Conference PaperPDF Available

Rainfall interception in tropical forest ecosystems: tree plantations and secondary forest

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

A study was conducted in the tropical lowlands of Costa Rica, at La Selva Biological Station, to evaluate the rainfall interception of two forest plantations of Vochysia guatemalensis Donn. Sm. Vochysia ferruginea Mart. and one secondary forest. Daily measurements of gross rainfall, throughfall and stemflow were taken during the peak of the rainy seasons of 2004 and 2005 (August to November). The estimated throughfall expressed in percentage of the total gross rainfall for the secondary forest, Botarrama plantation and Cebo plantation were: 76%; 87.6% and 92.1% respectively. The estimated stem flow in percentage of gross rainfall was of 3% for Vochysia ferruginea and of 3.4% for Vochysia guatemalensis. Streamflow for the secondary forest was omitted due to the forest structure, composition and high density of palms trees that makes stemflow measurements a difficult task. This study shows that forest structure and composition of studied ecosystems have different degrees of influence in rainfall interception losses. Complex forest structure and composition such as tropical secondary forest intercept more rainfall than forest plantations. This information is important for selection of reforestation species in watershed managements programs as well as in evaluating the hydrological environmental service of these ecosystems. An electronic copy of the proceedings is available for download free of charge from: http://www.vwrrc.vt.edu/proceedings.html
Content may be subject to copyright.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
An electronic copy of the proceedings is available for download free of charge from:
http://www.vwrrc.vt.edu/proceedings.html
Published by:
Virginia Water Resources Research Center
210 Cheatham Hall (0444), Blacksburg, VA 24061
Phone: (540) 231 5624 Fax: (540) 231 6673
Email: water@vt.edu | Web: www.vwrrc.vt.edu
Rice Center for Environmental Life Sciences
1000 West Cary Street, P.O. Box 842012, Richmond, VA 23284-2012
Phone: (804) 827-5600 Fax: (804) 828-1961
Email: lsmock@vcu.edu | Web: www.vcu.edu/rice
Virginia Tech does not discriminate against employees, students, or applicants on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual
orientation, disability, age, veteran status, national origin, religion, or political affiliation. Anyone having questions
concerning discrimination should contact the Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action Office.
Disclaimer: Papers published in these proceedings were submitted by authors in electronic format. The
authors are responsible for the content and accuracy of their individual papers. Papers were edited only to
ensure a consistent format. The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the
Virginia Water Resources Research Center or the co-sponsors of the symposium. The mention of
commercial products, trade names, or services does not constitute an endorsement or recommendation.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
Conference Proceedings
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
Water Resources
in
Changing
Climates
October 15-16, 2009
Sponsored by:
Edited by:
Patrick Fay, Virginia Water Resources Research Center
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
i
Table of Contents
Plenary Session: Meeting the Challenges of Climate Change ..........................................................................1
Governor Kane’s Commission on Climate Change: Science, Economics & Politics ..........................................................................1
L. Preston Bryant, Jr.,
Secretary of Natural Resources, Commonwealth of Virginia
Meeting the Challenges of Climate Change .......................................................................................................................................1
Virginia R. Burkett,
Chief Scientist for Global Change Research, U.S. Geological Survey
Changing Climate and Institutions: Impact on Public Water Supply Adequacy ..............................................................................2
William E. Cox,
Professor and Assistant Department Head, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech
Dominion: New Direction in Energy ................................................................................................................................................10
Judson W. White,
Environmental Policy Manager - Water, Dominion
Climate Change Adaptation and Water Resources in Virginia .......................................................................................................10
William A. “Skip” Stiles,
Executive Director, Wetlands Watch
Concurrent Session I-A: Understanding Climate Change Effects on Water Resources.................................11
(1) The Impact of Climatic Change in Population and Economic Activities in Costa Rica ............................................................11
Freddy Araya Rodríguez
, Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica;
Daniel Pérez Murillo
, Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica;
Cristian
Moreira Segura,
Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica;
Alfonso Navarro Garro
, Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica;
Jorge Chaves Arce
,
Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica
(2) Water in Mind: Investigating the Cultural Implications of Climate Change in Siberia ............................................................22
Susan A. Crate,
Environmental Science & Policy, George Mason University
(Presented by Vivek Prasad,
Environmental Science & Policy, George
Mason University)
(3) Population Dynamics of American Horseshoe Crabs: A Story of Historic Climatic Events and Recent Anthropogenic
Pressures .....................................................................................................................................................................................23
Søren Faurby,
Ecology and Genetics, Department of Biological Sciences, Aarhus University
; Tim L. King,
Aquatic Ecology Branch,
Leetown Science Center, Biological Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey;
Matthias Obst,
Sven Lovén Center for Marine Sciences
Kristineberg, University of Gothenburg;
Eric M. Hallerman,
Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, Virginia Tech;
Cino Pertoldi,
Ecology and Genetics, Department of Biological Sciences, Aarhus University; Peter Funch, Ecology and Genetics, Department of
Biological Sciences, Aarhus University
Concurrent Session I-B: Modeling Water Quantity and Quality .......................................................................24
(1) Defining Hydroclimatic Provinces and Regional Factors in Precipitation Dynamics for Water Resource Engineering in
Contiguous United States ...........................................................................................................................................................24
Y. Jeffrey Yang,
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development;
Karen Metchis,
U.S.EPA Office of Water;
Steven G. Buchberger,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Cincinnati:
Zhiwei
Li,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Cincinnati;
Robert M. Clark,
Environmental Engineering and
Public Health Consultant
; Jill Neal,
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development;
James A. Goodrich,
U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development
(2) Incorporating Uncertainty and Variability When Determining Ground Water Contamination Source Reductions ............. 25
Owen D. Gallagher,
Department of Computer and Electrical Engineering, University of Virginia,
Daniel L. Gallagher,
Department of
Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech
(3) Modeling Framework for Balancing Water Supply, Water Quality, and Environmental Objectives ......................................38
W. Joshua Weiss,
Hazen and Sawyer, P.C.;
Daniel Sheer,
HydroLogics, Inc.
(4) Using Probabilistic and Process-Based Models to Characterize Water Flows in Virginia Streams and the Potential Influences
of Climate Change .......................................................................................................................................................................39
Robert Burgholzer,
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality;
Samuel H. Austin,
U.S. Geological Survey Water Science Center
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
ii
Concurrent Session I-C: Connecting Nutrient Cycling and Water Quality (Part 1) ........................................ 40
(1) Assessment of Nitrogen Retention in a Tidal Freshwater Stream Following Restoration .........................................................40
Joseph Wood,
Department of Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University;
Paul A. Bukaveckas,
Department of Biology, Virginia
Commonwealth University
(2) Wastewater Treatment Derived Effluent Organic Nitrogen: Bioavailability in the Environment ............................................41
Katherine C. Filippino,
Department of Ocean, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Old Dominion University;
Margaret R. Mulholland,
Department of Ocean, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Old Dominion University;
Nancy G. Love,
Department of Civil & Environmental
Engineering, University of Michigan;
Deborah A. Bronk,
Virginia Institute of Marine Science, The College of William and Mary;
Rajaa
Mesfioui,
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Old Dominion University;
Patrick Hatcher,
Department of Chemistry and
Biochemistry, Old Dominion University
(3) Biomanipulation Effects on Nutrient Release by Gizzard Shad in Central Florida Lakes ......................................................... 42
Maynard H. Schaus,
Department of Biology, Virginia Wesleyan College;
W. Godwin,
Department of Water Resources, St. Johns River
Water Management District;
L. Battoe,
Department of Water Resources, St. Johns River Water Management District;
M. Coveney,
Department of Water Resources, St. Johns River Water Management District;
E. Lowe,
Department of Water Resources, St. Johns River
Water Management District;
R. Roth,
Department of Water Resources, St. Johns River Water Management District;
W. Morris,
Department of Biology, Virginia Wesleyan College;
C. Selecky,
Department of Biology, Virginia Wesleyan College;
K. Wright,
Department of Biology, Virginia Wesleyan College
(4) Nitrate Leaching in No-Tillage Versus Tilled Fields ................................................................................................................... 43
Cleiton H. Sequeira,
Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences Department, Virginia Tech;
John Spargo,
USDA Agricultural Research Service;
Mark M.
