DOCSLIB.ORG

Drainage for Salinity Control at Pithara

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Government of Western Australia Department of Water Drainage for salinity control at Pithara Department of Water 168 St Georges Terrace, Perth, Western Australia PO Box K822 Perth Western Australia 6842 Phone: (08) 6364 7600 Fax: (08) 6364 7601 www.water.wa.gov.au ter needs all our wa g after Lookin Salinity and land use impacts series Report no. SLUI 46 November 2010 Drainage for salinity control at Pithara by NM Cox Department of Water Salinity and land use impacts series Report no. SLUI 46 November 2010 Drainage to control salinity at Pithara SLUI 46 Salinity and land use impacts series Department of Water 168 St Georges Terrace Perth Western Australia 6000 Telephone +61 8 6364 7600 Facsimile +61 8 6364 7601 www.water.wa.gov.au © Government of Western Australia 2010 November 2010 This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in unaltered form only (retaining this notice) for your personal, non-commercial use or use within your organisation. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, all other rights are reserved. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Department of Water. ISSN 1447-7394 (print) 1449-5252 (online) ISBN 978-1-921637-18-6 (print) 978-1-921637-19-3 (online) 978-1-921789-75-5 (Appendix CD) Recommended reference Cox, NM 2010, Drainage for salinity control at Pithara, Salinity and land use impacts series, Report no. SLUI 46, Department of Water, Perth. Acknowledgements The Department of Water thanks the following for their contributions to this case study and publication: Kingsley and Paula Roach, owners of Petrador Farms, Pithara; Sylvia Tetlow for groundwater monitoring and data management; the Department of Water Swan-Goldfields hydrographical group for water monitoring; Water Information for data collation and management and Peter Geste for water sampling for chemical analysis and Alex Waterhouse for editing. For more information about this report, contact: Nick M Cox Salinity and Water Resource Recovery Branch Department of Water Telephone +61 8 6364 7804. Disclaimer This document has been published by the Department of Water. Any representation, statement, opinion or advice expressed or implied in this publication is made in good faith and on the basis that the Department of Water and its employees are not liable for any damage or loss whatsoever which may occur as a result of action taken or not taken, as the case may be in respect of any representation, statement, opinion or advice referred to herein. Professional advice should be obtained before applying the information contained in this document to particular circumstances. This publication is available at our website <www.water.wa.gov.au>. Contact the department for alternative formats such as audio, large print or Braille for those with special needs. Cover photograph: The downstream drain gauging station at the Pithara site Photographer: Nick Cox Salinity and land use impacts series Drainage for salinity control at Pithara SLUI 46 Contents Summary ................................................................................................................... vii 1 Introduction.............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Objectives ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Supporting information ..................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Errors and accuracy ......................................................................................................... 2 2 Pithara drainage site ............................................................................................... 4 2.1 Climate ............................................................................................................................. 5 2.2 Land use .......................................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Topography and natural drainage .................................................................................... 8 2.4 Soils ................................................................................................................................. 9 2.5 Geology and hydrogeology ............................................................................................ 11 2.6 Watertables and salinity ................................................................................................. 13 3 Pithara project design and methods ...................................................................... 15 3.1 Drain design and construction ........................................................................................ 15 3.2 Monitoring and measurements ....................................................................................... 17 4 Results .................................................................................................................. 20 4.1 Groundwater level responses to the drain ...................................................................... 20 4.2 Groundwater salinity ...................................................................................................... 21 4.3 Groundwater pH ............................................................................................................. 24 4.4 Groundwater chemistry .................................................................................................. 26 4.5 Upstream drain discharge .............................................................................................. 27 4.6 Downstream drain discharge ......................................................................................... 32 5 Water and salt balances ........................................................................................ 36 5.1 Drainage site .................................................................................................................. 37 5.2 Water balance for the upstream drainage site ............................................................... 38 5.3 Water balances for the drains ........................................................................................ 41 5.4 Salt balance for the upstream drainage site ................................................................... 42 5.5 Salt balances for the drains ............................................................................................ 43 6 Discussion ............................................................................................................. 45 6.1 Groundwater inflows ...................................................................................................... 45 6.2 Total drain discharges .................................................................................................... 46 6.3 Groundwater response ................................................................................................... 47 6.4 Salt land recovery .......................................................................................................... 49 6.5 Drain performance simulation ........................................................................................ 51 6.6 Construction costs .......................................................................................................... 56 7 Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 57 Department of Water iii Drainage to control salinity at Pithara SLUI 46 Salinity and land use impacts series Appendix A Watertable responses ...................................................................... 58 A.1 Comparison bores ......................................................................................................... 58 A.2 Transect 1 ..................................................................................................................... 59 A.3 Transect 2 ..................................................................................................................... 61 A.4 Transect 3 ..................................................................................................................... 65 A.5 Transect 4 ..................................................................................................................... 67 Appendix B Water balance methodology ............................................................. 70 B.1 Bounded and unbounded drains ................................................................................... 70 B.2 Drain inflows, discharges and loads .............................................................................. 72 B.3 Groundwater heads and drain discharge ....................................................................... 75 B.4 Aquifer storage change ................................................................................................. 77 B.5 Rainfall recharge ........................................................................................................... 80 B.6 Aquifer discharge .......................................................................................................... 81 B.7 Capillary discharge and groundwater evaporation ......................................................... 84 Glossary and abbreviations ......................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Groundwater Recharge from a Changing Landscape

