phy et al., 1996;Tyler et al., 1996), but CMB also has been used for estimating modern recharge rates, including those The chloride mass balance (CMB) method has been used extenthat have increased in response to land-use change, spesively to estimate recharge in arid and semiarid environments. Required data include estimates of annual precipitation, total Cl Ϫ input cifically where vegetation had been altered and deep-(from dry fallout and precipitation), and pore water Cl Ϫ concentrarooted trees were replaced with shallow-rooted grasses tions. Typically, CMB has been used to estimate ancient recharge, (Jolly et al., 1989; Walker et al., 1991). Because of its but recharge from recent land-use change has also been documented.
simplicity, CMB is an attractive method. With properRecharge rates below a few millimeters per year are reliably detected assumptions about average annual precipitation and Cl Ϫ with CMB; however, estimates above a few millimeters per year apinputs, the only direct measurement required is the volpear to be less reliable. We tested the CMB method against 26 yr of ume-averaged Cl Ϫ concentration in the pore water. drainage from a 7.6-m-deep lysimeter at a simulated waste burial The general principles of the CMB method have been ground located on the Department of Energy's Hanford Site in southknown and practiced in irrigation management for years eastern Washington, USA where removal of vegetation has increased (USDA, 1954). In a manner similar to the CMB method, recharge rates. Measured drainage from the lysimeter for the past 26 yr averaged 62 mm yr Ϫ1 . Precipitation averaged 190 mm yr Ϫ1 with an salt mass balance in irrigation water is often expressed estimated Cl Ϫ input of 0.22 mg L Ϫ1 . Initial pore water Cl Ϫ concentraas the leaching requirement (LR), defined as the applied tion was 88 mg L Ϫ1 and decreased to about 6 mg L Ϫ1 after 26 yr, water volume (Q) times the input salt concentration while the drainage water Cl Ϫ concentration decreased to Ͻ1 mg L Ϫ1 .(C i ) divided by the drainage volume (D) times the salt A recharge estimate made using Cl Ϫ concentrations in drain water concentration (C s ) of the drainage water; that is, was within 26% of the measured drainage rate. In contrast, recharge estimates using 1:1 (water/soil) extracts were lower than actual valuesby factors ranging from 2 to 8 or more. The results suggest that when recharge is above a few millimeters per year, soil water extracts can lead to unreliable estimates of recharge.