Understanding where groundwater recharge occurs is essential for managing groundwater resources, especially source-water protection. This can be especially difficult in remote mountainous landscapes ...where access and data availability are limited. We developed a groundwater recharge potential (GWRP) map across such a landscape based on six readily available datasets selected through the literature review: precipitation, geology, soil texture, slope, drainage density, and land cover. We used field observations, community knowledge, and the Analytical Hierarchy Process to rank and weight the spatial datasets within the GWRP model. We found that GWRP is the highest where precipitation is relatively high, geologic deposits are coarse-grained and unconsolidated, soils are variants of sands and gravels, the terrain is flat, drainage density is low, and land cover is undeveloped. We used GIS to create a map of GWRP, determining that over 83% of this region has a moderate or greater capacity for groundwater recharge. We used two methods to validate this map and assessed it as approximately 87% accurate. This study provides an important tool to support informed groundwater management decisions in this and other similar remote mountainous landscapes.
We hypothesized topographic features alone could be used to locate groundwater discharge, but only where diagnostic topographic signatures could first be identified through the use of limited field ...observations and geologic data. We built a geodatabase from geologic and topographic data, with the geologic data only covering ~40% of the study area and topographic data derived from airborne LiDAR covering the entire study area. We identified two types of groundwater discharge: shallow hillslope groundwater discharge, commonly manifested as diffuse seeps, and aquifer-outcrop groundwater discharge, commonly manifested as springs. We developed multistep manual procedures that allowed us to accurately predict the locations of both types of groundwater discharge in 93% of cases, though only where geologic data were available. However, field verification suggested that both types of groundwater discharge could be identified by specific combinations of topographic variables alone. We then applied maximum entropy modeling, a machine learning technique, to predict the prevalence of both types of groundwater discharge using six topographic variables: profile curvature range, with a permutation importance of 43.2%, followed by distance to flowlines, elevation, topographic roughness index, flow-weighted slope, and planform curvature, with permutation importance of 20.8%, 18.5%, 15.2%, 1.8%, and 0.5%, respectively. The AUC values for the model were 0.95 for training data and 0.91 for testing data, indicating outstanding model performance.
Distorting science, putting water at risk Sullivan, S. Mažeika Patricio; Rains, Mark C.; Rodewald, Amanda D. ...
Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science),
08/2020, Letnik:
369, Številka:
6505
Journal Article
Recenzirano
A recent rule is inconsistent with science and will compromise the integrity of U.S. waters.
The Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR) (
1
), which was published in April by the U.S. Environmental ...Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of the Army (“the Agencies”), has redefined “waters of the U.S.” (WOTUS) to restrict federal protection of vulnerable waters (
2
). With its emphasis on “continuous surface connections” and “permanence,” the NWPR removes or reduces protection for U.S. waters, including millions of miles of streams and acres of wetlands, many of which comprise headwaters that are critical for sustaining water quality and healthy watersheds (
3
) (see the figure). Although the Agencies claim to have “looked to scientific principles to inform” the NWPR, science has been largely ignored and oversimplified. These new exclusions are based on selective parsing of statutory language and earlier case law, rather than on previously established, science-based interpretations of the U.S. Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly known as the Clean Water Act (CWA) (
4
). The EPA's own Science Advisory Board (SAB) found sufficient evidence to conclude that “…the proposed Rule lacks a scientific justification, while potentially introducing new risks to human and environmental health” (
5
). Responding to this unprecedented distortion of science and rollback in water protections, which went into effect nationwide on 22 June, will require coordinated efforts among scientists, lawmakers, and resource managers.
Geographically isolated wetlands (GIWs), those surrounded by uplands, exchange materials, energy, and organisms with other elements in hydrological and habitat networks, contributing to landscape ...functions, such as flow generation, nutrient and sediment retention, and biodiversity support. GIWs constitute most of the wetlands in many North American landscapes, provide a disproportionately large fraction of wetland edges where many functions are enhanced, and form complexes with other water bodies to create spatial and temporal heterogeneity in the timing, flow paths, and magnitude of network connectivity. These attributes signal a critical role for GIWs in sustaining a portfolio of landscape functions, but legal protections remain weak despite preferential loss from many landscapes. GIWs lack persistent surface water connections, but this condition does not imply the absence of hydrological, biogeochemical, and biological exchanges with nearby and downstream waters. Although hydrological and biogeochemical connectivity is often episodic or slow (e.g., via groundwater), hydrologic continuity and limited evaporative solute enrichment suggest both flow generation and solute and sediment retention. Similarly, whereas biological connectivity usually requires overland dispersal, numerous organisms, including many rare or threatened species, use both GIWs and downstream waters at different times or life stages, suggesting that GIWs are critical elements of landscape habitat mosaics. Indeed, weaker hydrologic connectivity with downstream waters and constrained biological connectivity with other landscape elements are precisely what enhances some GIW functions and enables others. Based on analysis of wetland geography and synthesis of wetland functions, we argue that sustaining landscape functions requires conserving the entire continuum of wetland connectivity, including GIWs.
There are over 700 aquatic ecological assessment approaches across the globe that meet specific institutional goals. However, in many cases, multiple assessment tools are designed to meet the same ...management need, resulting in a confusing array of overlapping options. Here, we look at six riverine wetland assessments currently in use in Montana, USA, and ask which tool (1) best captures the condition across a disturbance gradient and (2) has the most utility to meet the regulatory or management needs. We used descriptive statistics to compare wetland assessments (
n
= 18) across a disturbance gradient determined by a landscape development intensity. Factor analysis showed that many of the tools had internal metrics that did not correspond well with overall results, hindering the tool’s ability to act as designed. We surveyed regional wetland managers (
n
= 56) to determine the extent of their use of each of the six tools and how well they trusted the information the assessment tool provided. We found that the Montana Wetland Assessment Methodology best measured the range of disturbance and had the highest utility to meet Clean Water Act (CWA§ 404) needs. Montana Department of Environmental Quality was best for the CWA§ 303(d) & 305(b) needs. The US Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Riparian Assessment Tool was the third most used by managers but was the tool that had the least ability to distinguish across a disturbance, followed by the US Bureau of Land Management’s Proper Functioning Condition.