    Groundwater Recharge from a Changing Landscape

    ST. ANTHONY FALLS LABORATORY Engineering, Environmental and Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Project Report No. 490 Groundwater Recharge from a Changing Landscape by Timothy Erickson and Heinz G. Stefan Prepared for Minnesota Pollution Control Agency St. Paul, Minnesota May, 2007 Minneapolis, Minnesota The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, religion, color, sex, national origin, handicap, age or veteran status. 2 Abstract Urban development of rural and natural areas is an important issue and concern for many water resource management organizations and wildlife organizations. Change in groundwater recharge is one of the many effects of urbanization. Groundwater supplies to streams are necessary to sustain cold water organisms such as trout. An investigation of the changes of groundwater recharge associated with urbanization of rural and natural areas was conducted. The Vermillion River watershed, which is both a world class trout stream and on the fringes of the metro area of Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota, was used for a case study. Substantial changes in groundwater recharge could destroy the cold water habitat of trout. In this report we give first an overview of different methods available to estimate recharge. We then present in some detail two models to quantify the changes in recharge that can be expected in a developing area. We finally apply these two models to a tributary watershed of the Vermillion River. In this report we discuss several techniques that can be used to estimate groundwater recharge: (1) the recession-curve-displacement method and (2) the base-flow-separation method that both use only streamflow records (Rutledge 1993, Lee and Chen 2003); (3) a recharge map developed by the USGS for the state of Minnesota (Lorenz and Delin 2007); (4) a minimal recharge map developed by the Minnesota Geological Survey using statistical methods (Ruhl et al.
  • A Fast, Physically-Based Subglacial Hydrology Model for Continental-Scale Application

    A Fast, Physically-Based Subglacial Hydrology Model for Continental-Scale Application

    , BrAHMs V1.0: A fast, physically-based subglacial hydrology model for continental-scale application. Mark Kavanagh1 and Lev Tarasov2 1Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL, Canada 2Dept. of Physics and Physical Oceanography, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL, Canada Correspondence to: Lev Tarasov ([email protected]) Abstract. We present BrAHMs (BAsal Hydrology Model): a physically-based basal hydrology model which represents water flow using Darcian flow in the distributed drainage regime and a fast down-gradientsolver in the channelized regime. Switching from distributed to channelized drainage occurs when appropriate flow conditions are met. The model is designed for long- 5 term integrations of continental ice sheets. The Darcian flow is simulated with a robust combination of the Heun and leapfrog- trapezoidal predictor-corrector schemes. These numerical schemes are applied to a set of flux-conserving equations cast over a staggered grid with water thickness at the centres and fluxes defined at the interface. Basal conditions (e.g. till thickness, hydraulic conductivity) are parameterized so the model is adaptable to a variety of ice sheets. Given the intended scales, basal water pressure is limited to ice overburden pressure, and dynamic time-stepping is used to ensure that the CFL condition is met 10 for numerical stability. The model is validated with a synthetic ice sheet geometry and different bed topographies to test basic water flow properties and mass conservation. Synthetic ice sheet tests show that the model behaves as expected with water flowing down-gradient, forming lakes in a potential well or reaching a terminus and exiting the ice sheet.
  • Miami-Dade County Drainage and Canals Flood Complaint Form

    Miami-Dade County Drainage and Canals Flood Complaint Form

    MIAMI-DADE COUNTY DRAINAGE AND CANALS FLOOD COMPLAINT FORM Service Request # _____________ Complaint Date Time AM PM Resident/Complainant Name Address Telephone Nearest Street Intersection of Flooding or Location of Flooding Is this the first time you report this? Yes No If No, date PLEASE SELECT ONLY ONE (1) COMPLAINT TYPE AND ANSWER RELATED QUESTIONS FOR BETTER SERVICE Type of Complaint 302 Clogged Storm Drain Is the water on top of drain now? Yes No How long does it take for the water to drain? What is the exact location of the drain? Is the area a new development? Yes No Was there a recent drainage project in the area? Yes No 303 Standing Water (No Drain) How deep is the water? How hard did it rain? Light Moderate Heavy Is your property flooded? Yes No Is your property in a new development? Yes No Where is the nearest drain? Flooding/Standing Water (Localized) Is the water flooding the inside of your residence? Yes No Is the water in your driveway / swale? Yes No Is the water across the roadway? Yes No Is it affecting traffic? Yes No How long does the water remain after rainfall? Page 1 of 2 MIAMI-DADE COUNTY DRAINAGE AND CANALS FLOOD COMPLAINT FORM Canal Complaints Solid waste (floating debris, bottles, cans, etc.) present Aquatic vegetation overgrown Needs mowing / treating vegetation on canal bank Bank instability due to Erosion / Collapses are present Culvert cleaning needed Damaged culvert / Headwall Encroachment of Easement / Right of Way Cutting / trimming of trees on a canal Right of Way needed Damaged Guardrails / Fence Canal Signs damaged / down Other Other Nature of Complaint For more information, call (305) 372-6688 Page 2 of 2 .
  • Acid Sulfate Soil Materials

    Acid Sulfate Soil Materials

    Site contamination —acid sulfate soil materials Issued November 2007 EPA 638/07: This guideline has been prepared to provide information to those involved in activities that may disturb acid sulfate soil materials (including soil, sediment and rock), the identification of these materials and measures for environmental management. What are acid sulfate soil materials? Acid sulfate soil materials is the term applied to soils, sediment or rock in the environment that contain elevated concentrations of metal sulfides (principally pyriteFeS2 or monosulfides in the form of iron sulfideFeS), which generate acidic conditions when exposed to oxygen. Identified impacts from this acidity cause minerals in soils to dissolve and liberate soluble and colloidal aluminium and iron, which may potentially impact on human health and the environment, and may also result in damage to infrastructure constructed on acid sulfate soil materials. Drainage of peaty acid sulfate soil material also results in the substantial production of the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitrous oxide (N2O). The oxidation of metal sulfides is a function of natural weathering processes. This process is slow however, and, generally, weathering alone does not pose an environmental concern. The rate of acid generation is increased greatly through human activities which expose large amounts of soil to air (eg via excavation processes). This is most commonly associated with (but not necessarily confined to) mining activities. Soil horizons that contain sulfides are called ‘sulfidic materials’ (Isbell 1996; Soil Survey Staff 2003) and can be environmentally damaging if exposed to air by disturbance. Exposure results in the oxidation of pyrite. This process transforms sulfidic material to sulfuric material when, on oxidation, the material develops a pH 4 or less (Isbell 1996; Soil Survey Staff 2003).
  • 6Th Biennial Stormwater Research and Watershed Management Conference

    6Th Biennial Stormwater Research and Watershed Management Conference

    PROCEEDINGS 6th Biennial Stormwater Research and Watershed Management Conference September 14–17, 1999 • Tampa, Florida PROCEEDINGS OF THE SIXTH BIENNIAL STORMWATER RESEARCH AND WATERSHED MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 14-17, 1999 FOUR POINTS SHERATON HOTEL TAMPA EAST TAMPA, FLORIDA Sponsored by the: Southwest Florida Water Management District Published by the: Southwest Florida Water Management District 2379 Broad Street Brooksville, Florida, 34609-6899 (352)796-7211 The Southwest Florida Water Management District (District) does not discriminate upon the basis of any individual’s disability status. This non-discrimination policy involves every aspect of the District’s functions, including one’s access to, participation, employment, or treatment in its programs or activities. Anyone requiring reasonable accommodation as provided for in the Americans With Disabilities Act should contact Gwen Brown, Resource Management Department, at (352) 796-7211 or 1-(800) 423-1476 (Florida), extension 4226; TDD ONLY 1-(800) 231-6103 (Florida); FAX (352) 754-6885/SUNCOM 663-6885. i Sixth Biennial Stormwater Research & Watershed Management Conference September 14-17, 1999 FOREWORD This conference is the sixth in a continuing series of symposia sponsored by the Southwest Florida Water Management District to disseminate the findings of current stormwater research, as well as the latest developments in watershed management. The conference was designed to provide a forum from which a wide range of stormwater treatment and watershed management ideas and issues could be discussed and debated, and where research results could receive initial peer review. The ultimate goal of the conference is to present the engineers, scientists, and regulators working in the field of stormwater and watershed management with the most current ideas and data available so that more efficient and cost-effective best management practices can be developed and implemented.
  • Drainage Water Management R

    Drainage Water Management R

    doi:10.2489/jswc.67.6.167A RESEARCH INTRODUCTION Drainage water management R. Wayne Skaggs, Norman R. Fausey, and Robert O. Evans his article introduces a series of the most productive in the world. Drainage needed. Drainage water management, or papers that report results of field ditches or subsurface drains (tile or plastic controlled drainage, emerged as an effec- T studies to determine the effec- drain tubing) are used to remove excess tive practice for reducing losses of N in tiveness of drainage water management water and lower water tables, improve traf- drainage waters in the 1970s and 1980s. (DWM) on conserving drainage water ficability so that field operations can be The practice is inherently based on the and reducing losses of nitrogen (N) to sur- done in a timely manner, prevent water fact that the same drainage intensity is face waters. The series is focused on the logging, and increase yields. Drainage is not required all the time. It is possible to performance of the DWM (also called also needed to manage soil salinity in irri- dramatically reduce drainage rates during controlled drainage [CD]) practice in the gated arid and semiarid croplands. some parts of the year, such as the winter US Midwest, where N leached from mil- Drainage has been used to enhance crop months, without negatively affecting crop lions of acres of cropland contributes to production since the time of the Roman production. Drainage water management surface water quality problems on both Empire, and probably earlier (Luthin may also be used after the crop is planted local and national scales.
  • The Groundwater Recharge Function of Small Wetlands in the Semi-Arid Northern Prairies

    The Groundwater Recharge Function of Small Wetlands in the Semi-Arid Northern Prairies

