See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/281489308

Watershed Management Structures and Decision Making Frameworks

Article  in  Water Resources Management · October 2015

DOI: 10.1007/s11269-015-1094-8

CITATIONS READS

7 3,218

3 authors, including:

Anil Kumar Misra Amandeep Kaur

Sikkim University 7 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS   
63 PUBLICATIONS   976 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Waste Water treatment View project

Centre of Excellence on Water Resource, Cryosphere and Climate Change, Sikkim University View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Anil Kumar Misra on 04 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Watershed Management Structures and
Decision Making Frameworks

Anil Kumar Misra, Ankit Pachouri &

Amandeep Kaur

Water Resources Management

An International Journal - Published
for the European Water Resources
Association (EWRA)

ISSN 0920-4741
Volume 29
Number 13

Water Resour Manage (2015)

29:4849-4861
DOI 10.1007/s11269-015-1094-8

1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and all
rights are held exclusively by Springer Science
+Business Media Dordrecht. This e-offprint
is for personal use only and shall not be self-
archived in electronic repositories. If you wish
to self-archive your article, please use the
accepted manuscript version for posting on
your own website. You may further deposit
the accepted manuscript version in any
repository, provided it is only made publicly
available 12 months after official publication
or later and provided acknowledgement is
given to the original source of publication
and a link is inserted to the published article
on Springer's website. The link must be
accompanied by the following text: "The final
publication is available at link.springer.com”.

1 23
 Author's personal copy
Water Resour Manage (2015) 29:4849–4861
DOI 10.1007/s11269-015-1094-8

Watershed Management Structures and Decision

Making Frameworks

Anil Kumar Misra 1 & Ankit Pachouri 1 &

Amandeep Kaur 2

Received: 17 December 2014 / Accepted: 2 August 2015 /

Published online: 19 August 2015
# Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Abstract Integrated watershed management has been adopted worldwide as best

management practices, can minimise the climate change impact on agricultural pro-
duction and fresh water resources. Critical elements for making best watershed
management systems, like precise locations and designs of recharge structures, correct
location of check dams within the watershed to ensure the optimum utilization have
been discussed. Best Management Practices (BMP) for agricultural watershed man-
agement that includes integrated and consortium approach has been proposed. Case
study demonstrates that the construction of artificial recharge structures like check
dams on the upstream of the tributaries not only causes additional recharge but is also
useful in improving the ground water quality. Study also proposes a watershed
performance assessment model for identifying the parameters in the watershed, whose
precise characterization is essential for the success of any watershed management
program. A methodology has been develop for the evaluation of a complete water-
sheds model parameterization and performance scores has been assigned on the basis
of parameter impact on output. The analysis and methodology of the proposed work
can extremely useful for the practice of evaluation and effective implementation of
watersheds.

Keywords Watershed parameters . Recharge structures . Check dams . Performance estimation .

Evaluation points

* Anil Kumar Misra

anilgeology@gmail.com
Ankit Pachouri
ankitpachouri@itmindia.edu
Amandeep Kaur
nitttraman@gmail.com
1
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, ITM University, Sector 23A, Palam Vihar,
Gurgaon 122017 Haryana, India
2
National Institute of Technical Teachers Training & Research, Chandigarh, India
 Author's personal copy
4850 A.K. Misra et al.

1 Introduction

A watershed can be used as the basic unit for management because it forms a natural boundary
that is functional, stable, and identifiable (Bohn and Kershner 2002; Demissie and Keefer
1998). Watershed is considered to be a system that integrates socioeconomic and physical
processes (Mavrommati et al. 2013), which are closely related through exploitation of
resources and provision of service functions. The approach commonly used for watershed
management encompasses the following processes: (a) system recognition, (b) diagnostic
analysis, (c) goal setting, (d) system simulation, (e) strategy assessment, and (f) strategy
optimization (Heathcote 1998; Nakamura 2003; Liu et al. 2015). Studies shows that several
factors that directly or indirectly affects the performance of watershed are (a) large changes in
imperviousness in downstream areas reduced the time to peak and increases the peak discharge
(Wang et al 2015), (b) Soil erosion and loss (Durga Rao and Kumar 2004) (c) Development
intensity, development size, and watershed slope (Goff and Gentry 2006) and (d) sediment
delivery factors viz., topography, vegetation cover, proximity to water courses and soil
(Chowdary et al 2013).
There will be increase in the frequency and intensity of tropical cyclones, extreme rainfall and
temperature events and all of these events will severely affect the water resources and agricultural
production and the related consequences may cause more rains and runoffs and increase the
probability of flood (IPCC 2007). Moreover escalation in the precipitation pattern and variation,
resulting from the climate change would lead to the further problems related to water shortages
and droughts. An integrated watershed management plan equipped with suitable recharge
structures and check dams can provide solutions to changing climatic conditions problems.
The aim of this paper is (i) to observe the magnitude of climate change impact on water
resource and agriculture (ii) to provide an integrated watershed management plan equipped with
suitable recharge structures (iii) Propose suitable designs of check dams for different stream
orders and (iii) to develop a methodology for evaluating the performance of a watershed.

1.1 Impact on Water Resources and Agriculture

Several human activities, economic and population growth and urban agglomeration are
continuously affecting water resources and crop production. Climate change has resulted in
increases in globally-averaged mean annual air temperature and variations in regional precip-
itation and these changes are expected to continue and intensify in the future (Solomon et al.
2007). The impact of climate change on the quantity and quality of groundwater resources is of
global importance because 1.5 to 3 billion people rely on groundwater as a drinking water
source (Kundzewicz and Döll 2009). Studies show that agriculture yield will likely be severely
affected over the next hundred years due to unprecedented rates of changes in the climate
system (Jarvis et al. 2010; Thornton et al. 2011). In arid and semi-arid areas the expected
precipitation decreases over the next century would be 20 % or more. Furthermore studies
conducted by Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) after the study of 2190 Himalayan
glaciers revealed that approximately 75 % of the Himalayan glaciers are on the retreat, with the
average shrinkage of 3.75 km during the last 15 years (Misra 2013). These findings raise
serious concern over the accelerated retreat of glaciers in the Himalayan Mountains because it
will increase the variability of water flows to downstream regions and threatening the
sustainable water use planning in the world’s most populous Ganga Basin. Studies (Maarten
and Stankiewicz 2006 & A. Nyong 2005) predict that by the year 2050 the rainfall in Sub-
 Author's personal copy
Watershed Management Structures 4851

Saharan Africa could drop by 10 %, which will cause a major water shortage. This 10 %
decrease in precipitation would reduce drainage by 17 % and the regions which are receiving
500 to 600 mm/year rainfall will experience a reduction by 50 to 30 % respectively in the
surface drainage. In 1955, only seven countries were found to be with water stressed
conditions. In 1990 this number rose to 20and it is expected that by the year 2025 another
10 to 15 countries shall be added to this list. It is further predicted that by 2050, 2/3rds of the
world population may face water stressed conditions (Gosain 2006). The country like India
where the population is increasing with unprecedented rate is likely to be water scarce by
2050. The water requirement in India by 2050 will be in the order of 1450 km3, which is
significantly higher than the estimated water resources of 1122 km3 per year. Therefore to meet
the shortfall requirement, it is necessary to harness additional 950 km3 per year over the
present availability of 500 km3 per year (Gupta and Deshpande 2004). The Table 1 shows the
worlds natural renewable resources.
The current water management practices are not capable to cope with the impacts of climate
change on water availability, flood risk, health, agriculture, energy and ecosystems. Therefore
execution of successful watershed management and development is imperatively needed to
reduce the impact on overexploited natural resources.

2 Management of Watershed

In majority of the areas groundwater aquifers are the major source or the only source of water
supply for domestic, industrial and irrigational purposes. In such areas sustainable

Table 1 The world’s natural renewable resources (Rounded figures) (Source; UNESCO 2004)

Geopolitical regions Total average internal Portion coming from Relatively constant
(Groups of Countries) and external resources outside of the region portion (Surface and
(km3/Yr) (external resources) groundwater)
(KM3/Yr) (km3/Yr)

OSS region** 520 113 ~200

Europe 1900 10 600
Ex-USSR (the former USSR) 4,400 430 1400
North America (USA and Canada) 6,700 0 1700
Latin America (including the Caribbean) 13000 3 4000
Africa, excluding the OSS region 3,500 0 1200
(but including the Madagascar)
Near the Middle east 480 17 100
Indian sub-continent and south east Asia 6,600 1000 1600
China (including Mongolia and North 2,800 0 1000
korea)
Japan and ‘four dragons’ 700 0 200
Australia and oceania 2,000 0 300
Total (without overlap) 42,600 12,300

