Guidelines for

Monitoring and assessment of wind erosion at site level

Prepared for:
Arab Center for the Study of Arid Zones and Dry Lands (ACSAD)
Damascus, Syria

By:

Dhruba Pikha Shrestha

May 2008

International Institute for Geo-information Science and Earth Observation (ITC)

P. O. Box 6, 7500 AA Enschede, the Netherlands
2
 3

Executive summary

Land degradation is a worldwide issue. The estimated surface area affected by human-induced
soil degradation is 24 per cent of the inhabited land areas (Oldeman, 1994; Oldeman et al.,
1991). Of various degradation processes soil erosion by action of wind plays an important role in
semi arid and arid environment. The causative factors are the dryness of the environment, soil
properties and vegetation cover. Wind erodes finer sediments by a process called deflation. The
sediments are transported by saltation and/or suspension. The wind transported sediments can
also wear away rocks. This process is called abrasion. When there is selective removal of finer
sediments by wind, there remains surface coarser sediments which are called desert pavements.
The principal depositional landform of wind action is dune formation. Depending on sediments
supply, wind characteristics and vegetation cover several types of dune formation are possible.

For monitoring and assessing wind erosion the GLASOD approach would be very much useful.
For assessing erosion features air photo interpretation technique helps in delineating accurately
the type, extent and severity of wind erosion patterns. In case of unavailability of recent air
photos, a rapidly deployable and effective low cost method can be applied to detect and assess
wind erosion damage in its early stages. Photographs can be taken from a small aircraft by
carefully planning flight lines to cover the study area. If photos are not digital, they can be
scanned and converted into raster data format to be used in a GIS system. For geo-referencing
the photos ground control points can be taken using a GPS receiver. Satellite data will be useful
to map large areas and also to derive indices useful to map erosion hazard. In addition, the
combination of remote sensing data and digital elevation model helps generate stereoscopic view
of the area which can be used for delineating erosion features at large areas efficiently.

For applying wind erosion model, one has to clearly define the objective of assessment and also
to check if required data for running the model is available. A suitable model can then be
selected. In addition, it is very important that field data is available for calibration and validation
of the model results.
 4

The case study included towards the end of the guidelines is on wind erosion feature mapping
and monitoring, based on the work of Hennemann and Nagelhout (2002). The idea is that in case
of unavailability of conventional aerial photos or if they are too old, small format aerial
photography (SFAP) can be taken aboard a small aircraft and used to map and monitor erosion
features. The case study consists of 2 parts: the analysis of the performance of SFAP and the
analysis and assessment of wind erosion. The use of SFAP proved in spite of some minor
operational drawbacks to be quite promising in terms of geometric accuracy, visual quality, cost
effectiveness and above all timeliness. Generation and application of SFAP allowed for a
detailed assessment of the current erosion status followed by a spatio-temporal GIS analysis of
wind erosion patterns and trends in relation to key environmental factors.
 5

I. Introduction

Desertification is the degradation of land in arid, semi arid and dry sub-humid areas resulting
primarily from human activities and influenced by climatic variations. It occurs predominantly,
but not exclusively, in semi-arid areas (Eswaran et al., 2001). A major impact of desertification
is loss of biodiversity and loss of productive capacity of land. It is also associated with change of
vegetation e.g. from perennial grasses to one dominated by shrubs. Primary reasons for
desertification are overgrazing, over cultivation, deforestation, overdrafting of groundwater and
global climate change. While drought is a contributing factor, the main causes are related to
mans overexploitation of the environment.

In drier environment land degradation by wind action is very crucial. Winds may erode, transport
and deposit materials, and are effective agents in regions with sparse vegetation cover and a large
supply of unconsolidated sediments. Wind erosion process, also known as Aeolian process
involves the removal of loose and fine-grained particles including organic matter from the
surface of Earth, their transportation by various processes, and finally the deposition of the
particles. The effect of wind erosion is fertility depletion in agricultural fields leading to
reduction in crop harvest and desertification in the long run. The offsite effects of wind erosion
can be accumulation of sand and dust on the fields, drainage ditches, farm machinery, surface
water, infrastructures such as roads, railways, buildings etc. In a global extent, wind erosion
accounts for about 28 % of area affected by land degradation (Oldeman, 1994).

Wind action in erosion, transport and subsequent deposition of fine particles has been recognized
as an important environmental problem (Goossens and Riksen, 2004). Coarse and finer particles
enter the atmosphere through various mechanisms, affecting a large number of physical and
chemical processes and consequently the natural environment. In drier regions of the world this
has been major environmental issue. Wind action not only affects erosion and deposition of soil
particles but the atmospheric dust also causes environmental pollution. The concentration of dust
in the atmosphere also influences the climate. The short term effects of high dust concentration
in the atmosphere is reduction of visibility, this is especially the case during dust storms. If
 6

pesticides are used in agricultural fields this can be harmful to the surrounding areas. The long
term effects are due to the transportation of finer dust particles which may carry organic matter,
heavy metals, pesticides and fertilizers long distances from their source. This will have negative
effects on human health. The effects of fine airborne particles on environmental pollution have
been a subject of study, in the field of both rain and water pollution. It is reported that fine
atmospheric dust affects various aspects of human health (Griffin et al., 2001; Smith and Lee,
2003). In addition, the role of fine dust particles in the atmosphere in climate change can not be
underestimated. This will certainly be the topic of many researchers.

II. General setting of wind action in drylands

II. 1 Processes and types

Like water, wind also erodes sediment more readily. Wind is also an agent of sediment transport
which moves soil particles by rolling them along the surface, by the processes known as saltation
and/or suspension. The finest particles are suspended in the air and carried long distances.
Saltation is a process by which sheets of sand (size between 50 500) is raised by violent wind
and is transported few meters over smooth surfaces, leaving sheets of sand on the ground or
small mounds of sand trapped by plant (Figure 1). These sand sheets can cause serious crop
damage.

Wind exercises a pressure on solid particles in repose. This pressure is exerted above the centre
of gravity on the surface exposed to wind and is opposed by a friction centred on the base of the
particles. Like water, wind erodes sediment more readily than solid rock. Abrasion is a process
by which wind transported sediment can wear away at rock. Wind abrasion is a sort of natural
sandblasting, very similar to milling by sand-laden waves. Abrasion during dust storms is
capable of eroding rocks. Since wind-borne sand is seldom lifted far off the ground, wind
abrasion is generally a near surface process.

Deflation is the removal of unconsolidated sediment by wind action. In this process light and
 7

finer particles of soil (less than 100 diameter, e.g. clay, silt and fine sand including organic
matter) are carried away in suspension (Figure 2). This dust is sucked up by wind and carried
several kilometres and then dispersed as a dry mist, or it may travel several hundred kilometres
as a dust cloud. Deflation is most active where winds are unobstructed and the sediments
exposed unprotected by vegetative cover.

Figure 1: Sand movement by a process called saltation

 8

Figure 2: Fine soil particles in suspension

Wind related products are called eolian. Eolian sediments are well sorted in terms of size since it
is related to wind velocity. Winds selectively move finer particles; as they slow down they drop
coarser particles first. When there is selective removal of finer sediments by wind and seasonal
surface runoff, there remains surface sediments of residual coarser materials called desert
pavement (Figure 3). This desert pavement then protects underlying finer sediments from further
erosion. Desert pavement surface, once established, can be very stable. It is also known as
deflation armour.
 9

Figure 3: Desert pavement

The principal eolian depositional landform is the dune, a low mound or ridge of sediment. Dunes
begin to form when sediment-bearing winds encounter an obstacle that slows them down. With
reduced velocity, the wind begins to drop the coarsest or heaviest fraction of its load. The
deposition, in turn, creates a larger obstacle creating a windbreak, causing more deposition in a
self reinforcing cycle. Dunes can have height of 3 100 m. Dunes are not a permanent or static
objects. Once formed, they tend to migrate if wind continue to blow predominantly from a
single direction.

There are several types of dunes, depending on sediment supply, wind characteristics and
vegetation. The transverse dunes are elongated perpendicular to the prevailing wind direction.
Many of these dunes have a crescent shape, with arms of horns pointing downward. They are
called barchan dunes (Figure 4, Figure 5). Barchan dunes are known to form in regions with
limited sediment supply and unidirectional wind regimes (Daniell and Hughes, 2007).
 10

Figure 4: Barchan dune

Figure 5: Barchan dunes as seen on a satellite image.

The longitudinal dunes occur where sediment supply is limited and winds are relatively strong.
These dunes are elongated and parallel to the direction of wind flow (Figure 6).
 11

Figure 6: The parallel longitudinal dunes

II. 2 Impacts of wind erosion

Effect of wind erosion can be on-site as well as off-site. The on-site effects are loss of topsoil
and plant nutrients, which have direct impact on crop growth. Soils become less productive
because they contain less nutrients and less capacity to retain water. A field experiment
conducted in the effect of wind erosion and sand accumulation in inner Mongolia shows that
long term wind erosion could result in significant soil coarseness, infertility and dryness (Zhao et
al., 2006). Abrasion caused by flying soil particles does considerable damage to crops and to
young plants in particular. In addition to this, evaporation from plant leaves is accelerated by
 12

wind, restricting wheat growth. The off-site effects are due to sand cover on fertile agricultural
areas which affects crop growth and eventual decrease of harvest. In number of situations there
will be soil textural changes resulting in decrease of clay particles and reduction in the ability of
soil to conserve water. In a study of the effect of wind erosion on soil properties in China, similar
results are reported: decrease of clay content and nutrient reduction in the soil e.g. decrease of
organic matter, nitrogen and phosphorus contents (Jian et al., 1992). Also infrastructures can be
covered by over-blown sand which will be very nuisance (Figure 7). In extreme cases the land
becomes useless because of thick sand cover (Figure 8). Fine dust in the atmosphere will have
environmental problem causing health hazard to human beings.

Figure 7: Sand covering part of a main road in Priai, Cape Verde

 13

Figure 8: Over blowing with dune formation, case of extreme wind action

II. 3 Distribution

3.1 Global context

Desertification is a worldwide issue. It affects all the continents of the world (Figure 9).
However, the present situation shows that it is predominantly affecting large parts of the world
between the latitudes 15 35o N, which are relatively hotter and drier. But wind action not only
limits to this zone, large part of Australia, Mongolia, China, Europe, United States of America
and many countries in south America are affected. In drier and open environment where there are
no obstructions soil degradation by wind action is very crucial. After water erosion, wind action
in erosion is very important degradation process. The global estimates of area affected by wind
erosion are in the order of 5.49 million km2 (Table 1) which occurs mainly in drier regions.
 14

Table 1: Estimates of the global extent (in million km2) of land degradation (Oldeman, 1994)
Type Light Moderate Strong +extreme Total
Water erosion 3.43 5.27 2.24 10.94
Wind erosion 2.69 2.54 0.26 5.49
Chemical degradation 0.93 1.03 0.43 2.39
Physical degradation 0.44 0.27 0.12 0.83
Total 7.49 9.11 3.05 19.65

Figure 9: Desertification vulnerability (Eswaran et al., 2001)

3.2 Arab context

The Arab world (Figure 10, Table 2) stretches over an area of 13551029 Km, divided in the
Arab Maghreb (Algeria, Libya, Morocco, Mauritania and Tunisia), the Arab Mashreq (Jordan,
Lebanon, Syria Arab Republic and Iraq), the Central region (Egypt, Sudan, Djibouti and
Somalia), and the Arabian Peninsula (Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab
Emirates, Oman and Yemen) (ACSAD, 2007). With the exception of Bahrain, Kuwait, Lebanon
and Syria population density is less than 100 persons per Km2 (Table 2).
 15

Apart from Yemen and some areas in Jordan and Syria, annual rainfall in most of the area is less
than 400 mm. Also vegetation cover is sparse. The analysis of the satellite vegetation images
(NDVI images) of the Arab World shows negative change of vegetation cover during the period
1999-2005 in all the countries of the Arabian Peninsula (Table 3) (ACSAD, 2007). Similar trend
is reported in Libya, Djibouti and Lebanon, indicating the threat of land degradation problem in
many Arab countries.

Table 2: Arab world (ACSAD, 2007; UNEP and Leauge_of_Arab_States, 2004)

Country Surface area Population Pop. density Annual rain

(Km2) (persons/Km2) (mm)
United Arab Emirates 82880 4496000 54 65
Jordan 92300 5703000 62 150-600
Bahrain 665 727000 1093 80
Tunisia 163610 10102000 62 NA
Algeria 2381740 32854000 14 250
Djibouti 23000 793000 34 30
Saudi Arabia 1960582 24573000 13 50-100
Sudan 2505810 36233000 14 NA
Syria 185180 19043000 103 NA
Somalia 637657 8228000 13 50 200
Iraq 437072 28807000 66 300 1200
Oman 212460 3100300 15 50 - 100
Palestine 62206 NA NA 150 - 300
Qatar 11437 813000 71 75
Kuwait 17820 2687000 151 31 - 318
Lebanon 10400 3577000 344 NA
Libya 1759540 5853000 3 NA
Egypt 1001450 74033000 74 40 75
Morocco 446550 31478000 70 NA
Mauritania 1030700 3069000 3 NA
Yemen 527970 20975000 54 1000

Soil degradation by wind action is thus common in most of the countries. In Lebanon, however,
water erosion seems to be the main issue. In the map of the global assessment of human induced
soil degradation (GLASOD) the area covered by active dune formation is quite extensive in
Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, part of Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman and part of
United Arab Emirates. Similarly, in considerable areas of these countries wind action is
 16

responsible for the removal of topsoil resulting in nutrient depletion leading to desertification. It
is reported that desertification in north-western Jordan is taking place through overgrazing,
erosion, soil fertility depletion and decreased productivity. Erosion by wind and water is
considered to be the major cause of land degradation in Jordan (Khresat et al., 1998). The soils
contain little organic matter and their alkaline reactions reduce the availability of phosphorous
and macronutrients and consequently lead to very low crop yields. In Syria evidence of wind
erosion is widespread in the drylands as shown in a case study from the Khanasser valley (Masri
et al., 2003). Similarly in the Sudan wind erosion is the most widespread soil degradation type,
especially in the arid zones (Ayoub, 1998).

Figure 10: The Arab extent (ACSAD, 2007)

 17

Table 3: Distribution of positive and negative vegetation change during 1999-2005 in the Arab
countries (ACSAD, 2007)

II. 4 Causative factors

The main causative factor is the dryness of the environment. In areas where annual rain is less
than 600 mm there are more than 6 months of dry months without rain. Potential evapo-
transpiration rate is also very high in the dry regions (more than 2000 mm). In these cases soils
are often bare for long period because of lack of water in agricultural areas. If there is strong
wind the chance is much higher that there will be erosion.

Other factor is related to soil properties. If soil particle size is dominantly between 10 and 100
microns in size, it is very vulnerable. Clayey soils are more resistant and coarse sand particles are
too heavy to be removed by wind. Soil organic matter content is equally important since it helps
in maintaining good soil structure. When soil is moist it is also resistant since it helps in
 18

cohesion. Vegetation cover is equally important. If the area is covered by vegetation it protects
the soil against wind action in the same way it protects against the impact of raindrops.

III. Methodology

III.1 Monitoring wind erosion

For monitoring wind erosion it is necessary to assess current status of the problem and assess risk
which may occur in future. Assessment of the current status reflects what has happened to date.
It is assessed by direct observation and expert judgement. To predict a potential situation that
may occur in future a risk assessment can be made. Risk assessment is generally made based on
modelling. For mapping purposes various techniques can be applied such as the use of remote
sensing techniques and the use of models.

