Streamflow response to forest management

Journal Article (2020)
Author(s)

James W. Kirchner (Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL, ETH Zürich)

WR Berghuijs (ETH Zürich)

Scott T. Allen (University of Utah, ETH Zürich)

M. Hrachowitz (TU Delft - Water Resources)

R.W. Hut (TU Delft - Water Resources)

D.M. Rizzo (University of Vermont)

Research Group
Water Resources
Copyright
© 2020 James W. Kirchner, Wouter R. Berghuijs, Scott T. Allen, M. Hrachowitz, R.W. Hut, D.M. Rizzo
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-1940-6
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2020
Language
English
Copyright
© 2020 James W. Kirchner, Wouter R. Berghuijs, Scott T. Allen, M. Hrachowitz, R.W. Hut, D.M. Rizzo
Research Group
Water Resources
Issue number
7794
Volume number
578
Pages (from-to)
E12-E15
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.

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.

Files

S41586_020_1940_6.pdf
(pdf | 2.75 Mb)
- Embargo expired in 12-08-2020
License info not available