Comparison of erosion and erosion control works in Macedonia, Serbia and Bulgaria

Blinkov, Ivan; Kostadinov, Stanimir; Marinov, I.

doi:10.1016/s2095-6339(15)30027-7

Cited by 23 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rainfall erosivity index (R factor), which is the main parameter for soil erosion risk assessment, is with the mean value of 695.0 MJ mm haˉ¹ hˉ¹ yrˉ¹, which is around the mean values for Europe (Panagos et al, 2015). In some regions of the country the intensity of soil erosion is among the highest in Europe -territories of Regional Forestry Board (RFB) Blagoevgrad, Kardjali, Kyustendil, Sofia and Smolyan (Marinov, Bardarov, 2005, Blinkov et al, 2013.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Evaluation of water erosion risk of Badinska River catchment, Southwest Bulgaria

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This investigation has been carried out at Badinska River watershed -one of the most famous torrents in Bulgaria. The purpose of the survey is to analyse the main erosion factors and erosion potential of territories, with a view to assess soil erosion risk and opportunity of high water formation from watershed. A methodical approach for determination and mapping of the territories in terms of the class of erosion risk with the use of GIS is applied. Assessments are made according to the "Methodology for preparing the national long term programme for protection against erosion and flooding in forestlands". The total assessment for Badinska river watershed is "low to moderate" potential risk and "very low to low" actual erosion risk. About of 5% of the forest stock territory is with "moderate" and "moderate to high" actual risk, and the biggest part of this territory (about 63%) is in the main stream watershed above the Yaloviko tributary.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Evaluation of water erosion risk of Badinska River catchment, Southwest Bulgaria

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Accelerated soil erosion by anthropogenic activity in Bulgaria dates back to the 1950s and has caused severe damage to the national economy over time, becoming a crucial issue on the national agenda in the early 1970s (Blinkov et al, 2013). Since the early 1990s, considerable activities have been carried out to control soil erosion that threatened agricultural areas (Rousseva et al, 2006b;Shishkov and Kolev, 2014).…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil Erosion Risk Assessment due to Land Use/Cover Changes (LUCC) in Bulgaria from 1990 to 2015

Özşahin

Eroğlu

2019

Alınteri Zirai Bilimler Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soil erosion by water jeopardizes land use/cover changes (LULCC) for anthropogenic reasons. It results in enormous and irreversible damage if no action is taken. The Balkan Peninsula has experienced considerable LULCC in recent years; however, the influence of such changes on soil erosion has not been adequately explored. This study sought to explore the influence of LULCC in Bulgaria on soil erosion. Annual soil loss quantity was estimated, and the erosion risk classes were defined using the RUSLE (3D) method based on Geographical Information Systems (GIS). The results of this study indicated that annual soil loss in Bulgaria has been decreasing recently due to various support practices (P-factor) rather than LULCC. However, the recent increase in severe erosion risk class indicates that measures against soil erosion are critical for land degradation.

show abstract

“…They can be made of logs, gabions, dry stones, masonry or/and reinforced concrete. Quite similar structures have been called check-dams, consolidation dams (D'Agostino, 2013), solid body dams (Wehrmann et al, 2006), SABO dams (Chanson, 2004), crib barriers (Garcìa et al, 2008), bed sills (Gaudio et al, 2000), weirs (Rinaldi and Simon, 1998), thresholds (Blinkov et al, 2013) or grade control structures (USACE, 1994). In agricultural contexts that are beyond the scope of this paper, 'check dams' may also refer to small water reservoirs for irrigation purposes (Agoramoorthy and Hsu, 2008) or dams dedicated to trap silts and to form agricultural areas (Xu et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The archive analysis principally focuses on the French example, which is interesting for several reasons: (i) despite probably not being the first to theorize the concept (see Discussion section), France was first to experiment with national scale implementation of torrent control works after the 1860 laws; (ii) the French experience later influenced numerous countries in the beginning of their torrent control management, e.g. in Austria (Patek, ), Balkans (Kostadinov, ; Blinkov et al , ) and Japan (JSA, , p. 18; Nishimoto, ); (iii) the large scale of French mountain land restoration programs in a comparatively varied environment of three mountain chains (Alps, Massif Central and Pyrenees) forced the French engineers to address extremely varied subjects dealing with torrent control, generally with regionally specific solutions (Kalaora and Savoye, ; Fesquet, ). A similar analysis could be done, and worth doing, in several other mountainous countries.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why do we build check dams in Alpine streams? An historical perspective from the French experience

Piton

Carladous

Recking

et al. 2016

Earth Surf Processes Landf

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For more than 150 years, humans have tried to limit the geomorphic activity of mountain streams, and the related damage, using torrent control works. Check dams are likely the most emblematic civil engineering structures used in soil conservation programs. Modern mountain societies have inherited thousands of these structures built in upland gullies and streams. To help define their effectiveness and decisions concerning their maintenance or new project designs, a clear understanding of potential effects of check dams on river systems, i.e. their functions, is first needed. The next steps concern quantitative assessments of each function on the flood features and combination of all effects. The present understanding of these sometimes old structures' functions can be complicated because the societal and environmental contexts in which the original structures were built may have changed. To bridge this gap, this paper traces the purposes for which check dams were built, through a detailed analysis of French archives. We first analyze chronologically how each function was theorized and applied in the field. In the nineteenth century, engineers developed a thorough empirical and conceptual knowledge of mountain soil erosion, torrential geomorphology, and sediment transport processes as well as check dam interactions with these natural processes. The second part of this paper synthesizes conceptual descriptions of the check dams' functions, in the light of more than 150 years of experience, with their implication on the features of the structures. The French experience is compared to other countries' pioneering works. Finally, the next steps and remaining research challenges toward a comprehensive analysis of check dams' efficiency in torrent hazard mitigation are presented. This analysis is proposed to remind how, conceptually, check dams may influence geomorphic systems, bearing in mind the knowledge represented in pioneer guidelines and recent works on the subject.

show abstract

Comparison of erosion and erosion control works in Macedonia, Serbia and Bulgaria

Cited by 23 publications

References 1 publication

Evaluation of water erosion risk of Badinska River catchment, Southwest Bulgaria

Evaluation of water erosion risk of Badinska River catchment, Southwest Bulgaria

Soil Erosion Risk Assessment due to Land Use/Cover Changes (LUCC) in Bulgaria from 1990 to 2015

Why do we build check dams in Alpine streams? An historical perspective from the French experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About