Soil Conservation-GIS-Fennimore Fork


Published on

The objective of this project was to use GIS based modeling to find land most susceptible to erosion along the Fennimore Fork, a tributary of the Blue River which drains directly into the lower Wisconsin River.

Published in: Technology, Business
1 Comment
  • please allow people to share this document for the successes
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Introduce ourselves
  • CHELSEA-More specifically, our study area is along the Blue River, a tributary of Fennimore Creek which drains directly into the lower Wisconsin Riverway.-The resulting GIS model of areas prone to erosion will be used in conjunction with: land ownership maps- to determine specific parcels of interest-The Conservation Researve Program, from here on out refered to as the CRP, is a nationwide, voluntary program that works to enhance the environment by aiming to reduce sedimentation in streams and lakes, improve water quality, and protect wildlife habitat.
  • CHELSEA-We used the WETSPA Model-WETSPA is a process based model-We determined the best way to model areas most prone to soil erosion, using the available data, was to use a hydrologic model as opposed to a sediment loss model-Primary reason for this is that discharge data was not available for our study area-WETSPA actually predicts runoff. This, coupled with discharge data allowed us to calculate soil erosion susceptibility-WETSPA extension allowed us to spatially reference data
  • JOHN-Two types of models: 1) empirically based models -earlier models -based only on direct observation 2)process based models (or physically based models) -simulate actual processes -can make predictions -conceptual models are a hybrid of these two
  • CHELSEAStep 1 Process…
  • ChelseaParameters used in step 1…
  • TIM
  • Tim
  • TIM
  • JOHN
  • Tim
  • Chelsea
  • JOHN
  • Soil Conservation-GIS-Fennimore Fork

    1. 1. Soil Conservation on the Lower Wisconsin Riverway: GIS Modeling to Determine Prospective CRPCandidates Based on Soil Erosion Susceptibility in the Fennimore Fork Watershed
    2. 2. The Fennimore ForkWatershed exhibitscharacteristics that makeit prone to soil erosion Highly variable topography Farming throughout region Soil loss as threat to soil quality (Govers et al., 2004)
    3. 3. Study Area: Fennimore Fork Watershed• Fennimore Fork Watershed is asubwatershed within one ofeighteen watersheds draining intothe Lower Wisconsin Riverway
    4. 4. • Agriculture is the economic mainstay of the region• The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) is a nationwide, voluntary program that works in part to enhance the environment by reducing sedimentation in streams and lakes
    5. 5. • Use GIS modeling (WetSpa) to find land most susceptible to erosion in the Fennimore Fork Watershed of Grant County• Provide results to CRP to determine which land should be targeted for enrollment in the program.
    6. 6.  Process-based GIS based hydrologic model Watershed/catchment scale Simulate hydrograph (flood), water balance Hydrological attributes over watershed
    7. 7.  WetSpa can provide: • Spatial distribution of runoff velocity • Spatial distribution of runoff volume Define areas with high runoff velocity and volume as highly susceptible to soil erosion • Velocity is calculated over entire time period • Volume is calculated for specific storm events
    9. 9. PERMATERS DERIVED FROM EACH LAYERSoil Land Use Topography Flow DirectionConductivity Root Depth Stream Link Fill SinkResidual Moisture Manning’s Coefficient Mask Flow LengthPorosity Vegetated Fraction Stream Order Stream NetworkPore distribution Interception Capacity Slope of land/river SubwatershedIndex Leaf Area Index Stream width Hydraulic RadiusWilting pointField Capacity
    10. 10. Simulates basic hydrologic process in each cell Yongbo Liu, Ping Wang
    11. 11. LAND SOIL USE DEM PARAMETERS DERIVED FROM EACH LAYER CLIMATE INPUTS ABOVE WETSPA Precipitation, Temperature, Potential Evapotranspiration Vary Temporally, Not Spatially
    12. 12. Parameterize with DEM, WISCLand, and soils layer Yongbo Liu, Ping Wang
    13. 13.  Quartile classification: • Four classes with even distribution  Bottom left corner chunk is the town of Fennimore (impervious area)High  Dark red consideredLow highest
    14. 14. High Velocity Farmland Farmland with high velocity
    15. 15. Farmland with High RunoffHigh Velocity Volume in 11 Storm Events Intersect Farmland susceptible to erosion
    16. 16.  The red areas show up as high velocity and volume in all eleven storm events Therefore, these areas, while taking into account land ownership parcels, should be considered for enrollment in CRP
    17. 17. POTENTIAL ERROR FUTURE RESEARCH Bad news: Climate data not within  Run comparison of our study site results to soil classes most Good news: Within 5 miles susceptible to erosion to find No model is perfect even more conclusive 6-8 year difference in data from today results 30 meter raster pixel size – not  Assign addresses to land very precise with most susceptible areas TROUBLE ENCOUNTERED Our first time using this model so roadblocks required help from more experienced users – even a fix from the creator of the model
    18. 18. A special thank you to Ping Wang for all of her help, A-Xing Zhu for the guidance and WetSpa Model Author: Yongbo Liu
    19. 19.  Classification based results Calibration gives more accurate numeric results, not the objective of this study