Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Runoff Estimation, and Surface Erosion and Control
Runoff Estimation, and Surface Erosion and Control
WATER EROSION
WIND EROSION
TILLAGE TRANSLOCATION
SOIL EROSION IS GLOBAL
PROBLEM
1/3 WORLD’S ARABLE LAND LOST SINCE 1950
MOST IN ASIA, AFRICA, S. AMERICA
13-18 t/a/yr
30% OF US FARMLAND ABANDONED
EROSION
SALINIZATION
WATER-LOGGING
90% OF US CROPLAND LOSING SOIL FASTER
THAN IT IS REPLACED
>1 t/a/yr
SIGNIFICANT SOIL LOSS IN THE USA
WATER
3.5 X 109 T/yr
WIND
1.5 X 109 T/yr
WIND EROSION
SUSPENSION
WIN SALTATION
D
CREEP
Near Mitchell, SD
Dust bowl
1931-1939 there was a
drought called the
“dust bowl”. It caused
huge dust storms to
erupt that destructed
billions of acres of
farm land.
storms
Based on:
– Rainfall pattern, soil type, topography, crop system and
management practices.
Predicts:
– Long term average annual rate of erosion
A = R x K x LS x C x P
A =R x K x LS x C x P
Average annual values of the rainfall erosion index (R).
K (soil erodibility)
Depend on:
– Texture, structure, organic matter content, and
permeability.
A =R x K x LS x C x P
Soil-erodibility nomograph.
LS (slope length-gradient)
A =R x K x LS x C x P
RUSLE:
Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation
USDA Agriculture Handbook 703 (Renard et. al. 1997)
USLE factor values: updated, expanded, improved.
– Expanded isoerodents
– Ponded water on the soil
– Freeze-thaw cycle and soil moisture
– Complex slopes
– Conservation tillage and crop rotation
Software
WHAT IS RUSLE 2
“GREAT GRANDSON” OF USLE
MODEL TO PREDICT SOIL LOSS
– WHERE OVERLAND FLOW OCCURS
– COMPUTES ANNUAL SHEET/RILL EROSION
– COMPUTES PARTICLE DISTRIBUTION AND
RUNOFF
CROPLAND, FOREST, LANDFILLS,
CONSTRUCTION SITES, SURFACE MINES
WINDOWS “PULL DOWN” MENUS
WHO AND WHAT OF RUSLE 2
USDA-ARS, USDA-NRCS, VARIOUS UNIVERSITIES
ON-GOING PROCESS OVER 70 YEARS
THOUSANDS OF RESEARCH DATA
SET UP WITH VARYING LEVELS OF COMPLEXITY
COMPUTER REQUIREMENTS
– WINDOWS 98
– INTERNET EXPLORER BROWSER
– 64 MB RAM
DOWNLOAD
– HTTP://BIOENGR.AG.UTK.EDU/RUSLE2/
APPLICABILITY OF RUSLE 2
ESTIMATES INTER-RILL AND RILL EROSION
ESTIMATES SEDIMENT YIELD FROM OVERLAND
FLOW AND TERRACE CHANNELS
DOES NOT ESTIMATE EPHEMERAL OR
PERMANENT GULLIES, MASS WASTING, OR
STREAM CHANNEL EROSION
BEST SUITED TO CROPLAND, BUT IS USEFUL FOR
CONSTRUCTION SITES, LANDFILLS,
RECLAMATION PROJECTS, AND DISTURBED
FOREST LAND
APPLICABILITY OF RUSLE 2 (cont.)
BEST WHERE RAINFALL IS REGULAR AND
EXCEEDS 20”/YR.
MEDIUM-FINE TEXTURED SOILS
SLOPES 3-20% AND LESS THAN 600 FT.
