Territory Stories

Effect of vegetative cover on USDA curve numbers for pastoral catchments in the Australian semi-arid tropics

Details:

Title

Effect of vegetative cover on USDA curve numbers for pastoral catchments in the Australian semi-arid tropics

Other title

J.A. Motha and M. Dilshad.

Creator

Motha, J. A.; Dilshad, M.

Collection

E-Publications; E-Books; PublicationNT; DLPE technical memorandum ; no. 97/01

Date

1997-02-26

Description

Made available via the Publications (Legal Deposit) Act 2004 (NT).

Notes

Date:1997; Bibliography: p. 13-14.

Language

English

Subject

Pastures -- Northern Territory; Soil erosion -- Northern Territory

Publisher name

Land Resource Conservation Branch, Land Resources Division, Department of Lands, Planning and Environment

Place of publication

Darwin

Series

DLPE technical memorandum ; no. 97/01

Format

14 p. ; 30 cm.

File type

application/pdf.

ISBN

0724529764

Copyright owner

Check within Publication or with content Publisher.

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/228477

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/674107

Page content

Effect of vegetative cover on USDA curve numbers In Figure 1, the optimised CN2 values for improved as well as native pastures have been combined; hence the scatter. Note that CN2 for SCI serves as the pivotal point at near-zero cover, thereby dissociating itself from the influence of pasture type. The derived function possessed a value of 85 at zero cover, and decreased 0.49 units for every 1 % increase in cover. Although CN2bare was felt to be lower than was expected (based on the study ofDilshad and Peel, 1994) cover had a pronounced effect on CN2. Based on a general understanding of runoff on Australian soils, it was deduced that CN2 stays constant beyond 80% cover. Due to the difference in vegetation as well as difference in the cultural history of the plot, the CN2 for SC5 should be treated separately. Figure 2 gives the cover-CN2 function for improved pasture plots, all three of which have a history of previous cultivation. CN2 was 91 when bare and decreased 0.52 units for a cover increase of 1%. These values look reasonable based on the study ofDilshad and Peel (1994). 100 80 "- " -"+---" - " - " -~'---" -'-+" - " - " -'-1"-'-" - " -+--_ ... _ .. !-..... _ ... +_ ........ . ! ! i i ! ! i 60 . : -+----,r-+- N ",.,' I I ~ 40 __ ._._.J Y = -~.52x ; 91 .03!--_-t---EJ9f---_-t___t-___ 20 r2 = 0.59 ... _ .. _._.l .. _ .. _ .. _.~ __ ._ .. _ .. _l_ .. _._._ .. l .. _ .. _._ .. 1 .......... _ f . . ! i O+-~---+---r--+---r--+---r--~--r-~ o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Cover ('Vo) Figure 2. Cover-CN2 Function for Improved Pasture Catchments at DDRF In Figure 2, there is an obvious outlier; the optimised CN2 of 42 for SC4 was derived from limited opserved runoff data. Although it is not desirable to obtain the cover-CN2 function from three data points, it is interesting to check the effect of omitting the CN2 value for SC4. 6


Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are advised that this website may contain the names, voices and images of people who have died, as well as other culturally sensitive content. Please be aware that some collection items may use outdated phrases or words which reflect the attitude of the creator at the time, and are now considered offensive.

We use temporary cookies on this site to provide functionality.
By continuing to use this site without changing your settings, you consent to our use of cookies.