流域农业面源污染生态工程调控措施

农业面源污染是导致目前流域水环境质量恶化的重要原因。文章从流域水环境状况、农业面源污染现状出发,结合面源污染的特点和研究发展历程,重点探讨了流域农业面源污染生态工程调控的可行性。     

Recent Changes in Stream Flashiness and Flooding,and Effects of Flood Management in North Carolina and Virginia

The southeastern United States has undergone anthropogenic changes in landscape structure, with the potential to increase (e.g., urbanization) and decrease (e.g., reservoir construction) stream flashiness and flooding. Assessment of the outcome of such change can provide insight into the efficacy of current strategies and policies to manage water resources. We (1) examined trends in precipitation, floods, and stream flashiness and (2) assessed the relative influence of land cover and flow‐regulating features (e.g., best management practices and artificial water bodies) on stream flashiness from 1991 to 2013. We found mean annual precipitation decreased, which coincided with decreasing trends in floods. In contrast, stream flashiness, overall, showed an increasing trend during the period of study. However, upon closer examination, 20 watersheds showed stable stream flashiness, whereas 5 increased and 6 decreased in flashiness. Urban watersheds were among those that increased or decreased in flashiness. Watersheds that increased in stream flashiness gained more urban cover, lost more forested cover and had fewer best management practices installed than urban watersheds that decreased in stream flashiness. We found best management practices are more effective than artificial water bodies in regulating flashy floods. Flashiness index is a valuable and straightforward metric to characterize changes in streamflow and help to assess the efficacy of management interventions.     

Bison and cattle grazing management,bare ground coverage,and links to suspended sediment concentrations in grassland streams

This study quantified the impact of bison and cattle grazing management practices on bare ground coverage at the watershed, riparian, and forested riparian scales within the Flint Hills ecoregion in Kansas. We tested for correlations between bare ground coverage and fluvial suspended sediment concentrations during base‐flow and storm‐flow events. We used remotely sensed imagery combined with field surveys to classify ground cover and quantify the presence of bare ground. Base‐flow water samples were collected bi‐monthly during rain‐free periods and 24 h following precipitation events. Storm‐flow water samples were collected on the rising limb of the hydrograph, using single‐stage automatic samplers. Ungrazed treatments contained the lowest coverage of bare ground at the watershed, riparian, and forested riparian scales. Bison treatments contained the highest coverage of bare ground at the watershed scale, while high‐density cattle treatments contained the highest coverage of bare ground at the riparian and forested riparian scales. In bison and cattle‐grazed treatments, a majority of bare ground was located near fence lines, watershed boundaries, and third‐ and fourth‐order stream segments. Inorganic sediment concentrations at base flow were best predicted by riparian bare ground coverage, while storm‐flow sediment concentrations were best predicted by watershed scale bare ground coverage.     

Boosted Regression Tree Models to Explain Watershed Nutrient Concentrations and Biological Condition

Boosted regression tree (BRT) models were developed to quantify the nonlinear relationships between landscape variables and nutrient concentrations in a mesoscale mixed land cover watershed during base‐flow conditions. Factors that affect instream biological components, based on the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI), were also analyzed. Seasonal BRT models at two spatial scales (watershed and riparian buffered area [RBA]) for nitrite‐nitrate (NO₂‐NO₃), total Kjeldahl nitrogen, and total phosphorus (TP) and annual models for the IBI score were developed. Two primary factors — location within the watershed (i.e., geographic position, stream order, and distance to a downstream confluence) and percentage of urban land cover (both scales) — emerged as important predictor variables. Latitude and longitude interacted with other factors to explain the variability in summer NO₂‐NO₃ concentrations and IBI scores. BRT results also suggested that location might be associated with indicators of sources (e.g., land cover), runoff potential (e.g., soil and topographic factors), and processes not easily represented by spatial data indicators. Runoff indicators (e.g., Hydrological Soil Group D and Topographic Wetness Indices) explained a substantial portion of the variability in nutrient concentrations as did point sources for TP in the summer months. The results from our BRT approach can help prioritize areas for nutrient management in mixed‐use and heavily impacted watersheds.     

