4.7 Article

Streamflow response to potential land use and climate changes in the James River watershed, Upper Midwest United States

Journal

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY-REGIONAL STUDIES
Volume 14, Issue -, Pages 150-166

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrh.2017.11.004

Keywords

Watershed modeling; Precipitation; Agricultural land; Grassland; Dakota; SWAT

Funding

  1. South Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station at South Dakota State University [SD00H542-15]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Study region: North and South Dakotas, United States Study focus: Changes in watershed hydrology are mainly driven by changes in land use and climate. This study evaluated the impacts of climate and land use changes on streamflow in an agricultural watershed in the Upper Midwest. Three projected climate change scenarios (A1B, A2 and B1) of three general circulation models (CGCM3.1, GFDL-CM2.1, and HADCM3) were developed for mid (2046-2065) and end (2080-2099) of the 21st century. Corresponding land use maps for years 2055 and 2090 were obtained from the FOREcasting SCEnarios of Land-Cover (FORE-SCE) model. The scenarios were designed in a way that land use was changed while climate conditions remain constant, land use was then held constant under a changing climate, and finally both land use and climate were changed simultaneously to reflect possible future land use and climate conditions. New hydrological insights for the region: Potential land use and climate changes would result in 12-18% % and 17-41% increases in annual streamflow, respectively, by end of the century. The combined effects of land use and climate changes would intensify future streamflow responses with 13-60% increases in the region. This study provides a broad perspective on plausible hydrologic alterations in the region, prompting individual and collective opportunities to engage with this topic for sustainable planning and management of watersheds.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available