首页> 外文期刊>Forest Science >Sediment Trapping by Streamside Management Zones of Various Widths after Forest Harvest and Site Preparation
【24h】

Sediment Trapping by Streamside Management Zones of Various Widths after Forest Harvest and Site Preparation

机译:森林采伐和整地后各宽度河道管理区的泥沙截留

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Recommended widths for streamside management zones (SMZs) for sediment protection vary. The objectives of this study were to compare the effects of SMZ widths and thinning levels on sediment moving through SMZs. Four SMZ treatments were installed within 16 harvested watersheds where intermittent streams graded into small perennial streams. Sites were clearcut, prescribed burned, and planted with loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.). Treatments were 30.4-, 15.2-, and 7.6-m-wide SMZs without thinning and 15.2-m-wide SMZs with thinning. Three to seven treatments replicated within four blocks created a randomized incomplete block design. Erosion rates from watersheds and sediment trapping within SMZ treatments were monitored with modeling and sediment pins. A second study evaluated 24 subwatersheds within eight watersheds. Three subwatersheds were located within each watershed so sediment traps collected inputs into SMZs from harvest site-prepared areas, firelines, or at streams. SMZ treatments had no significant differences regarding sediment trapping. All SMZs widths were generally effective in trapping sediment. Within the 16 intermittent-perennial watersheds and 24 ephemeral subwatersheds, erosion to sediment delivery ratios from harvests ranged from 3 to 14%. For ephemeral stream subwatersheds, firelines adjacent to SMZs contributed 14% of total sediment. Sediment trap data collected within SMZs indicated that 97% of watershed erosion was trapped before reaching streams. In three subwatersheds, sediment penetrated SMZs due to channelized flow from failed or inadequate water controls on roads and firelines. Results support the common recommendation for SMZ widths of 15.2 m in which partial harvests may occur and emphasize the importance of implementation of best management practices for roads and firelines. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]
机译:用于保护沉积物的河边管理区(SMZ)的建议宽度有所不同。这项研究的目的是比较SMZ宽度和稀疏水平对通过SMZ的沉积物的影响。在16个收获流域内安装了4种SMZ处理,在这些流域中,间歇性溪流分为多年生小溪。清理场地,烧毁并种植火炬松(Pinus taeda L.)。处理为不带减薄的30.4-,15.2和7.6米宽SMZ和带减薄的15.2m宽SMZ。在四个区块内重复进行三到七个处理,创建了随机不完全区块设计。 SMZ处理过程中流域的侵蚀率和沉积物的捕集率通过模型和沉积物销进行监测。第二项研究评估了八个流域中的24个子流域。每个流域内有三个子集水区,因此沉积物陷阱将收集区准备好的区域,火线或溪流中的输入收集到SMZ中。 SMZ处理在沉积物捕获方面没有显着差异。所有SMZ宽度通常都有效地捕获沉积物。在16个间歇性的多年生流域和24个短暂的小流域中,收获物的侵蚀与沉积物输送比为3%至14%。对于短暂河流小流域,SMZ附近的火线占总沉积物的14%。在SMZ内收集的泥沙捕获数据表明,流域侵蚀的97%是在流到溪流之前捕获的。在三个小流域中,由于道路和火线水控制措施失败或控制不力,导致沉积物渗入SMZs。结果支持SMZ宽度为15.2 m的通用建议,在该建议中可能会出现部分收获,并强调了对道路和火线实施最佳管理做法的重要性。 [出版物摘要]

著录项

  • 来源
    《Forest Science》 |2010年第6期|p.541-551|共11页
  • 作者单位

    William A. Lakel, III, Virginia Department of Forestry. Wallace M. Aust, Virginia Tech, Department of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation, 228 Cheatham Hall, Mail Code 0324, Blacksburg, VA 24061- Phone: (540) 231-4523, Fax: (540) 231-3330: waust@vt.edu. M. Chad Bolding. Virginia Tech. C. Andrew Dolloff. US Forest Service. Patrick Keyser, University of Tennessee. Robert Feldt. Maryland Department of Natural Resources.Acknowledgments: This project received financial and logistical support from the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc.. MeadWestvaco Corporation, the US Forest Service, and Virginia Tech.Manuscript received October 13. 2009, accepted May 1 1, 2010 Copyright © 2010 by the Society of American Foresters,;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号