Alley,
Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences Department, Virginia Tech
Concurrent Session II-A: Assessing Stream Flows in a Changing Climate ....................................................51
(1) Using Field Measurement of Velocity to Study Erosion Processes in a River ............................................................................51
John Petrie,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech;
Soonkie Nam,
Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Virginia Tech;
Panayiotis Diplas,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech;
Marte Gutierrez,
Division of Engineering, Colorado School of Mines
(2) Investigate Relationships Between Water Quality Violations and Streamflow Changes ..........................................................52
Ram Gupta,
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation;
Nissa Dean,
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation
(3) Evaluating the Erodibility of Cohesive Riverbanks with the Jet Erosion Test ..........................................................................60
Soonkie Nam
, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech;
John Petrie,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Virginia Tech;
Panayiotis Diplas,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech;
Marte Gutierrez,
Engineering Division, Colorado
School of Mines
Concurrent Session II-B: Monitoring Watershed Characteristics and Changes .............................................61
(1) Analysis of Continuous Water Quality Monitoring Data from the Tidal Freshwater Potomac River ...................................... 61
R. Christian Jones,
Potomac Environmental Research and Education Center, George Mason University;
Claire Buchanan,
Interstate
Commission on the Potomac River Basin
(2) An Analysis of the Upper Stroubles Creek Watershed Characteristics Using Geospatial Technologies ..................................73
Tiffany Sprague,
Department of Biology, James Madison University;
Tammy E. Parece,
Department of Geography, Virginia Tech;
Tamim Younos,
Virginia Water Resources Research Center and the Department of Geography, Virginia Tech
(3) Rainfall Interception in Tropical Forest Ecosystems: Tree Plantations and Secondary Forest ................................................. 74
J. Calvo-Alvarado,
Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica;
César Jiménez-Rodríguez,
Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica;
D. Carvajal-
Venegas,
Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica;
D. Arias-Aguilar,
Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
iii
Concurrent Session II-C: Connecting Nutrient Cycling and Water Quality (Part 2) ....................................... 84
(1) Streamside Management Zones Minimize Nutrient Fluxes from Forest Fertilization in Piedmont Streams ...........................84
Joseph M. Secoges,
Department of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation, Virginia Tech;
Wallace M. Aust,
Department of
Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation, Virginia Tech;
John R. Seiler,
Department of Forest Resources and Environmental
Conservation, Virginia Tech;
C. Andrew Dolloff,
Forest Watershed Science, USDA Forest Service
(2) The Soil Nitrogen Source to Streamflow During Snowmelt is Affected by Soil Freezing ......................................................... 85
Sheila F. Christopher,
Virginia Water Resources Research Center, Virginia Tech;
Shreeram P. Inamdar,
Bioresources Engineering,
University of Delaware;
Myron J. Mitchell,
Department of Environmental and Forest Biology, State University of New York
(3) The Use of Floating Aquatic Plants for Phytoremediation of Eutrophic Waters .......................................................................86
Louis Landesman,
Virginia State University;
Clifford Fedler,
Department of Civil Engineering, Texas Tech University
Concurrent Session III-A: All About Algae ........................................................................................................87
(1) Factors Contributing to Persistent Algal Blooms in the James River ........................................................................................87
Paul A. Bukaveckas,
Department of Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University
(2) Factors Limiting Benthic Algal Abundance in Virginia Streams of the Coastal Plain ............................................................... 88
Michael Patrick Brandt,
Center for Environmental Studies, Virginia Commonwealth University
; Paul A. Bukaveckas,
Center for
Environmental Studies, Virginia Commonwealth University
(3) Increasing Occurrence and Development of Potentially Harmful Algal Blooms in Virginia Tidal Rivers .............................. 89
Harold G. Marshall,
Department of Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University;
Todd A. Egerton,
Department of Biological Sciences,
Old Dominion University
(4) Controls on the Formation and Transport of
Cochlodinium polykrikoides
Blooms in Lower Chesapeake Bay ......................... 102
Ryan Morse,
Department of Ocean, Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences, Old Dominion University;
Margaret R. Mulholland,
Department of
Ocean, Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences, Old Dominion University;
Will Hunley,
Hampton Roads Sanitation District;
Jose L. Blanco,
Center for Coastal and Physical Oceanography, Old Dominion University
(5) Molecular Identification and Detection of
Alexandrium monilatum
in Chesapeake Bay Water and Sediment ...................... 113
Kimberly S. Reece,
Virginia Institute of Marine Science, The College of William and Mary;
William M. Jones III,
Virginia Institute of
Marine Science, The College of William and Mary;
Patrice L. Mason,
Virginia Institute of Marine Science, The College of William and
Mary;
Gail P. Scott,
Virginia Institute of Marine Science, The College of William and Mary;
Wolfgang K. Vogelbein,
Virginia Institute
of Marine Science, The College of William and Mary;
Carmelo Tomas,
Center for Marine Science, University of North Carolina
Wilmington
Concurrent Session III-B: Managing Wastewater ..........................................................................................114
(1) Molecular Techniques for Assessing Pathogenic Organisms in Dairy Manure ....................................................................... 114
Ying Jin,
Department of Biological Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech;
Dwi Susanti,
Virginia Bioinformatics Institute and the Genetics,
Bioinformatics, and Computational Biology Interdisciplinary PhD Program, Virginia Tech;
Biswarup Mukhopadhyay,
Virginia
Bioinformatics Institute, the Department of Biochemistry, and the Department of Biological Sciences, Virginia Tech;
Jactone Arogo
Ogejo,
Department of Biological Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech;
Katharine Knowlton
, Department of Dairy Sciences, Virginia
Tech;
Zhiyou Wen,
Department of Biological Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech
(2) Ecology of Pathogenic Mycobacteria in Chesapeake Bay ........................................................................................................ 115
David Gauthier,
Department of Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University;
Kimberly Reece,
Virginia Institute of Marine Science,
The College of William and Mary;
Wolfgang Vogelbein,
Virginia Institute of Marine Science, The College of William and Mary
(3) The Effects of Aquatic Estrogen Pollution on the Development of
Rana slyvatica
.................................................................. 116
Candice R. Artis,
Department of Biology, Norfolk State University;
Diana Adebambo,
Department of Biology, Norfolk State University
(4) Wastewater Stabilization Ponds: Water Quality Assessment ................................................................................................... 117
Isai T. Urasa,
Department of Chemistry, Hampton University;
Anael Kimaro,
Department of Chemistry, Hampton University
(5) Methods for Detecting Failing Septic Systems and Assessing their Relative Impact .............................................................. 117
David Sample,
Biological Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
iv
Concurrent Session IV-A: Planning for Water Uses and Water Impacts.......................................................119
(1) Regional Water Supply Alternatives for the City of Richmond and its Neighboring Jurisdiction ........................................ 119
Christopher Beschler,
City of Richmond Department of Public Utilities;
Robert Steidel,
City of Richmond Department of Public Utilities;
Federico Maisch,
Greeley and Hansen,
Yuan Fang,
Greeley and Hansen
(2) Water Resources Element, Cecil County, Maryland ................................................................................................................ 132
Maggie Cawley,
Environmental Resources Management
(3) A Longitudinal Analysis of the Impact of Urbanization on Stroubles Creek: Historical Perspective .................................... 144
Stephanie DiBetitto,
University of Vermont;
Tammy E. Parece,
Department of Geography, Virginia Tech;
Tamim Younos,
Virginia
Water Resources Research Center and the Department of Geography, Virginia Tech
(4) The Taste and Economics of Desalinated Water ....................................................................................................................... 145
Andrew Snyder-Beattie,
Department of Economics, University of Mary Washington;
Andrea M. Dietrich,
Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech
Concurrent Session IV-B: Stormwater (Part 1): Developing Management Policies and Practices .............154
(1) Some Challenges Confronting Stormwater Policy in Virginia ................................................................................................. 154
Kurt Stephenson,
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Virginia Tech
(2) Assessing the Water Quality Performance of BMPs .................................................................................................................155
David Sample,
Biological Systems Engineering,
Virginia Tech;
T. Grizzard,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Virginia Tech;
Allen Davis,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Maryland;
John Sansalone,
Department
of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida;
Robert Roseen,
Stormwater Center and Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, University of New Hampshire
(3) Stormwater Codes and Ordinances in the Rivanna River Watershed ..................................................................................... 156
Roberta Savage,
Rivanna Conservation Society
;
Morgan Butler,
Southern Environmental Law Center;
Leon Szeptycki,
UVA
Environmental Law and Conservation Clinic
(4) Stormwater Management in Virginia: Proposed Amendments to Parts I, II, III, and XIII of the Virginia Stormwater
Management Program Regulations .......................................................................................................................................... 165
Russell Baxter,
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation
Concurrent Session V-A: Conserving Water and Exploring Alternative Water Supplies .............................166
(1) Modern Rainwater Collection Provides Additional Potable Water for Poor Virginia Community ....................................... 166
Douglas Phillips, Jr.,
Southeast Rural Community Assistance Project, Inc.
