Upper Big Walnut Creek, Ohio
An ARS Benchmark Research Watershed
- Characteristics
Upper Big Walnut Creek Watershed is an 11-digit HUC (05060001-130) located in central Ohio. The watershed is approximately 492km2 and is situated in Delaware (66%), Franklin (1%), Morrow (21%), Licking (9%), and Knox (3%) counties in Ohio. The watershed is comprised of 467 perennial and intermittent stream miles that drain into Hoover Reservoir. Hoover Reservoir has a residence time of 180 days and serves as source water for approximately 800,000 residents in and around Columbus. Average annual precipitation over the watershed is 1020 mm.
Four major soil associations are distributed throughout the watershed. The four
associations are the Amanda-Centerburg (3.5%), Bennington-Pewamo-Cardington
(60.0%), Cardington-Alexandra (14.8%), and Centerberg-Bennington (19.7%). Soils in
the Upper Big Walnut Creek watershed can generally be described as nearly level,
clayey, and poorly drained.
Crop production agriculture comprises the largest land use classification within the
watershed. The primary agricultural crops are corn, soybeans, and wheat. An extensive
portion of the watershed used for agricultural production is systematically tile-drained.
Without the tile systems, agricultural production would be limited. In addition to crop
production agriculture, a significant transition from agriculture to urban land use is
occurring in the watershed. Delaware County is rated in the top 10 most rapidly
urbanizing counties in the United States. The urban land use component is comprised
of single- and multi-unit dwellings as well as parks and golf courses. These land use
changes may significantly alter the hydrology and water quality characteristics of the
watershed.
+ Environmental Impacts
Average annual levels of atrazine in the reservoir have
fluctuated around the established MCL of 3µg L-1, and the Columbus Division of Water
has cited atrazine as well as other agrichemicals as potentially problematic in the future.
There exists a considerable potential for soil erosion in the watershed; however, based
on recent studies the projected life of the reservoir has been increased by 100 to 200
years (a positive that needs to be understood and accentuated).
+ Management Practices
1. drainage water management (554)
2. filter strips (393)
3. subsurface drainage (606)
4. nutrient management (590)
5. pesticide management (595)
6. waste utilization (633)
+ Research Objectives
General: Determine the watershed scale impact of voluntary, practical, and scientifically
based conservation practices.
Specific:
1. Evaluate the impact of specific conservation practices (CORE4, water table
management, soil amendments, point source/structural filters, etc.) on source
water quantity and quality.
Hypotheses:
a. Installation of a specified conservation practice will have a significant impact
on hydrology and pollutant loading.
b. Subsurface drainage is a significant component of the hydrologic balance and
pollutant transport.
c. The impact of a conservation management practice is inversely proportional
to the scale at which the impact is measured.
d. The physical and cropping characteristics (slope, time of concentration,
cropping rotation, etc.) of the landscape significantly affect the impact of a
conservation management practice.
e. The benefit of implementing conservation practices within a defined area is
proportional to the percentage of treated area.
2. Quantify the influence of differing landscapes, land uses, and land conversion on
water quantity and quality.
Hypotheses:
a. Conversion of agricultural lands to urban/suburban land use significantly alters
the hydrology and water quality of a watershed.
b. Commercial turfgrass systems significantly increase the amount of nutrients
and pesticides transported to surface water.
3. Assess the impact of land management practices on aquatic and terrestrial
habitat.
Hypotheses:
a. A conservation management practice will increase the diversity of the
terrestrial and aquatic habitat.
b. Significant increases in aquatic and terrestrial wildlife populations occur along
riparian corridors.
4. Determine the impact of conservation management practices on soil quality.
Hypothesis:
a. Conservation management practices will impact the physical and chemical
properties of the soil.
+ Approaches
This research program will be conducted in the Upper Big Walnut Creek Watershed in Ohio. The research approach includes field measurements from plots and nested, paired watersheds and incorporates model predictions. Three primary spatial scales will be investigated: edge-of-field (acres), small watershed (100s of acres), and large watershed (1000s of acres). Hydrology and water quality field data will be collected using automated samplers with and without control volumes. In each study area, storm event and base flow samples will be collected and analyzed, using standard methods, for pesticides, nutrients, and sediments. Each sampler will be programmed to record continuous 10-minute flow readings. Water quality samples including storm and base flow will be collected using a flow-proportional technique.
