Volume 9, Issue 17 (9-2018)                   J Watershed Manage Res 2018, 9(17): 1-13 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Momenian P, Nazarnejhad H, Miryaghoubzadeh M, Mostafazadeh R. (2018). Assessment and Prioritizing of Subwatersheds Based on Watershed Health Scores (Case Study: Ghotorchay, Khoy, West Azerbaijan). J Watershed Manage Res. 9(17), 1-13. doi:10.29252/jwmr.9.17.1
URL: http://jwmr.sanru.ac.ir/article-1-796-en.html
Assessment and Prioritizing of Subwatersheds Based on Watershed Health Scores (Case Study: Ghotorchay, Khoy, West Azerbaijan)
Parvin Momenian, Habib Nazarnejhad *1, MirHassan Miryaghoubzadeh, Raoof Mostafazadeh
Abstract:   (4488 Views)

IIntegrated watershed management is known as a new pattern of planning which emphasizes importance of the sustainable development and management of on watershed: water and soil. Therefore, the goals of watershed management will be fulfilled when an integrated management is employed on watershed’s resources. In this study, Ghotorchay watershed is located in West Azarbaijan province, Iran was prioritize according to the health rate. The study area with 6800 ha the study watershed is divided into 11 sub-watershed. Toward this purpose, indices are defined that play main role in the health rate of watershed and show the importance of watershed components. Communications and interactions of each sub-watersheds constituent parts are considered to evaluate the indices. The sub-watershed are divided into five categories: biological condition (species richness), continuity (the number of structure per unit length of river), geomorphology (sensitivity of soil to erosion and climate), hydrology (perennial vegetation and impervious surfaces), and water quality (point and non-point sources). Eventually, the sub-basins were prioritized in terms of each index and the final map was obtained by combining all the calculate criteria. The results show that the health rate of watershed is medium (50-60%), sub-basin 11 has the highest watershed health with 60.39 score rather than other sub-watershed and sub-watershed 6 has the lowest watershed health with 50.71 score with respect to other sub-watersheds. The cause of reduction of health was assessed in each sub-watershed and solutions to improve health and prevent the decline was proposed that these results can prioritize actions to improve and strengthen watershed services should be considered.
 