For monitoring wind erosion the approach described in the global assessment of human induced
soil degradation (GLASOD) (Oldeman et al., 1991) will be very suitable. In the GLASOD
methodology three wind erosion features are recognised: loss of topsoil (Et), terrain deformation
(Ed) and over-blowing (Eo). Loss of topsoil by wind action is a widespread phenomenon in arid
and semi-arid environment. In general coarse textured soils are more susceptible to wind erosion
than fine textured soils. In (semi-)arid environment natural wind erosion is often difficult to
distinguish from human-induced wind erosion, but natural wind erosion is often aggravated by
human activities. Terrain deformation by wind erosion is a much less widespread type of
degradation than loss of topsoil. It is defined as the uneven displacement of soil material by wind
action and leading to deflation hollows and dunes. It can be considered as an extreme form of
loss of topsoil, with which it usually occurs in combination. Overblowing is defined as the
coverage of the land surface by wind-carried particles. It is an off-site effect of the wind erosion
types mentioned above. When it is at extreme case the whole area is then be covered by sand.
Over blowing may occur in the same mapping unit as those other types, or in adjacent units. It
may influence structures like roads, buildings and waterways but it can also cause damage to
 19

agricultural land. Stereoscopic air photo interpretation can be used to delineate boundaries of
erosion features.

In addition to mapping wind erosion features degree of degradation can be assessed. The degree
of degradation can be categorized into 4 classes as follows: (1) Light: if the terrain has somewhat
reduced agricultural suitability, but it is suitable for use in local farming systems. Restoration to
full productivity is possible by modifications of the management system. Original biotic
functions are still largely intact. (2) Moderate, if the terrain has greatly reduced agricultural
productivity but is still suitable for use in local farming systems. Major improvements are
required to restore productivity. Original biotio functions are partially destroyed. (3) Strong, if
the terrain is not reclaimable at farm level. Major engineering works are required for terrain
restoration. Original biotic functions are largely destroyed and (4) Extreme, if the terrain is not
reclaimable and beyond restoration. Original biotic functions are fully destroyed.

It is also useful to indicate whether the degradation type recognised in a mapping unit
(geomorphic mapping unit?) occurred (1) infrequently (up to 5% of the unit), (2) common (6-
10% being affected), (3) frequent (11-25% being affected), (4) very frequent (26 50% being
affected) or (5) dominant (more than 50% affected). In addition, it would be also useful to
indicate the causative factors. Causative factors could be over grazing, over exploitation of land,
etc.

Mapping symbol could be combination of alphanumeric letters e.g. Eo2.3g (Eo = Overblowing,
2 = moderate degree of degradation, 3 = frequent or 11-25% of mapping unit affected, and g =
overgrazing as being the cause of accelerated erosion).

III.2 Assessment of wind erosion

2.1 Use of Aerial Photography

Assessment of wind erosion can be made based on image interpretation. Air photos can be
 20

analysed stereoscopically to delineate areas of wind erosion features e.g. areas affected by loss of
topsoil, active dune formation, areas affected by over blowing, etc.

If aerial photos are too old the new wind erosion features may not be possible to map. In such a
situation a rapidly deployable and effective low cost method to detect and assess wind erosion
damage in it early stages should be an alternative method. With such a method one should be
able to:
- accurately establish the type, spatial extent, severity and spatio-temporal trends of the
wind erosion pattern in the source areas;
- analyse the nature of the underlying erosion processes and causal factors involved;
- achieve the above within acceptable geometric accuracy limits and with due
effectiveness and efficiency in terms of manpower, cost and time.

One of the alternate and rapid methods of assessing wind erosion damage is the use of small-
format aerial photography (SFAP). SFAP has proven to be valuable instrument for various
resource inventory studies such as in forestry, rangeland mapping, etc. Tueller et al. (1988) used
SFAP to measure changes in rangeland vegetation in north-eastern Nevada, USA using
helicopter-borne 35 mm aerial photography. Hennemann and Nagelhout (2004) applied SFAP in
Naivasha area in the Rift valley, Kenya as a tool to develop wind erosion detection and
assessment method. In the Naivasha area in Kenya the SFAP photographs were taken with a 35
mm Minolta camera from a small Cessna 182 aircraft in the year 2000; a total of 130
photographs were shot in 4 flight lines to cover the study area. Sufficient ground control points
were taken to rectify the photos. The photos were scanned and imported as raster data in a GIS
system (ILWIS 3.4). Using old aerial photos from 1991 of the area erosion severity maps of the
two different periods, general trends and rates of land degradation for the period 1991-2000
could be calculated and assessed. The use of small-format aerial photography applied in the
Naivasha area, Kenya shows that an up-to-date colour photo cover of the entire study area can be
generated at a scale of 1:5,000 at a reasonable cost and that erosion severity map can be
generated quickly.
 21

2.2 Use of satellite remote sensing techniques

Satellite image interpretation can be done monoscopically on colour composites at relevant scale.
For making false colour composites the band combinations of Landsat TM band 4 (red), TM
band 5 (green) and TM band 3 (blue) is commonly used. In case of ASTER and SPOT image the
ideal combination would be band 3 (red), band 2 (green) and band 1 (blue). Once the colour
composites are made interpretation can be carried out for wind erosion features following
GLASOD approach.

If stereo pair of satellite data is available e.g. SPOT stereo pair or ASTER stereo pair
interpretation can be carried out using stereoscope or directly on compute screen. Stereo pair can
be also generated if digital terrain model (DTM) or contour data is available. To generate
stereoscopic image from the combination of satellite image and DTM, a GIS system e.g. ILWIS
can be applied. The procedure is explained in detail as follows:

For stereoscopic interpretation of satellite image a stereo pair is necessary. In case of

unavailability of stereo pair (e.g. stereo SPOT image or stereo ASTER image) digital elevation
model (DEM) can be also used. For this purpose a GIS software is indispensible. The ITC
developed GIS software (ILWIS 3.4) can be freely downloaded from
http://52north.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=131&Itemid=155. ILWIS is a
remote sensing and GIS software which integrates image, vector and thematic data in one unique
and powerful package on the desktop. ILWIS delivers a wide range of features including
import/export, digitizing, editing, analysis and display of data, as well as production of quality
maps. ILWIS software is renowned for its functionality, user-friendliness, and has established a
wide user community over the years of its development.

In ILWIS the stereo pair from DTM operation creates a stereo pair from a single raster image
and a Digital Terrain Model of the area (Figure 11). This stereo pair can be viewed on the
computer screen (split screen mode) with a stereoscope (screen-scope) or as an anaglyph using
red-green or red-blue glasses (Figure 12). To create a stereo pair in ILWIS following steps need
 22

to be followed:

a. The satellite image has to be first imported into ILWIS format. The image will have to be geo-
referenced selecting an appropriate coordinate system. The parameters required for geo-
referencing can be derived from the topographic map of the area. The DTM has also to be
imported into ILWIS format which should have the same geo-reference. DTM can be also
created from digitized contour lines by interpolation. It is also possible to use an existing DTM
such as the SRTM DTM or an ASTER DTM.

Figure 11: Generation of stereo pair from DTM and Landsat TM data

b. In ILWIS use the Stereo Pair from DTM option from the operations list and select the geo-
referenced raster image (satellite image). Also select the DTM of the same area as the image. It
 23

is important that image and DTM have (approx.) the same resolution. The operation will create a
stereo pair which can be displayed and viewed using a special stereoscope which can be mounted
on computer screen. The stereo pair can be also displayed as an anaglyph for which red-green or
red-blue glasses will be necessary to view the image. Detail information on various options for
creating stereo pair from DTM in ILWIS is given in the help function of ILWIS. This is shown
in the Table 4.

Apart from visual interpretation for wind erosion features, satellite data can be also used in
computing vegetation canopy estimation which can be used for wind erosion hazard assessment.
Canopy cover is generally computed using Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI). A
linear function to derive USLE C- factor in a case study in Southern France with the resulting
equation of C = 0.431 (0.805xNDVI) is described by de Jong (1994). For estimation of canopy
cover exponential function seems to give better result than linear function (Van der Knijf et al.,
1999). Exponential function is given by:

( NDVI )

( NDVI )
C=e (1)

where and are the parameter determining the shape of the curve with constants 2 and 1 used
for and respectively.
 24

Figure 12: Stereo anaglyph (a) and image interpretation based on the anaglyph (b) (Shrestha et al., 2005)
 25

Table 4: Various options for creating stereo pair in ILWIS

Input raster map: Select an input raster map, i.e. a single scanned aerial photograph, a satellite image, or a
normal raster map. The map should use the Image domain, any other value domain, the
Color domain, or the Picture domain. Open the list box and select the desired input map, or
drag a raster map directly from a Catalog into this box.

On the commmand line, there are no restrictions on the domain type of the input map.

DTM: Select an input Digital Elevation Model (DTM) (raster value map).

If the DTM does not cover the entire area of the input raster map, then the parts of the input
raster map for which no DTM value can be found will appear black in the output stereo
pair.

A Digital Terrain Model is also known as a Digital Elevation Model (DEM).

Tip: It is highly recommended to have the Interpolation check box selected in the Properties
sheet of your DTM.

Look angle: Specify a value between 0 and 90 for the total angle of 'projection' of the two output raster
maps which together will form the output stereo pair. For more information, refer to Stereo
pair from DTM : functionality.

Reference height: Specify a height value (of your DTM) that should appear at 'ground' level of your monitor
when inspecting the stereo pair. Larger height values in the DTM will appear 'outside of
your monitor'; smaller height values in the DTM will appear 'inside your monitor'.

Look modus: Select how the Look angle should be divided over the two output raster maps that will form
the stereo pair.

Left: The left output raster map will be 'projected' using the total Look angle; the right output
raster map will be 'projected' vertically.

Both: The left and the right output raster map will each be 'projected' using half the Look angle.

Right: The left output raster map will be 'projected' vertically; the right output raster map will be
'projected' using the total Look angle.

Resample modus: Select the method to resample the input raster map into two output raster maps which
together will form the output stereo pair.

Fast: For quick resampling. Resampling is input-driven (the estimated position of output pixels is
less accurate) and biased nearest neighbour.

Accurate: For slow but accurate resampling. Resampling is output-driven just as the Resample
operation; value maps and maps with the Color domain are resampled using bilinear
interpolation; other maps are resampled using nearest neighbour.

Output stereo pair: Type a name for the stereo pair. The (resampled) output raster maps of the stereo pair will
also obtain this name, followed by _Left or _Right.
 26

2.3 Application of model

Modelling wind erosion started in the early sixties for semi-quantitative estimation of soil losses.
Wind erosion modelling has been mainly semi-empirical and focussed mainly on on-site effects.
The Wind Erosion Equation (Woodruff and Siddoway, 1965) is a good example. It has been
applied in several locations (Klik, 2008; Panebianco and Buschiazzo, 2008; Wassif et al., 2002).
Klik (2008) reports that soil erosion assessment by wind erosion equation linked to a GIS
enables the designation of potential risk areas and that the results seem to be reasonable. The
Wind Erosion Equation (WEQ) calculates potential average annual erosion rates as follows:

E = f ( I , K , C , L, V ) (2)

Where,
E is the potential annual soil loss (t ha-1 yr -1),
I is the soil erodibility, expressed as potential annual soil loss in (t ha-1 yr -1) from a wide,
unsheltered isolated field with bare, smooth, level, loose and non-crusted surface,
K is the surface roughness factor which is a measure of the effect of ridges made by tillage
and planting implements, or other means of creating systematically spaced ridges.
Ridges absorb and deflect wind energy and trap moving soil particles.
C is an index of climatic erosivity, specifically wind-speed and surface soil moisture. The
factor for any given location is based on long-term climatic data and is expressed as a
percentage of the C factor,
L is the unsheltered, weighted travel distance (in m) along the prevailing wind direction,
V is the equivalent vegetation cover expressed by relating the kind, amount, and
orientation of vegetative material to its equivalent in kg ha-1 of small grain residue in
reference condition (SGe).

The equation includes some functional relationships which are not linear mathematical
calculations.
 27

Soil erodibility factor I

The soil erodibility factor I is related to the percentage of non-erodible surface soil aggregates
larger than 0.84 mm in diameter which can be determined by dry sieving method (Chepil, 1942).
Based on the soil texture 8 Wind Erodibility Groups are distinguished. A distinction is made in
calcium carbonate content because soils high in CaCO3 (> 5%) are more erodible. The Wind
Erodibility Groups have been applied to the Austrian Texture Triangle (Figure 13). The soil
erodibility index was then calculated as weighted average of the area of each texture class (Table
5).

Soil erodibilty factor is also affected by topographic features like knolls. Knolls are topographic
features characterized by short, abrupt windward slopes. Wind erosion potential is greater on
knoll slopes than on level or gently rolling terrain because wind flow-lines are compressed and
wind velocity increases near the crest of the knolls. Erosion that begins on knolls often affects
field areas downwind. Adjustments of the soil erodibility index I are used where windward-
facing slopes are less than 160 m long and the increase in slope gradient from the adjacent
landscape is 3 percent or greater. Both slope length and slope gradient change are determined
along the direction of the prevailing erosive wind.

Figure 13: Application of wind erodibility groups to the Austrian soil texture triangle (Klik, 2008)
 28

Table 5: Soil erodibility index (t ha -1 yr -1) for soil textural classes

Surface roughness factor K

The roughness factor K describes the effect of soil surface roughness on soil erosion. It is
distinguished between random roughness (Allmaras et al., 1996) and oriented roughness made by
tillage and planting implements, or other means of creating systematically spaced ridges. K-
factor for oriented roughness can be also determined using equations by Williams (1986) where
ridge height and ridge distance in prevailing wind direction are considered.

The random roughness values used in the WEQ are the same values used in the Revised
Universal Soil Loss Equation RUSLE (Renard et al., 1997). The effect of random roughness on
K is only used with the Management Period Procedure. The random roughness factor accounts
for roughness effects on soil erodibility. It considers that surface roughness of soils with high
erodibility decreases faster than of less erodible soils.

Climatic factor C

The C factor is an index of climatic erosivity, specifically wind-speed and surface soil moisture,
and is expressed as a percentage of the C factor, which has been assigned a value of 100 (Lyles,
1983). The climatic factor equation is expressed as:

C = 386.u 3 /( PE ) 2 (3)
 29

Where,
C is the annual climatic factor, u is the average annual wind velocity,
PE is the precipitation-effectiveness index of Thornthwaite, which is calculated by:

PE = 3.16.[ Pi /(1.8Ti + 22)]10 / 9 (4)

Where,
Pi is monthly precipitation in mm and Ti average monthly air temperature in C.

The prevailing wind erosion direction is the direction from which the greatest amount of erosive
wind occurs during the critical wind erosion period or time period being evaluated.

Beside wind speed the erosive wind energy (EWE) has the main impact on the erosion process.
When hourly wind speed data are available the hourly EWE can be assessed by following
equation:

EWE hr = 3600. p.U 2 (U Ut ) (5)

Where,
EWEhr is the hourly erosive wind energy in g s-1, p is the air density (g m-3 ), U and Ut are
the average hourly wind speed and average hourly threshold wind speed (m s-1),
respectively. For the threshold wind speed a value of 8 m s-1 is often indicated.

Unsheltered distance L

The L factor represents the unsheltered distance along the prevailing wind erosion direction for
the field or area to be evaluated. It is the total length of the field reduced by the length sheltered
 30

by protection measures. The determination of the unsheltered distance is done stepwise:

- Determination of an isolated field

- Determination of wind breaks and their properties
- Determination of prevailing wind direction
- Calculation of sheltered field length by wind breaks
- Calculation of unsheltered distance

The L factor begins at a point upwind where no saltation or surface creep occurs (stable) and
ends at the downwind edge of the area being evaluated. The investigation area had to be divided
into a number of fields which could be considered as isolated from each other. This means that
no soil particles are crossing these field boundaries. Field boundaries consist of wind breaks,
roads and field paths, creeks etc.

For the determination of isolated fields topographical maps can be combined with information
from satellite images and aerial photos. Satellite imageries or aerial photos can be useful for the
knowledge of the field geometry, tillage direction, existence of wind breaks and roads.
Determination of area sheltered by wind breaks can be estimated as a length of 15 times the
height of the wind break assumed in prevailing wind direction (Tibke, 1988). However
effectiveness of the wind break depends on the porosity of the wind breaks (Table 6).

Table 6: Sheltered field length

Porosity Sheltered field length
(x height of wind breaks) in m
Low 15
Medium 10
High 5
Very high 2

Vegetation cover factor V

The effect of vegetative cover in the Wind Erosion Equation is expressed by relating the kind,
 31

amount, and orientation of vegetative material to its equivalent in kg per hectare of small grain
residue in reference condition (SGe). This condition is defined as 25 cm long stalks of small
grain, parallel to the wind, lying flat in rows spaced 25 cm apart, perpendicular to the wind.
Position and anchoring of residue is important. In general, the finer and more upright the residue,
the more effective it is for reducing wind erosion. (Williams et al., 1990) proposed an equation
for the V-factor based on the small grain equivalent SGe:

V = 0.2533( SGe)1.363 (6)

The SGe can be assessed by:

SGe = g1.BAG + g 2. SR + g 3. FR (7)

where g1, g2, g3 are crop coefficients, BAG is the above ground living biomass (kg ha-1), SR is
the standing residues (kg ha-1) and FR is the flat residues (kg ha-1). The variables g1 - g3 are
derived from Williams et al. (1990) and are shown in Table 7 for the main crops.

Table 7: Coefficients g1, g2, g3 for calculation of small grain

equivalent SGe for main crops
Crop g1 g2 g3
Summer barley 3.390 3.400 1.510
Winter wheat 3.390 3.400 1.610
Sugar beet 1.140 0.600 0.330
Soybean 1.266 0.633 0.729
Corn 0.433 0.433 0.213
Sorghum 0.657 0.657 0.320
Summer wheat 3.390 3.390 1.610
Sunflower 3.390 3.390 1.610
Potatoes 3.390 3.390 0.320

The protective impact of the vegetation depends also on the angle between prevailing wind
direction and the tillage direction or direction of planting. In the WEQ a correction factor
considers this fact. For the Management Period Procedure the knowledge of temporal
distribution of living biomass production, residue amounts and impact of tillage on soil surface
 32

roughness is necessary.

Depending on availability of detail data including wind velocity rates at a given storm event a
dynamic process-based model such as the Texas Tech Erosion Analysis Model (TEAM) can be
also applied to predict detachment, movement and deposition of soil particles associated with
wind processes (Gregory et al., 2004). TEAM simulates the suspension and movement of dust
above and downwind from eroding sites and predicts a horizontal movement in mass per unit
width per unit of time for wind and humidity inputs.

IV. Conclusion and recommendation

Air photo interpretation is very useful technique for mapping wind erosion features. For
assessing the effects of wind action, GLASOD method will be very much suitable. The method
may need some adjustments to make it suitable for assessment at local scale. The drawback of air
photos is that they will become soon old and it will not be possible to map recent erosion
features. If there is no financial constrains high resolution image (e.g. IKONOS image) can be
obtained for monitoring wind erosion. Other alternative will be the small format aerial
photography because of its acceptable geometric accuracy and its low costs. For regional scale
mapping ASTER data can be also used which is easily available.

Suitable models can be selected and applied, depending on availability of data. However, one
should not forget about model calibration and validation. For this field data becomes very
essential.
 33

V. Case study

The case study described here is on wind erosion feature mapping and monitoring. It is based on
photo interpretation technique. In case that conventional aerial photos are too old or not
available, small format aerial photography (SFAP) can be taken aboard a small aircraft and used
to map and monitor erosion features. The case study is located in the central Rift valley of
Kenya. It is based on the work of Hennemann and Nagelhout (2002). The case study consists of
2 parts: the analysis of the performance of SFAP and the analysis and assessment of wind
erosion. A field study was carried out to map and monitor wind erosion features using small
format aerial photography. The use of SFAP proved in spite of some minor operational
drawbacks to be quite promising in terms of geometric accuracy, visual quality, cost
effectiveness and above all timeliness. Generation and application of SFAP allowed for a
detailed assessment of the current erosion status followed by a spatio-temporal GIS analysis of
wind erosion patterns and trends in relation to key environmental factors.

V.1 Description of case study

Over the past two decades the semi-arid rangeland zone around Lake Naivasha in the central Rift
Valley of Kenya has come under severe human pressure. Main causes are the steady
encroachment into the area by smallholder farmers coming from higher parts of the Rift Valley,
and the subsequent reduction of grazing land left for the Maasai pastoralists (Ataya, 2000). These
developments have lead to overgrazing followed by severe wind erosion, which has now become
a major threat to the livelihood of many inhabitants of the rangeland zone.

Accurate analysis of wind erosion problems appeared to be impossible due to the overall lack of
up-to-date, high-resolution remote sensing data of the affected area. This included the absence of
recent aerial photographs, and although up-to-date satellite imagery (Landsat TM obtained in
1995 and 2000) was available for the rangeland zone, their general spatial resolution proved to
be far too low for accurate mapping and monitoring of the prevailing wind erosion patterns. It
 34

was therefore decided to apply small format aerial photography (SFAP) in order to achieve the
required analysis. A special study was designed with as main objective to map and monitor wind
erosion features using SFAP as a complementary tool to conventional aerial photography.
Specific study objectives included (a) analysis of SFAP performance in terms of geometric
accuracy and resource & cost effectiveness, (b) analysis and mapping wind erosion features, (c)
assessment of current wind erosion status, (d) monitoring of wind erosion rate and (e) analysis
of spatial relationships between current erosion status and trends with underlying erosion factors.

V.2 Study area

The study area is situated in the central part of the Kenya Rift Valley, southeast of Lake
Naivasha, about 70 km northwest of Nairobi. The area lies at an altitude of around 2,100 m a.s.l.
and covers about 370 ha. It is bounded by latitudes 0o 49' S to 0o 53' S and longitudes 36o 27' E
to 36o 29'E and, administratively, falls under the Naivasha Division of Nakuru District. The area
has a semi-arid to dry sub-humid, cool tropical highland climate. Mean annual rainfall ranges
between 600-700 mm/year. Mean minimum and maximum monthly temperatures vary between
15.9oC to 18.5oC and from 24.6oC to 28.3oC, respectively. The long rainy season is from March
to May with the short rainy season from October to December. Mean monthly wind velocity is
highest in the period April - September (6-7 m/s) and lowest during November-February (3-4
m/s). Mean maximum wind speed is considerably higher and may reach up to 15-20 m/s during
May-August resulting in high erosivity levels of the predominantly easterly winds during this
period. The natural vegetation of the area mainly consists of low Acacia shrub grassland with
Acacia drepanolobium ('Whistling Thorn') as main woody species and Themeda triandra as the
dominant grass. Since the 1980s, however, most of the natural vegetation has been cleared or
degraded into grassland. Current land use is mainly nomadic pastoralism with some marginal
arable farming on small isolated farms, remnants of the smallholder settlement schemes that
were abandoned in the early 1990s.
 35

V.3 Methodology

The generation of an adequate SFAP coverage of the study area requires careful planning. Figure
14 presents a flow-chart indicating the key parameters and successive steps required to determine
the following : (a) number of flight lines, (b) number of photographs per flight line and (c) total
number of SFAP photographs to be taken for a specified area, at the photo scale required.

S u b j e c t / th e m e

S tu d y a re a s iz e
F o c a l l e n g th

S c a le
C am era m o d e l
F lyin g h eig h t
N e g a t iv e s iz e

A r ea c o ve red p er p h o t o
A irc ra ft g r o u n d s p e e d

F o rw a rd o ve rl a p O rie n t a t io n o f c a m e r a

T im e in t e rv a l b e t w e e n
N e w a r e a p e r p h o to g r a p h
ph otos
N um ber of ph otos
p e r fi lm

N u m b e r o f p h o to s p e r L en g t h o f a
fl i g h tl i n e fl ig h tli n e

S id e w a rd o v e rl a p

N um b e r o f f l ig h t li n e s

T o ta l n u m b e r o f p h o t o s

Figure 14: Flow-chart showing key parameters in planning (a) number of flight lines, (b) number of
photographs per flight line and (c) total number of SFAP photographs for a specified area and
required photo scale.

To calculate above parameters, a simple spreadsheet in EXCEL was used. The following
predefined equipment-related parameters were entered: focal length (35 mm), photo negative
size (standard 24x36 mm) and ground speed (140 km/hour). Other parameters such as flying
height, depression angle and forward overlap were defined rather by the objectives of the study
 36

itself. Flying height, for example, is partly depending on photo-scale required. As the study of
wind erosion features needs detailed photographs of scale of 1:5,000 on a 10x15cm photo-
format, required flying height was determined at 2,300 feet above terrain. Further, stereoscopic
analysis demands a forward overlap of at least 50%. From these predefined parameters the area
covered per photograph, total photographs and time interval between photographs could be
obtained using the above EXCEL spreadsheet. Five N-S parallel running flight lines were
required to cover the reconnaissance area. Three coordinates of each flight line were entered in
the GPS (Garmin III) of the aircraft. The first point, around 4 kilometres before entering the
study area, was essential to position the aircraft so that it can enter the flight line in a straight
way. To start and finish photographing, the first and the last point of the flight line above the
reconnaissance area were also entered in the GPS. An important advantage of the Garmin III
proved its capability to display the complete route (flight lines) including the position of the
aircraft, so that during the flight small deviations from the flight course could be corrected.

The SFAP photographs were taken with a Minolta X7000 AF camera (35mm) from a small
Cessna 182 aircraft; a total of 130 photographs were shot covering the reconnaissance area
following a carefully planned flight plan. From the above 130 photographs 28 photographs
covering the actual pilot study area were finally selected for further analysis. A quality check
was first done on the GPS-observations for ground control. During the field phase for each
photograph around 20 GPS (Garmin 12) observations of 5 minutes were made to obtain ground
control points to rectify the images.

A photo-interpretation was then made of the pilot area using both old conventional aerial
photographs of 1991 (1:20,000) and the new SFAP colour prints (1:5,000). During the field
phase the prevailing soil pattern in the study area in combination with land cover and
degradation features was systematically examined and mapped. This generated a geo-pedological
map and two land cover/degradation maps, one for 1991 and one for 2000. To assess current
status of land degradation in the area, the different erosion features were grouped into severity
classes using an adapted version of the GLASOD methodology (Oldeman et al., 1991). From the
erosion severity maps of the two different periods, general trends and rate of land degradation for
 37

the period 1991-2000 could be calculated and assessed through standard GIS analysis using
ILWIS. Finally, a spatio-temporal analysis was made of the main causal factors underlying the
wind erosion patterns in the study area.

V.4 Results and discussions

4.1 Analysis of SFAP performance

1) Geometric aspects
The study showed that for a pilot area of 370 ha an up-to-date and adequate SFAP photo-cover at

a scale 1:5,000 can be generated within a remarkably short time of about two weeks. The visual

quality of the SFAP images ranged from good to excellent allowing for quick detection and

detailed analysis of wind erosion features and other land degradation-related phenomena; height

differences of less than 1 meter appeared to be readily detectable on the SFAP image. Main

operational constraints included adverse weather conditions prior to flying (cloudiness) and

during the flight (wind gusts), the latter in combination with the low speed as required and the

low weight of the aircraft itself. GPS quality testing using established benchmarks yielded

surprisingly good results with 85% of the observations within 6 m from the benchmark. Camera

position analysis showed general inclinations between 0.1o and 5 o. When these values are

matched with the accuracy limits used in conventional photography (< 3o), almost two-third of

the SFAP images appears to fall within the acceptable range.

Around 20 ground control points were obtained for each SFAP photograph. Each observation

showed a distinct error but in the rectification process observations with considerable horizontal
 38

errors were quickly detected as their root mean square error value (RMS value) is very high.

Table 8 gives a general overview of the active control points and the corresponding sigma's in

the rectification process. The overall sigma after rectification is low. Multiplying sigma value

with pixel size gives errors ranging between 1.0 m up to 2.1 m, with a mean of 1.4 m per

photograph. These values fall within the error range of the GPS (Garmin 12) recordings as

indicated above.

Table 8: Sigma values before and after correction, pixel size and calculated error per SFAP photo
(projective transformation)
SFAP GPS points Sigma with all Active control Sigma after Pixel size Error (m)
number measured GPS points points correction (m)

B00 14 7.58 9 2.36 0.41 0.97

B01 20 8.36 14 4.93 0.43 2.12

C18 19 4.80 14 3.26 0.50 1.63

C20 20 7.18 14 3.05 0.49 1.50

C22 24 5.79 17 2.78 0.48 1.34

Table 9: Number of man-days and costs (US$) for the various flight and fieldwork
operations and materials to map an area of 370 ha
SFAP operations and materials Number of Costs
Man-days (US$)
Flight preparation 1.0

Films & developing of photographs 1.0 60

Execution of flight 0.5 220
Collecting of GPS points (180) 3.0

Interpretation of photographs (14) and collecting wind erosion data 4.0

Scanning and georeferencing of photographs 1.5
Digitising and compilation of final map 2.0

Total resource use (370 ha) 13.0 280

2 2
Resource use efficiency in man-day / km and in US$ / km 3.5 76
 39

2) Manpower and cost efficiency aspects

Table 9 presents a general overview of the number of man-days and costs (US$) for the different
flight and fieldwork operations to obtain a wind erosion status map of the study area (370 ha). In
total, 13 working days were needed to cover an area of around 370 ha, 2.5 days for flight
preparation and obtaining the photographs, 5 days of fieldwork and 5.5 days office work.
However, this does not mean that the job was done in just two weeks: Between planning for the
flight and the flight itself, almost two weeks were lost due to prohibitive (cloudy) weather
conditions. In terms of delivery time SFAP compares quite favourably with conventional aerial
photography which only in exceptional cases can deliver a similar output in such a short period.
Also, overall costs for SFAP generation are minimal when compared with conventional aerial
photography. For the study area (3.7 km2) and the total reconnaissance area of 15.3 km2 (both
at scale 1:5,000) costs were US $ 76 and US$ 20 per km2, respectively. These values are only
25% and 7% of the photo costs (US$ 300/km2) incurred by an urban cadastral project in Bolivia
using conventional photographs of a comparable scale (1:4,000).

