Evaluating Geomorphic Change in Constructed Two‐Stage Ditches

D’Ambrosio, Jessica; Ward, Andrew; Witter, Jonathan D.

doi:10.1111/1752-1688.12334

Cited by 52 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For each analysis, we focused on the U.S. Corn Belt, with its intensive agricultural land use and high nitrogen export [5], and we used two time horizons: 10 years and 50 years. The 10-year window is short, but consistent with contract lengths for CRP, which are typically 10-15 years long [44], and the 50-year period is typical of previous studies [16,45,46] and is also a more relevant timespan for a two-stage ditch [32,47,48], as well as for some wetlands.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 54%

“…Opportunity costs range from 9% to 25% of total costs (10 years and 50 years respectively). Management costs are less than 1% of total costs, as the practice is generally self-sustaining [47]. USDA costs for the two-stage ditch were based on the Indiana EQIP payment rate of $27.91 linear m À 1 ($8.72…”

Section: Cost Assessment For Cover Crops Wetlands and Two-stage Ditchesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How cost-effective are cover crops, wetlands, and two-stage ditches for nitrogen removal in the Mississippi River Basin?

Roley

Tank

Tyndall

et al. 2016

Water Resources and Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Excess nitrogen (N) causes numerous water quality problems, and in the upper Mississippi River Basin, much of the excess N results from landscape modifications necessary for row crop agriculture. Several conservation practices reduce N export, but cost estimates for these practices are often lacking, which can inhibit decisions by farmers and policy-makers. Many practices are eligible for cost-share funds from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), but these programs do not usually cover the full cost, and so farmers need to be able to approximate their share of costs. In addition, cost estimates may help the USDA to set priorities and make programmatic decisions. We address lack of cost information by estimating the direct implementation costs and USDA program costs for three agricultural conservation practices: wetlands, cover crops, and two-stage ditches, over 10 and 50 year time horizons. We then compare these costs to the N removal effectiveness of each practice, in $ kg N −1 removed. Wetlands were the most cost-effective practice (in $ kg N −1 removed) over both time horizons. Over 50 years, the two-stage ditch ranked second in cost-effectiveness and cover crops were least cost-effective, while over 10 years, cover crops were second and two-stage ditches were least cost-effective. Finally, we note that these practices need not be used in isolation, but can be implemented simultaneously to maximize N removal. Overall, our analysis suggests that careful implementation can cost-effectively mitigate N pollution. a b s t r a c t Excess nitrogen (N) causes numerous water quality problems, and in the upper Mississippi River Basin, much of the excess N results from landscape modifications necessary for row crop agriculture. Several conservation practices reduce N export, but cost estimates for these practices are often lacking, which can inhibit decisions by farmers and policy-makers. Many practices are eligible for cost-share funds from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), but these programs do not usually cover the full cost, and so farmers need to be able to approximate their share of costs. In addition, cost estimates may help the USDA to set priorities and make programmatic decisions. We address lack of cost information by estimating the direct implementation costs and USDA program costs for three agricultural conservation practices: wetlands, cover crops, and two-stage ditches, over 10 and 50 year time horizons. We then compare these costs to the N removal effectiveness of each practice, in $ kg N À 1 removed. Wetlands were the most cost-effective practice (in $ kg N À 1 removed) over both time horizons. Over 50 years, the two-stage ditch ranked second in cost-effectiveness and cover crops were least cost-effective, while over 10 years, cover crops were second and two-stage ditches were least cost-effective. Finally, we note that these practices need not be used in isolation, but can be implemented simultaneously to maximize N removal. Overall, our analysis suggests that careful i...

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 54%

Section: Cost Assessment For Cover Crops Wetlands and Two-stage Ditchesmentioning

confidence: 99%

How cost-effective are cover crops, wetlands, and two-stage ditches for nitrogen removal in the Mississippi River Basin?