Keywords: Prioritizing, Connectivity, Health rate of watershed, Water quality, Hydrology
Full-Text [PDF 3110 kb]   (1893 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: مديريت حوزه های آبخيز
Received: 2017/04/25 | Accepted: 2018/04/9
References
1. Aghapor, A.A. 2005. Analysis of water quality and determine of its change reasons in Ghotor river, 8th National Congress on Environmental Health,290-300 Tehran, Iran (In Persian).
2. Alilou, H. 2015. Design of Sampling Locations for Surface Water Quality Monitoring at Watershed Scale (A Case Study: Khoy watershed). M.Sc. Thesis, University of Tehran, Faculty of Natural Resources, Karaj. Iran, 169 pp (In Persian).
3. Alizadeh, A. 2009. Principles of applied hydrology. 26th ed., Emam Reza University, Mashhad, Iran, 941 pp (In Persian).
4. Bazneshin, Sh., A. A. Emadi and R. Fazoula. 2016. Investigation the Flooding Potential of Basins and Determination Flood Producing Areas (Case Study: NEKA Basin). Journal of Watershed Management Research, 7(14): 20-28 pp (Persian). [DOI:10.29252/jwmr.7.14.28]
5. Chehrazi, D. 2010. Assessment and exploitation of ground water. 1st ed., Ministry of Energy of Iran, Tehran, Iran, 354 pp (In Persian).
6. Dai, Q., G. Liu, Sh. Xue, X. Lan, Sh. Zhai, J. Tian and G. Wang. 2007. Health diagnoses of ecosystems subject to a typical erosion environment in Zhifanggou watershed, north-west China. Front of Forestry China, 2(3): 241-250. [DOI:10.1007/s11461-007-0040-1]
7. Diebel, M., M. Fedora and S. Cogswell. 2009. Prioritizing road crossing improvement to restore stream connectivity for stream resident fish. International Conference on Ecology and Transportation, 1-18 pp., North Carolina State University, USA.
8. Ejtehadi. H., A. Sepehry and H.R. Akkafi. 2012. Methods of Measuring Biodiversity. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad. Iran, 230 pp (In Persian).
9. Environment Protection Agency. 2011. Healthy Watersheds Initiative, National Framework and Action Plan. EPA 841-R-11-005.
10. Environment Protection Agency. 2012. Identifying and protecting Healthy Watersheds. EPA 841-B-11-002.
11. Environment Protection Agency. 2014. Wisconsin Integrated Assessment of Watershed Health, A Report on the status and Vulnerability of watershed Health in Wisconsin. EPA 841-R-14-001
12. Esmali, A. and Kh. Abdolahi. 2010. Watershed management and soil conservation. Ardabil University, Ardabil, Iran, 612 pp (In Persian).
13. Guangwei, H. 2011. Long-term impacts of policy mismatch upon watershed health. Journal of River Basin Management, 9(1): 79-84. [DOI:10.1080/15715124.2011.559909]
14. Hara, Y., K. Takeuchi and S. Okubo. 2004. Urbanization Linked with Past Agricultural Land use Patterns in the urban Fringe of a Deltaic Asian mega-city: a case study in Bangkok. Landscape and Urban Planning, 73(1): 16-28. [DOI:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.07.002]
15. He, H., J. Zhou, Y. Wu, W. Zhang and X. Xie. 2008. Modelling the response of surface water quality to the urbanization in Xian, China, Journal of Environmental Management, 86(4): 731-749. [DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.12.043]
16. Homauonfar, V., A.D. Darvishan and S.D.R. Sadeghi. 2016. Effects of Soil Preparation for Laboratorial Erosion Studies on Surface Runoff. Journal of Watershed Management Research, 7(14): 60-68 pp (In Persian). [DOI:10.29252/jwmr.7.14.68]
17. Isabel, D.A., V. Ferreira and M. Graca. 2012. The performance of biological indicators in assessing the ecological state of streams with varying catchment urbanization levels in Coimbra, Portugal. Limnetica, 31(1): 141-153.
18. Jat, M.K., D. Khare, K. Garge and V. Shankar. 2009. Remote Sensing and GIS-based assessment of urbanization and degradation of watershed health. Urban Water Journal, 6(3): 251-263. [DOI:10.1080/15730620801971920]
19. Jenkins, M.A. and G.A. Parker. 1998. Composition and diversity of woody vegetation in silvicultural openings of southern Indiana forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 109(1): 57-74. [DOI:10.1016/S0378-1127(98)00256-4]
20. Marriott, D. and S. Adams. 2005. Environmental services city of Portland, Summary of the Framework for Integrated Management of Watershed Health, Portland Oregon.
21. Mohseni Saravi, M. 2013. Hydrology of rangeland. 1st edn, Jahad Daneshgahi, Tehran, Iran, 233 pp (In Persian).
22. Nerkar, S.S., A.J. Tamhankar, E. Johansson and C.S. Lundburg. 2013. Improvement in health and empowerment of families as a result of watershed management in a tribal area in India-a qualitative study. International Health and Human Rights, 13(42): 1-12. [DOI:10.1186/1472-698X-13-42]
23. Rezvani, H. 1998. Study the Effective Factors in Flood Production and Evaluation Control Factors. Forest and Rangeland. Journal of Watershed Management Research, 23: 25-36 (In Persian).
24. Sherbinin, D., A. Schiller and A. Pulsipher. 2007. The vulnerability of global cities to climate hazards. Environment and Urbanization, 19(1): 39-64. [DOI:10.1177/0956247807076725]
25. Singh, A., A. Dieye and M. Finco. 1999. Assessing Enviromental Condition Major River Basins in Africa as Surrogates for Watershed Health. Ecosystem Health, 5(4): 265-274. [DOI:10.1046/j.1526-0992.1999.09945.x]
26. SolaimaniSardo, M., A.A. Vali, R. Ghazavi and H.R. Saidi Goraghani. 2013. Trend Analysis of Chemical Water Quality Parameters; Case study Cham Anjir River. Irrigation & Water Engineering, 3(12): 95-106 (In Persian).
27. Staton, S., K.A. Dextrase, J. MetcalfeSmith, J.D. Maio, M. Nelson, J. Parish, B. Kilgour and E. Holm. 2003. Status and trends of Ontario's Sydenham River Ecosystem in relation to aquatic species at risk. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 88(1): 283-310. [DOI:10.1023/A:1025529409422]
28. Vitousek, P., H. Mooney, J. Lubchenco and J. Melillo. 1997. Human domination of Earth's ecosystems. Urban Ecology, 277(5325): 494-499. [DOI:10.1126/science.277.5325.494]
29. White, M.D and K.A. Greer. 2006. The effects of watershed urbanization on the stream hydrology and riparian vegetation of Los Penasquitos Creek, California. Landscape and Urban Planning, 74(2): 125-138. [DOI:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.11.015]
30. Wildhaber, Y.S., D. Bnninger, K. Burri and C. Alewell. 2012. Evaluation and application of a portable rainfall simulator on subalpine grassland. Catena, 91: 56-62. [DOI:10.1016/j.catena.2011.03.004]
31. Williams, J.E., C.A. Wood and M.P. Dombeck. 1997. Watershed Restoration: Principles and Practices. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Md.
32. Wohl, E.E., P.L. Angermeier, B. Bledsoe, G.M. Kondolf, L. MacDonnell, D.M. Merritt, M.A. Palmer, N.L. Poff and D. Tarboton. 2005. River restoration. Water Resources Research, 41(10301): 1-12. [DOI:10.1029/2005WR003985]
33. Xia, J., Y. Zhang, Ch. Zhao and S.E. Bunn. 2014. A bio indicator assessment framework of river ecosystem health and the detection of factors influencing the health of the Huai River Basin, China. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 19(8): 1-34. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000989]
Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA
Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Watershed Management Research

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb