Water Resources Management

, Volume 24, Issue 8, pp 1531–1549

Factors Controlling Gully Advancement and Models Evaluation (Hableh Rood Basin, Iran)

  • Aliakbar Nazari Samani
  • Hassan Ahmadi
  • Aliasghar Mohammadi
  • Jamal Ghoddousi
  • Ali Salajegheh
  • Guy Boggs
  • Razieh Pishyar
Article

Abstract

Gully erosion is one of the most complicated and destructive forms of water erosion. In order to prevent this erosion, the important factors controlling gully heads must be understood. This paper examines gully head advancement in the Hableh Rood Basin, Iran by (1) observing gully head advance between 1957 and 2005 using field studies, aerial photography and GIS analysis and: (2) applying and evaluating widely used experimental models including the, Thompson (Trans ASAE 7(1):54–55, 1964), SCS (I) and SCS (II) models, for estimating migrating headcuts over the study period. The results showed that the highest mean gully advancement (0.26 m year − 1) took place during the 1956–1967 period, with most gullies having lower and steady headcut retreat rates between 1967–2000 (0.21 m year − 1) and 2000–2005 (0.15 m year − 1). This suggests that the majority of gullies in the study area were still in the early stages of formation in the first study period and their formation may be linked to land use or climatic changes pre 1956. Analysis of the correlation between environmental characteristics of the study area and gully advancement indicated that the upslope area of head cuts and soluble mineral content of the soil were the two most important factors influencing the spatial and temporal variation of gully longitudinal development. Results of multiple regression revealed that the simple relation including upslope area and soluble minerals can explain 93% of total variance and relatively reflects the effects of runoff and waterfall process for headcut retreat. Application of statistical error analysis to evaluate the four gully advancement models showed that in comparison to other models, the second model of SCS has more reliable results for predicting longitudinal gully advancement in this study area and other similar regions. However, this study indicates that future modelling in the region should consider the role of soil soluble mineral content in predicting gully advancement.