Roley

Tank

Tyndall

et al. 2016

Water Resources and Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Their nutrient removal efficiency compares well with, and can complement, other farmland best practices, like planting cover crops [90]. When properly constructed according to fluvial principles, these ditches can remain functionally stable, without maintenance, for years [109]. Thus, water infrastructure of agricultural landscapes can be designed, and successfully re-built, to achieve a wider range of goals than water conveyance, though additional land area and design and construction effort may be required.…”

Section: Planning and Constructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In restored wetlands, for example, ecological structures and functions such as carbon sequestration can improve with time since intervention, and soil characteristics approach natural properties over decades [108]. Re-configured two-stage ditches can achieve soil formation and a geomorphological "quasi-equilibrium" within a decade [109]. Agricultural ditches also undergo a relatively predictable succession of plants and associated invertebrate communities [110].…”

Section: Timementioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial Aquatic Ecosystems

Clifford

Heffernan

2018

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:As humans increasingly alter the surface geomorphology of the Earth, a multitude of artificial aquatic systems have appeared, both deliberately and accidentally. Human modifications to the hydroscape range from alteration of existing waterbodies to construction of new ones. The extent of these systems makes them important and dynamic components of modern landscapes, but their condition and provisioning of ecosystem services by these systems are underexplored, and likely underestimated. Instead of accepting that artificial ecosystems have intrinsically low values, environmental scientists should determine what combination of factors, including setting, planning and construction, subsequent management and policy, and time, impact the condition of these systems. Scientists, social scientists, and policymakers should more thoroughly evaluate whether current study and management of artificial aquatic systems is based on the actual ecological condition of these systems, or judged differently, due to artificiality, and consider resultant possible changes in goals for these systems. The emerging recognition and study of artificial aquatic systems presents an exciting and important opportunity for science and society.

show abstract

“…Literature indicates some species exploit food resources on the episodic submerged floodplain [52,184,188,223]. In general, the importance of flood refugia has been recognized in stream restoration for agricultural Midwest streams with two-stage cross-sectional designs [274][275][276]. Further research is needed to enhance of understanding of trait expression associated with these high-flow mesohabitat units.…”

Section: Concave-bank Benchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Ecohydraulic-Based Mesohabitat Classification and Fish Species Traits for Stream Restoration Design

Schwartz

2016

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stream restoration practice typically relies on a geomorphological design approach in which the integration of ecological criteria is limited and generally qualitative, although the most commonly stated project objective is to restore biological integrity by enhancing habitat and water quality. Restoration has achieved mixed results in terms of ecological successes and it is evident that improved methodologies for assessment and design are needed. A design approach is suggested for mesohabitat restoration based on a review and integration of fundamental processes associated with: (1) lotic ecological concepts; (2) applied geomorphic processes for mesohabitat self-maintenance; (3) multidimensional hydraulics and habitat suitability modeling; (4) species functional traits correlated with fish mesohabitat use; and (5) multi-stage ecohydraulics-based mesohabitat classification. Classification of mesohabitat units demonstrated in this article were based on fish preferences specifically linked to functional trait strategies (i.e., feeding resting, evasion, spawning, and flow refugia), recognizing that habitat preferences shift by season and flow stage. A multi-stage classification scheme developed under this premise provides the basic "building blocks" for ecological design criteria for stream restoration. The scheme was developed for Midwest US prairie streams, but the conceptual framework for mesohabitat classification and functional traits analysis can be applied to other ecoregions.

show abstract

Evaluating Geomorphic Change in Constructed Two‐Stage Ditches

Cited by 52 publications

References 26 publications

How cost-effective are cover crops, wetlands, and two-stage ditches for nitrogen removal in the Mississippi River Basin?

How cost-effective are cover crops, wetlands, and two-stage ditches for nitrogen removal in the Mississippi River Basin?

Artificial Aquatic Ecosystems

Use of Ecohydraulic-Based Mesohabitat Classification and Fish Species Traits for Stream Restoration Design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About