Modeling soil erosion after mechanized logging operations on steep terrain in the Northern Black Forest, Germany
Climate change makes it necessary to re-evaluate the erosion potential of forest infrastructure. We used the Forest Service WEPP interfaces (FS WEPP) to compare soil erosion potentials of two competing logging practices in steep terrain in the Northern Black Forest, Germany: (1) Felling with harvest...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of forest research 2020-08, Vol.139 (4), p.549-565 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 565 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 549 |
container_title | European journal of forest research |
container_volume | 139 |
creator | Haas, Julian Schack-Kirchner, Helmer Lang, Friederike |
description | Climate change makes it necessary to re-evaluate the erosion potential of forest infrastructure. We used the Forest Service WEPP interfaces (FS WEPP) to compare soil erosion potentials of two competing logging practices in steep terrain in the Northern Black Forest, Germany: (1) Felling with harvesters and logging with forwarders in slope line with optional traction supporting winches. (2) Felling by chainsaw, logging with a cable winch, and further transport of logs via forest dirt roads. After forest harvest we measured erosion, runoff, and DOC concentration in runoff from 50 m sections of two machine tracks, two cable tracks, and a dirt road for 2 years. The erosion measurements were used to validate FS WEPP management options and a regionally adjusted CLIGEN input file. With these parameterizations we compared the erosion potential of the two practices on subcatchment scale by modeling return periods and total sediment export with FS WEPP. Model results show that logging operations with heavy machinery in slope line are less prone to soil erosion than logging operations including winch logging and additional dirt roads. The former produces less sediment in its worst-case configuration than the latter in its most moderate configuration by a factor of two. Model results also show that erosion prevention benefits from long periods of 10 years between two harvests. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10342-020-01269-5 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2417822961</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2417822961</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-6873543f243c31d42172eb9e59ad62ef59536aaf677756466b1a20881fcb97633</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kD9PwzAQxS0EEqXwBZgssWLwn8SOR6hoQSqwwGy5ySVNSe1gh6F8elyCYEM66W74vbt7D6FzRq8Ypeo6MioyTiinhDIuNckP0IRJxkkmlTr8naU-RicxbijlhS6KCeoffQVd6xocfdthCD623mFbDxDwFsq1de0nVLjzTbOnfA_BDgmJOGFxAOhxQoNtHU41rAE_-ZBacPi2s-UbnvsAcbjECwhb63an6Ki2XYSznz5Fr_O7l9k9WT4vHmY3S1IKKQYiCyXyTNQ8E6VgVcaZ4rDSkGtbSQ51rnMhra2TO5XLZGzFLKdFwepypZUUYoouxr198O8f6QOz8R_BpZOGZ0wVnGvJEsVHqkzGY4Da9KHd2rAzjJp9smZM1qRkzXeyJk8iMYpigl0D4W_1P6ovHbB7ww</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2417822961</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Modeling soil erosion after mechanized logging operations on steep terrain in the Northern Black Forest, Germany</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Haas, Julian ; Schack-Kirchner, Helmer ; Lang, Friederike</creator><creatorcontrib>Haas, Julian ; Schack-Kirchner, Helmer ; Lang, Friederike</creatorcontrib><description>Climate change makes it necessary to re-evaluate the erosion potential of forest infrastructure. We used the Forest Service WEPP interfaces (FS WEPP) to compare soil erosion potentials of two competing logging practices in steep terrain in the Northern Black Forest, Germany: (1) Felling with harvesters and logging with forwarders in slope line with optional traction supporting winches. (2) Felling by chainsaw, logging with a cable winch, and further transport of logs via forest dirt roads. After forest harvest we measured erosion, runoff, and DOC concentration in runoff from 50 m sections of two machine tracks, two cable tracks, and a dirt road for 2 years. The erosion measurements were used to validate FS WEPP management options and a regionally adjusted CLIGEN input file. With these parameterizations we compared the erosion potential of the two practices on subcatchment scale by modeling return periods and total sediment export with FS WEPP. Model results show that logging operations with heavy machinery in slope line are less prone to soil erosion than logging operations including winch logging and additional dirt roads. The former produces less sediment in its worst-case configuration than the latter in its most moderate configuration by a factor of two. Model results also show that erosion prevention benefits from long periods of 10 years between two harvests.