Archive

Tag Archives: land rehydration

This post is a pictorial example of how to apply P.A. Yeomans’ Keyline-patterning for deep ripping, direct drilling or tree planting. It is meant to hopefully help clarify the subject a little for those who’d like to apply keyline patterning to their landscape in some respect, as I’ve seen and heard a number of incorrect applications and explanations floating around the internet. Nice to have a few clearer digital images too.

For a rundown on other aspects of Keyline design, a good starting point is to check out Abe Collins and Darren Doherty’s article, Keyline Mark IV, or visit Ken Yeomans site, http://www.keyline.com.au, where you can purchase Yeoman’s book, ‘Water for Every Farm’.

Finding the Keypoint and Keyline

If you would like to take advantage of the water distribution benefits offered by keyline pattern cultivation, identifying the keypoint and keyline are critical.

(Click on the first image to see a larger slideshow)

Application of Keyline patterning for:

Cultivation (i.e. Deep ripping, Pasture Cropping)

If you’ve decided to rip a paddock to help ease 100 years of compaction (having properly assessed the suitability of the landscape for this practice), or you’re direct drilling for a Pasture Crop, it doesn’t take a great deal more effort to do so on a keyline pattern. Here’s how I go about it.

Tree Mounds

Utilising keyline patterning for setting out tree rows can be very advantageous for any situation where equidistant rows are favourable, particularly where machinery is utilised in management of the inter-row.  There are two well known proponents of this method: The first is Darren Doherty, (many would have seen the image iconic image taken of the Tree Crop paddock on George Howson’s agroforestry property, Dalpura Farm), Mark Sheppard is another.

Here’s an example of how to set out a 4 lane tree belt using keyline patterning.

The same sort of approach can be taken for larger plantations, but there has to end up being some stub rows, or else the runs can get ridiculously steep and be erosion hazards in their own right.

Before you do any sort of hillside cultivation or earthworks which encourage more water to soak into a hillside, make sure you check the local environmental conditions carefully, particularly the presence of dispersive or slaking soils, saline seepage or the occurrence of slips in the local region. Entire hillsides of topsoil have been lost by ripping in the wrong place.

Disclaimer: Where water flow is concerned there are substantial risks involved. While the information and images we publish are formulated in good faith, with the intention of raising awareness of landscape rehydration processes, the contents do not take into account all the social, environmental and regulatory factors which need to be considered before putting that information into practice.  Accordingly, no person should rely on anything contained within as a substitute for specific professional advice.

Please visit and ‘Like’ our Facebook page to hear about future posts.

Article and Images © Cam Wilson, Earth Integral, 2013

Advertisements

Weeping Willow

“I believe that the presence of willows along streams in agricultural zones can be shown to be almost universally preferable to cleared streams in those zones. I would also suggest that even relatively low-disturbance eucalypt-Acacia dominated riparian vegetation may not have compelling benefits over willows under many circumstances.” (Wilson, 2007)

It would be fair to presume the comment above had been made by Peter Andrews, Natural Sequence Farming originator and outspoken champion for the much maligned willow. In fact, this statement came from Dr Michael Wilson, a stream ecologist who supervised numerous PhD and Masters research projects in Ballarat, Victoria, during the early 2000s, comparing streams flanked by willows; 100 year old, multi-strata, native regrowth, and cleared land with introduced pasture.

The full paper which is linked to at the bottom of this article goes into more detail, but here’s a summary from Wilson (2007) to give you the gist:

– On average, willow-lined streams had a higher retention of sediment (187t more/km) and organic matter (30t more/km) than the native forest.

– “Willow-mediated aggradation in these channels is converting them from incised channels to in-fill channels that are more characteristic of pre-European conditions”.

Litterfall of willow and native-reveg reaches had a similar annual distribution pattern due to the not-so-well-known summer dominant leaf drop habit of many Eucalypts.

– The annual weight of leaves, twigs, bark and flowers was very similar at the willow and native sites.

– With similar annual litterfall amount and distribution, coupled with dense shade patterns in the seasons of maximum productivity, the overall metabolism (and resulting biological oxygen demand) was also very similar.

– Root mats of willows were found to provide beneficial habitat to native fish in the absence of large woody debris.