OSS region**: Arabic Maghreb Union (AMU) countries: Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco and
Tunisia. Permanent Interstate committee for drought Control in the Sahel (CILSS) countries: Burkina faso,
Cape Verde, Cad, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Mauritania, Niger and Senegal. Intergovernmental authority on
Development (IGAD) countries: Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda
 Author's personal copy
4852 A.K. Misra et al.

development of groundwater resources is essential. Integrated watershed management and

development is one of the most important methods for to make and keep productive all the
water resources of any area. Implementation and success of any watershed need in depth
understanding of watershed characteristics. A watershed equipped with suitable recharge
structures and check dams at pre-determined location can drastically improve the status of
groundwater development of any region. This paper proposes a suitable technique of water-
shed development and management.

2.1 Suitable Recharge Location and Structures

Suitable recharge locations within a watershed are shown in Fig. 1. These locations
identified on the bases of discharge and topographical gradient. Within a watershed
morphometric analysis provides a quantitative description of the drainage system, which
is an important aspect of the characterization of watersheds (Strahler 1964). In any
watershed stream ordering is the first step of quantitative analysis, it was first proposed
by Horton (1945) and then by Strahler (1952) with some modifications. Stream ordering
has been carried out on the bases of the method proposed by Strahler (Fig. 1). The
maximum frequency has been noticed for the first order streams there is a decrease in
stream frequency as the stream order increases.
The correct positions of the recharge structures and checks dams can enhance the perfor-
mance of any watershed manifold. The study proposed following positions of different
recharge structures within a watershed.

(a) Ist Order Streams: Streams with the first order are usually the smallest streams in a
watershed and consists of several small tributaries. These are the streams that flow into
and Bfeed^ larger streams but do not normally have any water flowing into them. They
can be thought of as a Bstarter^ stream. Most often they are located in the upper parts of a
watershed, and water enters them from overland. First order streams are usually seasonal
streams. These streams generally form on steep slopes & flow quickly until they slow
down & meet the next order stream.

Fig. 1 A watershed showing stream orders and positions of suitable recharge structures and check dams within
the watershed
 Author's personal copy
Watershed Management Structures 4853

Recharge structures for Ist Order Streams: Since the discharge is limited and these
streams are non-perennial, therefore the construction of vertical shaft (Fig. 2) will be
the most suitable on Ist order streams.

(b) IInd Order Streams: When two first order streams come together, they form a second
order stream. Due to this the quantum of flow of water in a second order stream is double
to that of a first order stream. These are also formed on higher reaches and generally have
a high flow rate. When 2 second order streams meet each other, the resultant is a third
order stream.

Recharge structures for IInd Order Streams: Discharge is almost double in the
second order streams as compare to the Ist order but these streams are also non-
perennial, therefore the construction of Horizontal shaft (Fig. 3) can ensure the
maximum infiltration of the stream water.

(c) IIIrd Order Streams: These streams are also called headwater streams, it constitute
approximatelty 75 to 80 % of the world’s waterways. In comparison to first and second
order stream they are usually less steep and flow slower. They do however tend to have
larger volumes of runoff and debris as it collects in them from smaller waterways flowing

Fig. 2 Vertical shaft equipped with artificial set of lithology, suitable for stream order I and II
 Author's personal copy
4854 A.K. Misra et al.

Fig. 3 Horizontal shaft equipped with artificial set of lithology, suitable for stream order III,IV and above

into them. The quantum of water in a third order stream is usually double to that in a
second order stream and is generally recurring.

Recharge structures for IIIrd Order Streams: Water discharge in the third order
streams is almost double as compare to the IInd order and these streams are usually
perennial, therefore the construction of Horizontal shaft (Fig. 3) equipped with
suitable check dam can ensure the maximum infiltration of the stream water.

(d) IVth and Higher Order Streams: When two or more third order stream meets each
other they result in a stream of fourth order and so on. The flow of water in such streams
also keeps on increasing. A stream of order IV or higher may become the principal
drainage line of a small watershed. Usually the quantum of water in an IVth order stream
is twice to that in a third order stream.

Recharge structures for IVrd and Higher Order Streams: In majority of the
watershed IVth and higher order streams are the principle drainage lines. Water
discharge in these streams is maximum and are usually perennial, therefore the
construction of L shaped bunds equipped with horizontal shaft (Fig. 4) can ensure
the maximum infiltration of the stream water.

3 Check Dam Locations and Designs

Check dam is a type of small dam that can be built across a minor channel or drainage line as a
temporary or permanent structure. These dams are capable of reducing the erosion and
gullying in the channels and decrease the surface runoff and maximize the infiltration of

Fig. 4 Recharge structure for principle drainage line equipped with L shaped bunds and horizontal shaft
 Author's personal copy
Watershed Management Structures 4855

groundwater by retaining it at the upstream side of the check dam. These dams also lower the
speed of water flow during storm events and control flooding. Check dams directly or
indirectly support ground water recharge and also help in raising the water table of the region.
Check dams can be of various sizes and built with a variety of materials including stone,
clay and cement. The size and shape of check dam, largely depends on the stream type, it has
been built across. The different types of check dams, which may be designed for different
stream orders, are proposed.

(a) Check dams for Stream Order I & II: For stream order I & II, which flow on gentle
slope ground, a smooth concrete check dam is most suitable (Fig. 5). The height of such
check dams should be around 2 ft (0.6 m). The centre of check dam is around 6 in.
(152 mm) lower than the outer edges. These check dams can be built of logs, stone or pea
gravel filled sand bags. Such a design would serve to slow movement of water also and
would allow increased percolation into the ground.
(b) Check dams for Stream Order II & III: For higher order headwater streams, on gentle
to moderately slopy ground, a hemispherical shaped check dam would be best (Fig. 5).
The maximum spacing between the dams should be such that the toe of the upstream
dam is at the same elevation as the top of downstream dam. Such check dams should be
checked for sediment accumulation after each significant rainfall. Sediment should be
removed when it reaches one half of the original height or before. The height of such a
dam is generally kept between 0.6 and 1 m and is made mainly of concrete. The silt that
builds up behind such a check dam design would create a good farmland.
(c) Check dams for Stream Order III & IV: On moderate slope grounds, having stream
orders of III & VI, a trapezoidal shaped check dam, made of concrete shall be preferred
(Fig. 5). Such a dam design would help in controlling the large quantum of water flowing
in an IIIrd or an IVth order stream. Regular inspections should be made to insure that the
centre of the dam is lower than the edges. The erosion caused due to high flows near the
dam edges should be immediately corrected. The height of such a dam usually varies

Fig. 5 Designs of check dams suitable for different stream orders

 Author's personal copy
4856 A.K. Misra et al.

between 1 and 1.2 m, and is having slating sides. The slant sides would help in reducing
channel erosion by restricting flow velocity.
(d) Check dams for Stream Order IV and above: On steep slope grounds having streams
of orders 4 and above, a rather closed looped check dam structure is proposed (Fig. 5).
The dam shall be made of high strength concrete, so as to control the quantum of water
that will be carried in a stream of order 4 and above. Such a check dam would generally
be present on the principle drainage line in watershed. It reduces the runoff speed and
erosion and gullying in the channel and allows sediments and other pollutants to settle
out. These may be permanent if designed properly and can be used where it is not
possible to otherwise divert flow and stabilize the channel. If the slope angle of the terrain
is more than 30°, multiple check dams (Fig. 6) are needed to control the runoff and
ensure the maximum infiltration and percolation of surface runoff.

4 Case Study

This case study demonstrates that how the best watershed management practices can not only
cause additional recharge to the groundwater aquifers but also useful in solving severe
groundwater water quality problems. Case study is based on the study of best watershed
development and management practices in Anantapur District, Andhra Pradesh, India. In
Anantapur District ground water quality was severely affected with the fluoride and dental
and skeletal fluorosis were the common diseases.
For tackling the drinking water quality problem in fluorosis-affected villages of Anantapur
district, Andhra Pradesh State Remote Sensing Applications Centre (APSRAC) developed a
watershed management programme for Anantapur District, Andhra Pradesh, under the Inte-
grated Fluorosis Control Project (IFCP). In this study, construction of rain water harvesting
structures (RWHS) such as check dams and mini-percolation tanks were suggested upstream
of the affected areas for artificial recharge. As a result, the impounded water would not only
recharge ground water but also helps in diluting the fluoride rich ground water and thus serves
the dual purpose of both quality and quantity (APSRAC 1994; Rao et al. 1995).
Under this project in 1993 several check dams were constructed across the first and
second order streams in nearly level to gently sloping (0–5 %) areas. Percolation tanks
are constructed on 1–3 order streams located in the plains having sufficient weathered

