Virginia Tech
    • Log in
    View Item 
    •   VTechWorks Home
    • ETDs: Virginia Tech Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • Masters Theses
    • View Item
    •   VTechWorks Home
    • ETDs: Virginia Tech Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • Masters Theses
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Evaluation of a Water Budget Model for Created Wetland Design and Comparative Natural Wetland Hydroperiods

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Sneesby_EP_T_2019.pdf (10.01Mb)
    Downloads: 283
    Date
    2019-04-04
    Author
    Sneesby, Ethan Paul
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Wetland impacts in the Mid-Atlantic USA are frequently mitigated via wetland creation in former uplands. Regulatory approval requires a site-specific water budget that predicts the annual water level regime (hydroperiod). However, many studies of created wetlands indicate that post-construction hydroperiods frequently are not similar to impacted wetland systems. My primary objective was to evaluate a water budget model, Wetbud (Basic model), through comparison of model output to on-site water level data for two created forested wetlands in Northern Virginia. Initial sensitivity analyses indicated that watershed curve number and outlet height had the most leverage on model output. Addition of maximum depth of water level drawdown greatly improved model accuracy. I used Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) and root mean squared error (RMSE) to evaluate goodness of fit of model output against site monitoring data. The Basic model reproduced the overall seasonal hydroperiod well once fully parameterized, despite NSE values ranging from -0.67 to 0.41 in calibration and from -4.82 to -0.26 during validation. For RMSE, calibration values ranged from 5.9 cm to 12.7 cm during calibration and from 8.2 cm to 18.5 cm during validation. My second objective was to select a group of "design target hydroperiods" for common Mid-Atlantic USA wetland types. From > 90 sites evaluated, I chose four mineral flats, three riverine wetlands, and one depressional wetland that met all selection criteria. Taken together, improved wetland water budget modeling procedures (like Wetbud) combined with the use of appropriate target hydroperiod information should improve the success of wetland creation efforts.
    General Audience Abstract
    Wetlands in the USA are defined by the combined occurrence of wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and hydrophytic vegetation. Wetlands serve to retain floodwater, sediments and nutrients within their landscape. They may serve as a source of local groundwater recharge and are home to many endangered species of plants and animals. Wetland ecosystems are frequently impacted by human activities including road-building and development. These impacts can range from the destruction of a wetland to increased nutrient contributions from storm- or wastewater. One commonly utilized option to mitigate wetland impacts is via wetland creation in former upland areas. Regulatory approval requires a site-specific water budget that predicts the average monthly water levels (hydroperiod). A hydroperiod is simply a depiction of how the elevation of water changes over time. However, many studies of created wetlands indicate that post-construction hydroperiods frequently are not representative of the impacted wetland systems. Many software packages, called models, seek to predict the hydroperiod for different wetland systems. Improving and vetting these models help to improve our understanding of how these systems function. My primary objective was to evaluate a water budget model, Wetbud (Basic model), through comparison of model output to onsite water level data for two created forested wetlands in Northern Virginia. Initial analyses indicated that watershed curve number (CN) and outlet height had the most influence on model output. Addition of a maximum depth of water level drawdown below the ground surface greatly improved model accuracy. I used statistical analyses to compare model output to site monitoring data. The Basic model reproduced the overall seasonal hydroperiod well once inputs were set to optimum values (calibration). Statistical results for the calibration varied between excellent and acceptable for our selected measure of accuracy, the root mean squared error. My second objective was to select a grouping of “design target hydroperiods” for common Mid-Atlantic USA wetland types. From > 90 sites evaluated, I chose four mineral flats, three riverine wetlands, and one depressional wetland that met all selection criteria. Taken together, improved wetland water budget modeling procedures (like Wetbud) combined with the use of appropriate target hydroperiod information should improve the success of wetland creation efforts.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10919/88836
    Collections
    • Masters Theses [21208]

    If you believe that any material in VTechWorks should be removed, please see our policy and procedure for Requesting that Material be Amended or Removed. All takedown requests will be promptly acknowledged and investigated.

    Virginia Tech | University Libraries | Contact Us
     

     

    VTechWorks

    AboutPoliciesHelp

    Browse

    All of VTechWorksCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    Log inRegister

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    If you believe that any material in VTechWorks should be removed, please see our policy and procedure for Requesting that Material be Amended or Removed. All takedown requests will be promptly acknowledged and investigated.

    Virginia Tech | University Libraries | Contact Us