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Great Plains Research: A Journal of Natural and Social Sciences Great Plains Studies, Center for Spring 1998 The Groundwater Recharge Function of Small Wetlands in the Semi-Arid Northern Prairies Garth van der Kamp National Hydrology Research Institute, Environment Canada Masaki Hayashi University of Calgary, Canada Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsresearch Part of the Other International and Area Studies Commons van der Kamp, Garth and Hayashi, Masaki, "The Groundwater Recharge Function of Small Wetlands in the Semi-Arid Northern Prairies" (1998). Great Plains Research: A Journal of Natural and Social Sciences. 366. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsresearch/366 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Great Plains Studies, Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Plains Research: A Journal of Natural and Social Sciences by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Great Plains Research 8 (Spring 1998):39-56 © Copyright by the Center for Great Plains Studies THE GROUNDWATER RECHARGE FUNCTION OF SMALL WETLANDS IN THE SEMI-ARID NORTHERN PRAIRIES Garth van der Kamp National Hydrology Research Institute, Environment Canada 11 Innovation Boulevard, Saskatoon, SK Canada S7N 3H5 and Masaki Hayashi Department ofGeology and Geophysics, University of Calgary 2500 University Drive, Calgary, AB Canada T2N IN4 Abstract. Small wetlands in the semi-arid northern prairie region are focal pointsfor groundwater recharge. Hence the groundwater recharge function of the wetlands is an important consideration in development of wetland conservation policies.
  • Drainage Engineering

    Drainage Engineering

    Drainage Engineering Dr. M K Jha Prof. K Yellareddy Drainage Engineering -: Course Content Developed By:- Dr. M K Jha Professor Dept. of Agricultural and Food Engg., IIT Kharagpur -: Content Reviewed by :- Prof. K Yellareddy Director (A&R) Walamtari, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad Index Lesson Page No Module 1: Basics of Agricultural Drainage Lesson 1 Introduction to Land Drainage 5-12 Lesson 2 Land Drainage Systems 13-15 Module 2: Surface and Subsurface Drainage Systems Lesson 3 Design of Surface Drainage Systems 16-33 Lesson 4 Design of Subsurface Drainage Systems 34-48 Lesson 5 Investigation of Drainage Design Parameters 49-64 Module 3: Subsurface Flow to Drains and Drainage Equations Lesson 6 Steady-State Flow to Drains 65-83 Lesson 7 Unsteady-State Flow to Drains 84-95 Lesson 8 Special Drainage Situations 96-104 Module 4: Construction of Pipe Drainage Systems Lesson 9 Materials for Pipe Drainage Systems 105-111 Lesson 10 Layout and Installation of Pipe Drains 112-119 Module 5: Drainage for Salt Control Lesson 11 Drainage of Irrigated, Humid and Coastal 120-130 Regions Lesson 12 Vertical Drainage and Biodrainage Systems 131-138 Lesson 13 Salt Balance of Irrigated Land 139-149 Lesson 14 Reclamation of Chemically Degraded Soils 150-163 Lesson 15 Salient Case Studies on Drainage and Salt 164-186 Management Module 6: Economics of Drainage Lesson 16 Economic Evaluation of Drainage Projects 187-193 ******☺****** This Book Download From e-course of ICAR Visit for Other Agriculture books, News, Recruitment, Information, and Events at www.agrimoon.com Give FeedBack & Suggestion at [email protected] Send a Massage for daily Update of Agriculture on WhatsApp +91-7900 900 676 Disclaimer: The information on this website does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of the courseware contents.
  • 17 Major Drainage Basins

    17 Major Drainage Basins

    HUC 8 HYDROLOGIC UNIT NAME CLINTON 04120101 Chautauqua-Conneaut FRANKLIN 04150409 CHAMPLAIN MASSENA FORT COVINGTON MOOERS ST LAWRENCE CLINTON 04120102 Cattaraugus BOMBAY WESTVILLE CONSTABLE CHATEAUGAY NYS Counties & BURKE LOUISVILLE 04120103 Buffalo-Eighteenmile BRASHER 04150308 CHAZY ALTONA ELLENBURG BANGOR WADDINGTON NORFOLK MOIRA 04120104 Niagara ESSEX MALONE DEC Regions JEFFERSON 6 04150307 BEEKMANTOWN MADRID 05010001 Upper Allegheny LAWRENCE BELLMONT STOCKHOLM DANNEMORA BRANDON DICKINSON PLATTSBURGH LEWIS OGDENSBURG CITY LISBON 05010002 Conewango 5 PLATTSBURGH CITY HAMILTON POTSDAM SCHUYLER FALLS SARANAC 05010004 French WARREN OSWEGATCHIE DUANE OSWEGO 04150306 PERU 04130001 Oak Orchard-Twelvemile CANTON PARISHVILLE ORLEANS WASHINGTON NIAGARA DE PEYSTER ONEIDA MORRISTOWN HOPKINTON WAVERLY PIERREPONT FRANKLIN 04140101 Irondequoit-Ninemile AUSABLE MONROE WAYNE BLACK BROOK FULTON SARATOGA DEKALB HERKIMER BRIGHTON GENESEE SANTA CLARA CHESTERFIELD 04140102 Salmon-Sandy ONONDAGA NYS Major 04150406 MACOMB 04150304 HAMMOND ONTARIO MADISON MONTGOMERY RUSSELL 04150102 Chaumont-Perch ERIE SENECA CAYUGA SCHENECTADY HERMON WILLSBORO ST ARMAND WILMINGTON JAY WYOMING GOUVERNEUR RENSSELAER ALEXANDRIA CLARE LIVINGSTON YATES 04130002 Upper Genesee OTSEGO ROSSIE COLTON CORTLAND ALBANY ORLEANS 04150301 04150404 SCHOHARIE ALEXANDRIA LEWIS 7 EDWARDS 04150408 CHENANGO FOWLER ESSEX 04130003 Lower Genesee 8 TOMPKINS CLAYTON SCHUYLER 9 4 THERESA 04150302 TUPPER LAKE HARRIETSTOWN NORTH ELBA CHAUTAUQUA CATTARAUGUS PIERCEFIELD 02050104 Tioga ALLEGANY STEUBEN
  • Development of Technical and Financial Norms and Standards for Drainage of Irrigated Lands

    Development of Technical and Financial Norms and Standards for Drainage of Irrigated Lands

    DEVELOPMENT OF TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL NORMS AND STANDARDS FOR DRAINAGE OF IRRIGATED LANDS Volume 1 Research Report Report to the WATER RESEARCH COMMISSION By AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH COUNCIL Institute for Agricultural Engineering Private Bag X519, Silverton, 0127 Mr FB Reinders1, Dr H Oosthuizen2, Dr A Senzanje3, Prof JC Smithers3, Mr RJ van der Merwe1, Ms I van der Stoep4, Prof L van Rensburg5 1ARC-Institute for Agricultural Engineering 2OABS Development 3University of KwaZulu-Natal; 4Bioresources Consulting 5University of the Free State WRC Report No. 2026/1/15 ISBN 978-1-4312-0759-6 January 2016 Obtainable from Water Research Commission Private Bag X03 Gezina, 0031 South Africa [email protected] or download from www.wrc.org.za This report forms part of a series of three reports. The reports are: Volume 1: Research Report. Volume 2: Supporting Information Relating to the Updating of Technical Standards and Economic Feasibility of Drainage Projects in South Africa. Volume 3: Guidance for the Implementation of Surface and Sub-surface Drainage Projects in South Africa DISCLAIMER This report has been reviewed by the Water Research Commission (WRC) and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the WRC, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. © Water Research Commission EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report concludes the directed Water Research Commission (WRC) Project “Development of technical and financial norms and standards for drainage of irrigated lands”, which was undertaken during the period April 2010 to March 2015. The main objective of the Project was to develop technical and financial norms and standards for the drainage of irrigated lands in Southern Africa that resulted in a report and manual for the design, installation, operation and maintenance of drainage systems.
  • Pine Knot Mine Drainage Tunnel –