Fig. 6 Design and configuration of check dams suitable for steep slopes
 Author's personal copy
Watershed Management Structures 4857

zone fractures, and where acquisition of land for inundation of large areas is possible
(Bhagavan and Raghu 2005). In 1994 the impact of the these recharge structure was
evaluated by Bhagavan and Raghu, (2005) that shows that the construction of check
dams and artificial recharge structures on the upstream of different stream orders of the
watershed have not only drastically improve the water quality but also cause additional
recharge of ground water and now these structures are playing an important role in
improving the health of the villagers in Anantpur district.

5 Watershed and Agricultural Practices

In changing climatic conditions, improvement in agricultural practices and performance is

essential in order to fulfill the escalating demand of food and maintain the crop yield.
Generally the Inter-dependencies between different upstream and downstream tributaries, the
agriculture practices face the challenges for the development of sustainable agricultural
management. Continuous population growth, changing climate and land use patterns and
extraction of natural resources are increasing the pressure on existing watersheds. Implemen-
tation of best agricultural watershed management practices are required to prevent excessive
loss of water from the agricultural fields.
Studies show that in past best management practices (BMP) for agricultural growth, were
designed and implemented to reduce soil erosion (Walter et al. 1979; Clark et al. 1985). But
despite the BMP effectiveness there was no significant change in runoff amounts after the
BMP implementation (Haith and Loehr 1979) and no statistically significant change in stream
flow or runoff was recorded after BMP implementation in a Catskill Mountain (NY) watershed
(Bishop et al. 2005).
To mitigate, climate change impact on agricultural water management practices a frame-
work structure has been proposed (Fig. 6). Both flood and drought conditions can be managed
through suitable watershed management structures and impact of changing climatic conditions
can be reduced manifold. Both integrated and constorium approaches are required for agri-
cultural water management. In the proposed framework structure, the role of direct adaptation
(technological development, farm production & practices, farm financial management, miti-
gation and adaptation techniques) and indirect adaptation (public policy decision making
processes) is equally important (Fig. 7).

6 Performance Assessment of Watershed

Different hydrologic models are considered very useful tool for the planning, designing,
operation, and management of any watershed. But models are only simplifications of reality,
and their accuracy depends on how sophisticated they are towards different components. In
any performance assessment system, different specifications of parameter and their estimation
are the two most important calibration stages. Different approaches and difficulties for
conducting the calibration of two stages, directly or indirectly depend on factors, the type
and complexity of the watershed structure. Some past calibration studies have dealt with
lumped, empirical (i.e., black box) models and lumped, conceptual models (Klemes 1986;
Gupta et al. 1998). Several watershed model parameters are difficult or impossible to measure
in the natural world, therefore parameters must often be estimated or otherwise evaluated from
 Author's personal copy
4858 A.K. Misra et al.

Fig. 7 Frame work of agricultural water management practices in the context of climate change

secondary information sources and hence are typically laden with notable degrees of uncer-
tainty (Gallagher and Doherty 2006). Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of different param-
eters in a model is conventionally considered to be one of the primary steps in the development
and evaluation of models (Sudheer et al. 2011; Jakeman et al. 2006). Moreover, hydrological
models with numerous parameters are likely to produce equally acceptable predictions for
multiple different parameter sets (Hope et al. 2004).
This study adopts a common approach of evaluation, based on parameter specifications
and parameter estimation for the performance assessment of watershed structures. All
important parameters have been assigned scores out of total 1000 points, on the basis of

Fig. 8 Frame work of performance assessment model coupled with different parameters and parameter
estimation
 Author's personal copy
Watershed Management Structures 4859

