Effectiveness of three post‐fire rehabilitation treatments in the Colorado Front Range

Post‐fire rehabilitation treatments are commonly implemented after high‐severity wildfires, but few data are available about the efficacy of these treatments. This study assessed post‐fire erosion rates and the effectiveness of seeding, straw mulching, and contour felling in reducing erosion after a June 2000 wildfire northwest of Loveland, Colorado. Site characteristics and sediment yields were measured on 12 burned and untreated control plots and 22 burned and treated plots from 2000 to 2003. The size of the hillslope plots ranged from 0·015 to 0·86 ha. Sediment yields varied significantly by treatment and were most closely correlated with the amount of ground cover. On the control plots the mean sediment yield declined from 6–10 Mg ha^?1 in the first two years after burning to 1·2 Mg ha^?1 in 2002 and 0·7 Mg ha^?1 in 2003. Natural regrowth caused the amount of ground cover on the control plots to increase progressively from 33% in fall 2000 to 88% in fall 2003. Seeding had no effect on either the amount of ground cover or sediment yields. Mulching reduced sediment yields by at least 95% relative to the control plots in 2001, 2002, and 2003, and the lower sediment yields are attributed to an immediate increase in the amount of ground cover in the mulched plots. The contour‐felling treatments varied considerably in the quality of installation, and sediment storage capacities ranged from 7 to 32 m³ ha^?1. The initial contour‐felling treatment did not reduce sediment yields when subjected to a very large storm event, but sediment yields were significantly reduced by a contour‐felling treatment installed after this large storm. The results indicate that contour felling may be able to store much of the sediment generated in an average year, but will not reduce sediment yields from larger storms. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of water quality on infiltration,runoff and interrill erosion processes during simulated rainfall

This paper discusses the effects of water quality on the hydrological and erosion response of non‐saline, non‐sodic soils during simulated rain experiments. It is well known that rain water quality affects the behaviour of saline soils. In particular, rain simulation experiments cannot be run using tap water if realistic values of infiltration rates and soil erosion are to be found. This paper reports on similar effects for non‐saline, non‐sodic soils. Two soils – a well‐aggregated clay‐rich soil developed on marine silty clay deposits and a soil developed on silt loam – were selected and subjected to a series of simulated rainstorms using demineralized water and tap water. The experiments were conducted in two different laboratories in order to obtain results independent of the tap water quality or the rainfall simulator characteristics. The results indicate that time‐to‐ponding is largely delayed by solute‐rich water (tap water). When tap water is used, infiltration rates are significantly overestimated, i.e. by more than 100 per cent. Interrill erosion rates increase by a factor of 2·5–3 when demineralized water is used. The silty clay soil was more affected by the water quality than the silt loam soil, with respect to infiltration and runoff production. Regarding interrill erosion rates, the two tested soils were similarly affected by the water quality. Therefore, it can be concluded that rainfall simulation experiments with non‐dispersive soils (e.g. non‐saline, non‐sodic) must also be conducted using water with very low electrical conductivity (i.e. less than 30–50 µS cm⁻¹), close to that of distilled water. The use of tap water certainly hampers comparisons and the relative ranking of the hydrological and erosion response of different soils, while parameter values, such as final infiltration rate or time‐to‐ponding, cannot be extrapolated and extended to natural situations. Therefore, the majority of hydrological and erosion models and parameter values measured during rainfall simulations in the past should be used with caution for all types of soils. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.