The Utility of Spatially Explicit Parameters in Phosphorus Water Quality Monitoring Graduate Student: Mark Breunig Graduate Advisor: Dr. Paul McGinley.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PROCESS-BASED, DISTRIBUTED WATERSHED MODELS New generation Source waters and flowpaths Physically based.
Advertisements

Ranking Brook Trout Habitat Patches for Resiliency to Climate Change Brad Trumbo And Mark Hudy USDA Forest Service Fish and Aquatic Ecology Unit James.
Water Resources Monitoring Strategy for Wisconsin: Building on Experience Mike Staggs, WDNR Bureau of Fisheries Management and Habitat Protection Acknowledgements:
Predicting the likelihood of water quality impaired stream reaches using landscape scale data and a hierarchical methodology Erin Peterson Geosciences.
Developing Modeling Tools in Support of Nutrient Reduction Policies Randy Mentz Adam Freihoefer, Trip Hook, & Theresa Nelson Water Quality Modeling Technical.
Forests and surface water eutrophication and sedimentation Dr Mary Kelly-Quinn, Dr Michael Bruen, Dr Ted Farrell, Dr Jan- Robert Baars, Dr Robert Cruikshanks,
Watershed Delineation and Characteristics on Alaska’s North Slope Matt Khosh University of Texas at Austin Department of Marne Science.
0 The National Hydrography Dataset Plus a tool for SPARROW Watershed Modeling Richard Moore (presented by Alan Rea)
National Hydrography Data Use and Applications.
Using the Maryland Biological Stream Survey Data to Test Spatial Statistical Models A Collaborative Approach to Analyzing Stream Network Data Andrew A.
Getting the Big Picture How to Look at Your Watershed Indiana Watershed Planning Guide,
Digital Elevation Model based Hydrologic Modeling Topography and Physical runoff generation processes (TOPMODEL) Raster calculation of wetness index Raster.
FE Watershed Analysis Lecture 1a - Overview Finn Krogstad UW Forest Engineering
Missouri Nutrient Criteria Plan Mark Osborn October 20, 2005.
Development of an internet-accessible tool for the identification of hydrologically sensitive areas (HSA’s) and the calculation of New York State phosphorous.
Remote Mapping of River Channel Morphology March 9, 2003 Carl J. Legleiter Geography Department University of California Santa Barbara.
Non-Point Source Pollutant Modeling Analysis and Prediction David Munn.
NYCDEP Evaluation of Watershed Management Programs FAD requirement: Last one ; Next FAD Assessment : Use models to evaluate effects.
Biological and Environmental Engineering Soil & Water Research Group Hydrological pathways in a glaciated watershed in the Catskill Mountains Adrian Harpold.
Soil Erosion Assessment using GIS and RUSLE model
Landscape and Urban Planning Volume 79, Issue 1Landscape and Urban Planning Volume 79, Issue 1, 15 January 2007, Pages Biological integrity in.
From Topographic Maps to Digital Elevation Models Daniel Sheehan IS&T Academic Computing Anne Graham MIT Libraries.
Northwest hydraulic consultants 2NDNATURE Geosyntec Consultants September 11, 2007 Urban Upland / Groundwater Source Category Group (UGSCG) Overview Presentation.
FNR 402 – Forest Watershed Management
Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee Debbie Arnwine Water Pollution Control
ArcHydro – Two Components Hydrologic  Data Model  Toolset Credit – David R. Maidment University of Texas at Austin.
SPARROW Surface Water Quality Workshop October 29-31, 2002 Reston, Virginia Section 5. Comparison of GIS Approaches, Data Sources and Management.
Assessing Linkages between Nearshore Habitat and Estuarine Fish Communities in the Chesapeake Bay Donna Marie Bilkovic*, Carl H. Hershner, Kirk J. Havens,
National Aquatic Resource Surveys Wadeable Streams Assessment Overview November, 2007.
Stream macroinvertebrate responses to landscape variables; an evaluation of rapid bioassessment techniques using a statistical modeling approach. Declan.
