Planning for Extremes Workshop
Planning for Extremes Workshop
November 1-3, 2006
Briefing Paper
Session 1: Reviewing the Case for Action
Objectives:
· Review and evaluate the evidence that incorporating variability in precipitation—particularly the frequency and intensity of server storms—explicitly into conservation planning is needed to adapt to a climate regime in which extreme precipitation events are more frequent and more severe.
· Characterize the severity of the threat to the
· Articulate a sense of the urgency with which this problem should be addressed.
· Set the stage for Sessions 1 and 2—identify the most important issues that should be discussed and resolved in order to recommend a course of action.
Dr. James Bruce, SWCS Canada
Dr. W. Trevor Dickinson,
Abstract: The study of the effects of a changing rainfall regime, as climate change, on erosion, sediment transport and water quality in the Canadian part of the
Apparent Changes in Rainfall Intensities, Possible Impacts on Soil Erosion and Sediment Yield, and Remediation Needs in
Abstract: This paper clarifies apparent changes (and the lack of changes) in extreme rainfall intensities in
Overview of findings from Great Lakes/Clean Water workshops
Mr. Craig Cox
Presentation
Simulated effect of change in precipitation regime on sediment, nutrient, and pesticide loss from farm fields in the
Dr. Robert Kellogg, Natural Resources Conservation Service
Mr. Steve Potter,
Abstract: Studies indicate that increasing the precipitation intensity or volume of storm events may increase soil erosion losses and sediment yields (SWCS, 2003). Since water movement into the soil and across the landscape is the primary mechanism driving the offsite movement of soils, nutrients, and pesticides, it follows that an increase in the occurrence frequency of extreme precipitation events would increase nutrient and pesticide losses. However, there is a paucity of literature identifying the specific nutrient and pesticide impacts that may be affected by changes in the precipitation regime. Furthermore, conservation practices that were designed and implemented based on the current precipitation regime may not provide the same conservation benefits under a precipitation regime having an increased occurrence frequency of extreme precipitation events. The efficacy of conservation practices with respect to possible precipitation regime changes is not well studied. We address the two issues through a simulation study of cropland in the
Session 2: Planning at Field/Farm Scale
Objectives:
· Develop an action agenda for improving our ability to plan for and manage the effect of variable precipitation and severe storms at the field and farm scale.
o Enhance planning tools (RUSLE 2 etc.).
o Strengthen practice standards and performance data.
o Identify research agenda.
o Other actions needed.
· Prioritize action agenda.
Dr. Daniel Yoder,
Presentation
Abstract: Planning has traditionally been done on either very short or very long time scales, depending on the purpose. The use of a single design storm for sizing a culvert or channel is a short-term example, while a long-term example would be use of average annual soil erosion for conservation planning. This presentation will use planning based on soil erosion by water to first argue that planners should make use of the entire range of time scales, depending on the available information and on the planning goals. For example, determining whether a construction site silt fence will fail might best be done on a design-storm basis, while sizing of a sediment basin should probably be done on the basis of accounting period ranging over some months, and determining the deterioration of the soil resource should be done on at least an annual basis. The presentation will then discuss the use of average values as opposed to a value based on some specific return period, and will end with a discussion of the need for long-term modeling of the situation regardless of the time interval on which the planning is done.
