Impacts of upland open drains upon runoff generation: a numerical assessment of catchment‐scale impacts

Shallow upland drains, grips, have been hypothesized as responsible for increased downstream flow magnitudes. Observations provide counterfactual evidence, often relating to the difficulty of inferring conclusions from statistical correlation and paired catchment comparisons, and the complexity of designing field experiments to test grip impacts at the catchment scale. Drainage should provide drier antecedent moisture conditions, providing more storage at the start of an event; however, grips have higher flow velocities than overland flow, thus potentially delivering flow more rapidly to the drainage network. We develop and apply a model for assessing the impacts of grips on flow hydrographs. The model was calibrated on the gripped case, and then the gripped case was compared with the intact case by removing all grips. This comparison showed that even given parameter uncertainty, the intact case had significantly higher flood peaks and lower baseflows, mirroring field observations of the hydrological response of intact peat. The simulations suggest that this is because delivery effects may not translate into catchment-scale impacts for three reasons. First, in our case, the proportions of flow path lengths that were hillslope were not changed significantly by gripping. Second, the structure of the grip network as compared with the structure of the drainage basin mitigated against grip-related increases in the concentration of runoff in the drainage network, although it did marginally reduce the mean timing of that concentration at the catchment outlet. Third, the effect of the latter upon downstream flow magnitudes can only be assessed by reference to the peak timing of other tributary basins, emphasizing that drain effects are both relative and scale dependent. However, given the importance of hillslope flow paths, we show that if upland drainage causes significant changes in surface roughness on hillslopes, then critical and important feedbacks may impact upon the speed of hydrological response. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Rae Mackay,et al.  Modelling the hydrological impacts of open ditch drainage , 1996 .

[2]  A. Feldman,et al.  Evolution of Clark's Unit Graph Method to Spatially Distributed Runoff , 1998 .

[3]  Keith Beven,et al.  Equifinality, data assimilation, and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modelling of complex environmental systems using the GLUE methodology , 2001 .

[4]  J. Holden,et al.  Recovery of water tables in Welsh blanket bog after drain blocking: Discharge rates, time scales and the influence of local conditions , 2010 .

[5]  INVESTIGATION OF RAINFALL, RUN-OFF AND YIELD ON THE ALWEN AND BRENIG CATCHMENTS. , 1957 .

[6]  Lee E. Brown,et al.  Environmental effects of drainage, drain-blocking and prescribed vegetation burning in UK upland peatlands , 2009 .

[7]  M. Robinson Hydrological effects of moorland gripping: a re-appraisal of the Moor House research , 1985 .

[8]  A. C. Armstrong,et al.  The Extent of Agricultural Field Drainage in England and Wales, 1971-80 , 1988 .

[9]  Stuart Hamilton Just say NO to equifinality , 2007 .

[10]  Keith Beven,et al.  Catchment geomorphology and the dynamics of runoff contributing areas , 1983 .

[11]  J. Holden,et al.  Water table dynamics in undisturbed, drained and restored blanket peat , 2011 .

[12]  M. Robinson,et al.  Changes in catchment runoff following drainage and afforestation , 1986 .

[13]  Stuart N. Lane,et al.  A network‐index‐based version of TOPMODEL for use with high‐resolution digital topographic data , 2004 .

[14]  M. Robinson The effect of pre-afforestation drainage on the stream-flow and water quality of a small upland catchment , 1980 .

[15]  H Rajaie,et al.  Runoff hydrograph simulation based on time variable isochrone technique , 2002 .

[16]  S. Lane,et al.  The potential of digital filtering of generic topographic data for geomorphological research , 2009 .

[17]  P. Julien,et al.  Time to equilibrium for spatially variable watersheds , 1995 .

[18]  Frédéric Darboux,et al.  A fast, simple and versatile algorithm to fill the depressions of digital elevation models , 2002 .

[19]  A. Stewart,et al.  Effects of moor-draining on the hydrology and vegetation of Northern Pennine blanket bog , 1991 .

[20]  Richard H. McCuen,et al.  The role of sensitivity analysis in hydrologic modeling , 1973 .

[21]  Effects of agricultural drainage on upland streamflow: case studies in mid-Wales , 1983 .

[22]  J. Holden,et al.  Hydrological modelling of drained blanket peatland , 2011 .

[23]  L. Pfister,et al.  A diffusive transport approach for flow routing in GIS-based flood modeling , 2003 .

[24]  J. Holden,et al.  Runoff generation and water table fluctuations in blanket peat: evidence from UK data spanning the dry summer of 1995 , 1999 .

[25]  D. Maidment,et al.  UNIT HYDROGRAPH DERIVED FROM A SPATIALLY DISTRIBUTED VELOCITY FIELD , 1996 .

[26]  C. Thorne,et al.  Quantitative analysis of land surface topography , 1987 .

[27]  J. Holden,et al.  Impact of land drainage on peatland hydrology. , 2006, Journal of environmental quality.

[28]  J. Holden,et al.  Short-term impact of peat drain-blocking on water colour, dissolved organic carbon concentration, and water table depth , 2007 .

[29]  Joseph Holden,et al.  Peatland hydrology and carbon release: why small-scale process matters , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[30]  J. Holden,et al.  Artificial drainage of peatlands: hydrological and hydrochemical process and wetland restoration , 2004 .

[31]  K. Beven,et al.  THE PREDICTION OF HILLSLOPE FLOW PATHS FOR DISTRIBUTED HYDROLOGICAL MODELLING USING DIGITAL TERRAIN MODELS , 1991 .

[32]  Paul K. Barten,et al.  The peatland hydrologic impact model: development and testing. , 1987 .

[33]  A. Stewart,et al.  Moor-draining: a review of impacts on land use , 1983 .

[34]  Stuart N. Lane,et al.  Representation of landscape hydrological connectivity using a topographically driven surface flow index , 2009 .

[35]  J. Holden,et al.  Chapter 22 Impacts of artificial drainage of peatlands on runoff production and water quality , 2006 .

[36]  K. Beven,et al.  A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology , 1979 .

[37]  J. Price,et al.  Characterization of surface storage and runoff patterns following peatland restoration, Quebec, Canada , 2006 .

[38]  A. Heathwaite,et al.  Hydrological processes in abandoned and restored peatlands: An overview of management approaches , 2003, Wetlands Ecology and Management.

[39]  Chong-Yu Xu,et al.  Development and testing of a new storm runoff routing approach based on time variant spatially distributed travel time method , 2009 .

[40]  J. Holden,et al.  Overland flow velocity and roughness properties in peatlands , 2008 .

[41]  David R. Maidment,et al.  Geographic Information Systems (GIS)‐based spatially distributed model for runoff routing , 1999 .

[42]  J. Holden,et al.  The impact of peatland drain-blocking on dissolved organic carbon loss and discolouration of water; results from a national survey , 2010 .

[43]  J. Holden Sediment and particulate carbon removal by pipe erosion increase over time in blanket peatlands as a consequence of land drainage , 2006 .