4.2 Analysis and assessment of wind erosion

1) Soils and landscape

The study area forms part of the central Rift Valley floor and consists largely of a gently sloping
Volcanic Plain landscape covered with stratified volcanic ash deposits from the nearby Mt.
Longonot volcano. The Volcanic Plain is almost entirely covered by young, poorly developed
coarse-textured soils derived from Pleistocene Longonot ash and Akira pumice deposits. The
soils generally consist of very deep, excessively drained, very friable, brown loamy sands and
sands (Ah and Bw horizons) overlying a succession of dark grey and whitish grey, loose fine ash
and pumice gravel layers (C-horizons). Three geopedological map units were distinguished on
the basis of micro-relief consisting of low knolls (representing fossil dunes) : Pv111 - Volcanic
Plain without knolly micro-relief, Pv112 - Volcanic Plain with low knolly micro-relief (0.5 to
2.0 m) and Pv113 - Volcanic Plain with moderate knolly micro-relief (2.0 to 4.0 m). Above soils
classify as Areni-Vitric Andosols (Dystric) according to the World Reference Base classification
(FAO 1998) on account of their sandy texture, relatively high content of volcanic glass in the
 40

fine earth fraction, and low base saturation in the control section. The soils are subdivided on the
basis of (a) thickness of the relatively coherent Bw horizon, and (b) presence and depth of loose,
highly erodible sandy ash layers in the lower subsoil (C-horizon). Three soil phases with
increasing vulnerability to wind erosion could thus be distinguished in the study area:

Soil phase A : thickness Bw horizon. < 50 cm, immediately overlying pumice gravel layers

Soil phase B : thickness Bw horizon > 50 cm immediately overlying loose fine ash layers

Soil phase C : thickness Bw horizon < 50 cm immediately overlying loose fine ash layers

2) Classifying and mapping of wind erosion features

The excellent visual quality and large photo-scale of the SFAP images allowed for a sound
analysis and interpretation of the various wind erosion features. Detailed photo examination
revealed the occurrence of a peculiar wind erosion pattern in the southern and central parts of the
study area. This pattern comprises clusters of ENE-WSW running strips each consisting on its
weather-side of a head, in the form of an oval to gully-shaped blow-out depression and a fan-
shaped depositional rear or tail on its lee-side (Figure 15). The morphology of the blow-out
depressions (wind erosion subtype D covering 0.5% of study area) is variable depending on their
stage of development. Shape and size may range from oval, shallow depressions of only a
metres long and wide at an early stage of development to massive deflation trenches of up to 150
m long and over 25 m wide in a mature stage. Depth of the blow-out depressions generally varies
between 0.5 meter to 4.0 meter. Shallow blow-out depressions appear to be carved out into the
Bw-horizon showing a brownish colour on the SFAP photo-image; Mature deflation trenches
have cut through the lower subsoil into the underlying whitish to dark grey ash strata thus
showing grey on the photo-image. The depositional areas or sand sheets (wind erosion subtype S
covering 5.1% of study area) are mostly associated with one particular blow-out depression. The
thickness of the sand sheets ranges from a few centimetres to over 50 cm. For the purpose of
mapping both wind erosion subtypes D and S have been sub-divided into 7 different classes
according to actual depth of deflation (abrasion) or deposition.
 41

Figure 15: SFAP stereogram showing wind erosion pattern of coalescing deflation trenches (approximate
scale 1: 3,400) (Hennemann and Nagelhout, 2002)

3) Assessment of current wind erosion status

The assessment of current erosion status has been based on the concept of soil degradation
severity as defined in the GLASOD classification (Oldeman et al., 1991). Soil degradation
severity is an aggregation of 2 dimensions: (1) the degree of soil degradation (vertical
dimension) and (2) the extent of the degradation process (lateral dimension). The degree or
intensity of soil degradation is related to observed changes in the agricultural suitability,
productivity, and restoration potential and biotic functions at one particular location(Oldeman
and Lynden, 1997). The extent of soil degradation is defined as the relative frequency of
occurrence of a particular type of degradation within the delineated map unit. The GLASOD
classification has been applied in this study in adapted form to categorize and interpret wind
 42

erosion features mapped. Four different erosion intensity classes were distinguished in both
deflation and depositional areas; class distinctions and critical levels are defined as below.

D - Blow-out depressions (deflation / abrasion areas)

None: No visible signs of recent erosion.

Slight: Topsoil is partly removed exposing brown Bw-horizon

Moderate: Topsoil and upper subsoil have been completely removed and dark grey C-horizon
is exposed deflation depth < 1 m.

Severe: Topsoil and entire subsoil have been removed and C-horizon with light and dark
grey ash-layers is exposed; deflation depth ranges between 1-4 m.

S - Sand sheets (depositional areas)

None: No visible signs of recent deposition.

Slight: Depth of deposition is < 5 cm; some grasses are still present

Moderate: Depth of deposition is 5 - 25 cm

Severe: Depth of deposition > 25 cm

Due to the high spatial resolution, large photo scale and good quality of the SFAP images in
combination with the relative spatial homogeneity of the different wind erosion features
themselves, it was possible to assess and spatially present the current wind erosion status directly
on the basis of above erosion intensity classes (Figure 16).
 43

Figure 16: Current wind erosion status of study (Hennemann and Nagelhout, 2002)

However, analysis of the spatial relationship between wind erosion occurrence and the various
geopedological units requires specific additional information about the relative extent of wind
erosion features in a particular map unit. This is expressed as the frequency of occurrence within
the delineated mapping unit. The following frequency classes have been used : Infrequent : < 5%
of the map unit is affected; Common: 6 to 10% of the map unit is affected; Frequent : 11 to
25% of the map unit is affected ; Very frequent : 26 to 50% of the map unit is affected and
Dominant : > 50% of the map unit is affected. To obtain wind erosion severity classes for the
area, a 2D-matrix table was used combining erosion intensity and frequency classes into
integrated erosion severity classes (Oldeman and Lynden, 1997). When applied to the three
main geopedological map units in the study area, Pv111, Pv112 and Pv113, it appears that the
latter unit is most severely affected (12.6 % in the high - very high severity class), followed by
map unit Pv112 (4.6 % in the high - very high severity class) and finally, map unit Pv111 (0% in
the high-very high severity class).
 44

Table 10: Absolute and relative changes in area affected by wind erosion during 1991 - 2000

Year 1991 2000

Area (ha) % study Area (ha) % study

area area

Deflation areas (D) 0.22 0.1 1.89 0.5

Deposition areas (S) 1.14 0.3 19.00 5.1

4) Spatio-temporal analysis of wind erosion

To monitor the impact of wind erosion on the area SFAP was used in combination with
conventional photography to analyse surface changes over the period 1991 2000. They
showed a nine-fold increase of deflation areas and a nearly twenty-fold increase of deposition
areas (Table 10). In addition, it was found that gross and annual volumetric soil losses per ha in
the area range between 53 64 m3/ha and 6-7 m3/ha/year, respectively. Assuming an average
soil bulk density of 1.3 Mg/m3, total and annual soil weight losses from the area are estimated at
69-83 Mg/ha and 8-9 Mg/ha/year, respectively. For the most vulnerable map unit (Pv113) total
and annual weight losses are quite considerable being 260 310 Mg/ha and 29-34 Mg/ha/year,
respectively.

Standard GIS analysis including map overlay revealed a strong spatial relationship between (a)
severity of wind erosion and b) the occurrence of a pronounced knolly micro-relief in the study
area. This is best exemplified by geopedological map unit Pv113 which combines a high erosion
severity class with a distinct knolly micro-relief. It seems likely that the presence of knolly
terrain forms a key factor in the wind erosion process as wind erodibility has been found to
increase sharply in areas with a distinct micro-relief (Chepil et al., 1964). An additional causal
factor is the predominance of wind erodible soil phase C in this map unit. Important parameters
here are the poor aggregate size distribution (high % aggregates with diameter < 0.84 mm) in
combination with a low specific density of the soil, probably due to the presence of pumice in the
fine earth fraction. Both soil characteristics have a strong influence on wind erodibility (Zobeck,
1991). More on-site research is required on the specific relationship between wind erodibility
and key mineralogical, pedological and soil physical properties of the different soils in the area.
 45

Finally, additional analysis revealed that almost all large deflation trenches are found on or near
abandoned arable fields. This confirmed earlier suspicions that careless soil management in
combination with cattle trampling and destruction of old farm roads has been a major
contributing factor to wind erosion in the area (Ataya, 2000).

