Land use effects on ecosystem service provisioning in tropical watersheds, still an important unsolved problem

Abstract

Simonit and Perrings (1) endeavor to assess effects of land use decisions on hydrological behavior of the Panama Canal watershed. Although this is a worthy study topic, the authors used the US Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service Curve Number (CN) model to predict hydrologic response. Modeling of land-management effects on tropical hydrological behavior requires a model that can describe detailed spatial variability in watershed characteristics, properly simulate the effects of tropical land use on rainfall partitioning, and groundwater dynamics. The CN model does none of these (2).The empirical CN method was developed to predict direct (nongroundwater) runoff from single storms, although some models use daily intervals, assuming that typical storms last about 1 d (2). The performance of the CN method is documented as being poor (2) in humid forest settings with deep soils, such as the Canal watershed. The authors erroneously cite , to justify the selection of a CN parameter of 75. The primary conclusion of CalvoGobbeti et al. was that the CN method is not applicable in the Canal headwaters because the CN parameter is nonstationary, varying between 64 and 98 as a result of seasonality and unknown factors. Moreover, Simonit and Perrings (1) applied the CN methodology on a pixel-by-pixel basis to simulate heterogeneous response. The CN methodology was developed to predict the response of watersheds, not pixels. Use of the CN method on individual pixels is meaningless (2, 4).Simonit and Perrings (1) used a monthly time step, which is unsupported by hydrologic research and violates the single-event assumption of the CN method (2). The monthly time step required use of an invalid value of 0.7 for the initial-abstraction ratio, λ. In applying the time step this way, Simonit and Perrings treat λ as a parameter that can assume any value. This is not correct, and use of λ = 0.7 causes their model to disregard periods where total rainfall is less than 70% of the maximum storage capacity of the watershed. Hawkins et al. (2) concluded that λ is more appropriately nearer to 0.0 and definitely less than 0.2. Finally, the monthly time step and large value of λ render Simonit and Perrings' model incapable of predicting landuse effects on droughts or peak flows. In fact, Ferguson (5), used by the authors to justify a monthly time step, specifically states that "average monthly analysis does not, by its nature, produce the same information that daily can, such as magnitudes of individual short-term high or low flows."Simonit and Perrings (1) applied the empirical CN model in a humid tropical forest, where it is known not to work, at an inappropriate spatial scale (pixels), and used an invalid monthly time step requiring use of an invalid value of the parameter λ. Hydrological modeling of land-use change effects requires a model that is capable of predicting the effects of those changes on flow path and groundwater dynamics, which the CN methodology cannot (4). The cumulative effects of these hydrologic...

The importance of and need for rapid hydrologic assessments in Latin America

“…Despite remarkable progress in long‐term observations and data acquisition in Latin America (e.g., Asbjornsen et al, ; Asbjornsen et al, ; Bruijnzeel, Mulligan, & Scatena, ; Gotsch et al, ; Moore, Orozco, Aparecido, & Miller, in press; Ogden & Stallard, ), the establishment and augmentation of long‐term data networks remains logistically challenging, particularly at the highest elevations. This challenge results in an ever‐growing scientific gap that hinders our understanding of differences and similarities between hydrological processes in tropical (e.g., tropical Latin America) and temperate (e.g., North America and Europe) regions (e.g., Boulton et al, ).…”

Comment on “Beyond the SCS‐CN method: A theoretical framework for spatially lumped rainfall‐runoff response” by M. S. Bartlett et al.

“…Its proliferation into many simulation models [see Garen and Moore, 2005] beckons us to try and improve it. At least partly because of regulatory requirements owing to its simplicity and ease of use, the method has been extended to larger watersheds, pixels, continuous forms with discrete time steps, and situations where its use was never envisioned or intended, often incorrectly as an unjustified hasty generalization [Kleme s, 1986;Hawkins et al, 2009;Ogden and Stallard, 2013].…”

Hydrologic ecosystem services: linking ecohydrologic processes to human well‐being in water research and watershed management

“…However, the distribution of research across journals may also hamper peer‐review. Hydrologic services papers published in journals outside the field have been criticized for lacking rigorous hydrologic science …”

“…Hydrologic services papers published in journals outside the field have been criticized for lacking rigorous hydrologic science. 38,39 Geography Many of the studies on hydrologic services published in the early 2000s were generic or theoretical, often based on nonspecific examples (e.g. 1).…”