4.1 Article

Simulated environmental effects of wetland restoration scenarios in a typical Canadian prairie watershed

Journal

WETLANDS ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
Volume 18, Issue 3, Pages 269-279

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11273-009-9168-0

Keywords

Flood attenuation; HEW; Modeling; Nutrients; Sediment; SWAT; Wetland restoration

Funding

  1. Murphy Foundation
  2. SSHRC
  3. Ducks Unlimited Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Wetland conservation and restoration contribute to improved watershed functions through providing both water quantity benefits in terms of flood attenuation and water quality benefits such as retention of sediment and nutrients. However, it is important to quantify these environmental benefits for informed decision making. This study uses a hydrologic equivalent wetland concept in the Soil and Water Assessment Tool to examine the effects of various wetland restoration scenarios on stream flow and sediment at a watershed scale. The modeling system was applied to the 25,139 ha Broughton's Creek watershed in western Manitoba in Canada. As a representative prairie watershed, the Broughton's Creek watershed experienced historic wetland losses from 2,998 ha in 1968 to 2,379 ha in 2005. Modeling results showed that if wetlands in the Broughton's Creek watershed can be restored to the 1968 level, the peak discharge and average sediment loading can be reduced by 23.4 and 16.9%, respectively at the watershed outlet. Based on wetland and stream drainage areas estimated by the model and empirical nutrient export coefficients, the corresponding water quality benefits in terms of reductions in total phosphorus and nitrogen loadings were estimated at 23.4%. The modeling results are helpful for designing effective watershed restoration strategies in the Broughton's Creek watershed. The developed methodology can be also applied to other study areas for examining the environmental effects of wetland restoration scenarios.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available