Water samples will be collected from March 1st to November 30th using a frequency
interval equivalent to 1 mm volumetric depth. During January, February, and December,
grab samples will be collected weekly when the streams are not frozen. Hydrology
measurements will be collected throughout the year. The modeling approach will be
carried out using the SWAT (Soil and Water Assessment Tool) model.
Hypothesis 1a: Field and modeling approaches will be used to assess the impact of a
specific practice on hydrology and water quality. The field portion of this research will
primarily be conducted on individual plots and fields. Baseline data on hydrology and
water quality will be collected for a period of at least one year prior to the change in or
installation of a specific management practice. After installation, hydrology and water
quality data will be collected for a period equivalent to the life of the practice. The
modeling portion of the assessment will be completed using the SWAT model. Different
practices will be tested to identify those that potentially offer the most benefit once
installed.
Hypothesis 1b: This hypothesis will be tested using field measurements. Hydrologic and
water quality data will be collected at strategic points within the small watersheds. The
strategic points will include tile outlets, with and without surface inlets as well as the
watershed outlet. This will permit the partitioning of excess water and chemical transport
between surface runoff and subsurface drainage.
Hypothesis 1c: This research will be accomplished by collecting hydrology and water
quality data at three different scales: edge-of-field (acres), small watershed (100s of
acres), and large watershed (1000s of acres). Hydrologic and water quality instruments
will be installed at the three different scales. A specific practice or combination of
practices will be implemented at the field level. After installation, the hydrology and
water quality impacts of that practice or practices will be measured at the three identified
points. The resulting data will permit the cascading impact of the practice(s) to be
determined.
Hypothesis 1d: This research will be conducted using individual fields and small
watersheds. Four small watersheds (2-pair), with a target drainage area of 1000 acres
each, have been instrumented with automated hydrologic and water quality sampling
equipment. Each pair of watersheds is characterized by different physical properties.
The impact of crop rotation will be tested using an individual pair of watersheds. The
impact of characteristics such as slope and time of concentration will be tested by
implementing identical conservation practices on contrasting watersheds. In each case,
water quality and hydrology will be measured over time to document different responses.
Hypothesis 1e: This research will be conducted at the small watershed (approximately
1000 acres) scale and will include both field and modeling efforts. The field assessment
will take advantage of the paired design. In each watershed pair, one watershed will be
designated a control and one a treatment. In the control watershed, implementation of
conservation practices will be held to a minimum. In the remaining watershed,
conservation practices will be promoted. The selected practices will be agreed upon
and implemented by NRCS and operators. In addition to the small watershed scale
assessment, watershed water quality models and long term climatic data will be used to
generate probability estimates of the water quality benefits achievable through
comprehensive implementation of specific conservation practices throughout these
watersheds.
Hypothesis 2a: Two similar watersheds within the larger UBWC watershed have been
selected for this assessment. Agriculture accounts for 75-80% of the land use in each
watershed. One watershed will be designated a treatment watershed and the second
will serve as a reference watershed. The treatment watershed is scheduled to undergo
significant development (2000 plus single unit dwellings) over the next 5-10 years.
Baseline data will be collected for as long as possible. Comparisons of the hydrologic
and water quality data will be made to the baseline data as well as data collected from
the reference watershed. Samples will be analyzed for a suite of chemicals commonly
found in agriculture and urban areas.
Hypothesis 2b: This hypothesis will be tested on a commercial turfgrass/golf course
facility within the larger UBWC watershed. The facility is approximately 200 acres in size
and is managed at a moderately intense level. Surface water from the adjacent
agricultural areas enters the course at two locations. The two inputs converge on the
course and exit through one outlet. Inflow and outflow data will be collected and
compared.
Hypothesis 3a: To be determined.
Hypothesis 3b: To be determined.
Hypothesis 4a: This hypothesis will be tested at the small watershed (approximately
1000 acres) scale. Four small watersheds have been instrumented for hydrologic and
water quality measurements. In each of these watersheds, detailed management data is
also being gathered. Each watershed contains three primary soil types and three
primary operators. Soils samples will be collected from three depths (0-6”, 6-12”, and
>12”) at two different locations for each soil type and operator, resulting in a total of 216
soil samples across the four watersheds. Soil samples will be taken from the same
locations every three years. The physical and chemical properties of the samples will be
related to the management over time.
+ Collaborators and Cooperating Agencies and Groups
Local landowners and operators, UBWC water quality partnership, Delaware County Soil
and Water Conservation District, The Ohio Environmental Council, Ohio State Extension
Service, Ohio EPA , Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources, City of Columbus, Ohio State
University, NRCS, Farm Service Agency