10.08.2015 Views

Wind Erosion in Western Queensland Australia

Modelling Land Susceptibility to Wind Erosion in Western ... - Ninti One

Modelling Land Susceptibility to Wind Erosion in Western ... - Ninti One

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Chapter 5 – Land Erodibility Model Developmenttree and stone cover effects on w<strong>in</strong>d erosion, provide a more appropriate parameterisation ofthe erodibility cont<strong>in</strong>uum and further improve the model skill <strong>in</strong> assess<strong>in</strong>g land susceptibilityto w<strong>in</strong>d erosion.Vegetation EffectsVegetation effects on land erodibility are considered by separat<strong>in</strong>g the effects of woody(shrub/tree) and herbaceous (grass) cover. Herbaceous vegetation cover <strong>in</strong> arid and semi-aridenvironments tends to <strong>in</strong>crease and decrease at rates faster than shrub- and tree cover <strong>in</strong>response to climate and management (Specht and Specht, 1999). While regional tree covercan be considered static over short periods, and its effect on w<strong>in</strong>d erosion can be consideredby a simple threshold, the effects of temporally dynamic grass cover are better modelled by acont<strong>in</strong>uous function. The effects of grass cover (E gc ) on land erodibility are modelled by anegative exponential relationship:E gc(% gc)= exp(5.2)where α and β are regression coefficients (55.873; -0.0938) denot<strong>in</strong>g the equation <strong>in</strong>terceptand rate of change <strong>in</strong> erodibility given a change <strong>in</strong> percentage cover (Chapter 2, Figure 2.7).The relationship was determ<strong>in</strong>ed by w<strong>in</strong>d tunnel experimentation at w<strong>in</strong>d speed 18 ms -1(Leys, 1991a) and is similar to that determ<strong>in</strong>ed by Chepil (1944), and the Soil Loss Ratio(SLR) relat<strong>in</strong>g soil loss from a soil with cover to that of a bare soil (Fryrear, 1985; F<strong>in</strong>dlateret al., 1990; Chapter 2, Section 2.2.8). While the expression was developed for prostrate (flatly<strong>in</strong>g) wheat stubble, similar exponential relationships were determ<strong>in</strong>ed by Siddoway et al.(1965) and Lyles and Allison (1981) for stand<strong>in</strong>g stubble. By <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g surface roughness,low cover levels of stand<strong>in</strong>g vegetation can reduce w<strong>in</strong>d erosion to rates experienced athigher levels of prostrate cover. The mixture of prostrate and stand<strong>in</strong>g grass cover <strong>in</strong> thestudy region can be accounted for by adjust<strong>in</strong>g the regression coefficients <strong>in</strong> Equation 5.2 to<strong>in</strong>crease or decrease the sensitivity of land erodibility to grass cover.Marshall (1972) determ<strong>in</strong>ed a threshold for w<strong>in</strong>d erosion control based on tree and shrubcover. The threshold exists where tree/shrub spac<strong>in</strong>g is approximately 3.5 times the averagemaximum height of the vegetation, correspond<strong>in</strong>g to roughly 20% lateral cover <strong>in</strong> the drylandshrub communities <strong>in</strong> <strong>Australia</strong>. Tree cover effects on land erodibility are modelled <strong>in</strong>138

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!