BEST AT CALCULATING “AVERAGE ANNUAL
SOIL LOSS”, NOT RECOMMENDED FOR SINGLE
STORM EVENTS
RUSLE 2 FACTORS
A = R x K x LS x C x P
CLIMATE (R) AND SOIL (K) FACTORS ARE SET
FOR A GIVEN FIELD
SLOPE GRADE (S) AND LENGTH (L) CAN BE
ADJUSTED WITH DIFFICULTY
MOST FLEXIBILITY WITH COVER MGT. (C) AND
SUPPORTING PRACTICES (P)
EROSION CONTROL
PRACTICES
Structures: diversions, terraces, waterways
Reduce slope length
Slow runoff velocity
Divert excess water safely
Avoid runoff over barnyard, feedlots, etc.
CONTOUR TERRACES
Grant Co.
EROSION CONTROL
PRACTICES
Management practices
– Cover crops
– Crop residue management
30% residue reduces erosion 50-60%
– Contour tillage
Slope < 8% and 300’ long
– Contour strip cropping and buffers
Alternating sod strip for steep land
Controlling Water
contaminants at the Source,
Kaiaka-Waialua Watershed
Kaiaka and Waialua bays, are water quality
limited segments due to high levels of total P,
NO-3, chlorophyll a, and turbidity exceeding
the maximum allowable levels (HI-DOH).
Sediment loads from agricultural lands and
effluent discharged from household cesspools
are two of the major sources of pollution.
Sediment losses are generated from cropped
and fallow zones as a result of an intensive
agricultural system that includes a
crop/fallow cropping combination.
Objectives
The goal of this project is to implement and
demonstrate erosion control practices to
help manage erosion throughout Kaiaka-
Waialua watershed, thereby reducing
sediment and potential pollutant loads (P, N)
into the surface water resources, and
consequently improving water quality of the
coastal area.
Materials and Methods
Field in a commercial farm,
Ewa Silty clay soil, a mean
Ksat = 3.5 cm d-1 (Candler 15
m d-1)
Three cover crops (Sunn hemp,
Sudex & Oats) were replicated
3 times in a RCB design.
Suction cups were installed in
each plot to collect soil solution
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2/25
2/28
3/2
3/5
3/8
3/11
3/14
3/17
3/20
3/23
3/26
3/29
4/1
4/4
4/7
4/10
4/13
Average Rainfall Intensity
4/16
4/19
4/22
4/25
4/28
5/1
5/4
5/7
5/10
5/13
2 per. Mov. Avg. (Series1)
5/16
292 mm occurred in 11 hr, 2/27 at a rate of 24 mm hr-1
300
280
260
240
220
200
Rainfall (mm)
180
160 March 3
140
May 18
120
100 April 27
80 March 31 April 18
03-16
60 March 22
40 March 25 April 22
20 April 7
0
2/25
4/1
4/4
4/7
4/25
2/28
3/2
3/5
3/8
3/11
3/14
3/17
3/20
3/23
3/26
3/29
4/10
4/13
4/16
4/19
4/22
4/28
5/1
5/4
5/7
5/10
5/13
5/16
ANOVA Runoff Results
--------------
---------------March---------------- April------------ May
Variable 3 16 22 25 31 7 18 22 27 18
TSS NS NS * ** * NS * * * **
TDS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS ** NS NS
Nitrate * NS NS * NS ** NS ** NS **
Ammonium NS NS NS ** ** NS ** NS ** NS
TN * NS NS ** ** ** ** NS ** NS
Phosphorous NS NS NS NS NS NS NS ** ** **
*, ** denotes a significant or highly significant difference was detected between
treatment means, respectively.