Response of benthic algae communities to nutrient enrichment in agricultural streams: Implications for establishing nutrient criteria R.W. Black 1, P.W.
The Effects of Vegetation Loss on the Two Elk Creek Watershed as a Result of the Proposed Vail Category III Ski Area Development CE 394 K.2 By Dave Anderson.
Chesapeake Bay Program’s Baywide and Basinwide Monitoring Networks: Options for Adapting Monitoring Networks and Realigning Resources to Address Partner.
LTHIA and Online Watershed Delineation - Tale of a DEM consumer Larry Theller,Bernie Engel, and Tong Zhai Purdue University Agricultural and Biological.
Adem.alabama.gov ADEM’s Monitoring Summary Reports Alabama – Tombigbee CWP Stakeholders Meeting Montgomery, Alabama 3 February 2010 Lisa Huff – ADEM Field.
1. The Study of Excess Nitrogen in the Neuse River Basin “A Landscape Level Analysis of Potential Excess Nitrogen in East-Central North Carolina, USA”
BOT / GEOG / GEOL 4111 / Field data collection Visiting and characterizing representative sites Used for classification (training data), information.
Relating Surface Water Nutrients in the Pacific Northwest to Watershed Attributes Using the USGS SPARROW Model Daniel Wise, Hydrologist US Geological Survey.
Building an OpenNSPECT Database for Your Watershed Shan Burkhalter and Dave Eslinger National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office for.
1 Contractor for the USGS at the EROS Data Center NHD Plus as a geospatial framework for drought indicators Jim Verdin.
Introduction to Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
Preparing input for the TOPKAPI (TOPographic Kinematic Approximation and Integration) model PRASANNA DAHAL.
Surface Water Surface runoff - Precipitation or snowmelt which moves across the land surface ultimately channelizing into streams or rivers or discharging.
Topics The Cart The Horse Answers to previously asked questions and comments on the comments to said questions Dan Obrecht – University of Missouri.
ISEMP Data Management System. Support entire workflow Based on required functions Based on understanding of the data ISEMP Data Management System.
ESTIMATION OF RIVER DISCHARGE WITH MODIS IMAGES The University of Tokyo, Institute of Industrial Science (IIS) Kohei Hashimoto and Kazuo Oki.
David Rounce. Outline Why Erosion Potential RUSLE Model Process of Project Relevance.
Using the NHDPlus for drainage area delineation and site matching Kirsten Cassingham, NC Water Science Center Silvia Terziotti, NC Water Science Center.
Water Quality Analysis of The Lower Colorado River Paula Kulis CE 394K.1.
1 Application of SDI in hydrology for assessment of hydropower potential of small streams Subija IZEIROSKI Bashkim IDRIZI Sotir PANOVSKI Igor NEDELKOVSKI.
Application of TOPMODEL GIS for Bear River Watershed
Tools for Tracking Healthy Watersheds
Modeling Source-water Contributions to Streamflow
Phosphorous Transport in Surface Overland Flow
watershed analysis of Oak Ridge
Spatial Models – Raster Stacy Bogan
An Integrated Approach for Subsidence Monitoring and Sinkhole Formation in the Karst Terrain of Dougherty County, Georgia Matthew Cahalan1 and Adam Milewski1.
Lauren Schneider CE394K.2 Surface Water Hydrology Dr. Maidment 4/28/05
L-THIA Online and LID in a watershed investigation
L-THIA Online and LID Larry Theller
in the Neversink River Basin, New York
Meng Lu and Edzer Pebesma
1. The Study of Excess Nitrogen in the Neuse River Basin
Terrain Analysis Using Digital Elevation Models (TauDEM)
SoE Guidance – Biological reporting sheets
The utility of spatially explicit variables in watershed scale phosphorus water quality modeling Mark Breunig GEOG 681.
Environmental Modelling with RASTER DEMs: Hydrologic Features
Evaluation of Proposed Controls Over Baseflow Phosphorus Concentrations in Wadeable Streams in Wisconsin Graduate Student: Mark Breunig Graduate Advisor:
Creating Watersheds and Stream Networks
Prioritizing Watershed Protection in King County
Presentation transcript:

