2005
DOI: 10.1672/0277-5212(2005)025[0697:wiowmi]2.0.co;2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Water-quality impacts of wetland management in the Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge, Oregon and California, USA

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2). Ady Canal flow needs were greatest then, for irrigation, to meet evapotranspirative demand in the wetlands, and to flood seasonal wetlands in late autumn (Mayer, 2005).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…2). Ady Canal flow needs were greatest then, for irrigation, to meet evapotranspirative demand in the wetlands, and to flood seasonal wetlands in late autumn (Mayer, 2005).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mayer (2005) found that nutrient concentrations increased in refuge outflow, but that overall nutrient loads were decreased, with net retention of nitrogen and phosphorus by the refuge. Lost River TMDL analysis also determined that Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge was a nutrient sink (Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 2010), considering its inflows from Ady Canal, Tule Lake, and other inputs.…”
Section: Consideration Of Cumulative Effectsmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…There are multiple ways to examine water movement and subsequent water quality conditions in wetland and aquatic systems, including: measuring stage differences between canal and marsh (e.g., Mayer and Thomasson 2004); application of dye studies (e.g., Kadlec and Knight 1996;Kratzer and Biagtan 1997;Hutcheson 1998); measurement of water quality constituents in a wetland (e.g., Mayer 2005;USFWS 2007); and documenting ecological changes attributable to effects of point and non-point nutrient sources (e.g., O'Dell et al 1995;Lopez and Fennessy 2002). In the Refuge, canal water conductivity frequently is an order of magnitude higher than that in the marsh interior (Harwell et al 2005), and the conservative nature of conductivity allows for its use as a tracer of canal water.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%