当前位置: X-MOL 学术J. Soil Water Conserv. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Comparing Agricultural Conservation Planning Framework (ACPF) practice placements for runoff mitigation and controlled drainage among 32 watersheds representing Iowa landscapes
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation ( IF 2.2 ) Pub Date : 2020-01-01 , DOI: 10.2489/jswc.2020.00001
M.D. Tomer , J.D. Van Horn , S.A. Porter , D.E. James , J. Niemi

Precision conservation planning tools can use high-resolution data to identify conservation practice-placement options for watershed improvement plans. Use of these tools across multiple watersheds could help to identify regional conservation strategies. This study evaluated practice-placement options determined using the Agricultural Conservation Planning Framework (ACPF) ArcGIS tools for controlled drainage (CD), contour buffer strips (CBS), water and sediment control basins (WASCOBs), and grassed waterways (GWWs) across 32 headwater hydrological unit code (HUC)12 watersheds in Iowa. The watersheds represented three Major Land Resource Areas (MLRAs) and four Agro-Hydrologic Landscape (AHL) classes, with four watersheds randomly chosen from each of eight combined MLRA-AHL landscape groupings. Placement options for the practices identified using the ACPF were quantified by watershed as densities (km km−2 of cropland) for GWWs, counts of proposed practice locations per square kilometer for CBS and WASCOBs, and as fractions of tile-drained land for CD. The influence of the landscape groupings on practice-placement densities among watersheds was tested using analysis of variance and contrast comparisons. Significant differences were found that led to nuanced interpretations. Differences attributed to slope steepness were captured by AHL classes, while differences attributed to slope shape and convergence were best captured by MLRA, which better segregated the watersheds based on landscape age and stream dissection. Grassed waterway placements showed minor differences among MLRAs but provided data to better inform the choices that ACPF users can make when running the GWW tool. The MLRA/AHL landscape classifications could be used together to develop effective regional conservation strategies using precision planning tools.

中文翻译:

比较农业保护规划框架 (ACPF) 在代表爱荷华州景观的 32 个流域中径流减缓和控制排水的实践安置

精确的保护规划工具可以使用高分辨率数据来确定流域改善计划的保护实践安置选项。在多个流域使用这些工具有助于确定区域保护战略。本研究评估了使用农业保护规划框架 (ACPF) ArcGIS 工具确定的实践安置选项,用于控制排水 (CD)、等高缓冲带 (CBS)、水和沉积物控制盆地 (WASCOB) 以及 32 个草地水道 (GWW)。爱荷华州源头水文单位代码 (HUC)12 流域。流域代表三个主要土地资源区 (MLRA) 和四个农业水文景观 (AHL) 类别,其中四个流域从八个组合的 MLRA-AHL 景观分组中随机选择。使用 ACPF 确定的实践的放置选项通过流域量化为 GWW 的密度(农田的 km-2),CBS 和 WASCOB 每平方公里建议的实践位置计数,以及 CD 的瓦片排水土地的分数。使用方差分析和对比比较来测试景观分组对流域间实践安置密度的影响。发现了显着差异,导致了细微的解释。归因于斜坡陡度的差异由 AHL 类捕获,而归因于斜坡形状和收敛的差异由 MLRA 最好地捕获,它根据景观年龄和河流解剖更好地分离了流域。草地水道布置显示 MLRA 之间的细微差异,但提供的数据可以更好地告知 ACPF 用户在运行 GWW 工具时可以做出的选择。MLRA/AHL 景观分类可以一起使用,以使用精确规划工具制定有效的区域保护策略。
更新日期:2020-01-01
down
wechat
bug