(2) Rainwater Harvesting as a Water Conservation Tool in Coastal Tourism Areas: Punta Cana, Dominican Republic ............171
Caitlin Grady,
Humanities, Science, and Environment, Virginia Tech;
Tamim Younos,
Virginia Water Resources Research Center and the
Department of Geography, Virginia Tech
(3) Investigating the Relationship Between Education and Water Conservation in University Residence Halls ....................... 172
Tammy E. Parece,
Department of Geography, Virginia Tech;
Tamim Younos,
Virginia Water Resources Research Center and the
Department of Geography, Virginia Tech
(4) Carbon Footprint of Water Consumption: Case Study ............................................................................................................. 184
Heather Poole,
Environmental Policy and Planning, Virginia Tech;
Tamim Younos,
Virginia Water Resources Research Center and the
Department of Geography, Virginia Tech
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
v
Concurrent Session V-B: Stormwater (Part 2): Using Tools for Better Management ..................................195
(1) True Low Impact Development: From Single Family Home to the Entire Development, Real LID .......................................195
Richard A. Street, Sr.,
Spotsylvania County
(2) Municipal Incentive Programs for Stormwater BMPs Installation on Private Property ........................................................ 201
Dana E. Puzey,
Urban Affairs and Planning, Virginia Tech;
Tamim Younos,
Virginia Water Resources Research Center and the
Department of Geography, Virginia Tech
(3) Effect of Spatial Rainfall Data on the Performance of Hydrologic Models .............................................................................213
Stephanie Rew,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Maryland;
Richard H. McCuen,
Department of Civil
and Environmental Engineering, University of Maryland
(4) Spatio-Temporal Effects of Low Impact Development Practices ............................................................................................. 224
Kristin Gilroy,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Maryland;
Richard H. McCuen,
Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Maryland
(5) Using Landscape Plants for Phytoremediation ......................................................................................................................... 237
Mindy Ruby,
Filterra Bioretention Systems
; Bonnie Appleton,
Hampton Roads Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Virginia
Tech
Poster Session ................................................................................................................................................247
Contamination & Climate Change: Examining the Relationship Between Virginia’s Hazardous Waste Sites & Public Health .........248
Emily Russell,
Environmental Stewardship Concepts;
Martha Ellen Wingfield,
Environmental Stewardship Concepts;
Peter deFur,
Environmental
Stewardship Concepts
Adsorption of Fluorine on Limestone-derived Apatite: Equilibrium and Kinetics ..............................................................................249
Cyprian Murutu,
Department of Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering, Tshwane University of Technology;
Maurice S. Onyango,
Department
of Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering, Tshwane University of Technology;
Ochieng Aoyi
, Department of Chemical Engineering, Vaal
University of Technology, South Africa;
Fred O. Otieno,
Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment
,
Tshwane University of Technology
The Impact of Environmental Water Pollution on Pre-metamorphic Tadpole Development .............................................................250
Cherelle J. Johnson,
Department of Biology, Norfolk State University;
Lawrence O. Garnett,
Department of Biology, Norfolk State University;
Thomas L. Christian, Department of Biology, Norfolk State University
Bacterial Community Diversity and Metabolic Activity in the James River .........................................................................................251
Catherine M. Luria,
Virginia Commonwealth University;
Brent C. Lederer,
Virginia Commonwealth University;
Paul A. Bukaveckas,
Virginia
Commonwealth University
Perchlorate Concentrations in Commercially Available Sparklers and Post Burn Residues ................................................................251
Jennifer L. Gundersen,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region 3
Application of Molecular Techniques for Assessment of Marine Recreational Waters .......................................................................252
Martha Rhodes,
Department of Environmental and Aquatic Animal Health, VIMS, College of William and Mary;
Corinne Audemard,
Department of Environmental
and Aquatic Animal Health, VIMS, College of William and Mary;
Kimberly Reece,
Department of Environmental and Aquatic Animal Health, VIMS, College of
William and Mary;
Howard Kator,
Department of Environmental and Aquatic Animal Health, VIMS, College of William and Mary
Dye Tracing to Fay and Sempeles Springs in Winchester, Virginia ........................................................................................................253
Nathaniel C. Farrar,
Department of Environmental Science, University of Virginia;
Janet S. Herman,
Department of Environmental Science,
University of Virginia;
Daniel H. Doctor,
U.S. Geological Survey
Interim Measures of Water Quality Change: A Standardized Non-parametric Characterization ........................................................ 254
Roger E. Stewart,
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality;
Don H. Smith,
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
Using a GIS Approach to Analyze Blue-green Interactions ................................................................................................................... 254
Jennifer Ciminelli,
Center for Environmental Studies, Virginia Commonwealth University
Using
Galdieria sulphuraria
Oxidative Enzymes as a Water Quality Biosensor .....................................................................................255
Camellia M. Okpodu,
Department of Biology, Norfolk State University
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
vi
Saltwater Intrusion Effects on Soil Organic Carbon in Tidal Freshwater Wetland Soils ......................................................................256
Lindsey M. Koren,
Virginia Commonwealth University;
S. Leigh McCallister,
Virginia Commonwealth University;
Scott C. Neubauer,
Baruch Marine Field Laboratory,
University of South Carolina;
Youhei Yamashita,
Florida International University;
Rudolf Jaffé,
Florida International University
Plant Community and Soil Saturation Effects on the Structure and Function of Microbial Communities in an Emerging Freshwater
Wetland .....................................................................................................................................................................................................257
Christine E. Prasse,
Virginia Commonwealth University;
David J. Berrier,
Virginia Commonwealth University;
Rima B. Franklin,
Virginia
Commonwealth University
Seasonal Dynamics of Microbial Communities in an Emergent Freshwater Marsh ..............................................................................258
Amy Jenkins
,
Virginia Commonwealth University,
Rima Franklin,
Virginia Commonwealth University
Reedy Creek: A Prime Example of Urbanization’s Detrimental Effects on Streams and Watersheds ..................................................259
Tammy E. Parece,
Department of Geography, Virginia Tech
Challenging Assumption: Physical Contributions to Water Quality Variation in Stormwater Retention Ponds ................................260
Melissa Montagna,
Keck Environmental Lab, College of William and Mary;
Michelle McKenzie,
Keck Environmental Lab, College of William and Mary;
Randolph Chambers,
Keck Environmental Lab, College of William and Mary
Effectiveness of Amendments in Reducing Nutrients and Mercury Release from Green Roofs ..........................................................261
Lan M. Tran,
Virginia Wesleyan College;
John Maravich,
Virginia Wesleyan College;
Elizabeth G. Malcolm,
Virginia Wesleyan College;
Maynard
H. Schaus,
Virginia Wesleyan College;
Margaret L. Reese,
Virginia Wesleyan College
Impact of Heated Runoff from Parking Lots During Summer Storms on Stream and Wetland Temperatures ...................................261
Erich T. Hester,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech;
Kalen Bauman,
Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Virginia Tech
Stormwater Management: Discharge, Turbidity, and Nutrient Concentrations During Storm Events ...............................................262
Robert S. Arthur,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Virginia;
Kate E. Abshire,
Department of Environmental
Sciences, University of Virginia;
Michael J. Downey,
Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia;
Joanna C. Curran,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Virginia;
Teresa B. Culver,
Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, University of Virginia;
Janet S. Herman,
Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia
Validating Water Quality and Quantity Outcomes for an Innovative Stormwater-management Design ........................................... 263
Michael J. Downey,
Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia;
Andrew T. Smith,
Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, University of Virginia;
Robert S. Arthur,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Virginia;
Kate E.
Abshire,
Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia;
Nathaniel C. Farrar,
Department of Environmental Sciences, University of
Virginia;
Jessica S. Wenger,
Office of Environmental Health and Safety, University of Virginia;
Jeffrey A. Sitler,
Office of Environmental Health
and Safety, University of Virginia
Space-efficient Enhancement of Phosphorus Removal for Urban Stormwater Practices Through Supplemental Wetland
Filtration ...................................................................................................................................................................................................264
Shawn Rosenquist, Department of Biological Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech
Reevaluating Irreducible Concentration Limits Based on Filterra® System Performance Monitoring in Washington State ............265
Rebecca Dugopolski,
Herrera Environmental Consultants;
Mindy Ruby,
Filterra Bioretention Systems
Advanced Bioretention Media for Enhanced Bacteria Removal from Stormwater Runoff .................................................................266
Mindy Ruby,
Filterra Bioretention Systems
Filterra® Advanced Bioretention System: Discussion of the Benefits, Mechanisms, and Efficiencies ................................................267
Glen Payton,
Filterra Bioretention Systems
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
1
Back to Table of Contents
2009 VIRGINIA WATER RESEARCH CONFERENCE
Plenary Session
Governor Kane’s Commission on Climate Change: Science, Economics & Politics --
L.
Preston Bryant, Jr.,
Secretary of Natural Resources, Commonwealth of Virginia
Meeting the Challenges of Climate Change --
Virginia R. Burkett,
Chief Scientist for Global
Change Research, U.S. Geological Survey
Changing Climate and Institutions: Impact on Public Water Supply Adequacy --
William E. Cox, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech
Dominion: New Direction in Energy --
Judson W. White,
Environmental Policy Manager -
Water, Dominion
Climate Change Adaptation and Water Resources in Virginia -- William A. “Skip”
Stiles, Executive Director, Wetlands Watch
GOVERNOR KANE’S COMMISSION ON CLIMATE CHANGE:
SCIENCE, ECONOMICS & POLITICS
L. Preston Bryant, Jr.
Secretary of Natural Resources
111 East Broad Street, Richmond, VA 23219
preston.bryant@governor.virginia.gov
[No abstract provided]
MEETING THE CHALLENGES OF CLIMATE CHANGE
Virginia R. Burkett
Chief Scientist for Global Change Research, U.S. Geological Survey
700 Cajundome Boulevard, Lafayette, Louisiana 70506
virginia_burkett@usgs.gov
[No abstract provided]
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
2
CHANGING CLIMATE AND INSTITUTIONS:
IMPACT ON PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY ADEQUACY
William E. Cox
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
200 Patton Hall 0105, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061
cox@vt.edu
KEY WORDS: water supply, climate change, institutions, environmental protection,
governmental regulation
ABSTRACT
Maintaining water supply adequacy is a basic social need that confronts varying challenges as
the many factors affecting water availability and water uses evolve. The potential for changing
climatic conditions is a major concern in maintenance of supply adequacy over time. Climate
determines the amount of precipitation and its distribution, spatially and temporally, thereby
setting limits on available water supply, and climate also affects water demand. Maintaining
supply adequacy also depends on the social and political environment that reflects society’s
priorities and establishes the policy and regulatory framework governing water use and
development. The most dramatic change in the social environment is the development of the
threat of terrorism to water supply operations. Another significant social change in the United
States has been the increasing restrictiveness in federal water management institutions. This
trend is illustrated by the Clean Water Act section 404 permit program that uses a one-
dimensional decision criterion providing for denial of permits for water facilities on
environmental grounds without consideration of project need or availability of alternative water
supplies. These changes in the social environment and the potential for more adverse climatic
conditions in some areas create additional challenges for water supply managers as they attempt
to provide an appropriately reliable supply to an increasing population. The combined effects of
increasing physical scarcity, greater uncertainty associated with terrorism threats, and a more
restrictive institutional environment will require reconsideration of the definition of supply
adequacy and continuing innovation in all aspects of water supply management.
INTRODUCTION
Confronting change is a continuous feature of water resources management. Water management
operates at the interface between complex natural systems that determine water availability on
the one hand and human social systems that influence water use on the other. Change is a
frequent occurrence in both of these dynamic systems. The natural hydrologic system that
provides the foundation for water management is notable for its variability, including substantial
fluctuation in precipitation, streamflow, and most of the other basic parameters. Social systems
also undergo frequent change as values shift and social priorities change. Change is therefore
not a new development for water managers.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
3
But recent developments and trends within both natural and social systems create concern that
changes of a more radical nature are occurring that will have greater disruptive impact and pose
greater challenges for water managers in the future. In the case of natural systems, the prospect
of climate change has potential for significant impact since it may establish new patterns of
variation for hydrologic events such as precipitation. Over most of recorded history, such
variation has occurred largely within the boundaries of established patterns. These patterns,
while not completely defined and understood, set limits on variability that will not apply within
new patterns resulting from climate change.
Major changes in the social environment of water management have also been underway. The
most dramatic of these is the prospect of terrorism that targets water supply. The increasing
willingness of some to inflict death and destruction on civilian populations in an attempt to
advance their causes has impacted most human activities, including water management
operations. Less dramatic changes in the social environment of water management are more
pervasive and therefore important due to their widespread nature. One of the most significant of
these social-change impacts in the United States arises from changes in water management
institutions that have substantially modified long-standing priorities among alternative water
uses. For example, the status of traditional water supply development has been substantially
reduced with the ascendency of environmental values. One prominent decision process in
current federal law allows water development proposals to be rejected for environmental-
protection reasons without consideration of the need for the project in question or the availability
of alternatives. This provision and other institutional modifications create a fundamentally
different context for current and future decision making about water use and development.
Impacts of these changes in the physical and social contexts of water management are far-
reaching and encompass both those programs that focus on managing excess water such as flood
damage reduction as well as those water programs that manage water shortage. One of the water
uses in this latter category likely to see significant impact from changes in the managerial
climate is public water supply, which is of special concern since water supply has such a direct
relationship with human welfare. The likely impacts of climate and social change on efforts to
maintain public water supply adequacy are the focus of the remainder of this paper.
CLIMATE CHANGE AND INCREASING WATER SUPPLY SCARCITY
Climate change has potential to strike at the heart of the water supply enterprise by altering
natural inputs to water supply systems. While some areas may receive additional water due to
altered precipitation patterns, other areas will be adversely affected as a consequence of reduced
inputs. A basic goal of water suppliers is to maintain an appropriate balance between water
demand and available supplies so that customer expectations are met. Over much of history,
meeting this goal involved expanding supply to satisfy whatever demand was projected to occur.
Supply was expected to meet demand not only under normal operating conditions but also during
predictable periods of natural shortage and times of greater than normal demand. This
managerial philosophy often required substantial interventions in hydrologic systems, usually in
the form of reservoir construction to store water for augmentation of naturally available supply
during periods of natural water scarcity.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
4
More recently, this managerial approach has been altered by implementation of demand
reduction measures as part of the process of balancing demand and supply. Such measures can
be implemented for all uses (or certain types of use) on a continuous basis in order to reduce
overall system demand, or they can be employed on a more limited basis such as during peak
usage hours or designated periods of shortage in supply. Willingness to impose temporary
restrictions during shortages on an increasingly frequent basis as system use increases over time
can postpone the need for system expansion.
Whatever management strategy is employed at a given location, the existing balance between
demand and supply can be upset by changes in natural inputs to the supply system. Adverse
changes could take the form of reduced average flows in source waters or changes in supply
patterns that reduce the dependable yield of supply facilities (such as change to a pattern
involving greater floods accompanied by more intense drought periods). Both types of change
could make an existing supply system inadequate sooner than anticipated and accelerate the need
for additional supply development or increased demand reduction measures. Water suppliers
historically have noted the difficulty of meeting increasing demand with a constant supply.
Recognition that the useable supply at a given location may not remain constant but may actually
decrease over time has interjected a new concern and suggested that maintaining supply
adequacy in some areas may be more difficult than previously thought.
These climate change impacts that reduce water supply inputs to existing water supply systems
and potential water supply sources are the most readily identifiable impact of climate change, but
other impacts are possible. For example, sea level rise may adversely affect the operation of
low-lying impoundments or other water infrastructure. In addition, higher sea levels may
increase salt-water intrusion into coastal rivers or aquifers in coastal regions that serve as sources
of public supply. All these reductions in water supply potential of hydrologic systems in some
geographic areas will place additional constraints on water supply managers as they continue the
basic challenge of maintaining an appropriate balance between supply and demand. With fewer
management options, such areas may have to rely more heavily on demand management or turn
to non-traditional alternatives such as desalination or importation of water from other areas.
WATER SUPPLIES AND THE TERRORISM THREAT
Expansion in the use of terrorism against the general population as a means to advance political
causes has added a new dimension to maintenance of adequate public water supplies. The
essential nature of water supply and the direct connection to human health and welfare make
such supplies and related facilities obvious targets for anyone desiring to disrupt and harm a
particular society. This threat has several aspects. One of the most direct is the contamination of
supplies, an event that historically was limited to accidental occurrences. Viewing
contamination as an intentional act requires a new approach to designing preventive measures
previously limited to control of accidental releases of contaminating substances.
Other aspects of the terrorism threat include destruction of water management infrastructure and
the potential loss of life and property that could arise from damage to facilities such as
reservoirs. The initial response to this threat has been restriction of access and increased
monitoring. The potential for destruction of facilities and other loss of water supply to terrorism
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
5
increases water supply uncertainty and may involve catastrophic events in some situations, but
the typical water supply operation is more likely to be directly affected by other, more pervasive
changes in the social environment such as policies and institutions affecting water supply
development.
INSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES TO WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT
Maintenance of adequate water supply is closely related to institutional arrangements affecting
water use and development within a particular society. Even with demand reduction measures
included in the overall management approach, supply development continues to be a basic option
for maintaining adequate supply as populations and human activities increase over time. Recent
institutional change in the United States has created new challenges by placing additional
constraints on traditional practices for expanding supply as a basic management option.
Although public water supply is one of the most basic of human water uses, human interactions
with water are multi-dimensional and encompass many water uses and values in conflict with
water supply. The institutions that establish priorities among water uses and provide decision
processes for resolving conflict have undergone long evolution. Public policy and underlying
public attitudes over much of U.S. history accorded the highest water-use priority to public water
supply, and the governance system controlling water use was generally sympathetic to water
supply proposals. Many large-scale projects, often based on generous assumptions about future
water demand, were approved with limited opposition. This favorable climate for water supply
facilitated the maintenance of adequate and highly dependable supplies but also resulted in
excessive development and significant environmental damage in some cases.
The institutional framework within which water supply is currently implemented is considerably
more restrictive. These changes have primarily been the result of the greater standing given to
environmental values in public perception and governmental policies and regulatory programs.
The ascendancy of environmental values has involved a variety of developments. One of the
earliest and the most symbolic was passage of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA,
2009). NEPA declared environmental protection to be a federal responsibility and established
requirements for environmental assessments, including preparation of environmental impact
statements under certain conditions. It is perhaps significant to note that maintenance of public
water supply adequacy is not a declared federal responsibility, and no federal water supply
programs exist on par with such purposes as flood damage reduction, navigation enhancement,
or, more recently, protection of environmental values. Facilitative programs exist such as the
Water Supply Act of 1958 (WSA 2009), which authorizes inclusion if water supply in federal
project being undertaken for other purposes, but the secondary status of water supply is evident.
The Act views water supply as an add-on to projects with other primary purposes and requires
that additional costs of its inclusion be paid by parties requesting the water supply storage; thus,
it does not elevate water supply to a project purpose of equal standing to other traditional
purposes.
The restrictive perspective of the federal government toward water supply relative to
environmental protection is most evident in regulatory programs that provide direct controls over
water supply and other development activities. One of the most significant of these with respect
to water supply is the Clean Water Act section 404 permit program for controlling the “discharge
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
6
of dredged or fill material” (CWA 2009, sec. 1344). Most water supply projects are within the
scope of section 404 since it has broad coverage of surface waters and water development
activities that potentially affect such waters. The jurisdictional coverage of the program has seen
both expansion and contraction at its margins as a result of litigation and remains a subject of
intense debate, but coverage of water supply facilities at present is broad.
The section 404 permit program goes considerably beyond the requirement of NEPA for
consideration of environmental values in decision making; it establishes priority for such values
over competing activities such as water supply. This effect can be seen in the criterion for final
decision making on a permit application. Unlike most permit actions, a final section 404
decision involves the actions of two federal agencies. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers makes
the initial section 404 permit decision under guidelines developed by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, but EPA has authority to veto permit issuance upon specified findings.
Corps’ regulations provide that its permit decisions include a public interest review in which
expected benefits of a proposed action are weighed against its foreseeable detriments, with the
decision reflecting concern for both protection and utilization of important resources (USACE
2009). In the case of section 404 permits, however, the balancing process to determine the
public interest is subjected to the constraint that a permit cannot be issued if the proposal is not
consistent with EPA guidelines for such permits. These guidelines prohibit permit issuance if a
“practicable alternative” to the proposed project exists that would have less adverse impact on
the aquatic environment or if the proposed action would “cause or contribute to significant
degradation” of the waters covered by CWA (USEPA 2009a). These prohibitions place
substantial constraints on the flexibility to define the public interest as part of the Corps’ review
and requires the denial of certain section 404 permits that otherwise would be issued based on
the broad balancing approach.
If these special constraints on section 404 permit issuance leave any doubt as to the reduced
standing of water supply and other development projects relative to environmental protection in
current federal law, it is dispelled by the principles that define EPA’s veto power over Corps’
permits that are issued. This decision is based on a single criterion: whether the environmental
impact is acceptable (CWA 2009 sec. 1344 (c)). EPA maintains that it does not have to consider
either the need for the permit-applicant’s project or the availability of alternatives to the project
(USEPA 2009b). The federal courts have upheld EPA’s position in a case involving an EPA
veto of a permit for a local government water supply impoundment in Virginia (JCC 1993). The
fact that this principle appears well established indicates complete reversal of the historic
approach to project approval. While some water projects once were approved without
consideration of costs in the form of environmental values to be destroyed, such projects now
can be rejected without consideration of their merits in the form of the values associated with
water supply or other water development. (For a more detailed analysis of the CWA section 404
permit program, see Shabman and Cox 2004.)
In addition to CWA section 404 requirements, several other federal laws restrict water supply
and other development projects in conflict with specifically designated environmental values.
Included are other potentially applicable permit programs that require consideration of
environmental impacts (such as the Federal Water Power Act (FWPA 2009) and the Rivers and
Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899 (RHAA 2009)) and additional protective measures that serve
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
7
as constraints on issuance of section 404 and other permits. Examples of these additional
measures include the Endangered Species Act (ESA 2009), the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
(WSRA 2009), the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA 2009), and the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA 2009). These acts generally operate by restricting federal activity,
including the issuance of permits for private projects, and may prohibit issuance of a federal
permit where proposed actions would be detrimental to protected environmental values. For
example, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act prohibits issuance of federal permits for dam
construction and other adverse activities on streams designated as part of the Wild and Scenic
Rivers System. Similarly, the Endangered Species Act prohibits permit issuance where proposed
projects threaten the continued existence of animal and plant species designated for protection
under the act. The restrictions illustrated by these particular examples do not apply to all
proposed projects since WSRA and ESA requirements apply only within areas where designated
environmental resources are located.