国外流域管理的成功经验对雅砻江流域管理的启示

世界各国对流域管理的不断探索,大大丰富了流域管理的理论和实践,流域管理已成为国家和地区水资源管理的一种行之有效的模式。我国的流域管理尚处于最初的探索阶段,如何借鉴国外流域管理的成功经验,形成有效的流域管理模式已成为我国水资源管理的主要任务之一。为了给国内流域管理实践提供一些有益的借鉴,分析总结了具有代表性的美国田纳西河流域管理模式、澳大利亚墨累 达令河流域管理模式和英国泰晤士河流域管理模式的成功经验和存在的问题。以雅砻江流域水电开发为实例,在对该流域的实际情况进行全面分析的基础上,将该流域与上述三条流域进行比较,充分借鉴三条流域管理模式成功经验,提出了雅砻江流域管理的相关对策和建议。     

Evaluation of a Watershed Model for Estimating Daily Flow Using Limited Flow Measurements1

Abstract: The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model was evaluated for estimation of continuous daily flow based on limited flow measurements in the Upper Oyster Creek (UOC) watershed. SWAT was calibrated against limited measured flow data and then validated. The Nash‐Sutcliffe model Efficiency (NSE) and mean relative error values of daily flow estimations were 0.66 and 15% for calibration, and 0.56 and 4% for validation, respectively. Also, further evaluation of the model’s estimation of flow at multiple locations was conducted with parametric paired t‐test and nonparametric sign test at a 95% confidence level. Among the five main stem stations, four stations were statistically shown to have good agreement between predicted and measured flows. SWAT underestimated the flow of the fifth main stem station possibly because of the existence of complex flood control measures near to the station. SWAT estimated the daily flow at one tributary station well, but with relatively large errors for the other two tributaries. The spatial pattern of predicted flows matched the measured ones well. Overall, it was concluded from the graphical comparisons and statistical analyses of the model results that SWAT was capable of reproducing continuous daily flows based on limited flow data as is the case in the UOC watershed.     

Development of a Quantitative Pasture Phosphorus Management Tool Using the SWAT Model1

Abstract: Assessment tools to evaluate phosphorus loss from agricultural lands allow conservation planners to evaluate the impact of management decisions on water quality. Available tools to predict phosphorus loss from agricultural fields are either: (1) qualitative indices with limited applicability to address offsite water quality standards, or (2) models which are prohibitively complex for application by most conservation planners. The purpose of this research was to develop a simple interface for a comprehensive hydrologic/water quality model to allow its usage by farmers and conservation planners. The Pasture Phosphorus Management (PPM) Calculator was developed to predict average annual phosphorus (P) losses from pastures under a variety of field conditions and management options. PPM Calculator is a vastly simplified interface for the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model that requires no knowledge of SWAT by the user. PPM Calculator was validated using 33 months of data on four pasture fields in northwestern Arkansas. This tool has been extensively applied in the Lake Eucha/Spavinaw Basin in northeastern Oklahoma and northwestern Arkansas. PPM Calculator allows conservation planners to take advantage of the predictive capacity of a comprehensive hydrologic water quality model typically reserved for use by hydrologists and engineers. This research demonstrates the applicability of existing water quality models in the development of user friendly P management tools.     

