The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2019
DOI: 10.1007/s10040-019-01936-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Maximizing on-farm groundwater recharge with surface reservoir releases: a planning approach and case study in California, USA

Abstract: Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be self-archived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Monitoring soil physical-biogeochemical processes during MAR has been extensively studied (Danfoura & Gurdak, 2016;Ganot et al, 2018;Gorski et al, 2019;Greskowiak et al, 2005;McNab et al, 2009;Rodríguez-Escales et al, 2020;Schmidt et al, 2011;Vandenbohede et al, 2013); however, since Ag-MAR is a relatively new technique in the MAR toolbox, to date only a few studies have monitored these processes in actual agricultural fields during Ag-MAR (Bachand et al, 2014(Bachand et al, , 2016(Bachand et al, , 2019Dahlke et al, 2018;Dokoozlian et al, 1987). Most Ag-MAR studies have focused on developing soil suitability guidelines (O'Geen et al, 2015), regionalscale aquifer storage estimations (Scanlon et al, 2016), water availability analysis (Kocis & Dahlke, 2017), hydro-economic analysis (Gailey et al, 2019), and benefits evaluation using numerical modeling (Kourakos et al, 2019;Niswonger et al, 2017). Among the few Ag-MAR field studies that exist, the soil aeration status, which may impair the implementation of future Ag-MAR projects, has been largely neglected.…”
Section: Core Ideasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Monitoring soil physical-biogeochemical processes during MAR has been extensively studied (Danfoura & Gurdak, 2016;Ganot et al, 2018;Gorski et al, 2019;Greskowiak et al, 2005;McNab et al, 2009;Rodríguez-Escales et al, 2020;Schmidt et al, 2011;Vandenbohede et al, 2013); however, since Ag-MAR is a relatively new technique in the MAR toolbox, to date only a few studies have monitored these processes in actual agricultural fields during Ag-MAR (Bachand et al, 2014(Bachand et al, , 2016(Bachand et al, , 2019Dahlke et al, 2018;Dokoozlian et al, 1987). Most Ag-MAR studies have focused on developing soil suitability guidelines (O'Geen et al, 2015), regionalscale aquifer storage estimations (Scanlon et al, 2016), water availability analysis (Kocis & Dahlke, 2017), hydro-economic analysis (Gailey et al, 2019), and benefits evaluation using numerical modeling (Kourakos et al, 2019;Niswonger et al, 2017). Among the few Ag-MAR field studies that exist, the soil aeration status, which may impair the implementation of future Ag-MAR projects, has been largely neglected.…”
Section: Core Ideasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…7 Additional changes in groundwater storage (annual) due to future inflow volume and seasonality changes for RCP4.5 (a) and RCP8.5 (b) compared with historical (averaged over three future periods). The barplot represents average changes, and the whiskers show the interannual variability (standard deviation) can be a promising solution to mitigate the effect of climate change on groundwater storage (Kocis and Dahlke 2017; Gailey et al 2019;Fogg et al 2018).…”
Section: Role Of Headwater Inflow Volume and Seasonality Shifts Under Future Climatementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The portion of this aquifer system lying in central and southern Sacramento County (Fig. 1) has been the subject of considerable work on the potential for managed aquifer recharge, particularly with respect to wet-season high-magnitude flows in the upstream reservoir and river system (Gailey et al 2019;Maples et al 2019). Although this part of the aquifer system generally is not considered to be in serious overdraft, the portion lying largely south of the American River and extending underneath the Cosumnes River has been sufficiently depleted in groundwater storage to pose problems for the endangered fall run of the Chinook salmon in the Cosumnes River due to lack of groundwater-driven baseflow (Fleckenstein et al 2006;Niswonger and Fogg 2008).…”
Section: Hydrologic Setting and Folsom Reservoirmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, in the part of the aquifer system lying between the American and Cosumnes Rivers and east of the Sacramento River (Fig. 1), enough groundwater storage depletion has occurred to provide nearly enough space for subsurface water storage as the storage capacity of Folsom Lake itself (Gailey et al 2019). In other words, the conditions in this American-Cosumnes basin system are excellent for augmenting the total system storage by an amount equivalent to adding another Folsom Lake.…”
Section: Hydrologic Setting and Folsom Reservoirmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation