Climate is one of the single most important factors affecting watershed ecosystems and water resources. The effect of climate variability and change has been studied extensively in some places; in many places, however, assessments are hampered by limited availability of long-term continuous climate data. Weather generators provide a means of synthesizing long-term climate data that can then be used in natural resource assessments. Given their potential, there is the need to evaluate the performance of the generators; in this study, three commonly used weather generators—CLImate GENerator (CLIGEN), Long Ashton Research Station Weather Generator (LARS-WG), and Weather Generators (WeaGETS) were compared with regard to their ability to capture the essential statistical characteristics of observed data (distribution, occurrence of wet and dry spells, number of snow days, growing season temperatures, and growing degree days). The study was based on observed 1966–2015 weather station data from the Western Lake Erie Basin (WLEB), from which 50 different realizations were generated, each spanning 50 years. Both CLIGEN and LARS-WG performed fairly well with respect to representing the statistical characteristics of observed precipitation and minimum and maximum temperatures, although CLIGEN tended to overestimate values at the extremes. This generator also overestimated dry sequences by 18%–30% and snow-day counts by 12%–19% when considered over the entire WLEB. It (CLIGEN) was, however, well able to simulate parameters specific to crop growth such as growing degree days and had an added advantage over the other generators in that it simulates a larger number of weather variables. LARS-WG overestimated wet sequence counts across the basin by 15%–38%. In addition, the optimal growth period simulated by LARS-WG also exceeded that obtained from observed data by 16%–29% basin-wide. Preliminary results with WeaGETS indicated that additional evaluation is needed to better define its parameters. Results provided insights into the suitability of both CLIGEN and LARS-WG for use with water resource applications.

Subsurface tile drainage systems are widely used in agricultural watersheds in the Midwestern US and enable the Midwest area to become highly productive agricultural lands, but can also create environmental problems, for example nitrate-N contamination associated with drainage waters. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) has been used to model watersheds with tile drainage. SWAT2012 revisions 615 and 645 provide new tile drainage routines. However, few studies have used these revisions to study tile drainage impacts at both field and watershed scales. Moreover, SWAT2012 revision 645 improved the soil moisture based curve number calculation method, which has not been fully tested. This study used long-term (1991–2003) field site and river station data from the Little Vermilion River (LVR) watershed to evaluate performance of tile drainage routines in SWAT2009 revision 528 (the old routine) and SWAT2012 revisions 615 and 645 (the new routine). Both the old and new routines provided reasonable but unsatisfactory (NSE < 0.5) uncalibrated flow and nitrate loss results for a mildly sloped watershed with low runoff. The calibrated monthly tile flow, surface flow, nitrate-N in tile and surface flow, sediment and annual corn and soybean yield results from SWAT with the old and new tile drainage routines were compared with observed values. Generally, the new routine provided acceptable simulated tile flow (NSE = 0.48–0.65) and nitrate in tile flow (NSE = 0.48–0.68) for field sites with random pattern tile and constant tile spacing, while the old routine simulated tile flow and nitrate in tile flow results for the field site with constant tile spacing were unacceptable (NSE = 0.00–0.32 and −0.29–0.06, respectively). The new modified curve number calculation method in revision 645 (NSE = 0.50–0.81) better simulated surface runoff than revision 615 (NSE = −0.11–0.49). The calibration provided reasonable parameter sets for the old and new routines in the LVR watershed, and the validation results showed that the new routine has the potential to accurately simulate hydrologic processes in mildly sloped watersheds.