Development and Use of a Sedimentation Risk Index for Unpaved Road‐Stream Crossings in the Choctawhatchee Watershed1

Abstract: Unpaved road‐stream crossings increase sediment yields in streams and alter channel morphology and stability. Before restoration and sedimentation reduction strategies can be implemented, a priority listing of unpaved road‐stream crossings must be created. The objectives of this study were to develop a sedimentation risk index (SRI) for unpaved road‐stream crossings and to prioritize 125 sites in the Choctawhatchee watershed (southeastern Alabama) using this model. Field surveys involved qualitative and quantitative observations of 73 metrics related to waterway conditions, crossing structures, road approaches, and roadside soil erosion. The road‐stream crossing risk analyses involved elimination of candidate metrics based on redundancy, skewness, lack of data, professional judgment, lack of nonzero values, unbalanced box plots, and limited ranges of values. A final selection of 12 metrics formed the SRI and weighed factors involving soil erodibility, road sedimentation abatement features, and stream morphology alteration. The SRI was organized into narrative categories (excellent, good, fair, poor, and very poor) based on the distribution of scores. No excellent sites (scores ≥55) were found in this study, 17 (20.7%) were good (low sedimentation risk), 37 (45.1%) were fair (moderate sedimentation risk), 26 (31.7%) were poor (high sedimentation risk), and two (2.5%) were very poor (high sedimentation risk). There was no significant difference in SRI scores among crossing structure type (round culverts, box culverts, and bridges) (H = 4.31, df = 2, p = 0.058). A future study of the Choctawhatchee watershed involving the same study sites could assess the success of restoration plans and activities based on site score improvement or decline.     

Modeling the Hydrology of Climate Change in California’s Sierra Nevada for Subwatershed Scale Adaptation1

Young, Charles A., Marisa I. Escobar‐Arias, Martha Fernandes, Brian Joyce, Michael Kiparsky, Jeffrey F. Mount, Vishal K. Mehta, David Purkey, Joshua H. Viers, and David Yates, 2009. Modeling the Hydrology of Climate Change in California’s Sierra Nevada for Subwatershed Scale Adaptation. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 45(6):1409‐1423. Abstract: The rainfall‐runoff model presented in this study represents the hydrology of 15 major watersheds of the Sierra Nevada in California as the backbone of a planning tool for water resources analysis including climate change studies. Our model implementation documents potential changes in hydrologic metrics such as snowpack and the initiation of snowmelt at a finer resolution than previous studies, in accordance with the needs of watershed‐level planning decisions. Calibration was performed with a sequence of steps focusing sequentially on parameters of land cover, snow accumulation and melt, and water capacity and hydraulic conductivity of soil horizons. An assessment of the calibrated streamflows using goodness of fit statistics indicate that the model robustly represents major features of weekly average flows of the historical 1980‐2001 time series. Runs of the model for climate warming scenarios with fixed increases of 2°C, 4°C, and 6°C for the spatial domain were used to analyze changes in snow accumulation and runoff timing. The results indicated a reduction in snowmelt volume that was largest in the 1,750‐2,750 m elevation range. In addition, the runoff center of mass shifted to earlier dates and this shift was non‐uniformly distributed throughout the Sierra Nevada. Because the hydrologic model presented here is nested within a water resources planning system, future research can focus on the management and adaptation of the water resources system in the context of climate change.     

Constraints to Watershed Planning: Group Structure and Process1

Floress, Kristin, Jean C. Mangun, Mae A. Davenport, and Karl W.J. Williard, 2009. Constraints to Watershed Planning: Group Structure and Process. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 45(6):1352‐1360. Abstract: The roles that agencies and other partners play in collaborative watershed management are not always clearly identified. Key factors contributing to group‐level outcomes in watershed groups include both structural and procedural elements. Structural elements include membership systems, project partners, and funding, while procedural elements include leadership, shared vision, and mission development. The current research reports on a case study conducted with a Midwestern watershed group that received Clean Water Act Section 319 funds to undertake a watershed planning process. Data come from focus groups, interviews, public comments, and meeting observation, and were analyzed using grounded theory. Findings of this study indicate that homogenous skill set, discord over group and partner roles, and failed problem identification contributed to the organizational inertia experienced by the watershed group. Implications of this research for groups receiving 319 funds are provided.