# Presentation: 894108

## Water management scenarios within the Turkey Creek catchment –   questions might be asked,                         answers might be given

**Water m****anagement scenarios within the**** Turkey Creek ****catchment –   questions might be asked,                         answers might be given**
- _[ ](http://www.srs.fs.fed.us/charleston/index.html)_

**Artur Radecki-Pawlik**
**Agricultural University of Krakow**

***Charleston, SC - 12 Sept. Forest Service ***
***The ******Turkey Creek ******5******th******. ******Coop. meeting ***

## Turkey Creek Watershed

**When**** talking about**
**Integrated Water Resources Management**** ****policy**** for the**
**Turkey Creek and other streams and rivers**
**USDA Forest Service likes to give the answers **
**and solutions to real problems **
**and finish up with practical aplications**

## Most of the issues that have been proposed/identified in terms of water resources management on the Turkey Creek watershed are primarily based on characterizing the watershed as a baseline reference for inter-site comparisons and evaluating the impacts of other developing watersheds in the region.  

*** ***
**Most of the issues that have been proposed/identified in terms of water resources management on the Turkey Creek watershed are primarily based on characterizing the watershed as ****a baseline reference**** for inter-site comparisons and evaluating the impacts of other developing watersheds in the region.  **
**Most of this information was compiled based on the ideas and discussions from the last four cooperative meetings. **

## 1. How do the changes in land use and management practices – first of all: prescribed burning affect the hydrology (water yield, flooding) and water quality downstream both on a short- and long-term basis? 

**2. ****How increase in imperviousness areas and cross-drainage structures may impact the water yield, wetland hydrology?**

**3. ****How does the construction of new roads within the catchment increasing the imperviousness of the area which will change the surface runoff?**

**5. ****In what way the presence of the culverts, road bridges and road ditches ****are**** influencing the peak discharges, especially when some of them are clogged by ****shrubs, small trees and ****fine sediments?**

**4. ****How the change of the areas occupied by wetlands would influence the peak flow rates?**

**Ex.: ****Bridges and ****c****ulverts measured in the Turkey Creek**

## Different types, sizes, quantities, and conditions of culverts in the Turkey Creek watershed

**Different types, sizes, quantities, and conditions of ****c****ulverts in the Turkey Creek watershed**

## ... more culverts 

**... more**** ****c****ulverts **

## ... and bridges 

**... and bridges**** **

## The Turkey Creek bridge 

**Ex. Calculations – scenario 1**** **

**Turkey Creek bridge **
**Ex. Calculations – scenario 2**

## The Turkey Creek bridge 

**The Turkey Creek bridge **
**Ex. Calculations – scenario 1**** **

## The Turkey Creek bridge 

**Ex. Calculations – scenario 2**

## The Turkey Creek bridge 

**The Turkey Creek bridge **
**Ex. Calculations – scenario 2**
**cross sections**

## Summary table of the Turkey Creek catchment bridges and culverts

|  |
| --- |

## Canadian study - on reducing surface runoff using wet-ponds

**subject:    **
**WATER STORM CAPACITY IN LANGLEY AREA (B.C. CANADA) **
**USING RAINFALL AND STORMWATER RUNOFF**

**Objective:**
**Along the project a problem of designing and using wet-ponds as a reducing factor of runoff coefficient in small, urbanised water basins was considered.**

- The work was set up in British Columbia in Canada in Langley municipality in the Willowbrook catchment.

## For the hydrological analysis the 30-year rainfall record from 1959 to 1990 with the average of annual precipitation equal to 1700 mm was used. 

**November with 246.5 mm, December with 257 mm and January with 228 mm have the highest average values and the maximum 24 hours rainfall over the 30-year period occurred on Nov. 1990 (92 mm), Dec. 1980 (101 mm) and Jan. 1968 (102 mm).**

**Wet detention ponds are known as the environmental friendly method of temporary storing water and  they are used for cleaning it as well (Rood and Hamilton 1994). **

***“******... stormwater  wet******pon******ds are not holes in the ground, but rather complex and redundant treatment system[s] ...[they] require a sophisticated understanding of hydrology and wet plant ecology.” [Schueler, 1992]***

## The number of detention ponds required will be always determined by the area available for detention storage and the contributing catchment area. 

**It was showed that land requirements as far as wet pond area is concerned are usually 1.5 – 3 % of tributary/drainage basin size range.**
** **

**Also the analysis shows that the most desirable reduction of runoff coefficient is varying and depends on land use and individual needs of users of a land. It was found that the most desirable solution in terms of reducing the runoff coefficient value is to cut it down to 75 percent of it initial values.**

## Table 1.   Wetpond areas for different management scenarios

**C – runoff coefficient**
**for h = 0.6 m, P = 102.10 (winter), 86.00 (summer) [mm/day]**
**Qsurf-runoff= C I A, where: I is the for the time of concentration of the site**
**and A is the project site area.**

## Table 3. Potential water storage for different size detention ponds.

## Wetponds

## The Turkey Creek - the A-area  factor:

** **
**1.    A = 5000 ha    - considered along "up to now" done studies**
**2.    A = 6683 ha    - taken into account by National Forest**
**3.    A = 7200 ha    - SWAT calculated - the latest one**

**1.    A = 5000 ha    - considered along "up to now" done studies**

**2.    A = 6683 ha    - taken into account by National Forest**

**3.    A = 7200 ha    - SWAT calculated - the latest one**