Literature DB >> 24704962

Soil losses in rural watersheds with environmental land use conflicts.

F A L Pacheco1, S G P Varandas2, L F Sanches Fernandes2, R F Valle Junior2.   

Abstract

Soil losses were calculated in a rural watershed where environmental land use conflicts developed in the course of a progressive invasion of forest and pasture/forest lands by agriculture, especially vineyards. The hydrographic basin is located in the Douro region where the famous Port wine is produced (northern Portugal) and the soil losses were estimated by the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) in combination with a Geographic Information System (GIS). Environmental land use conflicts were set up on the basis of land use and land capability maps, coded as follows: 1-agriculture, 2-pasture, 3-pasture/forest, and 4-forest. The difference between the codes of capability and use defines a conflict class, where a negative or nil value means no conflict and a positive i value means class i conflict. The reliability of soil loss estimates was tested by a check of these values against the frequency of stone wall instabilities in vineyard terraces, with good results. Using the USLE, the average soil loss (A) was estimated in A=12.2 t·ha(-1)·yr(-1) and potential erosion risk areas were found to occupy 28.3% of the basin, defined where soil losses are larger than soil loss tolerances. Soil losses in no conflict regions (11.2 t·ha(-1)·yr(-1)) were significantly different from those in class 2 (6.8 t·ha(-1)·yr(-1)) and class 3 regions (21.3 t·ha(-1)·yr(-1)) that in total occupy 2.62 km(2) (14.3% of the basin). When simulating a scenario of no conflict across the entire basin, whereby land use in class 2 conflict regions is set up to permanent pastures and in class 3 conflict regions to pine forests, it was concluded that A=0.95 t·ha(-1)·yr(-1) (class 2) or A=9.8 t·ha(-1)·yr(-1) (class 3), which correspond to drops of 86% and 54% in soil loss relative to the actual values.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Environmental land use conflict; GIS; Hydric erosion; Soil loss; USLE

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24704962     DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.03.069

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Total Environ        ISSN: 0048-9697            Impact factor:   7.963


  5 in total

1.  Nutrient loads from agricultural and forested areas in Finland from 1981 up to 2010-can the efficiency of undertaken water protection measures seen?

Authors:  Sirkka Tattari; Jari Koskiaho; Maiju Kosunen; Ahti Lepistö; Jarmo Linjama; Markku Puustinen
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2017-02-04       Impact factor: 2.513

2.  Evaluation of a sustainable land use planning model in the Elmalı basin.

Authors:  Ertugrul Karas
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2020-03-30       Impact factor: 2.513

3.  Assessment of heavy metals in benthic macroinvertebrates, water and sediments in River Isiukhu, Kenya.

Authors:  Jane Oremo; Francis Orata; Joseph Owino; William Shivoga
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2019-10-16       Impact factor: 2.513

4.  Identifying important ecological areas for potential rainwater harvesting in the semi-arid area of Chifeng, China.

Authors:  Hao Zheng; Jixi Gao; Gaodi Xie; Yu Jin; Biao Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-08-22       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Toxicity, Physiological, and Ultrastructural Effects of Arsenic and Cadmium on the Extremophilic Microalga Chlamydomonas acidophila.

Authors:  Silvia Díaz; Patricia de Francisco; Sanna Olsson; Ángeles Aguilera; Elena González-Toril; Ana Martín-González
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-03-03       Impact factor: 3.390

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.