Wetlands across the globe provide extensive ecosystem services. However, many wetlands - especially those surrounded by uplands, often referred to as geographically isolated wetlands (GIWs) - remain ...poorly protected. Protection and restoration of wetlands frequently requires information on their hydrologie connectivity to other surface waters, and their cumulative watershed-scale effects. The integration of measurements and models can supply this information. However, the types of measurements and models that should be integrated are dependent on management questions and information compatibility. We summarize the importance of GIWs in watersheds and discuss what wetland connectivity means in both science and management contexts. We then describe the latest tools available to quantify GIW connectivity and explore crucial next steps to enhancing and integrating such tools. These advancements will ensure that appropriate tools are used in GIW decision making and maintaining the important ecosystem services that these wetlands support.
Many headwater wetlands are integrated into flowpath networks and can serve as sources of streamflow for downgradient waters. We demonstrate this with five years of data in vernal pool, swale, and ...headwater stream complexes in the Central Valley, California. Long-term United States Geological Survey data suggest that the mean flow duration from the smallest watersheds in this region, including those with vernal pool, swale, and headwater stream complexes, is ~ 85 days per year. Our data concur, indicating that the annual days of flow per year from our vernal pool, swale, and headwater stream complexes ranges from ~ 20–200, but is ~ 85 when annual precipitation is 100% of normal. Peak stages are evident first in vernal pools which then propagate sequentially downstream through swales, headwater streams, and to the Sacramento River at celerities of ~ 1-1.5 m/s, consistent with expected flood wave velocities. Geospatial analyses show that these vernal pool, swale, and headwater stream features cover > 4% of the study area. Our results suggest these systems can be significant sources of streamflow, and therefore play an important role in maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of downstream waters, which has important implications for the definition of waters of the United States subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act.
Wetlands provide essential ecosystem services, including nutrient cycling, flood protection, and biodiversity support, that are sensitive to changes in wetland hydrology. Wetland hydrological inputs ...come from precipitation, groundwater discharge, and surface run-off. Changes to these inputs via climate variation, groundwater extraction, and land development may alter the timing and magnitude of wetland inundation. Here, we use a long-term (14-year) comparative study of 152 depressional wetlands in west-central Florida to identify sources of variation in wetland inundation during two key time periods, 2005–2009 and 2010–2018. These time periods are separated by the enactment of water conservation policies in 2009, which included regional reductions in groundwater extraction. We investigated the response of wetland inundation to the interactive effects of precipitation, groundwater extraction, surrounding land development, basin geomorphology, and wetland vegetation class. Results show that water levels were lower and hydroperiods were shorter in wetlands of all vegetation classes during the first (2005–2009) time period, which corresponded with low rainfall conditions and high rates of groundwater extraction. Under water conservation policies enacted in the second (2010–2018) time period, median wetland water depths increased 1.35 m and median hydroperiods increased from 46 % to 83 %. Water-level variation was additionally less sensitive to groundwater extraction. The increase in inundation differed among vegetation classes with some wetlands not displaying signs of hydrological recovery. After accounting for effects of several explanatory factors, inundation still varied considerably among wetlands, suggesting a diversity of hydrological regimes, and thus ecological function, among individual wetlands across the landscape. Policies seeking to balance human water demand with the preservation of depressional wetlands would benefit by recognizing the heightened sensitivity of wetland inundation to groundwater extraction during periods of low precipitation.
•We measured wetland inundation as a function of social and environmental variables.•Inundation was lowest in periods of high groundwater extraction and low rainfall.•Water conservation policies increased the duration and magnitude of inundation.•Inundation varied among vegetation classes with some not showing signs of recovery.•Wetlandscapes support diverse hydrological regimes in the absence of water stress.
Abstract
Non-floodplain wetlands (NFWs) are important but vulnerable inland freshwater systems that are receiving increased attention and protection worldwide. However, a lack of consistent ...terminology, incohesive research objectives, and inherent heterogeneity in existing knowledge hinder cross-regional information sharing and global collaboration. To address this challenge and facilitate future management decisions, we synthesized recent work to understand the state of NFW science and explore new opportunities for research and sustainable NFW use globally. Results from our synthesis show that although NFWs have been widely studied across all continents, regional biases exist in the literature. We hypothesize these biases in the literature stem from terminology rather than real geographical bias around existence and functionality. To confirm this observation, we explored a set of geographically representative NFW regions around the world and characteristics of research focal areas. We conclude that there is more that unites NFW research and management efforts than we might otherwise appreciate. Furthermore, opportunities for cross-regional information sharing and global collaboration exist, but a unified terminology will be needed, as will a focus on wetland functionality. Based on these findings, we discuss four pathways that aid in better collaboration, including improved cohesion in classification and terminology, and unified approaches to modeling and simulation. In turn, legislative objectives must be informed by science to drive conservation and management priorities. Finally, an educational pathway serves to integrate the measures and to promote new technologies that aid in our collective understanding of NFWs. Our resulting framework from NFW synthesis serves to encourage interdisciplinary collaboration and sustainable use and conservation of wetland systems globally.
PDF