    Pine Knot Mine Drainage Tunnel –

    QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF STREAM WATER DRAINING MINED AREAS OF THE UPPER SCHUYLKILL RIVER BASIN, SCHUYLKILL COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, USA, 2005-20071 Charles A. Cravotta III,2 and John M. Nantz Abstract: Hydrologic effects of abandoned anthracite mines were documented by continuous streamflow gaging coupled with synoptic streamflow and water- quality monitoring in headwater reaches and at the mouths of major tributaries in the upper Schuylkill River Basin, Pa., during 2005-2007. Hydrograph separation of the daily average streamflow for 10 streamflow-gaging stations was used to evaluate the annual streamflow characteristics for October 2005 through September 2006. Maps showing stream locations and areas underlain by underground mines were used to explain the differences in total annual runoff, base flow, and streamflow yields (streamflow/drainage area) for the gaged watersheds. For example, one stream that had the lowest yield (59.2 cm/yr) could have lost water to an underground mine that extended beneath the topographic watershed divide, whereas the neighboring stream that had the highest yield (97.3 cm/yr) gained that water as abandoned mine drainage (AMD). Although the stream-water chemistry and fish abundance were poor downstream of this site and others where AMD was a major source of streamflow, the neighboring stream that had diminished streamflow met relevant in-stream water-quality criteria and supported a diverse fish community. If streamflow losses could be reduced, natural streamflow and water quality could be maintained in the watersheds with lower than normal yields. Likewise, stream restoration could lead to decreases in discharges of AMD from underground mines, with potential for decreased metal loading and corresponding improvements in downstream conditions.
  • Modeling Subsurface Drainage to Control Water-Tables in Selected Agricultural Lands in South Africa

    Modeling Subsurface Drainage to Control Water-Tables in Selected Agricultural Lands in South Africa

    Institute of Water and Energy Sciences (Including Climate Change) MODELING SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE TO CONTROL WATER-TABLES IN SELECTED AGRICULTURAL LANDS IN SOUTH AFRICA Cuthbert Taguta Date: 05/09/2017 Master in Water, Policy track President: Prof. Masinde Wanyama Supervisor: Dr. Aidan Senzanje External Examiner: Dr. Kumar Navneet Internal Examiner: Prof. Sidi Mohammed Chabane Sari Academic Year: 2016-2017 Modeling Subsurface Drainage in South Africa Declaration DECLARATION I Taguta Cuthbert, hereby declare that this thesis represents my personal work, realized to the best of my knowledge. I also declare that all information, material and results from other works presented here, have been fully cited and referenced in accordance with the academic rules and ethics. Signature: Student: Date: 05 September 2017 i Modeling Subsurface Drainage in South Africa Dedication DEDICATION To the Taguta Family, Where Would I be Without You? Continue to Shine! My son Tawananyasha and new daughter Shalom, may you grow to heights greater than mine! ii Modeling Subsurface Drainage in South Africa Abstract ABSTRACT Like many other arid parts of the world, South Africa is experiencing irrigation-induced drainage problems in the form of waterlogging and soil salinization, like other agricultural parts of the world. Poor drainage in the plant root zone results in reduced land productivity, stunted plant growth and reduced yields. Consequentially, this hinders production of essential food and fiber. Meanwhile, conventional approaches to design of subsurface drainage systems involves costly and time-consuming in-situ physical monitoring and iterative optimization. Although drainage simulation models have indicated potential applicability after numerous studies around the world, little work has been done on testing reliability of such models in designing subsurface drainage systems in South Africa’s agricultural lands.