The Utility of Spatially Explicit Parameters in Phosphorus Water Quality Monitoring Graduate Student: Mark Breunig Graduate Advisor: Dr. Paul McGinley 1

2 1.Background Information 2.Objectives 3.Methods 4.Discussion PRESENTATION OVERVIEW

3 1.Background Information 2.Objectives 3.Methods 4.Discussion PRESENTATION OVERVIEW

PHOSPHORUS Eutrophication …Models, Legislation

2001 – 157 sites 2002 – 78 sites 2003 – 5 sites Total: 240 sites R 2 = 43% p < 0.001

Water Chemistryug/l Secchi Depth106 Suspended Chlorophyll a 70 Average for category88 Benthic Benthic Chlorophyll a 39 Diatom Nutrient Index 57 Diatom Siltation Index 74 Diatom Biotic Index 72 Average for category61 Macroinvertebrates Hilsenhoff Biotic Index 88 Percent EPT Individuals 87 Percent EPT Taxa 91 Average for category 89 Fish Fish IBI 55 Percent Carnivores 55 Percent Intolerant 67 Average for category 59 Average of category averages 74 Total Phosphorus concentrations proposed by work group (ug/l) Least Impacted Reference Condition Minimum EffectCriteria Possible use in implementation Factor in ORW consideration Factor in ERW consideration Enforcement Level Streams – intermittent, headwater and mainstem for cold, cool and warm water natural communities Rivers

PHOSPHORUS Although efforts are underway to set stream standards in Wisconsin and elsewhere, there is still controversy regarding the mechanisms that control stream phosphorous concentrations. This represents a collective misunderstanding of the fundamental processes that control water quality at the catchment scale (Boomer et al. 2008).

8 WHAT? spatially explicit…

9 27% Land Use X

10 27% Land Use X

11 spatially explicit parameters… the location of landscape features within a watershed is significant -why?- flow path characteristics are a “driving factor” in this process

12 flow path characteristics surface overland flow only distance time topography connectivity run-on – cumulative effects?

13 1.Background Information 2.Objectives 3.Methods 4.Discussion PRESENTATION OVERVIEW

14 Objectives Derive spatially explicit parameters Demonstrate the utility of spatially explicit parameters

15 1.Background Information 2.Objectives 3.Methods 4.Discussion PRESENTATION OVERVIEW

16 Methods attempting to improve explained variation in observed data set Asses the utility of spatial parameters by… observed data set => over 200 sites across Wisconsin wade-able streams fixed monthly summer sampling Source: USGS

2001 – 157 sites 2002 – 78 sites 2003 – 5 sites Total: 240 sites R 2 = 43% p < 0.001

18 Methods 30m DEM - USGS 30m 2001 NALCD – USGS SSURGO (feature) – NRCS Robertson Watersheds Sampling Locations Raw Data – Water Quality Results Details of data management

19 Methods Details of data management OPERATION SSURGO Visual Basic/Arc Objects: For each county in Wisconsin 1.Query SSURGO database 2.Export query results as table 3.Join table to shapefile 4.Shapefile to 30m raster Next

20 Methods Details of data management OPERATION FLOWPATH Visual Basic/Arc Objects: For each pixel in watershed Calculate spatially explicit metric along flowpath Next

21 1.Background Information 2.Objectives 3.Methods 4.Discussion PRESENTATION OVERVIEW

Σ ( e FL ag * β ) Σ ( e FL all * β ) Pixel Value (proportion – no units)

23 Potential Barriers In Recognizing Signal SPATIAL SCALE TEMPORAL SCALE MATHMATICS WATER QUALITY METRIC BOUNDARY DELINEATION RANDOMNESS

24 SPATIAL SCALE

s Field-Scale vs. Basin-Scale Do remotely sensed basin-scale observations adequately represent surface overland flow paths? …sometimes *snap plus *micro-topology

Resolution Is 30m resolution enough? pixel

TEMPORAL SCALE

Properly Considering Time Is it appropriate to model surface overland flow path characteristics as a “long-term annual average” or must the time step be smaller? *wet years/dry years *variations in rainfall distribution *hour/minute time step – saturated areas

MATHMATICS

SUMMARY STATISTICS What is the best way of summarizing flow path characteristics for thousands of pixels – measures of central tendency?

WATER QUALITY METRIC

BOUNDARY DELINEATION

34 27% Land Use X

35 27% of “Watershed” not contributing but… % LU changes only 1% RANDOM SPATIAL CONFIGURATION?

HYDROLOGIC CONNECTIVITY Can the utility of spatially explicit parameters be demonstrated without accurately modeling hydrologic connectivity?

…Continued efforts generate a suite of spatially explicit parameters test utility of parameters

The Utility of Spatially Explicit Parameters in Phosphorus Water Quality Monitoring Graduate Student: Mark Breunig Graduate Advisor: Dr. Paul McGinley 38