Table 2 Performance evaluation scale for watershed

S.No Watershed Performance Remarks

performance Score

1 Out Standing 950 to 1000 2 m to 4 m water table rise per year, perennial tributaries in the region
2 Excellent 850 to 940 1 m to 2 m water table rise per year, static water table in wells and hand
pumps
3 Very Good 750 to 840 0.5 m to 1 m water table rise per year, availability of water in wells and
hand pumps through out the year
4 Good 650 to 740 No depletion in water table and availability of water in wells
5 Satisfactory 640 to 550 Depletion in water table between 0.5 m to 1 m and availability of water
in wells
6 Unsatisfactory < 550 Rate of depletion of water table more than 1 m and decrease in discharge
of wells and hand pumps

the importance of parameters and their direct or indirect affect on the performance of the
watershed. Figure 8 shows different parameters of the proposed performance evaluation
model of watershed and Table 2 represents performance assessment scores and correspond-
ing remarks.
Within the model, parameter like watershed area has been given high weightage (150
points) because the type of area (topography, topographic features, rock and soil types) plays
an extremely important role for the watershed development and management. Thereafter more
emphasis has been given on the infiltration and evaporation rates, fractures and joint density
within the rocks etc. (90 points). Fracture and joints strongly supports the infiltration of water
and can escalate the groundwater recharge manifold.
Four important parameters like, average annual precipitation, surface runoff and positions
of streams within the watershed, stage of groundwater development and suitable recharge
structures and their position within the watershed has been assigned equal 65 points. More or
less these parameters are extremely important and directly or indirectly control the perfor-
mance of the watershed. Since the success of any model depends on the cumulative output
therefore maximum weightage has been given to the result total 500 points.

7 Discussion and Conclusion

Worldwide integrated watershed management is practiced and its management involves

reliable approach and system to implement and evaluate all the watershed processes. It is
important, as management of agriculture water and fresh water resources has become a
challenging task owing to climate change, which can substantially reduce agricultural yields
and deplete existing water resources, as reported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC 2007). This study present a methodology for the evaluation of watersheds using
framed model parameters, equipped with all important hydrological factors that directly or
indirectly influence the performance of a watershed. Based on the importance and utility, each
parameter of model has been assigned some points out of total 1000 points. Developed
watershed model (Fig. 1) showing the suitable locations of recharge structures and check
dams within a watershed, which can be useful for executing successful water management
program.
 Author's personal copy
4860 A.K. Misra et al.

The study demonstrate the following conclusions:

& More importance should be given to soil and land use properties of watershed since these
are important factors, which act as foundation of watershed
& Locations of different recharge structures equipped with check dams on stream orders I, II,
III and IV or more can enhance the performance of a watershed manifold.
& The constructions of proposed recharge structures and check dams are easily and econom-
ically feasible and can be easily installed and constructed within a watershed catchment
area.
& Successful development of a watershed required accurate data of parameters like annual
average rainfall, infiltration rate, evaporation rate, surface runoff etc. for a region, with a
specific time period, which should be long enough to represent climate variability and can
help in designing and planning.
& Watershed performance assessment parameters and there estimation can help in perfor-
mance evaluation and successful implementation of watersheds in future.

References

AP State Remote Sensing Applications Centre, (APSRAC) (1994) Integrated remote sensing based study for
identification of low fluoride ground water zones for rural water supply in anantapur district, AP, Technical
Report, 21p
Bhagavan SV, Raghu V (2005) Utility of check dams in dilution of fluoride concentration in ground water and
the resultant analysis of blood serum and urine of villagers, Anantapur District, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Environ Geochem Health 27(1):97–108
Bishop PL, Hively WD, Stedinger JR, Rafferty MR, Lojpersberger JL, Bloomfield JA (2005) Multivariate
analysis of paired watershed data to evaluate agricultural best management practice effects on stream water
phosphorus. J Environ Qual 34(3):1087–1101
Bohn BA, Kershner JL (2002) Establishing aquatic restoration priorities using a watershed approach. J Environ
Manag 64(4):355–363
Chowdary VM, Chakraborthy D, Jeyaram A, Krishna Murthy YVN, Sharma JR, Dadhwal VK (2013) Multi-
criteria decision making approach for watershed prioritization using analytic hierarchy process technique and
GIS. Water Resour Manag 27(10):3555–3571
Clark EH II, Haverkamp JA, Chapman W (1985) Eroding soils: the off-farm impacts. Conservation Foundation,
Washington
de Wit M, Stankiewicz J (2006) Changes in surface water supply across africa with predicted climate change.
Science 311:1917–1921
Demissie M, Keefer L (1998) Watershed approach for the protection of drinking water supplies in central Illinois.
Water Int 23(4):272–277
Durga Rao KHV, Kumar DS (2004) Spatial decision support system for watershed management. Water Resour
Manag 18(5):407–423
Gallagher M, Doherty J (2006) Parameter estimation and uncertainty analysis for a watershed model. Environ
Model Softw 22:1000–1020
Goff KM, Gentry RW (2006) The influence of watershed and development characteristics on the cumulative
impacts of stormwater detention ponds. Water Resour Manag 20(6):829–860
Gosain AK, Rao S, Basuray D (2006) Climate change impact assessment on hydrology of Indian river basins.
Curr Sci 90(3):346–353
Gupta SK, Deshpande RD (2004) Water for India in 2050: first-order assessment of available options. Curr Sci
86(9):1216–1224
Gupta HV, Sorooshian S, Yapo PO (1998) Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: multiple and
noncommensurable measures of information. Water Resour Res 34(4):751–763
Haith DA, Loehr RC (1979) Effectiveness of soil and water conservation practices for pollution control.
Environmental Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, Athens
 Author's personal copy
Watershed Management Structures 4861

Heathcote IW (1998) Integrated watershed management. Wiley, New York

Hope A, Stein A, McMichael C (2004) Uncertainty in monthly river discharge predictions in a semi-arid
Shrubland Catchment. British Hydrological Society pp. 284–290
Horton RE (1945) Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins. Bull Geol Soc Am 56:275–370
IPCC (2007) Fresh water resources and their management climate change 2007; impact, adaptation and
vulnerability. Contribution of working group-II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental
panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Jakeman AJ, Letcher RA, Norton JP (2006) Ten iterative steps in development and evaluation of environmental
models. Environ Model Softw 21:602–614
Jarvis A, Ramirez J, Anderson B, Leibing C, Aggarwal P (2010) Scenarios of climate change within the context
of agriculture. In: Climate Change and Crop Production. CAB International
Klemes V (1986) Operational testing of hydrological simulation models. Hydrol Sci J 31(1):13–24
Kundzewicz ZW, Döll P (2009) Will groundwater ease freshwater stress under climate change? Hydrol Sci J – J
Des Sci Hydrol 54:665–675
Liu H, Benoit G, Liu T, Liu Y, Guo H (2015) An integrated system dynamics model developed for managing lake
water quality at the watershed scale. J Environ Manag 155:11–23
Mavrommati G, Bithas K, Panayiotidis P (2013) Operationalizing sustainability in urban coastal systems: a
system dynamics analysis. Water Res 47:7235–7250
Misra AK (2013) Global climatic variations and its impact on Indian hydrological conditions. Int J Eng Sci Res
Technol 2(2):148–158
Nakamura T (2003) Ecosystem-based river basin management: its approach and policy-level application. Hydrol
Process 17(14):2711–2725
Nyong A (2005) Abstract in impacts of climate change in the tropics: the African experience. avoiding dangerous
climate change (Meterological Office, Exeter, UK, 2005) (www.stabilisation2005.com)
Rao RS, Venkata Swamy M, Ramakrishna GVA, Mastan RC (1995) Role of remote sensing in integrated
fluorosis control programme in Anantapur District, Andhra Pradesh, India. In: Muralikrishna IV (ed)
Proceedings of the International Conference on Remote Sensing and Geographical Information Systems
for Environmental Planning. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi, pp 309–314
Solomon SD, Manning QM, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt K et al (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical
science basis. Contributions of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Strahler AN (1952) Dynamic basis of geomorphology. Bull Geol Soc Am 63:923–938
Strahler AN (1964) Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basin and channel network. Handbook Appl Hydrol
39–76
Sudheer KP, Lakshmi G, Chaubey I (2011) Application of a pseudo simulator to evaluate the sensitivity of
parameters in complex watershed models. Environ Model Softw 26(2):135–143
Thornton PK, Jones PG, Ericksen PJ, Challinor AJ (2011) Agriculture and food systems in sub-Saharan Africa in
a 4 °C+ world. Philos Trans R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 369(1934):117–136
UNESCO (2004) The water resources in the OSS (Observatory of the Sahara and the Sahel) countries;
evaluation, use and management; International Hydrological Programme. Published in 2004; 7, place de
Fontenoy, 75352, Paris 07 SP
Walter MF, Steenhuis TS, Haith DA (1979) Nonpoint source pollution control by soil and water conservation
practices. Trans ASAE 22:834–840
Wang YM, Li YJ, Cheng SJ, Yang FT, Chen YT (2015) Effects of spatial-temporal imperviousness on
hydrological responses of various areas in an urbanized watershed. Water Resour Manag 29(10):3551–3567

View publication stats