Each of these specialized environmental measures is intended to protect a recognized societal
value and was created to address the previous tendency to give inadequate consideration to these
values, but their cumulative impact may be considerably greater than the sum of their individual
restrictions. This effect arises because they apply in a largely uncoordinated, sequential manner
providing opportunities for redundant debate of essentially the same issues in multiple forums.
As a result of the sequential nature of these proceedings, opponents of water supply proposals
have several opportunities to voice the same objections, multiple environmental impact
assessments may be required, and multiple opportunities for judicial challenge of any decision
favorable to a proposed project may arise. (See Cox 2007 for an example of the repetitive nature
of the individual regulatory decisions applicable to the project to divert water from Lake Gaston
on the Virginia/North Carolina border to Virginia Beach, Virginia.)
The sequential nature of these independent proceedings creates a situation with general
similarities to the criminal-law concept of “double jeopardy.” Any given regulatory decision
related to a proposed project is likely to be followed by another decision process where many of
the same issues will again be debated. This fragmented, sequential process appears to maximize
the weight given to the interests of project opponents, who often include local groups supported
by national organizations who oppose most development projects without regard to their positive
contributions. Federal participation will likely be limited to opposition from federal agencies
with mandates for environmental protection since water supply is not a federal water
management responsibility. Within this chain of decisions, any negative outcome will nullify
multiple positive outcomes at other decision points. But the most fundamental flaw in the
fragmented decision making environment created by these diverse federal programs is its failure
to provide a forum for holistic consideration of the full range of public interest issues involved
with respect to the adequacy of water supply. The narrow focus of the individual decisions
limits the opportunity for broad consideration of the best overall approach to maintenance of
adequate water supply.
CONCLUSION
The challenges confronting those responsible for maintaining adequate water supply are
decidedly greater than at previous times in history. Supply and demand must continue to be
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
8
balanced as population increases, but development of scarcity may be accelerated by the new
threat of climate change. The threat of terrorism increases uncertainty and complicates
operations, as concern for security must be incorporated. All necessary management activities
relating to additional supply development must be accomplished in an institutional environment
considerably more hostile to water supply than in the past, primarily due to the greater weight
given to protection of environmental values and the associated restrictions placed on water
supply expansion.
Most of the heightened challenges confronting water suppliers are the result of trends not likely
to be reversed in the near term. Action to address the underlying causes of new challenges such
as climate change and terrorism must be undertaken, but quick solutions do not appear likely.
Measures to address climate change are still being debated, but no agreement has been reached
on such basic issues as the extent of the human role in the process, what actions are necessary to
control adverse impacts, and how to apportion responsibilities for implementing such actions.
Resolution of the terrorism concern also appears remote and illustrates the extent to which water
managers are affected by issues beyond their areas of influence.
Major adjustments to the hostile institutional framework for water supply development appear
unlikely. The ascendancy of environmental values through institutional evolution reflects a shift
in public values and a corresponding modification of decision processes that historically had
largely ignored environmental consequences. The additional challenges these new arrangements
impose can be seen as an adjustment to previously flawed decision processes no longer
consistent with public values and expectations.
But current institutions appear to have gone beyond addressing previous institutional deficiencies
and established decision processes with a different set of deficiencies. This outcome can be
explained by the pendulum theory of public policy that seems to be in effect (which suggests that
any movement to achieve a new balance between two opposing objectives will not likely stop at
a neutral position but will, like the pendulum, first swing to the other extreme). This theory
makes it likely that the shift to greater attention to environmental values will be accompanied by
loss of adequate recognition of competing values such as those embedded in utilitarian water
uses such as public supply.
The most direct example of current imbalance in current decision processes is the CWA section
404 permit process, which does not provide a neutral forum for holistic evaluation of society’s
conflicting interests in water but has an inherent bias against water resource development. In the
program’s current form, a permit for a proposed water supply project can be denied on the basis
of unacceptability of the associated environmental impacts without consideration of the need for
the project in question or the availability of alternatives. The need for a mechanism to prohibit
specific projects on environmental grounds is clear, but there is need for a more comprehensive
forum for evaluating all the public interest considerations associated with such determinations.
Another flaw in current decision processes consists of the uncoordinated, duplicative manner in
which a variety of independent environmental protection measures are implemented. Each of
these protective measures represents important societal values and appears to be necessary, but
better coordination to replace the multitude of independent, repetitive, and narrowly focused
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
9
procedures with a coordinated, more comprehensive evaluation process would add a needed
measure of rationality absent from the current process.
Addressing these institutional flaws may be possible over time, but, as in the case of the
challenges posed by climate change and terrorism, substantive change is difficult and does not
appear likely in the near term; therefore, the current challenges faced by water suppliers
represent the new reality for the predictable future. Meeting these challenges is changing the
water supply industry and in turn will impact the average water system customer. Traditional
water user expectations of low-cost water and unrestricted supply will continue to fade.
Increasing scarcity will require use of more costly supply options such as desalination, and more
intrusive demand reduction measures will likely become more common. The basic concept of
water supply adequacy may change. For example, the expectation that a dependable supply
involves almost no probability of inadequate service under reasonably anticipated conditions
may have to be exchanged for the view that a dependable supply has an expected frequency of
service disruptions (or scheduled prohibitions on certain water uses as a means to avoid system
failure). At the least, maintaining a high level of dependability will involve greater costs. To
some extent, these trends have been underway for a long time, but changes in climate and social
processes increase their rate of development. Ultimately, the public’s long tradition of taking for
granted a low-cost, dependable water supply may be in jeopardy. To maintain this tradition,
those responsible for water supply will have to be ever more innovative as they operate in this
more challenging environment.
REFERENCES
Cox, W.E. 2007. North Carolina-Virginia conflict: The Lake Gaston water transfer. Journal of
Water Resources Planning and Management, American Society of Civil Engineers 133(5): 456-
461.
CWA (Clean Water Act). 2009. 33 USC sec. 1251 et seq. http://www.law.cornell.edu/
(accessed September 23, 2009).
CZMA (Coastal Zone Management Act). 2009. 16 USC sec. 1415 et seq.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ (accessed September 23, 2009).
ESA (Endangered Species Act). 2009. 16 USC sec. 1531 et seq. http://www.law.cornell.edu/
(accessed September 23, 2009).
FWPA (Federal Water Power Act). 2009. 16 U.S.C. 791a et seq. http://www.law.cornell.edu/
(accessed September 23, 2009).
JCC (James City County). 1993. JCC, Va. vs. EPA, 12 F. 3d 1330 (4th Cir.), cert. den. 513 U.S.
823.
NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act). 2009. 42 USC sec. 4321 et seq.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ (accessed September 23, 2009).
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
10
NHPA (National Historic Preservation Act). 2009. 16 USC sec. 470 et seq.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ (accessed September 23, 2009).
RHAA (Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act). 2009. 33 USC sec. 401 et seq.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ (accessed September 23, 2009).
Shabman, L. and W. Cox. 2004. Urban water supply and the environment: extending the reach
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Virginia Journal of Environmental Law 23(1): 75-109.
USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2009. General Regulatory Policies. 33 CFR part
320.4. http://www.law.cornell.edu/ (accessed September 23, 2009).
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2009a. Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines for
Specification of Disposal Sites for Disposal of Dredged or Fill Materials. 40 CFR part 230.10.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ (accessed September 23, 2009).
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2009b. Section 404(c) Procedures. 40 CFR
part 231 http://www.law.cornell.edu/ (accessed September 23, 2009).
WSA (Water Supply Act of 1958). 2009. 43 USC sec. 390(b). http://www.law.cornell.edu/
(accessed September 23, 2009).
WSRA (Wild and Scenic Rivers Act). 2009. 16 USC sec. 1271 et seq.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ (accessed September 23, 2009).
DOMINION: NEW DIRECTION IN ENERGY
Judson W. White
Environmental Policy Manager - Water, Dominion
5000 Dominion Blvd., Glen Allen, VA 23060
Judson_White@dom.com
[No abstract provided]
CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION
AND WATER RESOURCES IN VIRGINA
William A. “Skip” Stiles
Executive Director, Wetlands Watch
1121 Graydon Avenue, Norfolk, VA 23507
skipstiles@att.net
[No abstract provided]
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
11
Back to Table of Contents
Concurrent Session I
(A) Understanding Climate Change Effects on Water Resources
(B) Modeling Water Quantity and Quality
(C) Connecting Nutrient Cycling and Water Quality (Part 1)
I-A Understanding Climate Change Effects on Water Resources
(1) The Impact of Climatic Change in Population and Economic Activities in Costa Rica
-- Freddy Araya Rodríguez, Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica
(2) Water in Mind: Investigating the Cultural Implications of Climate Change in
Siberia -- Susan Crate, Environmental Science & Policy, George Mason University
(Presented by Vivek Prasad, Environmental Science & Policy, George Mason University)
(3) Population Dynamics of American Horseshoe Crabs: A Story of Historic Climatic
Events and Recent Anthropogenic Pressures -- Eric Hallerman, Department of
Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, Virginia Tech
THE IMPACT OF CLIMATIC CHANGE IN POPULATION AND ECONOMIC
ACTIVITIES IN COSTA RICA
Freddy Araya Rodríguez
Daniel Pérez Murillo
Cristian Moreira Segura
Alfonso Navarro Garro
Jorge Chaves Arce
Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica
KEY WORDS: climatic change, interdisciplinary, global warming
ABSTRACT
Experts in climatic change have agreed that developing countries show a limited adaptative
capacity, related to the long term effects of increasing world temperature. In the particular case
of Central America, this region produces less than 0.5% of the carbon in the planet. Yet, it is one
of the most vulnerable places on earth to climatic change effects. In Costa Rica public
universities have assumed a challenge and a responsibility related to water use and conservation
at all levels. This is the case of the Instituto Tecnólogico de Costa Rica, which has developed
numerous projects in these fields with interdisciplinary groups. Those attempts have collided in
one idea, which attempts to studying the global warming problem in the context of Costa Rica by
designing a strategy that focus them from different angles and with contributions from
professionals of different areas. This proposal consists on an integral approach to sensitize target
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
12
population about causes, effects and possible solutions to this current issue. The educational
component remains as the main element from where all the other elements depart as an answer to
a multifactor problem. This paper illustrates the necessary steps to be followed when trying to
fulfill such endeavor, with the view point of a public university.