– There was a disproportionately large association between pool-riffle sequences and willows, formed by the root mats of the willows.

“Pool-riffle sequences are extremely valuable habitat and for that reason alone it is worthwhile (maintaining willows). But it becomes even more valuable when it can contribute to ideas focused on restoring the whole of the floodplain complex in agricultural landscapes.”

“In all the streams we have studied, clearing willows will mobilise sediment, nutrients and organic matter, will make heterotrophic streams more autotrophic, will threaten habitat values for invertebrates and fish and will threaten pool-riffle sequences. Native vegetation planted where willows are cleared will take many decades if not hundreds of years to mature, for the canopy to close over and for significant limb fall to occur.”

View the full article:

Click here to view the full article, Willows: Weeds of Retention 

Wilson, M., 2007. Willows: Weeds of Retention. Proceedings of the 1st Natural Sequence Farming Workshop. ‘Natural Sequence Farming: Defining the Science and the Practice’, Hazell, Peter and Norris, Duane, Bungendore, NSW,  2007. http://www.nsfarming.com/workshop/

Below are some photos and videos taken along a transect of the floodplain on Peter and Kate Marshall’s property. I hope you enjoy these images (taken 36 hrs after a 180mm overnight event), with the creek running crystal clear and spread out across the floodplain on Sunningdale.

To put what you’re seeing in context, most other watercourses in the region are restricted predominantly to the channel due to the erosion and incision caused by past land management practices. Although man-made, the hydrology in this landscape is much closer to the way it operated pre Euro settlement, in an intact chain of ponds or swampy meadow system. The noise of the frogs in the videos is testament to the significant aquatic and wetland habitat which has also been created.

Photo locations taken across a transect of the floodplain at Sunningdale

Locations of photos taken across a transect of the floodplain at Sunningdale. (For some scale, the image is 350m wide, and the main channel located at the meandering tree-line, flowing from bottom to top).

To flick through a larger slideshow of the images, click on any of the thumbnails below

Short video locations taken across a transect of the floodplain at Sunningdale

Locations of short videos taken across a transect of the floodplain at Sunningdale

Finally, another interesting little clip is of the ground literally bubbling as the subsurface flow rehydrates the gravel and sediments below the surface. This stored moisture benefits the land’s production and drought proofing resilience, while also providing a more sustained base-flow to the landscape below.

See the articles tagged as Key floodplain processes for more information on what is being achieved from a landscape perspective.

Please visit and ‘Like’ our Facebook page to hear about future posts.

Disclaimer: Where water flow is concerned there are substantial risks involved. While the information and images we publish are formulated in good faith, with the intention of raising awareness of landscape rehydration processes, the contents do not take into account all the social, environmental and regulatory factors which need to be considered before putting that information into practice.  Accordingly, no person should rely on anything contained within as a substitute for specific professional advice.

Article and Images © Cam Wilson, Earth Integral, 2013

A stroll, post flood

A stroll, post flood

Increasing atmospheric CO2 levels during the industrial age have gained a lot of exposure in the link with a changing climate. An area which has received far less attention are the significant changes to both local and global water cycles and vegetation patterns during the same period of time.

Water For the Recovery of the Climate – A New Water Paradigm (Kravcik et al, 2007) explores the science behind the very direct links between vegetation and both temperature and precipitation.

It’s a read I highly recommend and it can be downloaded by clicking on the title in the paragraph above. So that the time-poor can get the gist, I have included a number of the diagrams from the paper in a slideshow at the bottom of this article.

Here’s a very simple summary as well:

1) At any given time or place on the planet, there’s a certain amount of solar energy hitting the surface of the earth. That energy can be put to two very different uses.

The distribution of solar energy on drained land and on a landscape saturated with water (Kravcik et al, 2007)

At one extreme, a bare soil (or concrete, steel, etc), the majority of that energy is absorbed and re-radiated as (sensible) heat, warming the local environment.

At the other extreme, a saturated wetland, the majority of that energy is utilised by plants for photosynthesis, with the resulting transpiration drawing (latent) heat from the surrounding area.

So the sun’s energy is used to either power a landscape-scale radiant heater (above left) or a landscape-scale evaporative air conditioner (above right).