Keywords

Gully erosion Empirical model Evaluation Headcut retreat Environmental factors Aerial photography 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahmadi H (1999) Applied geomorphology, vol 1 (water erosion), 3rd edn. University of Tehran Press, Tehran, p 688 (in Persian)Google Scholar
  2. Beer CE, Johnson HP (1963) Factors in gully growth in the deep loess area of western Iowa. Trans ASAE 6(3):237–240Google Scholar
  3. Betts HD, De Rosel RC (1999) Digital elevation models as a tool for monitoring and measuring gully erosion. Int J Appl Earth Observ Geoinform 1(2):91–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burkard MB, Kostaschuk RA (1997) Patterns and control of gully growth along the shoreline of lake Huron. Earth Surf Process Landf 22:901–911CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Desmet PJJ, Poesen J, Govers G, Vandaele K (1999) Importance of slope gradient and contributing area for optimal prediction of the initiation and trajectory of ephemeral gullies. Catena 37:377–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Felfoar M, Boussema S (1999) Assessment of the influence of the lithology and rainfall events on gully erosion in Owed maize watershed in central Tunisia. 2nd inters regional conference in environmental-water, p 99Google Scholar
  7. Gallart F, Sole A, Puigdefabregas J, Lazaro R (2002) Badland system in the Mediterranean. In: Bull LJ, Kirkby MJ (ed) Dryl and rivers: hydrology and geomorphology of semi-arid channels. Wiley, Chichester, pp 299–362Google Scholar
  8. Ghaffari AR (1998) Aerospace techniques applied to gully erosion studied in Shahre-kord, Iran. MSc dissertation, ITC, Enschedule, The Netherlands, pp 113Google Scholar
  9. Ghoddousi J (1994) Gully growth and extend. Research Institute of Forest and Rangelands, Final research report, p 28, (abstract in English)Google Scholar
  10. Ghoddousi J (2002) Gully erosion morphology modeling and hazard zonation (studied area: Zanjanrood drainage basin). PhD dissertation, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Tehran, pp 368 (abstract in English)Google Scholar
  11. Hair JF, Andersen RE, Tatham RL, Black WC (1998) Multivariate data analysis. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  12. Ionita I (2006) Gully development in the Moldavian Plateau of Romania. Catena 68:133–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Karimi M (1997) A study on effective factors of gully erosion and introducing methods to prevent it in Zahan-e-Ghaen area. MSc dissertation, Faculty of Agricultural, Tarbiat Modarres University, p 192 (abstract in English)Google Scholar
  14. Krause AK, Franks SW, Kalam JD, Loughran RJ, Rowan JS (2003) Multi-parameter fingerprinting of sediment deposition in a small gullied catchment in SE Australia. Catena 53:372–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leopold LB, Wolman MG, Miller JP (1964) Fluvial processes in geomorphology. Freeman, London, p 522Google Scholar
  16. Montgomery DR, Dietrich WE (1994) Landscape dissection and drainage area-slope thresholds. In: Kirkby MJ (ed) Process models and theoretical geomorphology. Wiley, Chichester, pp 221–246Google Scholar
  17. Mortazaii G (2005) Evaluation of the quantitative effects of environmental parameters on occurrence of gully erosion in order to introduce the most relevant estimation model for longitudinal development of gully. PhD dissertation, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, p 154, (abstract in English)Google Scholar
  18. Nachtergaele J, Poesen J, Vandekerckhove L, Oostwoud Wijdenes D, Roxo M (2001) Testing the ephemeral gully erosion model (EGEM) for two Mediterranean environments. Earth Surf Processes Landf 26:17–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nachtergaele J, Poesen J, Oostwoud Wijdenes D, Vandekerckhove L (2002) Medium-term evolution of a gully developed in a loess-derived soil. Geomorphology 46(3–4):223–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Oostwoud Wijdenes DJ, Poesen J, Vandekerckhove L, Ghesquiere M (2000) Spatial distribution of gully head activity and sediment supply along an ephemeral channel in a Mediterranean environment. Catena 39:147–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Patra KC (2001) Hydrology and water resources engineering. Alpha Science International Ltd., Pangbourne, p 561Google Scholar
  22. Poesen J, Nachtergale J, Vertstraeten G, Valentin C (2003) Gully erosion and environmental change: importance and research needs. Catena 50(2–4):91–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Radoane M, Ichim I, Radoane N (1995) Gully distribution and development in Moldavia, Romania. Catena 24:127–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schumm SA, Mosely MP, Weaver WE (1987) Experimental fluvial geomorphology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Seginer I (1966) Gully development and sediment yield. J Hydrol 4:236–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sidorchuk A (1999) Dynamic and static models of gully erosion. Catena 37:401–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Thompson JR (1964) Quantitative effect of watershed variables on rate of gully-head advancement. Trans ASAE 7(1):54–55Google Scholar
  28. Tucker GE, Lancaster ST, Gasparini NM, Bras RL (2001) The Channel-Hillslope Integrated Landscape Development (CHILD) model. In: Harmon RS, Doe WW (ed) Landscape erosion and evolution modeling. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 349–388Google Scholar
  29. USDA (1966) Procedure for determining rates of land damage, land depreciation and volume of sediment produced by Gully Erosion. USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Release No. 32, p 18Google Scholar
  30. USDA, NRCS (1998) Keys to soil taxonomy, 8th edn. Soil Survey Staff, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  31. Vandekerckhove L, Poesen J, Oostwoud Wijdenes D, Nachtergaele J, Kosmas C, Roxo MJ, Figueiredo TDE (2000) Thresholds for gully initiation and sedimentation in Mediterranean Europe. Earth Surf Processes Landf 25:1201–1220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vandekerckhove L, Poesen J, Oostwoud Wijdenes D, Gyssels G (2001) Short-term bank gully retreat rates in Mediterranean environments. Catena 44:133–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vandekerckhove L, Poesen J, Govers G (2003) Medium-term gully headcut retreat rates in Southeast Spain determined from aerial photographs and ground measurements. Catena 50:329–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Vandaele K, Poesen J, Govers G, van Wesemael B (1996) Geomorphic threshold conditions for ephemeral gully incision. Geomorphology 16(2):161–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Valentin C, Poesen J, Li Y (2005) Gully erosion: impacts, factors and control. Catena 63:132–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Vente JD, Poesen J, Arabkhedri M, Verstraeten G (2007) The sediment delivery problem revisited. Prog Phys Geogr 31(2)1:155–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wasson RJ, Olive LJ, Rosewell CJ (1996) Rates of erosion and sediment transport in Australia. IAHS Publications 236, pp 139–148Google Scholar
  38. Wasson RJ, Caitcheon G, Murray AS, McCulloch M, Quade J (2002) Sourcing sediment using multiple tracers in the catchment of Lake Argyle, Nortwestern Australia. Environ Manage 29(4):634–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Woodward DE (1999) Method to predict cropland ephemeral gully erosion. Catena 37:393–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aliakbar Nazari Samani
    • 1
  • Hassan Ahmadi
    • 1
  • Aliasghar Mohammadi
    • 2
  • Jamal Ghoddousi
    • 3
  • Ali Salajegheh
    • 1
  • Guy Boggs
    • 4
  • Razieh Pishyar
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Arid and Mountainous Region Reclamation, Faculty of Natural ResourcesUniversity of TehranKarajIran
  2. 2.Research and Science BranchIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran
  3. 3.Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research InstituteTehranIran
  4. 4.School of Science and Primary IndustriesCharles Darwin UniversityDarwinAustralia

Personalised recommendations