Surface Runoff Collection
Fallow Sudex
Runoff water Quality
TSS, 70% there was statistically significant
treatment effect
Nitrate, 50% there was statistically significant
treatment effect
Ammonium, 40% there was statistically
significant treatment effect
TN, 60% there was statistically significant
treatment effect
Removal Efficiencies
Calculation for Removal Efficiencies (RE):
Date 3/3 3/16 3/22 3/25 3/31 4/7 4/18 4/22 4/27 5/18 AVG
Rainfall
(mm) 406 21 19 17 8 24 9 5 17 105
Sudex 73 72 57 84 51 81 86 60 52 94 74
Sunn
Hemp 77 58 70 93 70 72 90 95 87 91 77
Oats 86 42 80 97 79 80 91 96 90 83 85
Removal Efficiencies for Total Dissolved Solids
Date 3/3 3/16 3/22 3/25 3/31 4/7 4/18 4/22 4/27 5/18 AVG
Rainfall
(mm) 406 21 19 17 8 24 9 5 17 105
Sunn
Hemp -9 24 55 34 6 -68 -150 -83 -4 -96 -29.1
0.8 A
A
0.4 A
0.0
1 2 3 4
Treatment
1 = sudex, 2 = sunn hemp, 3 = oats, 4 = fallow
Total Suspended Solids May 18
20 A
15
TSS (g)
10
5 B
B B
0
1 2 3 4
Treatment
1 = sudex, 2 = sunn hemp, 3 = oats, 4 = fallow
Removal Efficiencies for Total Nitrogen
Date 3/3 3/16 3/22 3/25 3/31 4/7 4/18 4/22 4/27 5/18 AVG
Rainfall
(mm) 406 21 19 17 8 24 9 5 17 105
Sudex -7 -4 -7 0 44 46 72 -9 -58 51 13
Sunn
Hemp -53 -53 -52 -196 -8 -38 19 -17 -102 34 -47
Oats 43 -69 -68 18 57 70 60 61 12 31 22
Means of Nitrate for April 18
3.2 A
Nitrate (10E-4 g)
2.4 A
A
1.6 A
0.8
0.0
1 2 3 4
Treatment
1 = Sudex, 2 = Sunn Hemp, 3 = Oats, 4 = Fallow
Means of Ammonium for April 18
Ammonium (10E-3 g) A
8
6 AB
4 B
B
2
0
1 2 3 4
Treatment
1 = Sudex, 2 = Sunn Hemp, 3 = Oats, 4 = Fallow
Removal Efficiencies for Ammonium
Date 3/3 3/16 3/22 3/25 3/31 4/7 4/18 4/22 4/27 5/18 AVG
Rainfall
(mm) 406 21 19 17 8 24 9 5 17 105
Sudex 2.4 -5 -25 -15 45 -132 67 -46 -68 57 -12
Sunn
Hemp -43 -65 -83 -242 -13 36 35 -43 -145 32 -53
Oats 49 -53 -75 30 73 65 61 53 -12 39 23
Soil Solution Samples ANOVA
Variable 3/22 3/25 3/31 4/7
Nitrate ** * ** NS
Ammonium NS NS NS NS
TN ** * ** NS
Phosphorous NS NS NS NS
* denotes a significant difference was detected
Treatment
1 = Sudex, 2 = Sunn Hemp, 3 = Oats, 4 = Fallow
Means of Nitrate for April 7
A
2.4
Nitrate (10E-2 g)
AB
1.6
B
0.8 B
0.0
1 2 3 4
Treatment
1 = Sudex, 2 = Sunn Hemp, 3 = Oats, 4 = Fallow
Means of Total Nitrogen for March 25
6
A
TN (10E-3 g)
2 B B
B
0
1 2 3 4
Treatment
1 = Sudex, 2 = Sunn Hemp, 3 = Oats, 4 = Fallow
Summary & Conclusions
The presence of cover crops reduced the nitrate
and total nitrogen levels in the soil solution
compared to the fallow treatment regardless of
the sampling date.
95 to 97% of the total nitrogen collected was
nitrate.
The sunn hemp treatment had the second
highest nitrate and total nitrogen levels after
the fallow treatment.
Statistical Analyses Results
Crawford CO
Terracing & Contour Farming
References
Millward, A. A., and Mersey, http://www.bsyse.wsu.
J. E.,(1999) Adapting the edu/cropsyst/manual/si
RUSLE to model soil erosion mulation/soil/erosion.
potential in a mountainous
tropical watershed, Catena,
htm
38(2), 109-129. WOLKOWSKI,
DeRoo A.P.J. (1998)
Modelling runoff and D.Soil Science
sediment transport in Dept. UW-
catchments using GIS.
Hydrological Processes Madison.
12(6),905-922.