Advertisement

Water Resources Management

, Volume 24, Issue 8, pp 1621–1644 | Cite as

Spatially Explicit Modeling of Land Use Specific Phosphorus Transport Pathways to Improve TMDL Load Estimates and Implementation Planning

  • Erica J. B. GaddisEmail author
  • Alexey Voinov
Article

Abstract

Diffuse pollution from urban stormwater and agricultural runoff are among the leading causes of water pollution in the USA. A process-oriented, stakeholder-driven research approach was implemented in the small heterogeneous watershed of St. Albans Bay, Vermont to model the relative load of phosphorus from all sources, including diffuse transport pathways, and compared to goals and assumptions outlined by a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) developed for phosphorus in Lake Champlain. Mass-balance and dynamic landscape simulation models were used to describe the distribution of the average annual phosphorus load to streams (10.57 t/year) in terms of space, time, and transport process. The majority of the phosphorus load comes from two subwatersheds dominated by clay soils, Stevens and Jewett Brooks. Dissolved phosphorus in surface runoff from the agricultural landscape, driven by high soil phosphorus concentrations, accounts for 41% of the total load to watershed streams. Direct discharge from farmsteads and stormwater loads, primarily from road sand wash-off, are also significant sources. Results reported in this study could help target watershed interventions both in terms of the types and locations of recommended best management practices (BMPs). The study offers an approach to attaining TMDL diffuse pollution targets in a cost-effective and participatory manner and could be replicated for other TMDL processes around the country.

Keywords

Diffuse pollution management Non-point source pollution Spatially explicit watershed model Landscape model TMDL Phosphorus Vermont 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Breuer L, Frede H (2003) PlaPaDa: an online plant parameter database for eco-hydrological modelling approaches. Institute for Landscape Ecology and Resources Management. http://www.uni-giessen.de/~gh1461/plapada/plapada.html
  2. Cassell EA, Meals DW, Aschmann SG, Anderson DP, Rosen BH, Kort RL, Dorioz JM (2002) Use of simulation mass balance modeling to estimate phosphorus and bacteria dynamics in watersheds. Water Sci Technol 45:157–168Google Scholar
  3. Costanza R, Voinov A (eds) (2004) Landscape simulation modeling: a spatially explicit dynamic approach. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Drizo A, Forget C, Chapuis RP, Comeau Y (2006) Phosphorus removal by electric arc furnace steel slag and serpentinite. Water Res 40:1547–1554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Foster GR (1982) Modeling the erosion process. In: Haan C, Johnson H, Brakensiek D (eds) Hydrologic modeling of small watersheds. St. Joseph, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  6. Gaddis EJB (2007) Landscape modeling and spatial optimization of watershed interventions to reduce phosphorus load to surface waters using a process-oriented and participatory research approach: a case study in the St. Albans Bay watershed, Vermont. Dissertation, University of Vermont. http://www.uvm.edu/giee/?Page=about/students/Erica_Gaddis.html&SM=about/about_menu.html
  7. Gaddis EJB, Vladich H, Voinov A (2006) Participatory modeling and the dilemma of diffuse nitrogen management in a residential watershed. Environ Model Softw 22:619–629Google Scholar
  8. Gaddis EJB, Falk HH, Ginger C, Voinov A (2009) Effectiveness of a participatory modeling effort to identify and advance community water resource goals in St. Albans, Vermont. Environ Model Softw. doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.06.004 Google Scholar
  9. Gray DM, Prowse TD (1993) Snow and floating ice. In: Maidment DR (ed) Handbook of hydrology. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Heathwaite L, Sharpley A, Gburek W (2000) A conceptual approach for integrating phosphorus and nitrogen management at watershed scales. J Environ Qual 29:158–166Google Scholar
  11. Hegman W, Want D, Borer C (1999) Estimation of Lake Champlain basinwide nonpoint source phosphorus export. Lake Champlain Basin Program Technical ReportGoogle Scholar
  12. Hession WC, Storm DE (2000) Watershed-level uncertainties: implications for phosphorus management and eutrophication. J Environ Qual 29:1172–1179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hyde K, Kamman N, Smeltzer E (1994) History of phosphorus loading to St. Albans Bay, 1850-1990. Technical report no. 7B, Lake Champlain Basin program, North Hero, VermontGoogle Scholar
  14. Krider JN (1999) Agricultural waste management field handbook. Part 651 national engineering handbook. Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  15. Madani K, Mariño MA (2009) System dynamics analysis for managing Iran’s Zayandeh-Rud river basin. Water Resour Manage 23:2163–2187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Magdoff F, Lanyon L, Liebhardt B (1997) Nutrient cycling, transformations, and flows: implications for a more sustainable agriculture. Adv Agron 60:1–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Male DH, Gray DM (1981) Snowcover ablation and runoff. In: Gray D, Male D (eds) Handbook of snow: principles, processes, management and use. Pergamon, Toronto, pp 360–436Google Scholar
  18. Maxwell T (1999) A parsi-model approach to modular simulation. Environ Model Softw 14:511–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Maxwell T, Costanza R (1995) Distributed modular spatial ecosystem modeling. Int J Computer Simul 5:247–262Google Scholar
  20. Maxwell T, Costanza R (1997a) A language for modular spatio-temporal simulation. Ecolog Model 103:105–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Maxwell T, Costanza R (1997b) An open geographic modelling environment. Simul J 68:175–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McCool DK, Brown LC, Foster GR (1987) Revised slope steepness factor for the Universal Soil Loss Equation. Trans Am Soc Agric Eng 30:1387–1396Google Scholar
  23. McDowell RW, Sharpley AN (2001) Approximating phosphorus release from soils to surface runoff and subsurface drainage. J Environ Qual 30:508–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Meals DW (1996) Watershed-scale response to agricultural diffuse pollution control programs in Vermont, USA. Water Sci Technol 33:197–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Meals DW, Cassell EA, Hughell D, Wood L, Jokela WE, Parsons R (2008) Dynamic spatially explicit mass-balance modeling for targeted watershed phosphorus management—I. Model development. Agric Ecosyst Environ 127:189–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Michaud AR, Beaudin I, Deslandes J, Bonn F, Madramootoo CA (2008) SWAT-predicted influence of different landscape and cropping system alterations on phosphorus mobility within the Pike River watershed of south-western Québec. Can J Soil Sci 87:329–344Google Scholar
  27. Neitsch SL (2000) Soil and water assessment tool: theoretical documentation. Grassland, Soil and Water Research Laboratory, TempleGoogle Scholar
  28. NRAES (1993) Silage production from seed to animal. NRAES-67, Northeast Regional Agricultural Engineering Service, USDA, SyracuseGoogle Scholar
  29. Oberts GL (1986) Pollutants associated with sand and salt applied to roads in Minnesota. Water Res Bull 22:479–483Google Scholar
  30. Post DM, Taylor JP, Kitchell JF et al (1998) The role of migratory waterfowl as nutrient vectors in a managed wetland. Conserv Biol 12:910–920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rao KHVD, Kumar DS (2004) Spatial decision support systems for watershed management. Water Resour Manage 18:407–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rendard KG, Foster GR, Weesies GA et al (1997) Predicting soil erosion by water: a guide to conservation planning with the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). Agriculture handbook number 703, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  33. Rykiel EJJ (1996) Testing ecological models: the meaning of validation. Ecol Model 90:229–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sharpley AN, Kleinman PJA, McDowell RW, Gitau M, Bryant RB (2002) Modeling phosphorus transport in agricultural watersheds: processes and possibilities. J Soil Water Conserv 57:425–439Google Scholar
  35. Shuttleworth WJ (1993) Evaporation. In: Maidment DR (ed) Handbook of hydrology. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Tim US, Mostaghimi S, Shanholtz VO (1992) Identification of critical nonpoint pollution source areas using geographic information systems and water quality modeling. Water Res Bull 28:877–887Google Scholar
  37. Thornthwaite C, Mather J (1957) Instructions and tables for computing potential evapotranspiration and the water balance. Laboratory of Climatology Publication No. 10. Centerton, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  38. USDA (1997) Part 630—hydrology. In: National engineering handbook. US Dept of Agriculture—Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VirginiaGoogle Scholar
  39. Voinov A, Voinov H, Costanza R (1999a) Landscape modeling of surface water flow: 2nd Patuxent watershed case study. Ecol Model 119:211–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Voinov A, Costanza R, Wainger L et al (1999b) Patuxent landscape model: integrated ecological economic modeling of a watershed. Environ Model Softw 14:473–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Voinov A, Fitz C, Boumans R et al (2004) Modular ecosystem modeling. Environ Model Softw 19:285–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. VTANR and NYDEC (2002) Lake Champlain Phosphorus Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Department of Environmental Conservation and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Waterbury, VT and Albany, NYGoogle Scholar
  43. Wood T, Bormann FH, Voigt GK (1984) Phosphorus cycling in a northern hardwood forest—biological and chemical control. Sci 223:391–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zeinivand H, De Smedt F (2009) Hydrological modeling of snow accumulation and melting on river basin scale. Water Resour Manage 23:2271–2287CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Gund Institute for Ecological EconomicsUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA
  2. 2.Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural ResourcesUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations