J. G. Arnold

Watershed models are powerful tools for simulating the effect of watershed processes and management on soil and water resources. However, no comprehensive guidance is available to facilitate model evaluation in terms of the accuracy of simulated data compared to measured flow and constituent values. Thus, the objectives of this research were to: (1) determine recommended model evaluation techniques (statistical and graphical), (2) review reported ranges of values and corresponding performance ratings for the recommended statistics, and (3) establish guidelines for model evaluation based on the review results and project-specific considerations; all of these objectives focus on simulation of streamflow and transport of sediment and nutrients. These objectives were achieved with a thorough review of relevant literature on model application and recommended model evaluation methods. Based on this analysis, we recommend that three quantitative statistics, Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), percent bias (PBIAS), and ratio of the root mean square error to the standard deviation of measured data (RSR), in addition to the graphical techniques, be used in model evaluation. The following model evaluation performance ratings were established for each recommended statistic. In general, model simulation can be judged as satisfactory if NSE > 0.50 and RSR < 0.70, and if PBIAS + 25% for streamflow, PBIAS + 55% for sediment, and PBIAS + 70% for N and P. For PBIAS, constituent-specific performance ratings were determined based on uncertainty of measured data. Additional considerations related to model evaluation guidelines are also discussed. These considerations include: single-event simulation, quality and quantity of measured data, model calibration procedure, evaluation time step, and project scope and magnitude. A case study illustrating the application of the model evaluation guidelines is also provided.

including the US Environmental Protection Agency, Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Oceanic

The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model is a continuation of nearly 30 years of modeling efforts conducted by the USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS). SWAT has gained international acceptance as a robust interdisciplinary watershed modeling tool as evidenced by international SWAT conferences, hundreds of SWAT-related papers presented at numerous other scientific meetings, and dozens of articles published in peer-reviewed journals. The model has also been adopted as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Better Assessment Science Integrating Point and Nonpoint Sources (BASINS) software package and is being used by many U.S. federal and state agencies, including the USDA within the Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP). At present, over 250 peer-reviewed published articles have been identified that report SWAT applications, reviews of SWAT components, or other research that includes SWAT. Many of these peer-reviewed articles are summarized here according to relevant application categories such as streamflow calibration and related hydrologic analyses, climate change impacts on hydrology, pollutant load assessments, comparisons with other models, and sensitivity analyses and calibration techniques. Strengths and weaknesses of the model are presented, and recommended research needs for SWAT are also provided.

Abstract SWAT (Soil and Water Assessment Tool) is a conceptual, continuous time model that was developed in the early 1990s to assist water resource managers in assessing the impact of management and climate on water supplies and non‐point source pollution in watersheds and large river basins. SWAT is the continuation of over 30 years of model development within the US Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service and was developed to ‘scale up’ past field‐scale models to large river basins. Model components include weather, hydrology, erosion/sedimentation, plant growth, nutrients, pesticides, agricultural management, stream routing and pond/reservoir routing. The latest version, SWAT2000, has several significant enhancements that include: bacteria transport routines; urban routines; Green and Ampt infiltration equation; improved weather generator; ability to read in daily solar radiation, relative humidity, wind speed and potential ET; Muskingum channel routing; and modified dormancy calculations for tropical areas. A complete set of model documentation for equations and algorithms, a user manual describing model inputs and outputs, and an ArcView interface manual are now complete for SWAT2000. The model has been recoded into Fortran 90 with a complete data dictionary, dynamic allocation of arrays and modular subroutines. Current research is focusing on bacteria, riparian zones, pothole topography, forest growth, channel downcutting and widening, and input uncertainty analysis. The model SWAT is meanwhile used in many countries all over the world. Recent developments in European Environmental Policy, such as the adoption of the European Water Framework directive in December 2000, demand tools for integrative river basin management. The model SWAT is applicable for this purpose. It is a flexible model that can be used under a wide range of different environmental conditions, as this special issue will show. The papers compiled here are the result of the first International SWAT Conference held in August 2001 in Rauischholzhausen, Germany. More than 50 participants from 14 countries discussed their modelling experiences with the model development team from the USA. Nineteen selected papers with issues reaching from the newest developments, the evaluation of river basin management, interdisciplinary approaches for river basin management, the impact of land use change, methodical aspects and models derived from SWAT are published in this special issue. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.

ABSTRACT: The performance of two popular watershed scale simulation models — HSPF and SWAT — were evaluated for simulating the hydrology of the 5,568 km2 Iroquois River watershed in Illinois and Indiana. This large, tile drained agricultural watershed provides distinctly different conditions for model comparison in contrast to previous studies. Both models were calibrated for a nine-year period (1987 through 1995) and verified using an independent 15-year period (1972 through 1986) by comparing simulated and observed daily, monthly, and annual streamflow. The characteristics of simulated flows from both models are mostly similar to each other and to observed flows, particularly for the calibration results. SWAT predicts flows slightly better than HSPF for the verification period, with the primary advantage being better simulation of low flows. A noticeable difference in the models' hydrologic simulation relates to the estimation of potential evapotranspiration (PET). Comparatively low PET values provided as input to HSPF from the BASINS 3.0 database may be a factor in HSPF's overestimation of low flows. Another factor affecting baseflow simulation is the presence of tile drains in the watershed. HSPF parameters can be adjusted to indirectly account for the faster subsurface flow associated with tile drains, but there is no specific tile drainage component in HSPF as there is in SWAT. Continued comparative studies such as this, under a variety of hydrologic conditions and watershed scales, provide needed guidance to potential users in model selection and application.