Single Storm Analysis for Conservation Planning
Dr. William Elliot,
Presentation
Abstract: Most current erosion prediction tools used for soil conservation planning are based on average annual erosion rates, or on erosion associated with a predetermined single “design storm.” The average annual method does not suit erosion prediction when a disturbance is for a single season, such as a wildfire in a forest, or a construction site, where it is more important to know the risk of a given erosion amount occurring during a single year, and what are the benefits gained by mitigation for that year. The design storm approach also has its limitations in that the return period associated with the design storm may not be the same as the return period associated with a given erosion event. A large storm occurring when the soil is dry may cause less runoff and erosion than a smaller event when the soil is saturated. An additional problem in the context of trying to incorporate climate change into the prediction is determining how to model the erosivity of an altered climate. Two tools that solve these problems have been developed for predicting erosion following wildfire by the USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station. Both interfaces are online, and are accessible by any web browser from anywhere in the world. The climate interface allows a user to easily alter average monthly temperatures, precipitation amounts, and number of wet days. Additional fields could be added to allow users to alter the peak storm intensity values. A second interface incorporates variability of climate, soil properties, and spatial distribution of disturbances following wildfire. This interface carries out a soil erosion event return period analysis using the Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) model. The climate is built by the online climate interface, the topography can be acquired by GIS tools, and the soils database is online. The output screens provide a summary of when the erosion events occurred, the sediment delivery associated with a given probability of occurrence, and the effectiveness of three types of mitigation (seeding, mulching, and installation of logs on the contour on hillsides). These interfaces demonstrate that erosion can easily be predicted for single storms, and that scenarios for different changing climatic conditions can readily be incorporated into soil erosion prediction and conservation practice analysis.
Implications for the Field: Planning in the
Implications for the Field: Planning in
Mr. Kevin J.G. McKague, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
Session 3: Planning at Watershed/Regional Scales
Objectives:
· Develop an action agenda for improving our ability to plan for and manage the effect of variable precipitation and severe storms at the watershed and regional scale.
o Enhance planning tools (SWAT etc.).
o Enhance targeting.
o Landscape restoration and management.
o Research agenda.
o Other actions needed.
· Prioritize action agenda.
Process-based Decision-Support for Impact Assessment of Extreme Events at the Watershed Scale
Dr. Chris Renschler, Dept. of Geography, SUNY
Presentation
Abstract: Geospatial modeling tools using environmental models and Geographic Information Science (GIScience) techniques are increasingly used for decision-making and policy-making in natural resources or natural hazards management. Extreme events as well as environmental or policy change, however, may change the scale of interest in assessing environmental processes to that extent that models are not applied at the scales for which they were created. The design and successful implementation of the Geospatial Interface for the Water Erosion Prediction Project (GeoWEPP) at the watershed scale illustrates the challenges and solutions to build valid and useful assessment tools for cumulative watershed effects analysis. GeoWEPP enables natural resources managers of agricultural, grassland, rangeland, and forests to assess the spatial and temporal scheduling of management activities. The design, development, implementation and validation of GeoWEPP is based on a formulation of an integrated data transformation and scaling theory allowing scientists of various disciplines to effectively collaborate, to design flexible process-based modeling approaches and to implement them as useful decision support tools. This research contributes to our fundamental understanding and ability to communicate how we (a) represent the spatiotemporal variability, extremes, and uncertainty of environmental properties and processes in the digital domain, how we (b) transform their spatiotemporal representation across scales during data processing and modeling in the digital domain, and how we design and develop tools for (c) geo-spatial data management and (d) geo-spatial process modeling and implement them to effectively (e) support decision- and policy-making in natural resources and hazard management at various spatial and temporal scales of interest. The great interest of the forest and rangeland management community in using GeoWEPP resulted in two successful consecutive grant proposals to the interagency Joint Fires Science Program to use GeoWEPP for post-fire rehabilitation of watersheds and as a fuel reduction tool to spatially and temporally schedule management activities in watersheds (cumulative watershed effects analysis). GeoWEPP has been used for an erosion potential analysis tool for various burned areas including the 200
Targeting within a Watershed: Focusing Policies, Information, and Practices
Dr. Jon Bartholic, Michigan Institute of Water Research
Mr. Anthony Friona, USACE Great Lakes Tributary Modeling Program
Dr. William Northcott,
Presentation
View on
Ms. Hazel Breton,
Presentation
Session 4: Challenge, Clarify, and Prioritize Action Plan
Objectives:
· Refine and Prioritize Action Plan Recommendations
· Outline next steps to complete project
Discussion:
· Strengths and weaknesses of preliminary conclusions.
· Clarify points of agreement and disagreement.
· Prioritize action items.

