Soil & Water Res., 2012, 7(4):166-173 | DOI: 10.17221/18/2012-SWR

A comparison between natural forests and reforested lands in terms of runoff generation potential and hydrologic response (case study: Kasilian Watershed)Original Paper

Esmaeili Hoseen GHOLZOM1, Vahid GHOLAMI2
1 Faculty of Natural Resources, Islamic Azad University, Savadkooh Branch, Savadkooh, Iran
2 Department of Range and Watershed Management, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Guilan, Sowmeh Sara, Iran

Afforested lands are different from natural forests in terms of hydrologic conditions, runoff generation potential, and sediment generation rate. These differences emerge due to changes in soil structure and vegetation density, litter amount, trees heights, and so on. In this study, a comparison has been made between natural forests and afforested lands in Kasilian - a watershed located in Mazandaran province, Northern Iran. To achieve this purpose, harmonious units have been defined by overlay analysis of these layers in GIS environment: slope, aspect, Digital Elevation Model (DEM) and soil. Then, the location of couple plots was defined by field studies in the harmonious units. The plot locations were selected in a way that runoff generation was a function of tree species and tree conditions, assuming that rainfall intensity is equal in all areas. Initial loss and runoff volume were measured in even plots after rainfall. Then, the initial loss parameter in a rainfall-runoff model was applied to compare runoff volume and peak discharge in the afforested lands and natural forests. The rainfall-runoff model was presented using GIS and HEC-HMS model. The results showed that reforested lands have lower infiltration, lower initial loss, and higher runoff due to lower density, canopy, litter, and soil compaction. Furthermore, the runoff generation potential of reforested lands is several times higher than that of natural forests.

Keywords: couple plot; HEC-HMS; Kasilian watershed; natural forest; reforested lands; runoff

Published: December 31, 2012  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
GHOLZOM EH, GHOLAMI V. A comparison between natural forests and reforested lands in terms of runoff generation potential and hydrologic response (case study: Kasilian Watershed). Soil & Water Res. 2012;7(4):166-173. doi: 10.17221/18/2012-SWR.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Ajward M.H., Muzik I. (2000): A spatially varied unit hydrograph model. Journal of Environmental Hydrology, 8: 1-8. Go to original source...
    2. Brilly M., Rusjan S., Vidmar A. (2006): Monitoring the impact of urbanization on the Glinscica stream. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 31: 1089-1096. Go to original source...
    3. Burns D., Vitvar T. McDonnell J., Hassett J., Duncan J., Kendall C. (2005): Effects of suburban development on runoff generation in the Croton River basin, New York, USA. Journal of Hydrology, 311: 266-281. Go to original source...
    4. Calder I.R. (1992): The hydrological impact of land-use change with special reference to afforestation and deforestation. In: Proc. Conf. Priorities for Water Resources Allocation and Management. Natural Resources and Engineers Advisers Conference. Southampton, 91-101.
    5. Gholami V., Jokar E., Azodi M., Bashirgonbad M. (2009): The influence of man's activities on intensifying runoff generation and flood hazard in Kasilian watershed. Journal of Applied Sciences, 9: 3723-3730. Go to original source...
    6. Gholami V., Darvari Z., Jokar E. (2010): Presenting a method for simulating rainfall-runoff process (Case study: Kasilian Watershed). Journal of Environmental Sciences, 6: 341-351.
    7. Gush M.B., Scott D.F., Jewitt G.P., Schulze R.E., Hallowes L.A., Gorgens A.H. (2002): A new approach to modelling streamflow reductions resulting from commercial afforestation in South Africa. Southern African Forestry, 196: 27-36. Go to original source...
    8. Hall M.J., Zaki A.F., Shahin M.M. (2001): Regional analysis using the Geomorphoclimatic Instantaneous Unit Hydrograph. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 5: 93-102. Go to original source...
    9. Harr R. (1976): Forest practices and streamflow in western Oregon. General Technical Report PNW - 49, US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Portland.
    10. Iroume A., Huber A., Schulz K. (2005): Summer flows in experimental catchments with different forest covers, Chile. Journal of Hydrology, 300: 300-313. Go to original source...
    11. Jain V., Sinha R. (2003): Derivation of unit hydrograph from GIUH analysis for a Himalayan river. Water Resources Management, 17: 355-376. Go to original source...
    12. Jones J.A., Swanson F.J. (2001): Hydrological inferences from comparisons among small basin experiments. Hydrological Processes, 15: 2363-2366. Go to original source...
    13. Keppeler E.T. (1986): The effects of selective logging on low flows and water yield in a Coastal stream in northern California. [MS Thesis.] Humboldt State University, Arcata.
    14. Keppeler E.T. (1998): The summer flow and water yield response to timber harvest. General Technical Report PSW - 168, US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Albany, 35-43.
    15. Loukas A., Quick M.C., Russell S.O. (1996): A physically based stochastic-deterministic procedure for the estimation of flood frequency. Water Resources Management, 10: 415-437. Go to original source...
    16. Nourani V., Singh V.P., Delafrouz H. (2009): Three geomorphological rainfall-runoff models based on the linear reservoir concept. Catena, 76: 206-214. Go to original source...
    17. Pappas E.A., Smith D.R., Huang C., Shuster W.C., Bonta J. (2008): Impervious surface impacts to runoff and sediment discharge under laboratory rainfall simulation. Catena, 72: 146-152. Go to original source...
    18. Phong T., Marincioni F., Shaw R. (2010): Catastrophic flood and forest cover change in the Huong river basin, central Viet Nam: A gap between common perceptions and facts. Journal of Environmental Management, 91: 2186-2200. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    19. Shamseldin A.Y., Nash J.E. (1998): The geomorphological unit hydrograph - a critical review. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 2: 1-8. Go to original source...
    20. Stone B.S. (2001): Geospatial Database and Preliminary Flood Hydrology Model for the Lower Colorado Basin. Center for Research in Water Resources, University of Texas, Austin.
    21. Swanson R.H., Hillman G.R. (1977): Predicted increased water yield after clear-cutting verified in west-central Alberta. [Report NOR-X-198.] Northern Forest Research Centre, Canadian Forestry Service, Edmonton.
    22. Wahl N.A., Wollecke B., Bens O., Huttl R.F. (2005): Can forest transformation help reducing floods in forested watersheds? Certain aspects on soil hydraulics and organic matter properties. Physics and Chemistry of Earth, 30: 611-621. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content