 120.9 3.51
8 Ziu-Chian Bridge 2,988.88 19861992 17.2 64.8 1.94

262 Environmental Geology (2003) 44:257265


Fig. 4
a Results of streamflow partitioning at Yanhsing Bridge Station.
b Results of streamflow partitioning at Chunyun Bridge Station.
c Results of streamflow partitioning at Ziu-Chian Bridge Station
vegetation transpiring water directly from the ground-
water.
The effect of riparian evapotranspiration on baseflow,
using the analysis of streamflow hydrographs, is discussed
by Federer (1973) for a stream adjacent to the Mirror Lake
streams in the Hubbard Brook Valley, and by Daniel
(1976) for a stream in North Carolina. Both of those
studies imply that the effect of riparian evapotranspiration
on baseflow in wet months is more significant than in dry
Original article
months. The study reported herein considered only dry
months (i.e., December, January, February), when the
factor of evapotranspiration is considered negligible; some
of the 16% of average recharge that did not reach the
stream as baseflow for the Cho-Shui River basin could be
attributed to recharge to deeper ground-water flow sys-
tems.
The results show that the differences between the two
methods were caused by different methodologies.
From the river system in Fig. 3, it can be realized that the
water flow upstream first gathered into a narrow section
and then dispersed downstream. Thus, the study area can
be divided into two parts from the position of station 7.
The east side is the mountainous region and is recognized
as the drainage area of water flow. The west side is the
plain region (called the alluvial fan of Cho-Shui River) and
is recognized as the dispersal area of water flow.
Because it is more difficult to determine the hydraulic
permeability in the mountain region than the plain region,
the majority of related research (Chen and others 1999; Lee
and others 1999, 2000) has estimated ground-water re-
charge in the plain region. However, it should be noted
that there is a significant difference in water-flow charac-
teristics between the two regions. The two methods pro-
posed by this paper are more suitable to estimate the
ground-water recharge in the mountain region than that in
the plain region.
The ground-water recharge of the mountain region can be
represented by the estimation of station 7. Results, deter-
mined by the recession-curve-displacement method and
the base-flow record estimation, are listed, with previous
research in this field, in Table 5.
Conclusions
This study was designed to evaluate whether it is feasible
to estimate ground-water recharge by analyzing the
streamflow data of Cho-Shui River basin in Taiwan. Two
methods, the recession-curve-displacement method and
the base-flow-record estimation, were conducted to esti-
mate ground-water recharge and discharge, respectively.
These two methods are more applicable to the mountain
region than to the plain region. It was shown that baseflow,
determined by the base-flow-record estimation, was about
16% less than ground-water recharge for all stations, re-
gardless that the recession-curve-displacement method
was used to calculate recharge. This loss of water between
the areas of recharge and baseflow to the streams may be
caused by the different methodologies, riparian evapo-
transpiration, or could be attributed to recharge to deeper
ground-water flow systems.
A comparison with previously related studies of ground-
water recharge is also provided. Although the validity of
these methods is not well defined, the evaluation depends
on how well the estimated values compare. The use of
these methods requires hydrologic judgment. For in-
stance, the hydrologist who uses the recession-curve-
displacement method must determine the appropriate
Environmental Geology (2003) 44:257265 263
 Original article

Table 3
Result determined from the method of base-flow-record estimation

Station Station Drainage Time period Time base of Base flow Depths of Annual
map number name area analyzed surface runoff index annual ground-water
(km2) (days/log cycle) (%) infiltration recharge
(cm/year) (billion tons)

1 Wu-Chieh 501.26 19351961 2, 3, 4 67.2 163.98 0.822

2 Ching-Yun 1,526.26 19611969 3, 4, 5 59.9 73.64 1.124
3 Yanhsing Bridge 2,090.62 19871992 3, 4, 5 65.8 92.04 1.924
4 Shui-Li 55.46 19741978 1, 2, 3 55.7 80.40 0.045
5 Nei-Mao-Pu 367.4 19721992 2, 3, 4 75 146.92 0.54
6 Tung-Tou 259.2 19561992 2, 3, 4 52 122.67 0.318
7 Chunyun Bridge 2,906.32 19851992 4, 5, 6 61.1 106.28 3.089
8 Ziu-Chian 2,988.88 19861992 4, 5, 6 45.1 57.30 1.713
Bridge

Table 4
Comparison of methods 1 and 2. Note: method 1 is the recession-curve-displacement method, and method 2 is the base-flow-record estimation

Station map number Result from method 1 Result from method 2 Ratio of method 2 over method 1
(cm/year) (cm/year) (%)

1 212.7 163.98 77.09

2 85.6 73.64 86.03
3 111.9 92.04 82.25
4 112.7 80.40 71.34
5 149.5 146.92 98.27
6 154.2 122.67 79.55
7 120.9 106.28 87.91
8 64.8 57.30 88.43

Table 5
List of related researches of Cho-Shui River basin

Method Author Annual ground-water recharge Annual ground-water recharge

of the mountain region of the plain region

Water budget model Lee and others (1999), Chen and Unsuitable 9.9108 t/year
others (1999)
Water balance method simulated Lee and others (2000) Unsuitable 10.8108 t/year
by MODFLOW
Recession-curve-displacement This study 35.1108 t/year (120.9 cm/year) Unsuitable
method
8
Base-flow-record estimation This study 30.910 t/year (106.3 cm/year) Unsuitable

recession index and the time base of the surface runoff. References
Therefore, it is recommended that studies be approached
by comparing these methods to arrive at the best general Barnes BS (1939) The structure of discharge recession curves.
estimation. Trans Am Geophys Union 20:721725
Bevans HE (1986) Estimating streamaquifer interactions in coal
Acknowledgements This research was financially supported by areas of eastern Kansas by using streamflow records. In: Sub-
National Science Research Council of the Republic of China itzky, Seymour (eds) Selected papers in the hydrologic sciences.
(contract no. NSC-88-2218-E006-020 project). The organization US Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2290, pp 5164.
offered us a generous fund to finish the field investigation. The Boussinesq J (1877) Essa sur latheories des eaux courantes.
authors would like to thank Dr. Albert T Rutledge at USGS for Memoires presentes par divers savants a lAcademic des Sci-
offering many useful suggestions and a constructive review. We ences de lInstitut National de France. Tome XXIII, no 1
also thank Dr. Roald G. Dzhamalov, and Dr. Igor S. Zektser from Chen JF, Lee CH, Chen WP (1999) Application of the framework
the Water Problems Institute at the Russian Academy of Sciences for the water budget of the unsaturated zone to estimate
for originally suggesting that we should investigate this problem ground-water recharge in Janghauh area (in Chinese). J Taiwan
and also for their review. Water Conserv 47:5466

264 Environmental Geology (2003) 44:257265


Daniel JF (1976) Estimating ground-water evapotranspiration
from streamflow records. Water Resour Res 12:360364
Dzhamalov RG (1973) Ground-water flow of the Terek-Kuma
artesian basin (in Russian). Nauka, Moscow
Federer CA (1973) Forest transpiration greatly speeds streamflow
recession. Water Resour Res 9:15991604
Finch JW (1998) Direct ground-water recharge using a simple
water-balance model-sensitivity to land surface parameters.
J Hydrol 211:112125
Horton RE (1933) The role of infiltration in the hydrologic cycle.
Trans Am Geophys Union 14:446460
Hydrological Year Book of Taiwan (2000) Water resources (in
Chinese). Bureau Ministry of Economic Affairs, Republic of China
Ineson J, Downing RA (1964) The ground-water component of
river discharge and its relationship to hydrogeology. J Inst
Water Eng 18:519541
Kulandaiswamy VC, Seetharaman S (1969) A note on Barnes
method of hydrograph separation. J Hydrol 9:222229
Lee CH, Yu JL, Chen JF, Chen WP (1999) Estimating ground-
water recharge from infiltration and streamflow hydrographs (in
Chinese). Taiwan National Science Council Report NSC88-
2218-E006-020
Lee CH, Hsu CC, Lin TK (2000) Study of multiple-layers
ground-water resources management in Cho-Shui alluvial fan
(in Chinese). J Taiwan Water Conserv 48:4152
Linsley RK, Jr Kohler MA, Paulhus JLH (1982) Hydrology for
engineers, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York
Mau DP, Winter TC (1997) Estimating ground-water recharge
from streamflow hydrographs for a small mountain watershed
in a temperate humid climate, New Hampshire, USA. Ground
Water 35:291304
Meyboom P (1961) Estimating ground-water recharge from
stream hydrographs. J Geophys Res 66:12031214
Moore GK (1992) Hydrograph analysis in a fractured rock
terrane. Ground Water 30:390395
Nathan RJ, McMahon TA (1990) Evaluation of automated tech-
niques for base flow and recession analysis. Water Resour Res
26:14651473
Original article
Olmsted FH, Hely AG (1962) Relation between ground water and
surface water in Brandywine Creek basin Pennsylvania. US
Geological Survey Professional Paper 417-A
Rorabaugh MI (1964) Estimating changes in bank storage and
ground water contribution to streamflow. Int Assoc Sci Hydrol
Publ 63:432441
Rorabaugh MI, Simons WD (1966) Exploration of methods
relating ground water to surface water; Columbia River
basin-second phase. US Geological Survey Openfile Report
Rutledge AT (1992) Methods of using streamflow records for
estimating total and effective recharge in the Appalachian
Valley and Ridge, Piedmont, and Blue Ridge physiographic
provinces. In: Hotchkiss WR, Johnson AI (eds) Regional
aquifer systems of the United States, aquifers of the southern
and eastern states. Am Water Resour Assoc Monogr Series
17:5973
Rutledge AT (1993) Computer programs for describing the
recession of ground-water discharge and for estimating mean
ground-water recharge and discharge from streamflow records.
US Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations Report
93-4121
Rutledge AT (1998) Computer programs for describing the
recession of ground-water discharge and for estimating mean
ground-water recharge and discharge from streamflow re-
cordsupdate. US Geological Survey Water-Resources Inves-
tigations Report 98-4148
Rutledge AT (2000) Considerations for use of the RORA program
to estimate ground-water recharge from streamflow records. US
Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-156
Rutledge AT, Daniel III CC (1994) Testing an automated method
to estimate ground-water recharge from streamflow records.
Ground Water 32:180189
Simmons CS, Meyer PD (2000) A simplified model for the
transient water budget of a shallow unsaturated zone. Water
Resour Res 32:28352844
Zektser IS (1977) Laws of formation of ground-water runoff study
(in Russian). Nedra Publishers, Moscow
Environmental Geology (2003) 44:257265 265