Successfully reported this slideshow.
MONITORING EROSION ON KAHO‘OLAWE By Scot Izuka, USGS Presented at the  Hawaii Water Quality  Conference  March 25, 2008 A ...
Area = 45 mi 2 Uninhabited  Rainfall ~ 25 in/yr No perennial streams
400 AD – Earliest human habitation (archaeological evidence) Early times – grass and trees grew in thick soil on most of i...
Hakioawa Denudation by grazing Upper elevations bare
Restoration Efforts
Motivation for Study Need to assess effectiveness of restoration efforts in reducing erosion on Kaho‘olawe Objective Monit...
Approach Periodic measurements of soil erosion at selected locations (both in restoration and non-restoration areas) Monit...
Helicopter View of Bare Area
Badlands
Badlands Erosion in Soft Material
Pedestal Rocks
Upper Horizon is Removed in Many Areas Remnant hummock of upper soil horizon Soil stripped, leaving  underlying hardpan
Erosion Monitoring Method Install transects (“pins”) Measure ~ every 6 months for 3 years
Hakioawa Kaulana Hakioawa
Restoration  started No restoration
Rill Interfluve Hummock
PRELIMINARY RESULTS <ul><li>FIELD-MEASUREMENT DATES </li></ul><ul><li>January 2007 </li></ul><ul><li>September 2007 </li><...
Rainfall Between Measurements Dec. 2007 NWS Gage 499.6 Kaho‘olawe Data from National Climatic Data Center and National Wea...
Change Between January 2007 and March 2008 (negative = erosion)
Statistical Significance? Erosion rate of restoration sites was statistically less than that of non-restoration sites (one...
Even So, Rills Show Extremes of Erosion/Deposition
H15
H35
H37
Where Are the Biggest Changes?
H25
H14 H19 H17
H41
Some Variation in Rills and Interfluves not Accounted for in Sampling Design Are the transects representative of the entir...
Restoration Effect Likely to Mature over Time Plants are small at present Erosion rate likely to change in the future as p...
No Conclusions, Just Observations Rills show extreme variability in deposition and erosion Erosion rate less extreme in in...
 
Stream Gage and Automatic Sediment Sampler
Summary All preliminary – after only one year of erosion monitoring  Rills show extremes for both deposition and erosion, ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Monitoring the Effectiveness of Erosion Control Efforts on Kahoolawe, Hawaii

1,332 views

Published on

by Dr. Scot Izuka
Research Hydrologist, USGS
at the Hawaii Water Quality Conference 2008

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Monitoring the Effectiveness of Erosion Control Efforts on Kahoolawe, Hawaii

  1. 1. MONITORING EROSION ON KAHO‘OLAWE By Scot Izuka, USGS Presented at the Hawaii Water Quality Conference March 25, 2008 A USGS study in cooperation with the Kaho‘olawe Island Reserve Commission U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey
  2. 2. Area = 45 mi 2 Uninhabited Rainfall ~ 25 in/yr No perennial streams
  3. 3. 400 AD – Earliest human habitation (archaeological evidence) Early times – grass and trees grew in thick soil on most of island Wild goats (~1800 to 1990s) Sheep and cattle (1858 to 1952) Target bombing by U.S. military (1941 to 1993) UXO clearing (1998-2003) 74% of island cleared; 9% to depth of 4 feet Restoration projects, including revegetation (2001 – present) (Sources: Kaho‘olawe Island Reserve Commission; Macdonald and others, 1983) History
  4. 4. Hakioawa Denudation by grazing Upper elevations bare
  5. 5. Restoration Efforts
  6. 6. Motivation for Study Need to assess effectiveness of restoration efforts in reducing erosion on Kaho‘olawe Objective Monitor erosion and sediment transport in Hakioawa and Kaulana watersheds, which are currently undergoing restoration
  7. 7. Approach Periodic measurements of soil erosion at selected locations (both in restoration and non-restoration areas) Monitor streamflow and suspended-sediment discharge at mouths of streams
  8. 8. Helicopter View of Bare Area
  9. 9. Badlands
  10. 10. Badlands Erosion in Soft Material
  11. 11. Pedestal Rocks
  12. 12. Upper Horizon is Removed in Many Areas Remnant hummock of upper soil horizon Soil stripped, leaving underlying hardpan
  13. 13. Erosion Monitoring Method Install transects (“pins”) Measure ~ every 6 months for 3 years
  14. 14. Hakioawa Kaulana Hakioawa
  15. 15. Restoration started No restoration
  16. 16. Rill Interfluve Hummock
  17. 17. PRELIMINARY RESULTS <ul><li>FIELD-MEASUREMENT DATES </li></ul><ul><li>January 2007 </li></ul><ul><li>September 2007 </li></ul><ul><li>March 2008 </li></ul>
  18. 18. Rainfall Between Measurements Dec. 2007 NWS Gage 499.6 Kaho‘olawe Data from National Climatic Data Center and National Weather Service
  19. 19. Change Between January 2007 and March 2008 (negative = erosion)
  20. 20. Statistical Significance? Erosion rate of restoration sites was statistically less than that of non-restoration sites (one-tailed test, 95% confidence interval) Erosion rate of rills was not significantly different from that of interfluves (two-tailed test, 95% confidence interval)
  21. 21. Even So, Rills Show Extremes of Erosion/Deposition
  22. 22. H15
  23. 23. H35
  24. 24. H37
  25. 25. Where Are the Biggest Changes?
  26. 26. H25
  27. 27. H14 H19 H17
  28. 28. H41
  29. 29. Some Variation in Rills and Interfluves not Accounted for in Sampling Design Are the transects representative of the entire watershed? Assume that we have enough transects to eliminate bias in computed statistics
  30. 30. Restoration Effect Likely to Mature over Time Plants are small at present Erosion rate likely to change in the future as plants grow Erosion data collected today can be used basis for comparison in future
  31. 31. No Conclusions, Just Observations Rills show extreme variability in deposition and erosion Erosion rate less extreme in interfluves but mean is not statistically different from rills Erosion rate high in hummocks Erosion rate statistically lower in restoration than in non-restoration areas (but there is question of whether transect data are representative of the whole watershed) Erosion rate is likely to change as plants grow; data collected today can be basis for comparison with a future study
  32. 33. Stream Gage and Automatic Sediment Sampler
  33. 34. Summary All preliminary – after only one year of erosion monitoring Rills show extremes for both deposition and erosion, but the mean change was not statistically different from interfluves Erosion also high in hummocks At this stage, erosion rate in restoration areas is statistically lower than in non-restored areas More monitoring to come!

×