Misconceptions in hydrology and their consequences

Abstract

Several misconceptions have been introduced into hydrology that have had adverse consequences on the science and on water‐resources development. Persistent use of the concept of maximum precipitation and maximum probable precipitation, for which there is no physical proof, has discouraged research into the structure and probability of extreme events, and may have led to an unwarranted sense of security concerning flood‐control works. Attempts at long range forecasts of water supply based entirely on meteorological processes have misdirected research and raised false expectations. A misconception that hydrologic processes are composed of a limited number of hidden periodicities has retarded the use of modern stochastic analyses of time series. Cloud‐seeding to increase numbers of raindrops rather than their coalescence may have had a negative effect on precipitation in arid regions. Considering ground water, instead of the aquifer, as a resource has stressed the technology of withdrawal at the expense of study of methods of recharge and has led to much unplanned overdraft of ground water. Use of descriptive instead of numerical variables has delayed the application of modern statistical methods to planning the exploration of the ground‐water environment. As a result of the neglect of the stochastic properties of porous mediums, fluid mechanics theory has not departed far from the original works of Darcy. Hydrology has developed slowly because it has been considered an appendage of hydraulic engineering rather than a natural science.