Search for: All records

Abstract Between the 1780 and 1980s, more than half of the wetlands in the conterminous US were lost. As wetlands have been lost, numerous artificial water features (AWFs), such as stormwater retention ponds, golf course water features, and reservoirs, have been constructed. We contrasted the loss of wetland area and perimeter to the gain of AWF area and perimeter and further explored how this transformation has altered the spatial characteristics of the waterscape. We conducted this analysis in the Tampa Bay Watershed, a large coastal watershed that lost 33% of its wetland area between the 1950s-2007. Trends have been towards fewer, smaller wetlands and more, smaller AWFs. The loss of wetland area far exceeds the gain in AWF area, leading to an overall loss of 23% of the combined wetland and AWF area. However, the loss of wetland perimeter almost equals the gain in AWF perimeter, leading to an overall loss of just 2% of the combined wetland and AWF perimeter. The loss of wetlands and gain of AWFs have predominantly occurred in different geographic locations, with the loss of wetlands predominantly in the headwaters and the gain in AWFs predominantly adjacent to Tampa Bay. Wetlands became further apart, though generally retained their natural distribution, while AWFs became closer to one another and now mirror the more natural wetland distribution. Overall, the physical structure of the waterscape of today is different than in the past, which likely reflects a change in functions performed and related ecological services provided at local and landscape scales. 

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. 

Abstract. American bison (Bison bison L.) have recovered from the brink ofextinction over the past century. Bison reintroduction creates multipleenvironmental benefits, but impacts on greenhouse gas emissions are poorlyunderstood. Bison are thought to have produced some 2 Tg yr−1 of theestimated 9–15 Tg yr−1 of pre-industrial enteric methane emissions,but few measurements have been made due to their mobile grazing habits andsafety issues associated with measuring non-domesticated animals. Here, wemeasure methane and carbon dioxide fluxes from a bison herd on an enclosedpasture during daytime periods in winter using eddy covariance. Methaneemissions from the study area were negligible in the absence of bison(mean ± standard deviation = −0.0009 ± 0.008 µmol m−2 s−1) and were significantly greater than zero,0.048 ± 0.082 µmol m−2 s−1, with a positively skeweddistribution, when bison were present. We coupled bison location estimatesfrom automated camera images with two independent flux footprint models tocalculate a mean per-animal methane efflux of 58.5 µmol s−1 per bison, similar to eddy covariance measurements ofmethane efflux from a cattle feedlot during winter. When we sum theobservations over time with conservative uncertainty estimates we arrive at81 g CH4 per bison d−1 with 95 % confidence intervalsbetween 54 and 109 g CH4 per bison d−1. Uncertainty wasdominated by bison location estimates (46 % of the total uncertainty),then the flux footprint model (33 %) and the eddy covariance measurements(21 %), suggesting that making higher-resolution animal location estimatesis a logical starting point for decreasing total uncertainty. Annualmeasurements are ultimately necessary to determine the full greenhouse gasburden of bison grazing systems. Our observations highlight the need tocompare greenhouse gas emissions from different ruminant grazing systems anddemonstrate the potential for using eddy covariance to measure methaneefflux from non-domesticated animals.