Streamflow response to forest management

Journal article (2020)

Authors

JW Kirchner Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research, ETH Zürich
WR Berghuijs ETH Zürich
Scott T. Allen University of Utah, ETH Zürich
M. Hrachowitz Water Resources - CEG
R.W. Hut Water Resources - CEG
DM Rizzo University of Vermont
Research Group
Water Resources (CEG) (TU Delft)
Copyright: © 2020 James W. Kirchner, Wouter R. Berghuijs, Scott T. Allen, M. Hrachowitz, R.W. Hut, D.M. Rizzo
DOI
help_outline
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-1940-6
More Info
expand_more

Published Date

2020

Language

English

Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Faculty

Civil Engineering & Geosciences

Department

Water Management

Research Group

Water Resources

Abstract

Forests play a key part in the water cycle, so both planting and removing forests can affect streamflow. In a recent Article1, Evaristo and McDonnell used a gradient-boosted-tree model to conclude that streamflow response to forest removal is predominantly controlled by the potential water storage in the landscape, and that removing the world’s forests would contribute an additional 34,098 km3 yr−1 to streamflow worldwide, nearly doubling global river flow. Here we report several problems with Evaristo and McDonnell’s1 database, their model, and the extrapolation of their results to the continental and global scale. The main results of the paper1 remain unsubstantiated, because they rely on a database with multiple errors and a model that fails validation tests.