Premium
Characterization of surface storage and runoff patterns following peatland restoration, Quebec, Canada
Author(s) -
Shantz M. A.,
Price J. S.
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
hydrological processes
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.222
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1099-1085
pISSN - 0885-6087
DOI - 10.1002/hyp.6140
Subject(s) - snowmelt , surface runoff , hydrology (agriculture) , environmental science , peat , ponding , ditch , drainage , groundwater recharge , hydrograph , surface water , geology , groundwater , ecology , geotechnical engineering , aquifer , biology , environmental engineering
Blocking drainage ditches and creating bunds to limit surface water losses are important for restoring abandoned peat‐extraction sites in North America. However, these runoff control techniques have not been well characterized, particularly during the snowmelt period. Therefore, patterns of runoff timing and magnitude were evaluated in a peatland (Bois‐des‐Bel, Quebec, Canada) undergoing restoration (restored site), in comparison with an unrestored section of the same peatland (unrestored site). Snowmelt dominated runoff, representing over 79% of the April to August runoff for both sites in 2001. Low (25–35 cm) bunds constructed on the restored site detained water for much of the melt period, but some water loss occurred where bunds were breached. Overland flow and surface ponding were prevalent at the restored site, but were not evident at the unrestored site. At the restored site, the presence of bunds and frozen, saturated (thus impermeable) ground contributed to differences in snowmelt runoff patterns relative to the unrestored site. In the post‐snowmelt period (May–August 2001 and 2002), restored site runoff was reduced to 25% of that lost at the unrestored site. Both hydrometric and chemical hydrograph separation analysis using electrical conductivity indicated that blocked ditches restricted water losses from much of the restored site during the summer months, when the bunds had little effect on runoff. However, discharge peaks were greater at the restored site relative to the unrestored site and generally occurred more quickly following rainfall, because of the wetter antecedent conditions. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.