TECHNICAL PAPERS
Mar 1, 2007

Suitability of SWAT for the Conservation Effects Assessment Project: Comparison on USDA Agricultural Research Service Watersheds

Publication: Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 12, Issue 2

Abstract

Recent interest in tracking environmental benefits of conservation practices on agricultural watersheds throughout the United States has led to the development of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP). The purpose of CEAP is to assess environmental benefits derived from implementing various USDA conservation programs for cultivated, range, and irrigated lands. Watershed scale, hydrologic simulation models such as the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) will be used to relate principal source areas of contaminants to transport paths and processes under a range in climatic, soils, topographic, and land use conditions on agricultural watersheds. To better understand SWAT’s strengths and weaknesses in simulating streamflow for anticipated applications related to CEAP, we conducted a study to evaluate the model’s performance under a range of climatic, topographic, soils, and land use conditions. Hydrologic responses were simulated on five USDA Agricultural Research Service watersheds that included Mahantango Creek Experimental Watershed in Pennsylvania and Reynolds Creek Experimental Watershed in Idaho in the northern part of the United States, and Little River Experimental Watershed in Georgia, Little Washita River Experimental Watershed in Oklahoma, and Walnut Gulch Experimental Watershed in Arizona in the south. Model simulations were performed on a total of 30 calibration and validation data sets that were obtained from a long record of multigauge climatic and streamflow data on each of the watersheds. A newly developed autocalibration tool for the SWAT model was employed to calibrate eleven parameters that govern surface and subsurface response for the three southern watersheds, and an additional five parameters that govern the accumulation of snow and snowmelt runoff processes for the two northern watersheds. Based on a comparison of measured versus simulated average annual streamflow, SWAT exhibits an element of robustness in estimating hydrologic responses across a range in topographic, soils, and land use conditions. Differences in model performance, however, are noticeable on a climatic basis in that SWAT will generally perform better on watersheds in more humid climates than in desert or semidesert climates. The model may therefore be better suited for CEAP investigations in wetter regions of the eastern part of the United States that are predominantly cultivated than the dryer regions of the West that are more characteristically rangeland.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

