Monitoring and Modeling the Effect of Agricultural Drainage and Recent Channel Incision on Adjacent Groundwater-Dependent Ecosystems
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Objectives
1.2. Description of the Study Site
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Drainage History and Characterizing the Incision
2.2. Selecting Blocks and Transects
2.3. Monitoring the Water Table
2.4. Modeling Water Levels and Water Budget
2.5. Analysis of Plant Assemblages
- GPS was used to navigate to a dune crest at which point a transect was extended from the summit to the closest swale point previously identified in GIS.
- Five vegetation plots were examined along each transect:
- crest point of the dune
- swale point
- midpoint between these points
- an additional position referred to as the dune–swale transition was chosen to capture the vegetation continuum between the swale and dune slope, and/or
- a low transition was selected as a point representing vegetation characterizing the margin of the lowest and wettest point on the dune–swale continuum.
- At each of the four or five sampling points on each transect, the following procedure was carried out:
- all species present within a 1 × 1 m (one square meter) quadrat were recorded, including both vascular plants and bryophytes. This step was completed when the plants were actively growing and robust, after emergence and before senescence.
- the local zone category was recorded (from Step 2 above).
- the GPS coordinates of the point were checked again and re-recorded to the nearest meter.
- Data for the 2012 and 2013 field seasons were combined and analyzed.
3. Results
3.1. Drainage History and Characterizing the Incision
3.2. Monitoring and Modeling the Effect on the Water Table
- Recharge, flow, and discharge at points along the groundwater flow line from areas of recharge to discharge can be modeled satisfactorily by using a quasi-two-dimensional profile (Figure 8).
- A no-flow groundwater divide (zero-flux Neumann condition) occurs near the center of the regional groundwater mound that underlies the Sheyenne grassland. A narrow (2 m) drain comprises the boundary on the opposite end of the profile. A simple lowering of the drain elevation replicates the effect of drain excavation and incision.
- Surface water flow does not occur except to accommodate discharge at the drain. The drain does not recharge the groundwater model system, although monitoring results show there may be some infiltration and bank storage during peak flow events.
- The aeolian and deltaic sediments are assumed homogeneous and isotropic, and sufficiently coarse to result in a thin tension-saturated zone and a steep decrease of soil moisture above the water table. Therefore, modeling of variably saturated flow would not significantly affect the results.
- Local differences in the water table level between dunes and swales are ephemeral, brief, and do not change the broader patterns of groundwater flow (Figure 7).
- Recharge is modeled as a single annual pulse, 30 days long. This assumption is based on the observation that frost-related exfiltration occurs during the winter months, which has a similar effect on the water table as does evapotranspiration except that water is stored in the shallow vadose zone. Melting and infiltration of this stored water coupled with snowmelt and early spring rainfall creates a brief but strong recharge event [15].
- Evapotranspiration is distributed equally throughout a 150-day period during the year, which replicates the typical natural freeze-free growing season from April through October.
- The extinction depth, defined as the water table depth below which ET ceases to occur, was established at 2 m, with decay defined by piecewise linear increments [25] and the evapotranspiration surface set at ground level.