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1612-4669</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1612-4677</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10342-020-01269-5</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Chain saws ; Climate change ; Configurations ; Dirt ; Erosion control ; Forest harvesting ; Forestry ; Forests ; Harvesters ; Interfaces ; Life Sciences ; Logging ; Modelling ; Original Paper ; Plant Ecology ; Plant Sciences ; Roads ; Runoff ; Soil erosion ; Soils ; Terrain ; Unpaved roads ; Winches</subject><ispartof>European journal of forest research, 2020-08, Vol.139 (4), p.549-565</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2020</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2020. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-6873543f243c31d42172eb9e59ad62ef59536aaf677756466b1a20881fcb97633</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-6873543f243c31d42172eb9e59ad62ef59536aaf677756466b1a20881fcb97633</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0275-1903</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10342-020-01269-5$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10342-020-01269-5$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Haas, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schack-Kirchner, Helmer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lang, Friederike</creatorcontrib><title>Modeling soil erosion after mechanized logging operations on steep terrain in the Northern Black Forest, Germany</title><title>European journal of forest research</title><addtitle>Eur J Forest Res</addtitle><description>Climate change makes it necessary to re-evaluate the erosion potential of forest infrastructure. We used the Forest Service WEPP interfaces (FS WEPP) to compare soil erosion potentials of two competing logging practices in steep terrain in the Northern Black Forest, Germany: (1) Felling with harvesters and logging with forwarders in slope line with optional traction supporting winches. (2) Felling by chainsaw, logging with a cable winch, and further transport of logs via forest dirt roads. After forest harvest we measured erosion, runoff, and DOC concentration in runoff from 50 m sections of two machine tracks, two cable tracks, and a dirt road for 2 years. The erosion measurements were used to validate FS WEPP management options and a regionally adjusted CLIGEN input file. With these parameterizations we compared the erosion potential of the two practices on subcatchment scale by modeling return periods and total sediment export with FS WEPP. Model results show that logging operations with heavy machinery in slope line are less prone to soil erosion than logging operations including winch logging and additional dirt roads. The former produces less sediment in its worst-case configuration than the latter in its most moderate configuration by a factor of two. Model results also show that erosion prevention benefits from long periods of 10 years between two harvests.</description><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Chain saws</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Configurations</subject><subject>Dirt</subject><subject>Erosion control</subject><subject>Forest harvesting</subject><subject>Forestry</subject><subject>Forests</subject><subject>Harvesters</subject><subject>Interfaces</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Logging</subject><subject>Modelling</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Plant Ecology</subject><subject>Plant Sciences</subject><subject>Roads</subject><subject>Runoff</subject><subject>Soil erosion</subject><subject>Soils</subject><subject>Terrain</subject><subject>Unpaved roads</subject><subject>Winches</subject><issn>1612-4669</issn><issn>1612-4677</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kD9PwzAQxS0EEqXwBZgssWLwn8SOR6hoQSqwwGy5ySVNSe1gh6F8elyCYEM66W74vbt7D6FzRq8Ypeo6MioyTiinhDIuNckP0IRJxkkmlTr8naU-RicxbijlhS6KCeoffQVd6xocfdthCD623mFbDxDwFsq1de0nVLjzTbOnfA_BDgmJOGFxAOhxQoNtHU41rAE_-ZBacPi2s-UbnvsAcbjECwhb63an6Ki2XYSznz5Fr_O7l9k9WT4vHmY3S1IKKQYiCyXyTNQ8E6VgVcaZ4rDSkGtbSQ51rnMhra2TO5XLZGzFLKdFwepypZUUYoouxr198O8f6QOz8R_BpZOGZ0wVnGvJEsVHqkzGY4Da9KHd2rAzjJp9smZM1qRkzXeyJk8iMYpigl0D4W_1P6ovHbB7ww</recordid><startdate>20200801</startdate><enddate>20200801</enddate><creator>Haas, Julian</creator><creator>Schack-Kirchner, Helmer</creator><creator>Lang, Friederike</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0275-1903</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200801</creationdate><title>Modeling soil erosion after mechanized logging operations on steep terrain in the Northern Black Forest, Germany</title><author>Haas, Julian ; Schack-Kirchner, Helmer ; Lang, Friederike</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-6873543f243c31d42172eb9e59ad62ef59536aaf677756466b1a20881fcb97633</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Chain saws</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Configurations</topic><topic>Dirt</topic><topic>Erosion control</topic><topic>Forest harvesting</topic><topic>Forestry</topic><topic>Forests</topic><topic>Harvesters</topic><topic>Interfaces</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Logging</topic><topic>Modelling</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Plant Ecology</topic><topic>Plant Sciences</topic><topic>Roads</topic><topic>Runoff</topic><topic>Soil erosion</topic><topic>Soils</topic><topic>Terrain</topic><topic>Unpaved roads</topic><topic>Winches</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Haas, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schack-Kirchner, Helmer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lang, Friederike</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>European journal of forest research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Haas, Julian</au><au>Schack-Kirchner, Helmer</au><au>Lang, Friederike</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Modeling soil erosion after mechanized logging operations on steep terrain in the Northern Black Forest, Germany</atitle><jtitle>European journal of forest research</jtitle><stitle>Eur J Forest Res</stitle><date>2020-08-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>139</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>549</spage><epage>565</epage><pages>549-565</pages><issn>1612-4669</issn><eissn>1612-4677</eissn><abstract>Climate change makes it necessary to re-evaluate the erosion potential of forest infrastructure. We used the Forest Service WEPP interfaces (FS WEPP) to compare soil erosion potentials of two competing logging practices in steep terrain in the Northern Black Forest, Germany: (1) Felling with harvesters and logging with forwarders in slope line with optional traction supporting winches. (2) Felling by chainsaw, logging with a cable winch, and further transport of logs via forest dirt roads. After forest harvest we measured erosion, runoff, and DOC concentration in runoff from 50 m sections of two machine tracks, two cable tracks, and a dirt road for 2 years. The erosion measurements were used to validate FS WEPP management options and a regionally adjusted CLIGEN input file. With these parameterizations we compared the erosion potential of the two practices on subcatchment scale by modeling return periods and total sediment export with FS WEPP. Model results show that logging operations with heavy machinery in slope line are less prone to soil erosion than logging operations including winch logging and additional dirt roads. The former produces less sediment in its worst-case configuration than the latter in its most moderate configuration by a factor of two. Model results also show that erosion prevention benefits from long periods of 10 years between two harvests.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><doi>10.1007/s10342-020-01269-5</doi><tpages>17</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0275-1903</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1612-4669 |
ispartof | European journal of forest research, 2020-08, Vol.139 (4), p.549-565 |
issn | 1612-4669 1612-4677 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2417822961 |
source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Biomedical and Life Sciences Chain saws Climate change Configurations Dirt Erosion control Forest harvesting Forestry Forests Harvesters Interfaces Life Sciences Logging Modelling Original Paper Plant Ecology Plant Sciences Roads Runoff Soil erosion Soils Terrain Unpaved roads Winches |
title | Modeling soil erosion after mechanized logging operations on steep terrain in the Northern Black Forest, Germany |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T19%3A08%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Modeling%20soil%20erosion%20after%20mechanized%20logging%20operations%20on%20steep%20terrain%20in%20the%20Northern%20Black%20Forest,%20Germany&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20forest%20research&rft.au=Haas,%20Julian&rft.date=2020-08-01&rft.volume=139&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=549&rft.epage=565&rft.pages=549-565&rft.issn=1612-4669&rft.eissn=1612-4677&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10342-020-01269-5&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2417822961%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2417822961&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |