69th SWCS International Annual Conference “Making Waves in Conservation: Our Life on Land and Its Impact on Water” July 27-30, 2014 Lombard, IL

1. Ammara Talib
M.S. Program- Water, Watersheds, and Wetlands
Department of Environmental Conservation
University of Massachusetts Amherst
Committee
Allison Roy
Paula Rees
Timothy Randhir
IMPACTS OF LAND USE LAND COVER CHANGE ON WATER
RESOURCES IN SUASCO WATERSHED MASSACHUSETTS
Ammara Talib
Timothy Randhir
Department of Environmental Conservation
University of Massachusetts Amherst

2. Hydrological balance and
Biogeochemical processes Impacts of LULC Change
 Interception
 Evapotranspiration (ET)
 Soil moisture
 Water balance
 Biogeochemical cycling of carbon,
nitrogen and other elements
 Increasing runoff rate and volume
 Decreasing groundwater recharge and
base flow
 More intense and frequent floods
 Elevated levels of sediments
 Increase in concentration of nutrients
[Kosmas et al., 1997; Marshall and Randhir, 2008, and Kim
et al., 2013]

3.  Changes in LAI lead to disturbance in
surface energy balance
 Correlation between storm runoff volume
and the amount of impervious cover
 Food availability
 Water access and utilization
 Operation of water infrastructure
Global Changes on Water balance are
aggravated by stressor of LULC

4. Sediment Loading Nutrient Loading/ Eutrophication
Soil Erosion is a leading cause of sediment loading Fish Kill because of Eutrophication

5.  Conceptual Model

Phosphorus Runoff
Watershed System
Abiotic Biosphere
Socio‐
Economics
Soil
Fire
Light
Water
Air
Plants
Animals
Population
Land Use
Water Quality
Nitrogen
Sediments
Markets
Water Quantity
Infiltration
Base Flow
LULC change
Pervious
Impervious
Policy
Framework

6. Precipitation
Base flow
Evapotranspiration
Snow
storage
Stream flow
Watershed System
LULC change
• Pervious
• Impervious
Stressor
Nutrients
Input Time series Hydrological Simulations
Total Runoff
Sediments
Policy
Framework
BMPs
Infiltration
Interception
storage
Soil storage
Ground water
storage
ET
HSPF

7. SuAsCo watershed
Three Rivers
One watershed
Rowing our boat against the current, between
wide meadows, we turn aside into the
Assabet. A more lovely stream than this, for a
mile above its junction with the Concord, has
never flowed on earth.
--Nathaniel Hawthorne

8. SuAsCo 2001 water quality assessment report

9. 1. Assess and calibrate baseline
biophysical processes in the
watershed system
2. Evaluate impacts of (LULC) change
water quantity (runoff)
3. Assess the impacts of (LULC) change
water quality (sediments, nitrogen and
phosphorus)
Fish Kill in Ben Smith impoundment
on the Assabet River in Stow

10.  HSPF Model
Modeled classes
1. Forest (46%)
2. Wetlands (17%)
3. Urban (Pervious) (16%)
4. Urban (Impervious) (14%)
5. Agriculture cropland (2.5%)
6. Agriculture-pasture (1.5%)
7. Barren or mining (1.4)
8. Upland shrub land (1.2%)
9. Grassland (1.2%)
 157 sub-basin with 157 streams
 157 FTABLEs

11. DEM
(18-228m)
Networked Hydro
Centerlines
+
Delineated Watershed

12. Bedford
Worcester WSO AP
Walpole 2
Segmented watershed
Represent the heterogeneity of a
model segment include:
(a) Rainfall or important
meteorological data
(b) Soil type
(c) Land use conditions
(d) Reach characteristics
(e) Any other important physical
characteristic (infiltration,
overland slope, etc.)

14. Regression of observed data from streams in
physiographic provinces
 Appalachian Plateau
 Ridge and Valley
 Piedmont provinces of the Mid-Atlantic Region
of the United States Ftable for outlet

15.  Observed data for 11 year (1974,
1979, 1984, 1985, 1987, 1999,
2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, and
2005) will be used for calibration
91
107
124
130
141
147
136
145
150
152
156
Reaches used for Calibration and validation

16.  Statistical tests of model results
1)Percent flow difference [calculated as: (total model flow–total
observed flow)/total observed flow]
(2) Regression coefficient: R2
(3) Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) [Nash and Sutcliffe, 1970].
T is number of days,
Qt,obs is the observed streamflow at t,
Qt-.obs is the average of the observed streamflow,
Qt,sim is the simulated streamflow at t.

17. 1. Meteorological Data
 Meteorological inputs from January 1973 to December 2008
 National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)
2. Land use/land cover data
 MassGIS.
 0.5 meter resolution digital ortho imagery captured in April 2005
 40 land use classes will be grouped into nine classes
3. Hydrography data Set
 MassDEP Hydrography layer
 surface water (lakes, ponds, and reservoirs), wetlands, bogs, flats, rivers, streams, and others. March 2010
 Finer layer of Networked Hydro Centerlines captured in july 1999 and obtained from MassGIS.
4. Digital Elevation Map (DEM)
 Basin DEM used in grid format.
 A (DEM) is a grid of elevations.
5. Soils data
 State Soil Geographic Database (STATSGO) from Unites states department of agriculture (USDA, 1994).

18. LULC Scenarios
Current LULC
2050 LULC
2100 LULC

19. Discharge Calibration at Concord R below R meadows Brook Gaging station
R² = 0.7742
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Scatter plot Observed Vs Simulated Flow
Observed Flow (Cfs)
SimulatedFlow(Cfs)

20. R² = 0.714
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Scattered Plot Observed Vs Simulated
Observed Daily Flow (Cfs)
SimulatedDailyFlow(Cfs)

21. Discharge Calibration at Nashoba Brook near Acton, MA
R² = 0.6149
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 100 200 300 400
Scatter Plot Observed Vs Simulated Daily Flow
Observed Daily Flow (Cfs)
SimulatedDailyFlow(Cfs)

22. R² = 0.7502
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Scattered Plot Observed Vs Simulated Daily Flow
Observed Daily Flow (Cfs)
SimulatedDailyFlow(Cfs)

23. • Baseline simulations closely match with the observed information
• LULC change will have impacts on water quality and water quantity
• Information about the fate and transport of runoff, sediments and
nutrients
• To estimate the impacts and compare levels of stress
• Information can be used in developing watershed management plans for
semi urban watershed areas
Anticipated Results and Management Implication

24. Thank You