References

Allen, P. B., and Naney, J. W. (1991). “Hydrology of the Little Washita River Watershed, Oklahoma.” Rep. No. ARS-90, U.S.D.A., Agricultural Research Service.
Allen, R. G., Jensen, M. E., Wright, J. L., and Burman, R. D. (1989). “Operational estimates of evapotranspiration.” Agron. J., 81(4), 650–662.
Arnold, J. G., and Allen, P. M. (1996). “Estimating hydrologic budgets for three Illinois watersheds.” J. Hydrol., 176, 57–77.
Arnold, J. G., and Allen, P. M. (1999). “Automated methods for estimating baseflow and groundwater recharge from stream flow records.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 35(2), 411–424.
Arnold, J. G., Allen, P. M., and Bernhardt, G. (1993). “A comprehensive surface-groundwater flow model.” J. Hydrol., 142, 47–69.
Arnold, J. G., Srinivasan, R., Muttiah, R. S., and Williams, J. R. (1998). “Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment. Part I: Model development.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 34(1), 73–89.
Arnold, J. G., and Williams, J. R. (1987). “Validation of SWRRB—simulator for water resources in rural basins.” J. Water Resour. Plann. Manage., 113(2), 243–256.
Borah, D. K., and Bera, M. (2003). “Watershed-scale hydrologic and nonpoint-source pollution models: Review of mathematical bases.” Trans. ASAE, 46(6), 1553–1566.
Di Luzio, M., Srinivasan, R., and Arnold, J. G. (2002). “Integration of watershed Tools and SWAT model into BASINS.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 38(4), 1127–1141.
Donigian, A. S., Imhoff, J. C., and Bicknell, B. R. (1983). “Predicting water quality resulting from agricultural nonpoint source pollution via simulation—HSPF.” Agricultural management and water quality, Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, 200–249.
Duan, Q. D. (2003). “Global optimization for watershed model calibration.” Calibration of watershed models, Water Science Applied Series, Vol. 6, Q. Duan, et al., eds., AGU, Washington, D.C., 89–104.
Duan, Q., Gupta, V. K., and Sorooshian, S. (1992). “Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models.” Water Resour. Res., 28, 1015–1031.
Fontaine, T. A., Klassen, J. F., Cruickshank, T. S., and Hotchkiss, F. H. (2001). “Hydrological response to climate change in the Black Hills of South Dakota, USA.” Hydrol. Sci. J., 46(1), 27–40.
Gelderman, F. W. (1970). “Soil survey, Walnut Gulch Experimental Watershed, Arizona.” Special Rep., USDA SCS, USDA ARS, and Arizona Agricultural Experiment Station.
Green, W. H., and Ampt, G. A. (1911). “Studies on soil physics, 1. The flow of air and water through soils.” J. Agric. Sci., 4, 11–24.
Gupta, H. V., Sorooshian, S., and Yapo, P. O. (1999). “Status of automatic calibration for hydrologic models: Comparison with multilevel expert calibration.” J. Hydrol. Eng., 4(2), 135–143.
Hargreaves, G. H. (1975). “Moisture availability and crop production.” Trans. ASAE, 18, 980–984.
Harmel, R. D., Cooper, R. J., Slade, R. M., Haney, R. L., and Arnold, J. G. (2006). “Cumulative uncertainty in measured streamflow and water quality data for small watersheds.” Trans. ASABE, 49(3), 689–701.
Holland, J. H. (1975). Adaptation in natural and artificial systems, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Knisel, W. G. (1980). “CREAMS, a field scale model for chemicals, runoff and erosion from agricultural management systems.” USDA Conservation Research Rep. No. 26.
Leonard, R. A., Knisel, W. G., and Still, D. A. (1987). “GLEAMS: Groundwater loading effects on agricultural management systems.” Trans. ASAE, 30(5), 1403–1428.
Motovilov, Y. G., Gottschalk, L., Engeland, K., and Rodhe, A. (1999). “Validation of distributed hydrological model against spatial observations.” Agric. Forest Meteorol., 98, 257–277.
Nash, J. E., and Sutcliffe, J. V. (1970). “River flow forecasting through conceptual models. Part 1—A discussion of principles.” J. Hydrol., 10(3), 282–290.
Neitsch, S. L., Arnold, A. G., Kiniry, J. R., Srinivasan, J. R., and Williams, J. R. (2002). Soil and water assessment tool user’s manual: Version 2000, GSWRL Rep. No. 02-02, BRC Rep. No. 02-06, Texas Water Resources Institute TR-192, College Station, Tex.
Nelder, J. A., and Mead, R. A. (1965). “Simplex method for function minimization.” Comput. J., 7, 308–313.
Priestly, C. H. B., and Taylor, R. J. (1972). “On the assessment of surface heat flux and evaporation using large-scale measurements.” Mon. Weather Rev., 100(2), 81–92.
Renard, K. G., Lane, L. J., Simanton, J. R., Emmerich, W. E., Stone, J. J., Weltz, M. A., Goodrich, D. C., and Yakowitz, D. S. (1993). “Agricultural impacts in an arid environment: Walnut Gulch studies.” Hydrol. Sci. Technol., 9(1–4), 145–190.
Sevat, E., and Dezetter, A. (1991). “Selection of calibration of objective functions in the context of rainfall-runoff modeling in a Sudanese savannah area.” Hydrol. Sci. J., 36, 307–330.
Seyfried, M. S., Harris, R. C., Marks, D., and Jacob, B. (2000). “A geographic database for watershed research, Reynolds Creek Experimental Watershed, Idaho, USA.” USDA ARS Technical Bulletin No. NWRC-2000-3.
Sheridan, J. M. (1997). “Rainfall-steamflow relations for coastal plain watersheds.” Trans. ASAE, 13(3), 333–344.
Smith, R. E., Chery, D. L., Jr., Renard, K. G., and Gwinn, W. R. (1982). “Supercriticalflow flumes for measuring sediment-laden flow.” USDA-ARS Technical Bulletin No. 1655, 70.
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service (USDA SCS). (1986). “Urban hydrology for small watersheds.” Technical Release No. 55 (TR-55), Washington, D.C.
Van Griensven, A. (2002). “Developments towards integrated water quality modeling for river basins.” Publication No. 40, Dept. of Hydrology and Hydraulic Engineering, Vrije Universiteit Brussel.
Van Griensven, A., and Bauwens, W. (2003). “Multiobjective autocalibration for semidistributed water quality models.” Water Resour. Res., 39(12), 1348.
Van Liew, M. W., Arnold, J. G., and Bosch, D. D. (2005). “Problems and potential of autocalibrating a hydrologic model.” Trans. ASAE, 48(3), 1025–1040.
Van Liew, M. W., and Garbrecht, J. (2003). “Hydrologic simulation of the Little Washita River Experimental Watershed using SWAT.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 39(2), 413–426.
Van Liew, M. W., Garbrecht, J. D., and Arnold, J. G. (2003). “Simulation of the impacts of flood retarding structures on streamflow for a watershed in southwestern Oklahoma under dry, average, and wet climatic conditions.” J. Soil Water Conservat., 58(6), 340–348.
Veith, T. L., Sharpley, A. N., Weld, J. L., and Grurek, W. J. (2005). “Comparison of measured and simulated phosphorus losses with index site vulnerability.” Trans. ASAE, 48(2), 557–565.
Wilcox, B. P., Rawls, W. J., Brkensiek, D. L., and Wight, J. R. (1990). “Predicting runoff from rangeland catchments: A comparison of two models.” Water Resour. Res., 26(10), 2401–2410.
Williams, J. R., Jones, C. A., and Dyke, P. T. (1984). “A modeling approach to determining the relationship between erosion and soil productivity.” Trans. ASAE, 27(1), 129–144.
Williams, J. R., Nicks, A. D., and Arnold, J. G. (1985). “Simulator for water resources in rural basins.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 111(6), 970–986.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 12Issue 2March 2007
Pages: 173 - 189

History

Received: Sep 14, 2005
Accepted: Jun 30, 2006
Published online: Mar 1, 2007
Published in print: Mar 2007

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Michael W. Van Liew, M.ASCE
Hydrologist, Montana DEQ, 1520 E. 6th Ave., Helena, MT 59620. E-mail: [email protected]
Tamie L. Veith
Agricultural Engineer, USDA ARS PSWM, Building 3702, Curtin Rd., University Park, PA 16802. E-mail: [email protected]
David D. Bosch
Civil Engineer, USDA ARS SEWRL, P.O. Box 946, Tifton, GA 31794. E-mail: [email protected]
Jeffrey G. Arnold
Agricultural Engineer, USDA ARS GSWRL, 808 E. Blackland Rd., Temple, TX 76502. E-mail: [email protected]

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share