V.5 Conclusion

The use of SFAP proves to be quite promising in terms of geometric accuracy, visual quality and
spatial resolution in particular, manpower and cost efficiency and above all, timeliness. The
study showed that for an area of 370 ha an up-to-date, adequate SFAP photo-cover at scale
1:5,000 can be generated within a remarkably short time (two weeks). Main operational
constraints include adverse weather conditions prior to and during the flight, the latter in
combination with the low speed and low weight of the aircraft itself. SFAP compares quite
favourably with conventional aerial photography, particularly in terms of delivery time since the
latter only in exceptional cases can deliver a comparable output within such limited periods.
Finally, overall costs for SFAP generation are minimal in comparison to conventional aerial
photography. Generation and application of SFAP allowed for a detailed assessment of the
current erosion status in the study area followed by spatio-temporal analysis of wind erosion
patterns and trends in relation to key environmental factors.

References

ACSAD, 2007. Desertification monitoring and assessment in the Arab World using satellite
imageries between 1982 and 2005, The Arab Center for the Studies of Arid Zones and
Dry Lands, Damascus.
Allmaras, R.R., Burwell, R.E., Larson, W.E. and Holt, R.F., 1996. Total porosity and random
roughness of interrow zone as influenced by tillage. USDA Conserv. Res. 7, US. Gov.
Pritn. Office, Washington D. C.
Ataya, C.O., 2000. Wind erosion of volcanic soils. A reconnaissance study in the Southern
Catchment of Laka Naivasha Region, Kenya. MSc thesis Thesis, ITC, Enschede.
Ayoub, A.T., 1998. Extent, severity and causative factors of land degradation in the Sudan.
Journal of Arid Environments, 38(3): 397-409.
Chepil, S., F. H. Siddoway, F.H. and al., e., 1964. Wind erodibility of knolly terrain. Journal of
 46

soil and water conservation, 19 (5): 179-181.

Chepil, W.S., 1942. Measurement of wind erosiveness of soils by the dry sieving procedure.
Scientific Agriculture, 25: 154-160.
Daniell, J.J. and Hughes, M., 2007. The morphology of barchan-shaped sand banks from western
Torres Strait, northern Australia. Sedimentary Geology, 202(4): 638-652.
de Jong, S.M., 1994. Applications of reflective remote sensing for land degradation studies in a
mediterranean environment. Ph.D. Thesis, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands,
237 pp.
Eswaran, H., Lal, R. and Reich, P.F., 2001. Land degradation: An overview. In: E.M. Bridges et
al. (Editors), Response to land degradation. Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, pp. 21-35.
Goossens, D. and Riksen, M., 2004. Wind erosion and dust dynamics at the commencement of
the 21st century. In: D. Goossens and M. Riksen (Editors), Wind erosion and dust
dynamics: observations, simulation, modelling. ESW publications, Wageningen, pp. 7-
13.
Gregory, J.M., Wilson, G.R., Singh, U.B. and Darwish, M.M., 2004. TEAM: integrated, process-
based wind-erosion model. Environmental Modelling & Software, 19(2): 205-215.
Griffin, D.W., Garrison, V.H., Ferman, J.R. and Shinn, E.A., 2001. African desert dust in the
Caribbean atmosphere: Microbiology and public health. Aerobiologia, 17: 203 - 213.
Hennemann, G.R. and Nagelhout, A., 2002. Wind erosion mapping and monitoring in the central
Rift valley of Kenya using small-format aerial photography (SFAP), ISCO XII, Beijing,
China.
Hennemann, G.R. and Nagelhout, A., 2004. Searching for effective, low-cost methods to detect
and assess wind erosion damage: the promise of small-format aerial phtography (SFAP).
In: D. Goossens and R. Michael (Editors), Wind erosion and dust dynamics:
observations, simulations and modelling. ESW Publications, Wageningen, pp. 123-137.
Jian, Z., F., Wang, L.K. and Peng, X., 1992. Wind erosion on a coastal hilly soil in China. In: H.
Hurni and K. Tato (Editors), Erosion, conservation and small scale farming. Geographica
Bernensia, Marceline, Missouri, pp. 121 - 131.
Khresat, S.A., Rawajfih, Z. and Mohammad, M., 1998. Land degradation in north-western
Jordan: causes and processes. Journal of Arid Environments, 39(4): 623-629.
Klik, A., 2008. Wind Erosion Assessment in Austria Using Wind Erosion Equation and GIS.
BOKU University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences Vienna.
Lyles, L., 1983. Erosive wind energy distributions and climatic factors for the West. Journal of
Soil and Water Conservation, 38(2): 106-109.
Masri, Z., Zbisch, M., Bruggeman, A., Hayek, P. and Kardous, M., 2003. Wind erosion in a
marginal Mediterranean dryland area: a case study from the Khanasser Valley, Syria.
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 28(11): 1211-1222.
Oldeman, L.R., 1994. The global extent of land degradation. In: D.J. Greenland and I. Szabolcs
(Editors), Land Resilience and Sustainable Land Use. CABI, Wallingford.
Oldeman, L.R., Hakkeling, R.T.A. and Sombroek, W.G., 1991. World map of the status of
human-induced soil degration: an explanaroty note. Gobal Assessment of Soil
Degradation (GLASOD), second revised edition. ISRIC, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Oldeman, L.R. and Lynden, G.W.J., 1997. Revisiting the Glasod methodology. In: R. Lal, W.H.
Blum, C. Valentine and B.A. Stewart (Editors), Methods for assessment of soil
degradation. CRC Press, New York.
 47

Panebianco, J.E. and Buschiazzo, D.E., 2008. Erosion predictions with the Wind Erosion
Equation (WEQ) using different climatic factors. Land Degradation & Development,
19(1): 36-44.
Renard, K.R., Foster, G.R., Weesies, G.A., McCool, D.K. and Yoder, D.C., 1997. Predicting soil
erosion by water: a guide to conservation planning with the Revised Universal Soil Loss
Equation (RSLE). Agriculture Handbook No. 703, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Shrestha, D.P., Soliman, A.S., Farshad, A. and Yadav, R.D., 2005. Salinity mapping using
geopedologic and soil line approach, 26th Asian Conference on Remote Sensing, Hanoi,
Vietnam, pp. 6.
Smith, J.L. and Lee, K., 2003. Soil as a source of dust and implications for human health.
Advances in agronomy, 80: 1-32.
Tibke, G., 1988. Basic principles of wind erosion control. Agric. Ecosystem Environ.(22/23):
103-122.
Tueller, P.T., Lent, P.C., Stager, R.D., Jacobsen, E.A. and Platou, K.A., 1988. Rangeland
vegetation changes measure from helicopter-borne 35 mm aerial photography.
Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 54: 609-614.
UNEP and Leauge_of_Arab_States, 2004. State of desertification in the Arab World (Updated
study), ACSAD, Damascus.
Van der Knijf, J.M.f., Jones, R.J.A. and Montanarella, L., 1999. Soil Erosion Risk Assessment in
Italy. Joint Research Centre, Space Applications Institute, European Soil Bureau, pp. 58.
Wassif, M.M., Sharkawy, S.F., Genead, A.Y., Reda, M. and Atta, S.K., 2002. Evaluation of wind
erosion models under Egyptian conditions. Egyptian Journal of Soil Science, 42(2): 219-
237
Williams, J.R., 1986. Effect of erosion productivity EPIC water erosion model. Proc. Fourth Fed.
Interagency Sediment Conference, 6: 1-8.
Williams, J.R. et al., 1990. EPIC - Erosion/Productivity Impact Calculator: 2. User Manual,
Technical Bulletin No. 1768, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Woodruff, N.P. and Siddoway, F.H., 1965. A wind erosion equation. Proceedings of the Soil
Science Society of America, 29: 602 - 608.
Zhao, H.-L. et al., 2006. Wind erosion and sand accumulation effects on soil properties in Horqin
Sandy Farmland, Inner Mongolia. CATENA, 65(1): 71-79.
Zobeck, T.M., 1991. Soil properties affecting wind erosion. Journal of Soil and Water
Conservation, 46(2): 112-118.