Insights from watershed simulations around the world: Watershed service-based restoration does not significantly enhance streamflow

Increased water yield and baseflow and decreased peak flow are common goals of watershed service programs. However, is the forest management often used in such programs likely to provide these beneficial watershed services? Many watershed service investments such as water funds typically change less than 10% of watershed land cover. We simulate the effects of 10% forest-cover change on water yield, low flow, and high flow in hydrologic models of 29 watersheds around the world. The forest-cover changes considered are: forest restoration from degraded natural lands or agriculture, forest conversion to agriculture, and forest conversion to urban cover. We do not consider grassland restoration by removal of alien tree species from riparian zones, which does increase water yield and low flow. Forest restoration from locally-predominant agricultural land resulted in median loss in annual water yield of 1.4%. Forest restoration reduced low flow and high flow by ～3%. After forest restoration, low flow increased in ～25% of cases while high flow and water yield declined in nearly all cases. Development of forest to agriculture or urban cover resulted in a 1–2% median increase in water yield, a 0.25–1% increase in low flow, and a 5–7% increase in high flow. We show that hydrologic responses to forest cover changes are not linearly related to climate, physiography, initial land cover, nor a multitude of watershed characteristics in most cases. These results suggest that enhanced streamflow watershed services anticipated from forest restoration or conservation of 10% or less of a watershed are generally modest.