INTRODUCTION
According to experts in climatic change developing countries show a significantly reduced long-
term adaptative capacity in relation to the effects of increasing of temperature. This situation has
to do with a number of related factors: low levels of economical wealth; lack of social and
physical infrastructure, especially health and education; insufficient access to technology; low
level of trust in public institutions and the services they offer to society; lack of information and
knowledge; and finally social inequity and poverty that avoids an even distribution of social
benefits (Gutiérrez 2007).
It is undisputable that climatic change affects everybody without any distinction of social status
or the geographic region where we live. In the particular case of Central America, the United
Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) stated that this
region produces less than 0.5% of the carbon in the planet. Yet, it is one of the most vulnerable
places on earth to climatic change effects (CEPAL 2009). On the other hand, the rise of
atmospheric and ocean temperature, the reduction and instability of rain cycles and the increase
of ocean levels have a direct impact on production, infrastructure, living styles, and general
population’s health.
Research conducted in Costa Rica shows that even when climatic variables are impossible to
control; it is possible to take action to control and reduce vulnerability of population to
precipitation and provide some corrective measures. Vega and Vega (2007) suggest that an
adequate urban planning, construction and improvement in rain sewer and sanitary sewer
systems, increasing the wellbeing of habitants, element that affects in a better cost/benefit
relationship.
An attempt to quantify the impact of climatic change on economic activities present a first
scenery known as base climatic scenery, and it considers the repercussions climatic change has
on goods on the market—that is, it takes into account only those sectors where prices are explicit
and predetermined such agriculture, energy consumption, forestry utilization, etc. (Gutiérrez
2007).
Economic implications and social problems generated due to disasters caused by
hydrometeorologic events: drought, floods, heat waves, sudden gales, landslides, accidents
caused by rain, in Costa Rican economy in the last ten years this represented 84% of the total of
natural disasters registered.
JUSTIFICATION
Climatic variability has affected many different productive sectors of the country, even though
the particular characteristics Costa Rica has in the agriculture sector, where most of the
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
13
economic activity is centered, keeps facing emergencies, due to a lack of prevention. As a result
of this situation, the losses related to agro industry are greater and the recovery process of the
affected area and social groups become slower. Conditions affecting families which lost their
homes and crops influence negatively the development of the community, for instance, children
stop attending school, which worsen low educational levels in agricultural areas.
As a consequence of diverse impacts, the government intends to develop Strategies and Policies
with a regional point of view though which different sectors, including the private one, define
and execute mitigation, compensation and adaptation actions to face climatic change. A
particular strategy applied to the Productive Sector refers to Carbon Neutral that helps generate
competitive advantages to agricultural products that get that norm.
In constant change scenario, information and education continue to be key factors to make this
sector stronger and to develop innovative ideas to improve economical condition for agriculture
workers and making the planting of necessary crops more stimulating to fulfill Costa Ricans´
needs to contribute with food independence of the country.
MAIN CROPS AND EVOLUTION OF PRODUCTIVE
In the year 2007, agriculture sector, silviculture, fishing obtained the sixth place in relative
participation in the Gross Internal Product (GIP) according the type of activity, being banana,
pineapple, and coffee the most important in terms of agricultural added value.
Agriculture sector as well as livestock sector, fishing industry and food industry grew in the last
years. Sectors like pineapple doubled their production in the last two years with a very high
environmental cost. There was also an increasing in the sales, element that indicates the growing
of a structurally healthy sector (Barquero 2007).
Extreme climatic events that threaten human health country´s economy, production and
biodiversity become more common in the country every day. During 2007 rains damaged 80%
of the coffee production in Acosta, causing losses about ¢ 350 million due to the wastage of
5.000 bushels of grain and an increase in a disease named “ Ojo de Gallo” (Mycena citricolor)
(Hernández 2007). A month before, in Guanacaste, floods affected 20% of sugar cane
plantations in Hacienda el Viejo. In this part of the country, producers possess more than 7000
hectares (Arguedas 2007).
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
14
Table 1. Agriculture Sector: Total Stimate of Losses Caused
By Extreme Climatic Events in 2007
(Thousands of Colones)
Item
Amount of damages
Agriculture and Livestock
Fishing (Chorotega Region)
Irrigation infrastructure
Others (apiculture and aquaculture)
Source: SEPSA 2008
Losses
11,368,271,365.00
9,819,487,389.00
35,000,000.00
1,519,258,978.00
65,475,000.00
Heavy rains that affected the country in October caused damages in paved and ballast roads in
2005. The last three hurricanes: Stan, Rita and Katrina provoked losses near ¢5000 million in
road infrastructure. Preliminary numbers made by the Ministry of Public Transportation
(MOPT) indicate that urgent repairs to open roads, remove landslides, set provisional bridges
bear ¢22000 million. It is necessary to add to this amount ¢45000 million to build permanent
bridges, install new sewers and drainages and improve pavement and ballast coverage (Loaiza
2008).
According to SEPSA (Secretaría Ejecutiva de Planicación Sectorial Agropecuaria 2008), a
technical unit, the reduction in the sowing areas of 111,978.53 hectares – moving from
511,326.77 in 2006 to 399,348.24 in 2007 – is due to abnormal conditions (high rainfall levels,
strong winds, floods, low temperatures) in the Eastern Central and Western Regions.
Estimations made by the Ministry of Agriculture (MAG) indicate that “La Niña” affected more
than 255,853.8 hectares of diverse crops affecting more than 6,380 farmers mainly in the
Chorotega Region (Guanacaste) where 2,844 of them suffered from rainfall effects. A number of
crops were damaged: sugar cane, rice, beans, coffee, vegetables, plantain, palm trees, melon and
water melon (Barquero 2007). A total of ¢13,046,203.74 million colones are required to recover
affected areas.
Table 2. Area Affected by Niña According to Agricultural Activity
(Hectares)
Region
Chorotega
Brunca
South Central
Pacific Central
West Central
East Central
Total
Source: SEPSA 2008
Total
252,787
858.8
465.5
1,143
343.5
256
255,854
Agriculture
20,875
848.8
401.5
1,143
343.5
256
23,867.8
Livestock
231,912
10
64
ND
0
231,986
Activity
Sugar, rice, beans, corn, vegetables
Rice, coffee, vegetables, sugar, beans, pasture
Tomato, onion, green, beans, plantain, mango, palm, papaya, coffee
Rice, melon, water, melon, vegetable, coffee, corn, beans, milk
Vegetables, coffee, tomato
Potato, vegetables, fruits, flowers
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
15
Water systems, considered the base of community development, are vulnerable to climatic
conditions since their origins correspond to rainfall. Rainfall is influenced in its spatial and time
distribution by climatic elements like rain, evaporation and wind. Alteration in climatic patterns
reverberates in the water supply of the system varying the hydrological cycle and the activities
related to it. Climatic change, shows as a real threat. It models climate, nevertheless, its short
term implications are still uncertain and discussed. Recently, models of future scenarios
incorporate past effects of climate extremes produced by the registered variability. These
registers are used as starting points to analyze effects on short and medium term basis. For
instance, alterations in the rain periods as a result of El Niño can produce high-risk scenarios to
superficial water uptake facilities and nearby sources of water supply (OPS 1998).
According to Solera (2000), experiences in Costa Rica with EL Niño show variations in rain
patterns and the vulnerability of the water system to these atmospheric disturbances. The
irregular way in which rain season appears in the whole country affects drinkable water and
sanitary sewer services in either way, excess of deficit of rainfall. Rainfall deficit causes drought
that affects superficial and underground water intakes as a result of pollution or reduction of the
absorption and purification capacity and the concentration of agrochemicals, dead fish caused by
an oxygen level reduction or dead animals near riverbeds (OPS 1998). Excess of rainfall
provokes an increase in river and stream discharges, sediment load that make the drinkable water
supply impossible because of the suspended solids, turbidity, color, etc. (Solera 2000).
The impact of climatic change on water systems goes beyond damages caused on physical
conditions of water paths. It is not just the riverbed, the water well or the aqueduct, the social
implication, more than the economical moves to the cultural, patrimonial and political in regions
where migration and the trade of goods are ways to survive in the affected community.
According to this point of view, prevailing conditions of vulnerability in management and
disaster risk reduction associated to hydrometeorologic events involve a physical, social,
cultural, economic and political frame of a country (EIRD/UN 2004).
PROJECT TO BE DEVELOPED IN RIVER BASINS IMPACTED BY CLIMATIC
CHANGE CIRCUMSCRIBED BY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENT
As a reference element, sustainable development is defined. Economic growth, social
development, and environmental protection are interdependent and reinforce one another. The
need of finding equilibrium among these three elements is recognized under a wider concept:
sustainable development. This proposal was articulated in 1987 in the document “Our Common
Future,” created by the World Commission on Environment and Development. This document
was followed up in the 1992 United Nations Conference about Environment and Development,
the Las Americas Summit about Sustainable Development in 1996 and the United Nations World
Summit in 2002.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
16
DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA OF STUDY
A comparative study of two river basins in Costa Rica located in different areas: Humid Tropic
and Dry Tropic.
Characteristics of the River Basin Located in Humid Tropic
San Carlos River Basin is located in the northeast region of Costa Rica, specifically among North
Lambert Coordinates 425683 – 519405 and 307315 – 236810 approximately, consisting of an
area of 3122.1 Km2 (Chaves 2002). This river basin represents a good example of recent
climatic change problems that can reach high levels of deterioration and its recovery would
imply a disproportionate cost to the nearby population and the country in general. The greater
part of the population of the North Zone of the country is located inside the limits of the river
basin.
Physiography and Relief
The following figure shows a Digital Elevation Model and the drainage network of the river
basin where it is possible to appreciate its irregular escarpment.
Elevaci ón (msnm)
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
Lago Are nal
Red h ídr ica
2000000 0 2000000 4000000 Miles
N
EW
Figure 2. Digital Elevation Model and the drainage network.
Since the slope indicator correspond to 11% and the values in Table 3, it is possible to state that
topography of ground through the River Basin is curvilinear. Such conditions in basins with
high rainfalls favor the loss of soils with the consequent sediment load to the riverbed (Kiely
1999). These conditions have privileged the creation of nearly sixteen hydro electrical projects,
which make this river basin one of the most important in terms of electricity production in Costa
Rica.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
17
Table 3. Morphological Characteristics of San Carlos River Basin.
Characteristic Value
Surface 3122.1Km2
Perimeter 333.4 KM
Length of main channel 141.2Km
Maximum height 2320 m.a.s.l
Minimum height 20 m.a.s.l
Average Height 366.8 m.a.s.l
Compactness index 1.67
Slope indicator 0.11
Average gradient of the river 1.63%
Drainage density 1.05 (Km/km2)
Information contained in Table 3 confirms the existence of a notable slope since the riverbed of
141.2 km has variations in height ranging from 2320 to 20 meters above sea level, factor that
causes intense turbulence in water especially in the high and medium beds of the river. San
Carlos River basin is characterized by heavy rainfalls with a yearly average of 3,961 mm with an
annual rainfall runoff of 3,143 mm (PROCUENCA 2004).
Main Agricultural Activities
Cattle production is one of the most relevant activities of the region mainly in San Carlos where
it occupies 67% of the territory. It is also a perfect place to locate farms devoted to citrus fruits,
sugar cane, forestry, ornamental plants, root and tuber.
To vividly characterize the activities taken place in the region, some pictures illustrate them.
These pictures reflect the use of superficial water, the view from the upper part of the river basin
where mainly milk cattle is grown.
Figure 3. General characterization of representative areas in the San Carlos River Basin
In the next pictures, it is possible to observe some samples of livestock activity in the Río San
Carlos Basin. An important number of dairy farm facilities are located along the river of a
natural water stream with the purpose of tossing waste into the river the moment the milking
process is finalized. With this procedure countless quantities of water are wasted. This water
supply comes mostly from water devoted to human consumption.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
18
Figure 4. Characterization of livestock activity in the San Carlos River Basin
Dry Tropic Characterization
The Tempisque River Basin is located in the Northeast of Costa Rica, in the province of
Guanacaste. It has an area of 3,407 km2; in this basin 24,000 hectares of sugarcane are planted;
an important amount of local consumption rice is produced here, about 25%; it is the biggest
producer of water melon to export with an approximately 5,300 hectares dedicated to plant his
crop.
Figure 5. Location of Tempisque River Basin
Important ecosystems are also found, Bolsón, Riberino, Zapandi, Palo Verde Wetlands and some
habitats like low level dry forests, plains with trees, ever green forests, and some of these areas
correspond to national parks and reserves.
Hydro geologically, the Tempisque River is formed by the joint of two rivers: Tempisquito and
Ahogados. With the confluence of Colorado River, the alluvial valley of Tempisque River.
The river basin presents slopes above 7% in the high lands and less than 2% in low lands. The
highest elevation this area possesses is 1,916 m.a.s.l in Santa Marta Volcano (Alpizar et al.
2004). The average rainfall is approximately 1,833 mm (Oreanmuno 2004).
Meanwhile this river basin shows excess of water during rainy season – that shows what they
need for recurrent floods – in the dry season the availability of the resource is significantly
reduced with a delay of 6 months.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
19
The steadiness of the riverbed is combined with the fact that Rio Tempisque waters and all
superficial waters flow freely. It means that there is not any work of regulation and river stream
that facilitate its storage in the wet season to use it in the dry one.
MAIN OBJECTIVE
Develop a methodology to relieve the impact in the activities of economic development in urban
areas due to the modification of water systems in the basins as a result of climatic change.
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
Collect data in, rainfall cycle, riverbed status, and economical activities of population
centers in the river basins and the population centers in the entire basin
Develop risks and vulnerability indexes required to determine the impact in the river
basins as a result of climatic change.
Generate models of prevention of risk and vulnerability of human populations and
diverse economical populations in the basins.
Develop an early warning monitoring network to prevent natural disasters in the area
with low cost to maintain a permanent control to ease the decision making process.
Apply a proper methodology to mitigate the impact of climatic change in rainfall y beds
of rivers in the basins.
EXPECTED IMPACT OF THE PROJECT
There are numerous studies that appraise climatic change from many areas, nevertheless, it is
inevitable that without integrating the economic effects, efforts are washed away and lack of
expected impact since they try to guide another example.
Generating a Risk Map that defines areas that are vulnerable and where hydrometeorologic
extremes and the future tendencies of elements such as temperature and rainfall can strongly
impact the system.
Impacts that have been identified in this study as a consequence of extreme climatic scenarios,
not only have value for their qualified magnitude, but also for their risk analysis and the proper
strategy to reduce it. That is to say, areas with high risk (high vulnerability, high threat) with
documented negative impacts can be converted in examples to design an adaptation strategy.
The degree of affectation of an impact consists on one of the most important to define
methodology. Policies and legal framework set the route to be followed by proposed measures
and they constitute the milestone for strategies to adapt to condition of a future climate.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
20
METHODOLOGY
I Stage: Risk and Vulnerability
Diagnostic analyses of the selected areas become the first step of the process. A characterization
of the analysis of risk and vulnerability to climatic change is a priority. More populated areas
have the tendency of capturing heat, creating more vulnerable areas to atmospheric variation
which reduces the capacity of the system to provide basic water service. Besides, the collected
data will be stored in Geographical Information Systems. The selected river basins were defined
as a geographic unit recommended analyzing impacts on hydrologic systems.
II Stage: Risk and Vulnerability analysis
Analysis of risk and vulnerability according to Risk= “(threat, vulnerability)” will constitute the
second stage. Recollecting socio-economical information help to construct indicators to detail
activities in the micro basins.
III Stage: Construction of indicators
A statistical analysis with the different events and the proper indicators will guide this stage.
IV Stage: Prevention Models
Developing models becomes a representative element of the process since it will permit recreate
event before the happen and reconstruct them for analysis.
V Stage: Remote Sensor network
Monitoring different variables throughout the river basin will provide data and criteria to take
actions and reorient processes in different levels.
VI Stage: Transferring Technology
In this stage, data analysis helps guide the process of transferring information and technology to
people, institutions and organization related to the river basin in order to transfer generated
knowledge to be applied in real settings.
EXPECTED OUTCOMES
Designing of production scenarios to measure according to Costa Rican conditions.
Sampling and analyzing procedures of rainfall and riverbeds.
Designing a report about quantification of rainfall and riverbed that are beneficial to river
basin activities.
Establishing of indexes of risk and vulnerability due to climatic change.
Application of new methodologies to get a better use of water resource.
Installation of a remote sensor network to measure different variables.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
21
Identification of sensitive amphibious to climatic change.
Generating a proposal of variation in the productive areas to reduce climatic change
effects.
Training to implement environmental management to increase competitivity.
REFERENCES
Arguedas, C. 2007. Bajan las aguas y aparecen los daños por inundaciones. Periódico La
Nación.
Barquero, M. 2007. La Niña deja pérdidas por ¢11.000 millones en el agro. Periódico La
Nación.
Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL). 2009. Manual para la
Evaluación del Impacto Socioeconómico y Ambiental de los Desastres. Chile.
Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias (CNE). 2002.
Memoria Institucional 1998-2002. CNE.
Chaves, M. 2002. Estudio de la Cuenca del Río San Carlos. Tesis de graduación. Universidad
de Costa Rica. 254 pp.
Chaves, M. 2001. Estimación del Area Sembrada de Caña en Costa Rica, Durante el Año 2000.
DIECA, San José, Costa Rica. pp. 3-7.
Gutiérrez, I., s. f. América Latina ante la Sociedad del Riesgo. OEI.
http://www.oei.es/salactsi/gutierrez.htm (consultado en diciembre 2007).
Hernández, J. 2007. Cafetaleros de Acosta pierden ¢350 millones. Costa Rica, Periódico La
Nación.
Loaiza, V. 2008. Limitaciones legales impiden al CONAVI atender rutas principales. Periódico
La Nación, 10 de Noviembre.
Solera, C. 2000. Impacto de El Niño en el Sector Agua Potable de Costa Rica. Reducción de
Impactos de la Variabilidad Climática, el Caso de El Niño 1997-1998 en Costa Rica. Coronado,
Costa Rica.
OPS (Organización Panamericana de la Salud). 1998. Mitigación de Desastres Naturales en
Sistemas de Agua Potable y Alcantarillado Sanitario. Guías para el Análisis de Vulnerabilidad.
OPS-OMS. Washington, D.C., Estados Unidos de América. 102 pp.
EIRD/UN (Secretaría Interagencias de Naciones Unidas de la Estrategia Internacional para la
Reducción de Desastres). 2004. Gestión de riesgo de peligros relacionados con el agua. En:
OMM (Organización Meteorológica Mundial). Boletín Tiempo-Clima-Agua. 53(1): 23-28.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
22
WATER IN MIND: INVESTIGATING THE CULTURAL IMPLICATIONS OF
CLIMATE CHANGE IN SIBERIA
Susan A. Crate
Environmental Science & Policy
George Mason University
4400 University Drive, MS 5F2
Fairfax, Virginia, USA, 22030-4400
scrate1@gmu.edu
KEY WORDS: native Siberian communities, global climate change, altered water regimes,
cultural implications, policy implications
ABSTRACT
This talk explores the cultural implications of the uncertain water regimes brought about by
global climate change for Viliui Sakha, native horse and cattle breeders of northeastern Siberia,
Russia. 90% of 2004 survey participants confirmed that climate change is causing
unprecedented change in their local areas, threatening to undermine their subsistence economy,
their health and culture. In response, the author is conducting a three-year NSF-funded research
project, entitled: Assessing Knowledge, Resilience & Adaptation and Policy Needs in Viliui
Sakha Villages of Northeastern Siberia, Russia Facing Unprecedented Climate Change. After
providing project context, the paper focuses on water issues. Local perceptions of and responses
to changes in water regimes brought about by global climate change (GCC) are framed by a
culture’s past and evolving narratives of water. Similarly new narratives are imported to a
culture by media, researchers, local and regional policy efforts, etc. 2008 fieldwork revealed that
one of the main effects of climate change for these communities in increasing water on the land.