2) Of the average 720mm of precipitation that falls on land, the input from the sea is about 310 mm (the large water cycle). Hence, the land provides the larger part of its own precipitation (410 mm) from its own land-based evaporation (the small water cycle).

Small water cycle

Kravcik et al (2007)

Therefore, a drained and dehydrated landscape, coinciding with relatively shallow rooted plants (ie conventional western agriculture) ultimately means less rain over the land, in a (not so) positive feedback loop.

A landscape which is primed to accept whatever rainfall or overland flow that arrives and to send that moisture through actively growing plants, means more rain over the land in a (more) positive feedback loop.

More soil moisture = more evapotranspiration = more precipitation = more soil moisture etc

The radiant heater mentioned previously means less rain; the evaporative air conditioner, more.

In closing, a couple of short paragraphs from the paper:

“The renewal of the domination of the small water cycle, which is advantageous for humanity, vegetation and the land, depends on the renewal of the functional plant cover of a territory and water surfaces in a country.”

“With sensible management of water and vegetation we can curb climatic change on the local level; if we can act in the same way across larger areas, perhaps we can expect a tempering of global climate change.”

We’re in the business of landscape-scale air conditioners, so if you’re interested, please get in touch. Or, visit and ‘Like’ our Facebook page to hear about future posts.

 

Reference:

Kravcik M., Pokorny J., Kohutiar J., Kovac M., Toth, E, 2007. Water For the Recovery of the Climate – A New Water Paradigm

Click here to download a pdf of the paper

Click on the images for a slideshow of the diagrams from the paper.

For those who haven’t seen it, the following is a series of You-tube clips with Peter Andrews interviewed quite skilfully by Martin Royds at Baramul Stud. These clips, put together in 2007 by Paul Cochrane and the Natural Sequence Association, are one of the best overviews of Peter’s observations and hypothesis.  

Peter Andrews and Martin Royds discuss a leaky weir at the Natural Sequence Farming demonstration at Barramul Stud

Peter Andrews and Martin Royds discuss a leaky weir at the Natural Sequence Farming demonstration at Barramul Stud

(The following clips are placed in the same sequence as they appeared on the original DVD)

Peter Andrews at Baramul Stud – Introduction

Peter Andrews at Baramul Stud – Rock Walls

Peter Andrews at Baramul Stud – Weeds Pt1

Peter Andrews at Baramul Stud – Weeds Pt2

Peter Andrews at Baramul Stud – Deenergise

Peter Andrews at Baramul Stud – Floodplains

Peter Andrews at Baramul Stud – Wetlands 1

Peter Andrews at Baramul Stud – Wetlands 2

Peter Andrews at Baramul Stud – Tall Plants

Peter Andrews at Baramul Stud – Runnels

Peter Andrews at Baramul Stud – End of the flow

Peter Andrews at Baramul Stud – Erosion

In some locations with deeply incised gullies, both the goal of channel-floodplain reconnection and the goal of lateral floodplain rehydration are pretty much out of the question, at least in any way that will benefit most species on the floodplain (other than deep rooted trees).

One such example is the Natural Sequence Farming demonstration on the home farm at Mulloon Creek Natural Farms. To achieve either of the above goals would require a large engineered structure, which in a named perennial stream doesn’t sit too well with the existing regulations (extraction is achievable but would require a costly irrigation licence).

Currently, despite regulation exemptions which allowed some of the structures to already be quite large, the water level still remains 4-7m below much of the floodplain. This results in little benefit to the vegetation on the floodplain, but I believe the works have still been a success in a number of ways, one of which is setting the natural repair processes in action. (See the Mulloon Institute website for details of the research that’s been conducted)

Even during a 1 in 50 year rain event, the flow remains well below the surrounding floodplain

The locations where chains of ponds and swampy meadows existed in abundance at the time of Euro settlement, such as Mulloon Creek, are known as ‘cut and fill landscapes’.

The ‘fill’ phase referred to in ‘cut and fill’ is relatively well understood. As Peter Andrews has popularised, dense wetland vegetation choked the discontinuous channels, slowing the water flow, trapping sediment and then binding it within vertically growing root mats.

