• Natural tracers reveal runoff sources in UK natural flood management catchment. • Water already stored in the catchments dominated runoff in high flow events. • Plantation forest cover reduced the fraction of rapid rainfall runoff. • Soils and geology dominated forest cover as control on rapid rainfall runoff fraction. • Differences in sources were greater between events than between catchments. United Kingdom (UK). Natural flood management (NFM) schemes are increasingly prominent in the UK. Studies of NFM have not yet used natural tracers at catchment scale to investigate how interventions influence partitioning during storms between surface rainfall runoff and water already stored in catchments. Here we investigate how catchment properties, particularly plantation forestry, influence surface storm rainfall runoff. We used hydrograph separation based on hydrogen and oxygen isotopes ( 2 H, 18 O) and acid neutralising capacity from high flow events to compare three headwater catchments (2.4-3.1 km 2 ) with differences in plantation forest cover ( Picea sitchensis: 94%, 41%, 1%) within a major UK NFM pilot, typical of the UK uplands. Plantation forest cover reduced the total storm rainfall runoff fraction during all events (by up to 11%) when comparing two paired catchments with similar soils, geology and topography but ∼50% difference in forest cover. However, comparison with the third catchment, with negligible forest cover but different characteristics, suggests that soils and geology were dominant controls on storm rainfall runoff fraction. Furthermore, differences between events were greater than differences between catchments. These findings suggest that while plantation forest cover may influence storm rainfall runoff fractions, it is not a dominant control in temperate upland UK catchments, especially for larger events. Soils and geology may exert greater influence, with implications for planning NFM.

• Natural tracers reveal runoff sources in UK natural flood management catchment. • Water already stored in the catchments dominated runoff in high flow events. • Plantation forest cover reduced the fraction of rapid rainfall runoff. • Soils and geology dominated forest cover as control on rapid rainfall runoff fraction. • Differences in sources were greater between events than between catchments. United Kingdom (UK). Natural flood management (NFM) schemes are increasingly prominent in the UK. Studies of NFM have not yet used natural tracers at catchment scale to investigate how interventions influence partitioning during storms between surface rainfall runoff and water already stored in catchments. Here we investigate how catchment properties, particularly plantation forestry, influence surface storm rainfall runoff. We used hydrograph separation based on hydrogen and oxygen isotopes ( 2 H, 18 O) and acid neutralising capacity from high flow events to compare three headwater catchments (2.4-3.1 km 2 ) with differences in plantation forest cover ( Picea sitchensis: 94%, 41%, 1%) within a major UK NFM pilot, typical of the UK uplands. Plantation forest cover reduced the total storm rainfall runoff fraction during all events (by up to 11%) when comparing two paired catchments with similar soils, geology and topography but ∼50% difference in forest cover. However, comparison with the third catchment, with negligible forest cover but different characteristics, suggests that soils and geology were dominant controls on storm rainfall runoff fraction. Furthermore, differences between events were greater than differences between catchments. These findings suggest that while plantation forest cover may influence storm rainfall runoff fractions, it is not a dominant control in temperate upland UK catchments, especially for larger events. Soils and geology may exert greater influence, with implications for planning NFM.

This paper is the outcome of a community initiative to identify major unsolved scientific problems in hydrology motivated by a need for stronger harmonisation of research efforts. The procedure involved a public consultation through online media, followed by two workshops through which a large number of potential science questions were collated, prioritised, and synthesised. In spite of the diversity of the participants (230 scientists in total), the process revealed much about community priorities and the state of our science: a preference for continuity in research questions rather than radical departures or redirections from past and current work. Questions remain focused on the process-based understanding of hydrological variability and causality at all space and time scales. Increased attention to environmental change drives a new emphasis on understanding how change propagates across interfaces within the hydrological system and across disciplinary boundaries. In particular, the expansion of the human footprint raises a new set of questions related to human interactions with nature and water cycle feedbacks in the context of complex water management problems. We hope that this reflection and synthesis of the 23 unsolved problems in hydrology will help guide research efforts for some years to come.