Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-2022-69
https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-2022-69
 
19 Jan 2023
19 Jan 2023
Status: this preprint is currently under review for the journal ESurf.

Geospatial modelling of large wood supply to rivers: a state-of-the-art model comparison in Swiss mountain river catchments

Nicolas Steeb1, Virginia Ruiz-Villanueva2,3, Alexandre Badoux1, Christian Rickli1, Andrea Mini3, Markus Stoffel2,4,5, and Dieter Rickenmann1 Nicolas Steeb et al.
  • 1Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Zürcherstrasse 111, CH-8903 Birmensdorf, Switzerland
  • 2C-CIA-Climate Change Impacts and Risks in the Anthropocene, Institute for Environmental Sciences (ISE), University of Geneva, CH-1205 Geneva, Switzerland
  • 3Institute of Earth Surface Dynamics (IDYST), University of Lausanne, UNIL Mouline, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
  • 4Dendrolab.ch, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  • 5Department F.-A. Forel for Environmental and Aquatic Sciences, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

Abstract. Different models have been used in science and practice to identify instream large wood (LW) sources and to estimate LW supply to rivers. This contribution reviews the existing models proposed in the last 35 years and compares two of the most recent GIS-based models by applying them to 40 catchments in Switzerland. Both models, which we call here empirical GIS approach (EGA) and Fuzzy-Logic GIS approach (FGA), consider landslides, debris flows, bank erosion, and mobilization of instream wood as recruitment processes and compute volumetric estimates of LW supply based on three different scenarios of process frequency and magnitude. Despite being developed following similar concepts and fed with similar input data, the results from the two models differ markedly. In general, estimated supply wood volumes were larger in each of the scenarios when computed with the FGA and lower with the EGA models. Landslides were the dominant process identified by the EGA, whereas bank erosion was the predominant process according to the FGA model. These differences are discussed and results compared to available observations coming from a unique database. Regardless of the limitations of these models, they proved extremely useful for hazard assessment, and the design of infrastructure and other management strategies.

Nicolas Steeb et al.

Status: open (until 08 Mar 2023)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse

Nicolas Steeb et al.

Nicolas Steeb et al.

Viewed

Total article views: 155 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
123 29 3 155 18 0 0
  • HTML: 123
  • PDF: 29
  • XML: 3
  • Total: 155
  • Supplement: 18
  • BibTeX: 0
  • EndNote: 0
Views and downloads (calculated since 19 Jan 2023)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 19 Jan 2023)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 148 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 148 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 04 Feb 2023
Download
Short summary
Various models have been used in science and practice to estimate how much large wood (LW) can be supplied to rivers. This contribution reviews the existing models proposed in the last 35 years and compares two of the most recent spatially explicit models by applying them to 40 catchments in Switzerland. Differences in modelling results are discussed, and results compared to available observations coming from a unique database.