4.7 Article

Landslide-driven erosion and slope-channel coupling in steep, forested terrain, Ruahine Ranges, New Zealand, 1946-2011

期刊

CATENA
卷 142, 期 -, 页码 252-268

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.catena.2016.03.019

关键词

Landslide; Headwater; Steepland; Catchment connectivity; Aerial photography

资金

  1. Landcare Research NZ Ltd.
  2. Clean Water Productive Land [C10X1006]
  3. Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment's Science and Innovation Group
  4. University of Vienna

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Landslides are an important means of conveying sediment from slopes to channels in steepland environments, but landsliding is a discontinuous process. This means that any single assessment in time of their contribution to the sediment cascade is of limited value. To better understand landscape dynamics and the contribution of landslides to slope-channel coupling over time, this paper quantifies connectivity over a time span of 65 years in small, steep headwater catchments in the southern Ruahine Range, New Zealand. Temporal variability in landsliding and slope-channel coupling was assessed using six sets of aerial photography flown between 1946 and 2011, from which over 6900 landslides were mapped in ArcGIS, of which up to 78% connected with the stream network. Estimates of the volume of material delivered by landslide erosion to headwater channels were based on ground survey measurements of selected landslide scars and suggest that between 1946 and 2011 over 5 million m(3) of sediment was delivered from slopes to channels in the 221 km(2) study area. Forest cover is not sufficient to prevent this erosion. These catchment systems are particularly vulnerable to high magnitude storm events, which significantly elevate landslide intensity and enhance sediment delivery, as occurred in the mid-1970s. The legacy of these events remains in these headwater channels, with ongoing consequences for stream and hazard management in and adjacent to the ranges. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据