Like other cities in the Kathmandu Valley, Bhaktapur faces rapid urbanisation and population growth. Rivers are negatively impacted by uncontrolled settlements in flood-prone areas, lowering permeability, decreasing channels widths, and waste blockage. All these issues, along with more extreme rain events during the monsoon due to climate change, have led to increased flooding in Bhaktapur, especially by the Hanumante River. For a better understanding of flood risk, the first step is a return level analysis. For this, historical data are essential. Unfortunately, historical records of water levels are non-existent for the Hanumante River. We measured water levels and discharge on a regular basis starting from the 2019 monsoon (i.e., June). To reconstruct the missing historical data needed for a return level analysis, this research introduces the Classical Model for Structured Expert Judgment (SEJ). By employing SEJ, we were able to reconstruct historical water level data. Expert assessments were validated using the limited data available. Based on the reconstructed data, it was possible to estimate the return periods of extreme water levels of the Hanumante River by fitting a Generalized Extreme Value (GEV) distribution. Using this distribution, we estimated that a water level of about 3.5 m has a return period of ten years. This research showed that, despite considerable uncertainty in the results, the SEJ method has potential for return level analyses.@en

The Kathmandu Valley in Nepal is facing a water quantity and quality crisis due to rapid urbanization and haphazard water and wastewater planning and management. Annually, groundwater extractions in the Kathmandu Valley exceed capture, resulting in groundwater table declines. Streams are often important sources of recharge to (or destination of discharges from) aquifers. However, stream-aquifer interactions in the Kathmandu Valley are poorly understood. To improve this understanding, we performed topographic surveys of water levels, and measured water quality, in streams and adjacent hand-dug wells (shallow aquifer). In pre-monsoon, 12% (2018) and 44% (2019) of wells had water levels higher than adjacent streams, indicating mostly a loss of stream water to the aquifer. However, in post-monsoon, 69% (2018) and 70% (2019) of wells had water levels higher than adjacent streams, indicating that monsoon rainfall contributes to shallow aquifer recharge which, at least temporarily, causes streams to transition from losing to gaining. Concentrations of all water quality parameters (electrical conductivity, ammonia, alkalinity, and hardness) were higher in the pre-monsoon compared to post-monsoon in both streams and wells. There was no recurring trend in water level difference longitudinally from upstream to downstream. However, water quality in streams and wells depleted from upstream to downstream. While we clearly observed seasonal refilling of the shallow aquifer, the role of the deep aquifer in seasonal storage processes deserve future research attention.@en

Citizen science, as a complement to ground-based and remotely-sensed precipitation measurements, is a promising approach for improving precipitation observations. During the 2018 monsoon (May to September), SmartPhones4Water (S4W) Nepal—a young researcher-led water monitoring network—partnered with 154 citizen scientists to generate 6,656 precipitation measurements in Nepal with low-cost (<1 USD) S4W gauges constructed from repurposed soda bottles, concrete, and rulers. Measurements were recorded with Android-based smartphones using Open Data Kit Collect and included GPS-generated coordinates, observation date and time, photographs, and observer-reported readings. A year-long S4W gauge intercomparison revealed a −2.9% error compared to the standard 203 mm (8-inch) gauge used by the Department of Hydrology and Meteorology (DHM), Nepal. We analyzed three sources of S4W gauge errors: evaporation, concrete soaking, and condensation, which were 0.5 mm day−1 (n = 33), 0.8 mm (n = 99), and 0.3 mm (n = 49), respectively. We recruited citizen scientists by leveraging personal relationships, outreach programs at schools/colleges, social media, and random site visits. We motivated ongoing participation with personal follow-ups via SMS, phone, and site visit; bulk SMS; educational workshops; opportunities to use data; lucky draws; certificates of involvement; and in certain cases, payment. The average citizen scientist took 42 measurements (min = 1, max = 148, stdev = 39). Paid citizen scientists (n = 37) took significantly more measurements per week (i.e., 54) than volunteers (i.e., 39; alpha level = 0.01). By comparing actual values (determined by photographs) with citizen science observations, we identified three categories of observational errors (n = 592; 9% of total measurements): unit (n = 50; 8% of errors; readings in centimeters instead of millimeters); meniscus (n = 346; 58% of errors; readings of capillary rise), and unknown (n = 196; 33% of errors). A cost per observation analysis revealed that measurements could be performed for as little as 0.07 and 0.30 USD for volunteers and paid citizen scientists, respectively. Our results confirm that citizen science precipitation monitoring with low-cost gauges can help fill precipitation data gaps in Nepal and other data scarce regions@en

Wise management of water resources requires data. Nevertheless, the amount of streamflow data being collected globally continues to decline. Generating hydrologic data together with citizen scientists can help fill this growing hydrological data gap. Our aim herein was to (1) perform an initial evaluation of three simple streamflow measurement methods (i.e., float, salt dilution, and Bernoulli run-up), (2) evaluate the same three methods with citizen scientists, and (3) apply the preferred method at more sites with more people. For computing errors, we used midsection measurements from an acoustic Doppler velocimeter as reference flows. First, we (authors) performed 20 evaluation measurements in headwater catchments of the Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. Reference flows ranged from 6.4 to 240 L s−1. Absolute errors averaged 23 %, 15 %, and 37 % with average biases of 8 %, 6 %, and 26 % for float, salt dilution, and Bernoulli methods, respectively. Second, we evaluated the same three methods at 15 sites in two watersheds within the Kathmandu Valley with 10 groups of citizen scientists (three to four members each) and one “expert” group (authors). At each site, each group performed three simple methods; experts also performed SonTek FlowTracker midsection reference measurements (ranging from 4.2 to 896 L s−1). For float, salt dilution, and Bernoulli methods, absolute errors averaged 41 %, 21 %, and 43 % for experts and 63 %, 28 %, and 131 % for citizen scientists, while biases averaged 41 %, 19 %, and 40 % for experts and 52 %, 7 %, and 127 % for citizen scientists, respectively. Based on these results, we selected salt dilution as the preferred method. Finally, we performed larger-scale pilot testing in week-long pre- and post-monsoon Citizen Science Flow campaigns involving 25 and 37 citizen scientists, respectively. Observed flows (n=131 pre-monsoon; n=133 post-monsoon) were distributed among the 10 headwater catchments of the Kathmandu Valley and ranged from 0.4 to 425 L s−1 and from 1.1 to 1804 L s−1 in pre- and post-monsoon, respectively. Future work should further evaluate uncertainties of citizen science salt dilution measurements, the feasibility of their application to larger regions, and the information content of additional streamflow data.@en