 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ST. LAWRENCE INFO
The control of nonpoint-source pollution caused by agricultural practices is a major challenge for scientists and stakeholders working in water quality management. Many modelling tools have been developed in recent decades to simulate the environmental fate of pesticides. But which tool should be selected? There are advantages and disadvantages to each of these tools, and it is often difficult to make an informed choice without going through the long and costly process of model calibration.
In a study involving Environment Canada specialists, 36 of these modelling tools were inventoried. To enable the user to choose the appropriate tool more effectively, the specialists developed a method based on a multi-criteria analysis. This method considers the user’s specific needs as well as certain very specific conditions of use.
Based on a case study aimed at evaluating the effects of good environmental practices in agriculture on pesticides in the surface water in a watershed, the specialists applied the multi-criteria analysis. This method highlighted three tools for modelling the fate of pesticides at the watershed scale based on more than 40 criteria: BASINS, SWAT and GIBSI.
Work on the study is continuing in order to compare the application of the three modelling tools as part of a pilot project at the watershed scale. The results will make it possible to choose an effective modelling tool for assessing the fate of pesticides in many watersheds in Canada.
Quilbé, R., A.N. Rousseau, P. Lafrance, J. Leclerc, and M. Amrani. 2006. Selecting a pesticide fate model at the watershed scale using a multi-criteria analysis. Water Quality Research Journal of Canada 41(3): 283–295. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