3.3. Spatial and Temporal Discretization
3.4. Flow System Properties
3.5. Plant Communities
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Martin, C.W. Late Holocene Alluvial Chronology and Climate Change in the Central Great Plains. Quat. Res. 1992, 37, 315–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daniels, J.M.; Knox, J.C. Alluvial stratigraphic evidence for channel incision during the Mediaeval Warm Period on the central Great Plains, USA. Holocene 2005, 15, 736–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Germanoski, D.; Ritter, D.F. Tributary response to local base level lowering below a dam. Regul. Rivers Res. Manag. 1988, 2, 11–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Booth, D.B. Stream-channel incision following drainage-basin urbanization. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 1990, 26, 407–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heine, R.A.; Lant, C.L. Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Stream Channel Incision in the Loess Region of the Missouri River. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 2009, 99, 231–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rakovan, M.T.; Renwick, W.H. The role of sediment supply in channel instability and stream restoration. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2011, 66, 40–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petts, G.; Gurnell, A. 13.7 Hydrogeomorphic Effects of Reservoirs, Dams, and Diversions. In Treatise on Geomorphology; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013; pp. 96–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Driscoll, M.A.; Soban, J.R.; Lecce, S.A. Stream Channel Enlargement Response to Urban Land Cover in Small Coastal Plain Watersheds, North Carolina. Phys. Geogr. 2009, 30, 528–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taniguchi, K.T.; Biggs, T.W. Regional impacts of urbanization on stream channel geometry: A case study in semiarid southern California. Geomorphology 2015, 248, 228–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hardison, E.C.; O’Driscoll, M.A.; DeLoatch, J.P.; Howard, R.J.; Brinson, M.M. Urban Land Use, Channel Incision, and Water Table Decline Along Coastal Plain Streams, North Carolina. JAWRA J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 2009, 45, 1032–1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loheide, S.P.; Booth, E.G. Effects of changing channel morphology on vegetation, groundwater, and soil moisture regimes in groundwater-dependent ecosystems. Geomorphology 2011, 126, 364–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bluemle, J.P. Guide to the Geology of Southeastern North Dakota; North Dakota Geological Survey, Educational Series 18, revised; U.S. Geological Survey: Denver, CO, USA, 1988; pp. 1–36.
- Armstrong, C.A. Ground-water resources of Ransom and Sargent Counties, North Dakota; Part III. North Dakota Geological Survey Bulletin 69 and North Dakota State Water Commission County Ground Water Studies 31; U.S. Geological Survey: Bismack, ND, USA, 1982; pp. 1–51.
- Stevens, O.A. Handbook of North Dakota Plants; North Dakota State University Press: Fargo, ND, USA, 1963; ISBN 978-0911042078. [Google Scholar]
- Gerla, P.J.; Matheney, R.K. Seasonal variability and simulation of ground-water flow in a prairie wetland. Hydrol. Process. 1996, 10, 903–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delorme, A.; Valley City State University, Valley City, ND, USA. Personal Communication, 2005.
- International Water Institute. Red River of the North LiDAR Data; International Water Institute: Fargo, ND, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- North Dakota State Water Commission MapServices. Available online: http://www.swc.nd.gov/info_edu/map_data_resources/mapservices.html (accessed on 3 September 2018).
- Planchon, O.; Darboux, F. A fast, simple and versatile algorithm to fill the depressions of digital elevation models. CATENA 2002, 46, 159–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gallant, J.C.; Wilson, J.P. TAPES-G: A grid-based terrain analysis program for the environmental sciences. Comput. Geosci. 1996, 22, 713–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- De Reu, J.; Bourgeois, J.; Bats, M.; Zwertvaegher, A.; Gelorini, V.; De Smedt, P.; Chu, W.; Antrop, M.; De Maeyer, P.; Finke, P.; et al. Application of the topographic position index to heterogeneous landscapes. Geomorphology 2013, 186, 39–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerla, P.; Aldous, A.; Bach, L.; Carlson, C.; Gurrieri, J.; Hoff, E.; Johnson, R. Environmental Flows and Levels for Groundwater-Dependent Swale Wetlands of the Sheyenne National Grasslands, North Dakota; The Nature Conservancy: Portland, OR, USA, 2015; pp. 1–60. [Google Scholar]
- Harbaugh, A.W. MODFLOW-2005, The US Geological Survey Modular Ground-Water Model: The Ground-WaterFlow Process; Department of the Interior, Techniques and Methods 6–A16; U.S. Geological Survey: Reston, VA, USA, 2005.
- Banta, E.R. MODFLOW-2000, The U.S. Geological Survey Modular Ground-Water Model—Documentation of Packages for Simulating Evapotranspiration with a Segmented Function (ETS1) and Drains with Return Flow (DRT1); U.S. Geological Survey: Denver, CO, USA, 2000.
- Shah, N.; Nachabe, M.; Ross, M. Extinction Depth and Evapotranspiration from Ground Water under Selected Land Covers. Ground Water 2007, 45, 329–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sophocleous, M. Interactions between groundwater and surface water: the state of the science. Hydrogeol. J. 2002, 10, 52–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Northern Great Plains Floristic Quality Assessment Panel. Coefficients of Conservatism for the Vascular Flora of the Dakotas and Adjacent Grasslands; Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD/ITR‐2001‐0001; U.S. Geological Survey: Reston, VA, USA, 2001.