The ‘cut’ phase isn’t quite so well known. Although these systems could remain stable for thousands of years, they weren’t permanent. A natural disturbance could set a period of degradation into action, with erosion gullies cutting through the floodplain sediments. Eventually, the ‘cut’ phase stabilised and the ‘fill’ process would begin again (Johnston and Brierley, 2006).

This rebuilding phase has in fact begun in some places. Zierholz et al (2001) wrote a great paper on the process, outlining the natural establishment of instream wetlands. In some places, their study found that dense reedbeds had accumulated up to 20 years worth of sediment from the associated catchment. That is, the floor of the gully is aggrading, nutrients and sediment are being held, valuable wetland is being created, erosion is being prevented, and the main reason: lots of reeds have established.

Photo of a typical instream wetland. Up to 20 years of sediment has been trapped and stored in some tributaries in the Jugiong creek catchment, NSW (Zierholz et al. 2001)

The fine sediment has accumulated since the establishment of the instream wetlands. (Zierholz et al. 2001)

On Mulloon Creek, there are sections which before the NSF works were completed were either cut down to bedrock or basically gravel deserts, and had been that way since the degradation began, which likely occured in the early to mid 19th Century (Hazel et al. 2003). Those same sections now look very similar to the photo from the paper above.

Instream wetland forming as a result of Peter Andrews’ Natural Sequence Farming demonstration at Mulloon Creek Natural Farms. This site was down to bedrock before the works began.

What’s been the trigger? As they say, just add water:

A side profile of an incised gully, predominantly dry in between rain events

Unimpeded flow carries sediment through the incised channel

A grade control structure (or leaky weir) is constructed, causing a pool to form behind

The main flow slows as it hits the water backed up by the structure, causing sediment to deposit (halve the slope and your halve the energy)

Steel post markers put in place by Charlie Maslin on ‘Gunningrah’ show that 1.5m of sediment has been deposited at the rear of this pool. As a result of the new bar, a pool is forming in the tributary to the left of the photo

A new bar begins to form, holding moisture for longer and allowing stabilising vegetation to establish.

This bar which has formed as a result of Dimity Davy’s structure downstream has begun to stabilise with vegetation. With the exclusion of stock, Cumbungi (Typha) and Phragmites reeds are beginning to establish.

In time, retained moisture and sediment allows riparian vegetation to establish

Dense reeds are establishing at Peter’s Pond at the Mulloon Creek demonstration as a result of the pond formed by Peter’s (leaky) weir

Reeds themselves trap sediment and moisture and the bed of the channel begins to aggrade (opposite of degrade)

Universal process: Add a ‘structure’ to a gutter (a bit of spilt asphalt) and a few weeds growing from cracks and it even happens there.

Fornicating worms in the same gutter

As Craig Sponholtz of Dryland Solutions in New Mexico puts it, “This type of restoration work uses earthworks to create a foothold for natural processes. The structures then get assimilated into the ecosystem as natural healing processes take over.”

That pretty much sums up our work, so if you’re interested in helping to set nature’s repair processes into action, please contact us to discuss our design, consultancy and implementation options.

Please visit and ‘Like’ our Facebook page to hear about future posts.

Disclaimer: Where water flow is concerned there are substantial risks involved. While the information and images we publish are formulated in good faith, with the intention of raising awareness of landscape rehydration processes, the contents do not take into account all the social, environmental and regulatory factors which need to be considered before putting that information into practice.  Accordingly, no person should rely on anything contained within as a substitute for specific professional advice.

Article and Images © Cam Wilson, Earth Integral, 2012

References

Hazell, D., Osborne, W. and Lindemayer, D. 2003. Impact of post-European stream change on frog habitat: southeastern Australia. Biodiversity and Conservation, 12: 301–320, 2003.

Johnston, P. and Brierley, G. 2006. Late Quaternary river evolution of floodplain pockets along Mulloon Creek, New South Wales, Australia. The Holocene 16 (5): 661-674.\

Zierholz, C., Prosser, I., Fogarty, P. and Rustomji, P. 2001. In-stream wetlands and their significance for channel filling and the catchment sediment budget, Jugiong Creek, New South Wales. Geomorphology, 38221-235.