South Dakota State University Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2018 Quantifying Potential Long-term Changes in Erosion, Discharge, and Total Suspended Solids Resulting from Agricultural Land Use Change in South Dakota Hector Manuel Menendez III South Dakota State University Follow this and additional works at: https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd Part of the Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons Recommended Citation Menendez, Hector Manuel III, "Quantifying Potential Long-term Changes in Erosion, Discharge, and Total Suspended Solids Resulting from Agricultural Land Use Change in South Dakota" (2018). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 2653. https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd/2653 This Dissertation - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. QUANTIFYING POTENTIAL LONG-TERM CHANGES IN EROSION, DISCHARGE, AND TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS RESULTING FROM AGRICULTURAL LAND USE CHANGE IN SOUTH DAKOTA BY HECTOR MANUEL MENENDEZ III A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy Major in Biological Sciences South Dakota State University 2018 iii This dissertation is dedicated to Diana Menendez. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank and praise Jesus Christ my king and savior whom I was able to learn more about through these natural resource systems that reflect his glory and authority. Many thanks to my committee members without whom I would not have been able to complete this project as each had an instrumental role. Dr. Melissa Wuellner whose unparalleled excellence in writing is only matched by her empathetic nature both of which I cherish. Dr. Roger Gates who taught me to be a more patient listener and intentional speaker. Dr. Benjamin Turner, whose ability to translate complex information helped me to understand much of what I have studied these past few years. Dr. Michele Dudash, who did not hesitate to step in as my proxy-committee chair. Dr. Nacasius Ujah for serving as my graduate faculty representative. Dr. Barry Dunn, for having the courage to initiate this System Dynamics project, in addition to making the most of every opportunity to share profound thoughts and ideas. Many thanks to the faculty and staff of the Natural Resource Management Department, South Dakota State University, and the System Dynamics Society. To my dear friends Blake Roach, Tom Kasiga, Andrew Erickson, Sprih Harsh, Dr. Eric Michel, Dan Nelson, Brandon Vanderbush, Nick Kludt, Jeff Grote, Daniel Dempkoski, Kate Tvedt, Jameson Brenna, Sarah Hafner, Joona Toouvine, Tomas Hubik, Thomas Horschig, and Dr. Luis Luna, thank you all. Most of all, to my family who believed in me and provided all the support anyone could have wished for upon such an endeavor. To my loving wife Ashley, you saw me through this journey and made it better, thank you. v CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. vi LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... vii ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... ix CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1 CHAPTER 2. MODEL DEVELOPMENT........................................................................18 CHAPTER 3. POLICY RESULTS....................................................................................85 CHAPTER 4. DISCUSSION ...........................................................................................138 APPENDIX ......................................................................................................................151 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Definitions of key endogenous and exogenous variables ....................................62 Table 2. Climate data source description ...........................................................................63 Table 3. Tests for assessment of dynamic models .............................................................64 Table 4. Statistical measurements of accuracy for the erosion model. ..............................67 Table 5. Statistical measurements of precision for the erosion model ..............................68 Table 6. Root mean square error of prediction (RMSEP) decomposition for the erosion model..................................................................................................................................69 Table 7. Statistical measurements of accuracy for the hydrologic model .........................70 Table 8. Statistical measurements of precision for the hydrologic model .........................71 Table 9. Root mean square error of prediction (RMSEP) prediction decomposition for the hydrologic model ...............................................................................................................72 Table 10. Statistical measurements of accuracy for the total suspended solids model ......73 Table 11. Statistical measurements of precision for the total suspended solids model. ....74 Table 12. Root mean square error of prediction (RMSEP) decomposition in the total suspended solids model......................................................................................................75 Table 13. Data sources used in the erosion, hydrologic, and total suspended solids sub- models ..............................................................................................................................123 Table 14. Description of policy scenarios........................................................................124 Table 15. Eastern South Dakota water-catchments forecast results ................................125 Table 16. Western South Dakota water-catchments forecast results ...............................126 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Map of the study areas within the state of South Dakota, USA .........................15 Figure 2. General outline of the scientific method ............................................................16 Figure 3. Overview of the process for integrating data into the soil erosion, hydrological, and total suspended solids sub-models ..............................................................................17 Figure 4. Map of the Big Sioux, James, Bad, and Belle Fourche water-catchments study areas within South Dakota used for System Dynamics model development .....................76 Figure 5. Conceptual diagram for the collection and importation of model data ..............77 Figure 6. Conceptual diagram of System Dynamic sub-models........................................78 Figure 7. Conceptual diagram of the Dynamic Hypothesis ...............................................79 Figure 8. Example of System Dynamics model lookup table ............................................80 Figure 9. Observed and simulated rill and sheet erosion from cropland ...........................81 Figure 10. Observed and simulated rill and sheet erosion from grassland ........................82 Figure 11. Observed and simulated total annual discharge ...............................................83 Figure 12. Observed and simulated total suspended solids ...............................................84 Figure 13. Timeline of major United States federal policies, historic conservation landmarks, and programs related to soil, water, and land use .........................................127 Figure 14. Map of eastern and western South Dakota water-catchments used for policy analysis .............................................................................................................................128 Figure 15. Annual erosion model forecasts under conservation tillage ...........................129 Figure 16. Annual erosion model forecasts under conventional tillage ...........................130 Figure 17. Cumulative erosion estimates from model forecasts under both conservation and conventional tillage ...................................................................................................131 Figure 18. Annual discharge model forecasts under conservation tillage .......................132 viii Figure 19. Annual discharge model forecasts under conventional tillage .......................133 Figure 20. Cumulative discharge estimates from model forecasts under both conservation and conventional tillage ...................................................................................................134 Figure 21. Annual total suspended solids model forecasts under conservation tillage ...135 Figure 22. Annual total suspended solids model forecasts under conventional tillage ...136 Figure 23. Estimated cumulative total suspended solids from model forecasts under both conservation and conventional tillage ..............................................................................137 ix ABSTRACT QUANTIFYING POTENTIAL LONG-TERM CHANGES IN EROSION, DISCHARGE, AND TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS RESULTING FROM AGRICULTURAL LAND USE