- USDA/NRCS Plants Database. Available online: https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/java/ (accessed on 7 February 2019).
- Freyman, W.A.; Masters, L.A.; Packard, S. The Universal Floristic Quality Assessment (FQA) Calculator: An online tool for ecological assessment and monitoring. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2016, 7, 380–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, S.J.; Wardrop, D.H. Adapting the floristic quality assessment index to indicate anthropogenic disturbance in central Pennsylvania wetlands. Ecol. Indic. 2006, 6, 313–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Commercial West Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. 1907. Available online: https://tinyurl.com/y9zhp275 (accessed on 7 February 2019).
- Sinha, S.K.; Parker, G. Causes of Concavity in Longitudinal Profiles of Rivers. Water Resour. Res. 1996, 32, 1417–1428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baker, C.H.J.; Paulson, Q.F. Geology and ground-water resources of Richland County, North Dakota; Part III, Ground-Water Resources; North Dakota Geological Survey Bulletin 46 and North Dakota State Water Commission County Ground Water Studies 7; U.S. Geological Survey: Grand Forks, ND, USA, 1967; pp. 1–45.
- Gusyev, M.A.; Haitjema, H.M.; Carlson, C.P.; Gonzalez, M.A. Use of Nested Flow Models and Interpolation Techniques for Science-Based Management of the Sheyenne National Grassland, North Dakota, USA. Ground Water 2012, 414–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- NOAA National Climatic Data Center Satellite and Information Service - Imagery and Data. Available online: http://www7.ncdc.noaa.gov/CDO/CDODivisionalSelect.jsp# (accessed on 7 July 2018).
- Schilling, K.E.; Zhang, Y.K.; Drobney, P. Water table fluctuations near an incised stream, Walnut Creek, Iowa. J. Hydrol. 2004, 286, 236–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fraaije, R.G.A.; Poupin, C.; Verhoeven, J.T.A.; Soons, M.B. Functional responses of aquatic and riparian vegetation to hydrogeomorphic restoration of channelized lowland streams and their valleys. J. Appl. Ecol. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hopkins, D.G.; Running, G.L. Soils, dunes, and prairie vegetation: Lessons from the Sandhills of North Dakota. Prairie Forum 2000, 25, 45–64. [Google Scholar]
- Bastiaanssen, W.G.M.; Allen, R.G.; Droogers, P.; D’Urso, G.; Steduto, P. Twenty-five years modeling irrigated and drained soils: State of the art. Agric. Water Manag. 2007, 92, 111–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sisson, J.B.; Ferguson, A.H.; van Genuchten, M.T. Simple method for predicting drainage from field plots. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1980, 44, 1147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooke, R.; Badiger, S.; García, A. Drainage equations for random and irregular tile drainage systems. Agric. Water Manag. 2001, 48, 207–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skaggs, R.W.; Youssef, M.A.; Chescheir, G.M. DRAINMOD: Model use, calibration, and validation. Trans. ASABE 2012, 55, 1509–1522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skaggs, R.W.; Fausey, N.R.; Evans, R.O. Drainage water management. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2012, 67, 167A–172A. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lowry, C.S.; Loheide, S.P. Groundwater-dependent vegetation: Quantifying the groundwater subsidy. Water Resour. Res. 2010, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Partners for Grassland Stewardship. Coordinated Resource Management Plan for Iron Springs Creek and Drain 10 Watershed near McLeod; Partners for Grassland Stewardship: Bismarck, ND, USA, 2005; pp. 1–11. [Google Scholar]
- Finocchiaro, R.G. Agricultural subsoil tile drainage in the Dakotas: Potential effects on wetland hydrology. In Proceedings of the North Dakota Water Quality Monitoring Conference, Bismarck, ND, USA, 4–6 March 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Finocchiaro, R.G. Agricultural Subsurface Drainage Tile Locations by Permits in North Dakota; U.S. Geological Survey: Bismarck, ND, USA, 2016.
- Kondolf, G.M. PROFILE: Hungry Water: Effects of Dams and Gravel Mining on River Channels. Environ. Manag. 1997, 21, 533–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simon, A.; Rinaldi, M. Disturbance, stream incision, and channel evolution: The roles of excess transport capacity and boundary materials in controlling channel response. Geomorphology 2006, 79, 361–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bernhardt, E.; Palmer, M. River restoration: the fuzzy logic of repairing reaches to reverse catchment scale degradation. Ecol. Appl. 2011, 21, 1926–1931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mata-González, R.; McLendon, T.; Martin, D.W.; Trlica, M.J.; Pearce, R.A. Vegetation as affected by groundwater depth and microtopography in a shallow aquifer area of the Great Basin. Ecohydrology 2012, 5, 54–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Temporal Discretization | |
total time | 20 years (the time required to reach essentially steady-state conditions) |
stress periods | 60—3 per year (repeats with a 30, 150, and 185 day period each year) |
time steps | 3, 8, and 9 steps for the 3 stress periods per year, time-step multiplier = 1.2 |
Spatial Discretization (Figure 8) | |
layer | fixed—one unconfined layer with the top set at 30 m |
columns | fixed—26 (increasing width from the drain boundary) |
column width | 2, 3, 4.5, 7, 10.5, 13, 18, 27, 35, 50, 70, 100, 150, 200, 250, 360, 500, 700 …. |
1000, 1250, 1500, 1750, and 4 × 2000 m | |
row | fixed—1, length set at 1 m |
drain | column 1, row 1 (2 m wide column), elevation = 20 (initial) 19 (post-disturbance), conductance = 2, 7, and 24.5 m3/day |
Aquifer Properties | |
hydraulic conductivity | variable—2, 7, and 24.5 m/day |
specific yield | variable—0.06, 0.12, and 0.24 |
recharge rate | fixed—0.008 m/day (applied during 30 day stress period) |
evapotranspiration | |
rate | fixed—0.0013 m/day (applied during the 30 and 150 day stress periods) |
surface | fixed—20 m (at the ground surface) |
extinction depth | fixed—18 m (2 m below the surface) |
exp decay parameters | yo = −0.015, d″ = 0.32 m, b = 2.6 m−1 |
yearly water deficit | fixed—1.0 (potential evapotranspiration to recharge ratio) |
Solution | |
initial head | 20 m (original condition: non-incised drain), 19 m (incised drain) |
matrix solver | conjugate-gradient method (using default MODFLOW2005 variables) |
Profile ID | X (m) | Y (m) | Distance to Drain 10 (m) | Adjusted FQI | %C Value ≥7 | Total Species | Native/Non-Native | % Wtld Species |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
18 | 631447 | 5147380 | 2033 | 44.7 | 22 | 36 | 5.00 | 33 |
19 | 631565 | 5147437 | 1900 | 44.2 | 20 | 49 | 5.57 | 31 |
23 | 631769 | 5147553 | 1685 | 44.3 | 21 | 44 | 4.50 | 28 |
28 | 632135 | 5147570 | 1322 | 45.1 | 21 | 34 | 7.50 | 27 |
37 | 633094 | 5147729 | 356 | 39.0 | 11 | 28 | 4.60 | 41 |
38 | 633266 | 5147654 | 240 | 39.0 | 20 | 25 | 2.57 | 48 |
40 | 633460 | 5147572 | 67 | 34.2 | 7 | 30 | 1.73 | 14 |
© 2019 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Gerla, P.J. Monitoring and Modeling the Effect of Agricultural Drainage and Recent Channel Incision on Adjacent Groundwater-Dependent Ecosystems. Water 2019, 11, 863. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11040863
Gerla PJ. Monitoring and Modeling the Effect of Agricultural Drainage and Recent Channel Incision on Adjacent Groundwater-Dependent Ecosystems. Water. 2019; 11(4):863. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11040863
Chicago/Turabian StyleGerla, Philip J. 2019. "Monitoring and Modeling the Effect of Agricultural Drainage and Recent Channel Incision on Adjacent Groundwater-Dependent Ecosystems" Water 11, no. 4: 863. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11040863
APA StyleGerla, P. J. (2019). Monitoring and Modeling the Effect of Agricultural Drainage and Recent Channel Incision on Adjacent Groundwater-Dependent Ecosystems. Water, 11(4), 863. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11040863