Inhabitants expressed not only concern about their future but also common fear that they would
‘go under water.’ Effective adaptation and policy interventions need to address not only the
physical realities of altered water regimes but also the cultural implications. To investigate this
need, our 2009 field season looks in more depth at communities’ perceptions of water, using
cultural consensus methods. This paper will present our initial findings and make suggestions on
how these findings can be used to inform local adaptation and regional policy.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
23
POPULATION DYNAMICS OF AMERICAN HORSESHOE CRABS: A STORY OF
HISTORIC CLIMATIC EVENTS AND RECENT ANTHROPOGENIC PRESSURES
Søren Faurby, Department of Biological Sciences, Aarhus University
Tim L. King, Leetown Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey
Matthias Obst, Sven Lovén Center for Marine Sciences Kristineberg, University of Gothenburg
Eric M. Hallerman, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, Virginia Tech
Cino Pertoldi and Peter Funch, Department of Biological Sciences, Aarhus University
The American horseshoe crab, Limulus polyphemus, has declined in population size but neither
the causes not the magnitude are fully understood. In order to evaluate historic demography,
variation at 13 microsatellite DNA loci surveyed in 1218 American horseshoe crabs sampled
from 28 localities was analyzed with Bayesian coalescent-based methods. The analysis showed
strong declines in population sizes throughout the species’ distribution except in the
geographically isolated southernmost population in Mexico, where a strong increase in
population size was observed. Analyses suggested that demographic changes in the core of the
distribution occurred within the last 150 years and likely were caused by anthropogenic effects.
Declines of the peripheral northern and southern populations occurred during the “Little Ice
Age” and are more likely to have been climatically driven. This study highlights the importance
of considering both climatic changes and anthropogenic effects in efforts to understand
population dynamics – a topic which is highly relevant in the ongoing assessment of the effects
of climate change.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
24
Back to Table of Contents
I-B Modeling Water Quantity and Quality
(1) Defining Hydroclimatic Provinces and Regional Factors in Precipitation Dynamics
for Water Resource Engineering in Contiguous United States -- Jeffrey Yang,
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, U.S.EPA Office of Research and
Development
(2) Incorporating Uncertainty and Variability When Determining Ground Water
Contamination Source Reductions -- Owen Gallagher, Department of Computer and
Electrical Engineering, University of Virginia
(3) Modeling Framework for Balancing Water Supply, Water Quality, and
Environmental Objectives -- Joshua Weiss, Hazen and Sawyer
(4) Using Probabilistic and Process-Based Models to Characterize Water Flows in
Virginia Streams and the Potential Influences of Climate Change -- Robert
Burgholzer, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
DEFINE HYDROCLIMATIC PROVINCES AND REGIONAL FACTORS IN
PRECIPITATION DYNAMICS FOR WATER RESOURCE ENGINEERING IN
CONTIGUOUS UNITED STATES
Y. Jeffrey Yang.1, Karen Metchis2, Steven G. Buchberger3, Zhiwei Li3,
Robert M. Clark4, Jill Neal1, and James A. Goodrich1
1. U.S.EPA Office of Research and Development, National Risk Management Research
Laboratory, 26W Martin Luther King Dr., Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
2. U.S.EPA Office of Water, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, DC 20460
3. University of Cincinnati, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Cincinnati,
Ohio 45221
4. Environmental Engineering and Public Health Consultant, Cincinnati, Ohio 45242
ABSTRACT
Water resources adaptation is a risk management approach against adverse effects of climate
change. Future precipitation projections are its fundamental technical basis. This subject is at
the center of the EPA’s water resources adaptation program with the objectives to support water
utilities and other stakeholders in adaptation engineering and management. In this paper, we
describe the development of a novel methodology in precipitation projections that begins with
delineation of hydroclimatic provinces in the contiguous U.S. Through a comprehensive wavelet
temporal and GIS spatial analysis of historical precipitation records, in a total of 129,000 station-
years for 1207 climatic stations across the U.S., it is found that prominent climate change and
variability signals can be grouped into six hydroclimatic provinces and their transitional zones:
(1) Western Coast, (2) Ranges and Basins, (3) Great Plains and Midwest, (4) Lower Mississippi
– Ohio River valley – New England region, (5) Florida and Southeast coast, and (6) Great Lakes.
These provinces have their own distinctive wavelet time-frequency spectra reflecting regional
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
25
precipitation regimes. Their boundaries coincide with major topographic features indicating the
effects of topographic forcing and land boundary feedbacks on continental precipitation. Within
each province, the precipitation variations are relatively uniform with quantifiable periodicities.
These properties, when used in conjunction with atmosphere-ocean general climate model
(AOGCM) simulation outputs of future climate scenarios, provide a basis for precipitation
projections in the next 30-50 years, a time frame that is useful for general water resources master
planning.
INCORPORATING UNCERTAINTY AND VARIABILITY WHEN DETERMINING
GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION SOURCE REDUCTIONS
Owen D. Gallagher
NSF-REU, Department of Computer and Electrical Engineering, University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22904-4246
odg4n@virginia.edu
Daniel L. Gallagher
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA 24061-0246
KEY WORDS: 2nd order Monte Carlo models, simulation, decontamination, uncertainty
ABSTRACT
Contaminant source reduction is a technique that, when coupled with natural attenuation of a
plume, can be a cost-effective method for remediating ground water pollution. In many
situations, however, site characteristics and chemical properties are not fully known, and often
vary in space and time. This makes determining the needed level of source reduction difficult.
Risk assessment models currently distinguish between uncertainty and variability. Variability
represents the natural heterogeneity of the system, while uncertainty represents the lack of
knowledge about the system. Uncertainty can be reduced by further study, but variability is part
of the natural process and cannot normally be changed. Both are represented as probability
distributions in risk assessment models, and these distributions can be combined through the use
of an overall 2nd order Monte Carlo model.
This work illustrates the application of a 2nd order Monte Carlo model for determining source
level reduction using a simple advection-dispersion steady state model to simulate contaminant
transport. The model first determines the degree of reduction necessary to meet a user-defined
concentration limit at the property boundary at a user-defined level of confidence generated from
the Monte Carlo method. Then the model calculates how long from when remediation is
completed before the concentration actually meets the limit. This approach allows for better
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
26
resource allocation and less wasted spending when removing ground water pollution or
determining whether decontamination is even necessary.
INTRODUCTION
Contamination of groundwater sources poses severe health and environmental concerns. Source
reduction of contaminant, combined with the natural attenuation of contaminants in groundwater,
is one method for reducing contamination to a tolerable level. More and better methods for
removing contaminant mass are continuously developed, and as a result their usage in the field
has been growing considerably, accounting for approximately 50% of sites where remediation is
necessary (USEPA 2004).
As computing power has risen at an exponential rate per Moore's Law, creating deterministic
computer models to simulate the attenuation of contaminant plumes has become increasingly
viable. Moreover, models can now account for uncertainty and variability in areas that were
previously simplified for computational simplicity. Thus, the goal arose for this project to create
a computer model capable of incorporating both the natural variability, which represents the
natural heterogeneity of a system, as well as the inherent uncertainty within the system as a
whole. For this assessment, a stochastic, deterministic model utilizing a 2nd order Monte Carlo
method was created to simulate the attenuation of a plume and determine the necessary time of
stabilization to reach regulatory maximums.
There are three central tenets to calculating the necessary amount of source contaminant
reduction for a plume:
1. Time of Stabilization (ToS) - This is the time it takes for a plume currently in a steady
state to reach a new steady state once the source contaminant has been reduced. It measures the
delay between the reduction and its effects on the plume.
2. Point of Compliance (PoC) - The length of the plume that is allowed to be at or exceed
regulatory maximums for the contaminant. Beyond this point in the plume, all contaminants
should comply with the existing regulations.
3. Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) - The regulation specified maximum
concentration for a contaminant in the water supply.
The ultimate objective of this project is to determine the necessary amount of source reduction to
meet the MCL at the POC and then to determine the time it would take to reach this MCL. Thus,
the end result will be a degree of contaminant reduction that meets environmental and health
regulations within a desired timeframe, as well as uncertainty estimates around these values that
can help risk managers is setting appropriate levels of protection.
2009 Virginia Water Research Conference
October 15-16, 2009, Richmond, VA
27
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Modeling Uncertainty and Variability
Risk assessment models currently distinguish between uncertainty and variability. Variability
represents the natural heterogeneity of the system, while uncertainty represents the lack of
knowledge about the system. Uncertainty can be reduced by further study, but variability is part
of the natural process and cannot normally be changed (Cullen and Frey 1999, Vose 2008). Both
are represented as probability distributions in risk assessment models, and these distributions can
be combined through the use of an overall 2nd order Monte Carlo model.
The model was developed as a 2nd order Monte Carlo model, as conceptualized in Figure 1. This
is an extension to the standard or 1st order Monte Carlo modeling approach which allows input
parameters to be treated as stochastic. In the 2nd order approach, input parameters may be
deterministic, variable and therefore described as a probability distribution, or uncertain in which
case the probability distribution itself is not known. The variable parameters are treated in a
fashion similar to variables in a 1st order model. For the uncertain parameters, the parameters of
the distribution (e.g. the mean and standard deviation of a normal distribution) are treated as
probability distributions. For each uncertainty