ABSTRACT
A multi-level pesticide assessment methodology has been developed to permit regulatory personnel to undertake a variety of assessments on the potential for pesticide used in agricultural areas to contaminate the groundwater regime at an increasingly detailed geographical scale of investigation. A multi-level approach accounts for a variety of assessment objectives and detail required in the assessment, the restrictions on the availability and accuracy of data, the time available to undertake the assessment, and the expertise of the decision maker. The level 1: regional scale is designed to prioritize districts having a potentially high risk for groundwater contamination from the application of a specific pesticide for a particular crop. The level 2: local scale is used to identify critical areas for groundwater contamination, at a soil polygon scale, within a district. A level 3: soil profile scale allows the user to evaluate specific factors influencing pesticide leaching and persistence, and to determine the extent and timing of leaching, through the simulation of the migration of a pesticide within a soil profile. Because of the scale of investigation, limited amount of data required, and qualitative nature of the assessment results, the level 1 and level 2 assessment are designed primarily for quick and broad guidance related to management practices. A level 3 assessment is more complex, requires considerably more data and expertise on the part of the user, and hence is designed to verify the potential for contamination identified during the level 1 or 2 assessment. The system combines environmental modelling, geographical information systems, extensive databases, data management systems, expert systems, and pesticide assessment models, to form an environmental information system for assessing the potential for pesticides to contaminate groundwater.
ABSTRACT
Four watershed acidification models (TMWAM, ETD, ILWAS, and RAINS) are reviewed and a comparison of model performance is presented for a common watershed. The models have been used to simulate the dynamics of water quantity and quality at Batchawana Watershed, Canada, a sub-basin of the Turkey Lakes Watershed. The computed results are compared with observed data for a four-year period (Jan. 1981-Dec. 1984). The models exhibit a significant range in the ability to simulate the daily, monthly and seasonal changes present in the observed data. Monthly watershed outflows and lake chemistry predictions are compared to observed data. pH and ANC are the only two chemical parameters common to all four models. Coefficient of efficiency (E), linear (r) and rank (R) correlation coefficients, and regression slope (s) are used to compare the goodness of fit of the simulated with the observed data. The ILWAS, TMWAM and RAINS models performed very well in predicting the monthly flows, with values of r and R of approximately 0.98. The ETD model also showed strong correlations with linear (r) and rank (R) correlation coefficients of 0.896 and 0.892, respectively. The results of the analyses showed that TMWAM provided the best simulation of pH (E=0.264, r=0.648), which is slightly better than ETD (E=0.240, r=0.549), and much better than ILWAS (E=-2.965, r=0.293), and RAINS (E=-4.004, r=0.473). ETD was found to be superior in predicting ANC (E=0.608, r=0.781) as compared to TMWAM (E=0.340, r=0.598), ILWAS (E=0.275, r=0.442), and RAINS (E=-1.048, r=0.356). The TMWAM model adequately simulated SO4 over the four-year period (E=0.423, r=0.682) but the ETD (E=-0.904, r=0.274), ILWAS (E=-4.314, r=0.488), and RAINS (E=-6.479, r=0.126) models all performed poorer than the benchmark model (mean observed value).
ABSTRACT
The RAISON-micro (Regional Analysis by Intelligent System ON a micro-computer) expert system is being used to predict the effects of mine effluents on receiving waters in Ontario. The potential of this system to assist regulatory agencies and mining industries to define more acceptable effluent limits was shown in an initial study. This system has been further developed so that the expert system helps the model user choose the most appropriate model for a particular application from a hierarchy of models. The system currently contains seven models which range from steady state to time dependent models, for both conservative and nonconservative substances in rivers and lakes. The menu driven expert system prompts the model user for information such as the nature of the receiving water system, the type of effluent being considered, and the range of background data available for use as input to the models. The system can also be used to determine the nature of the environmental conditions at the site which are not available in the textual information database, such as the components of river flow. Applications of the water quality expert system are presented for representative mine sites in the Timmins area of Ontario.
