邢偉,胡續(xù)禮,張榮華,劉霞,袁利,杜子龍,張光燦

(1.山東省土壤侵蝕與生態(tài)修復(fù)重點(diǎn)實(shí)驗(yàn)室,山東農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)林學(xué)院,271018,山東泰安;2.水利部淮河水利委員會(huì), 233001,安徽蚌埠;3.南京林業(yè)大學(xué)林學(xué)院,210037,南京;4.山東省水文局,250002,濟(jì)南)

淮河流域國(guó)家水土保持重點(diǎn)工程土壤侵蝕防控效果

邢偉1,胡續(xù)禮2,張榮華1,劉霞3?,袁利2,杜子龍4,張光燦1

(1.山東省土壤侵蝕與生態(tài)修復(fù)重點(diǎn)實(shí)驗(yàn)室,山東農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)林學(xué)院,271018,山東泰安;2.水利部淮河水利委員會(huì), 233001,安徽蚌埠;3.南京林業(yè)大學(xué)林學(xué)院,210037,南京;4.山東省水文局,250002,濟(jì)南)

為探討國(guó)家水土保持重點(diǎn)建設(shè)工程對(duì)項(xiàng)目區(qū)土壤侵蝕的防控作用,以淮河流域沂蒙山大峪小流域項(xiàng)目區(qū)和大別山桃?guī)X小流域項(xiàng)目區(qū)為對(duì)象,采用遙感調(diào)查和地面調(diào)查相結(jié)合的方法,研究重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施后,項(xiàng)目區(qū)土壤侵蝕狀況的變化,分析不同措施對(duì)土壤侵蝕的防控效果,以期為認(rèn)識(shí)和評(píng)價(jià)國(guó)家水土保持重點(diǎn)建設(shè)工程的實(shí)施效果提供參考。結(jié)果表明:1)2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)在重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施后,土壤侵蝕面積和土壤侵蝕模數(shù)大幅度降低。沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū)和大別山區(qū)桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū)土壤侵蝕面積消減率為88.9%和76.3%,侵蝕模數(shù)降低率76.7%和72.1%,侵蝕模數(shù)降低到243和314 t/(km2·a)。土壤侵蝕防控效果以沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū)高于大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū),主要原因與2項(xiàng)目區(qū)實(shí)施的防治措施配置不同,以及與不同防治措施對(duì)土壤侵蝕防控效果的差別有關(guān)。2)重點(diǎn)工程不同防治措施對(duì)土壤侵蝕的防控效果,以梯田工程措施和水平階工程措施明顯大于封禁補(bǔ)植措施。2項(xiàng)目區(qū)中,坡耕地梯田工程區(qū)的土壤侵蝕模數(shù)降低率82.5%和83.8%,坡式林地水平階工程區(qū)(大別山區(qū)桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū))的土壤侵蝕模數(shù)降低率70.3%,疏林地封禁補(bǔ)植區(qū)的土壤侵蝕模數(shù)降低率39.5%和55.2%。

土壤侵蝕;水土保持重點(diǎn)工程;梯田工程;坡式林地;水平階工程;沂蒙山大峽谷;大別山桃?guī)X.

我國(guó)的水土保持重點(diǎn)建設(shè)工程(以下簡(jiǎn)稱“重點(diǎn)工程”),起源于1983年國(guó)家安排專項(xiàng)資金實(shí)施的全國(guó)八大片水土流失重點(diǎn)治理[1],是我國(guó)目前正在大規(guī)模實(shí)施的以小流域(或片區(qū))為單元的水土流失綜合治理工程。重點(diǎn)工程在分期規(guī)劃的基礎(chǔ)上,以國(guó)家重點(diǎn)項(xiàng)目的方式,進(jìn)行實(shí)施和管理,以小流域(或片區(qū))為單元,進(jìn)行項(xiàng)目實(shí)施方案設(shè)計(jì)和施工[2-8],目前已規(guī)劃實(shí)施到第五期工程(2013—2017年)。在重點(diǎn)工程項(xiàng)目的實(shí)施過(guò)程中,國(guó)家和地方投入了較大的財(cái)力、物力和人力,但迄今為止,針對(duì)重點(diǎn)工程項(xiàng)目實(shí)施效果開(kāi)展的調(diào)查和研究還很少,現(xiàn)有的報(bào)道[4-8]還局限于對(duì)重點(diǎn)工程項(xiàng)目實(shí)施措施、經(jīng)驗(yàn)和效果方面的總結(jié)。而對(duì)重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施后,項(xiàng)目區(qū)土壤侵蝕的變化狀況,以及不同工程措施對(duì)土壤侵蝕的防控效果,缺乏專門(mén)的研究;因此,調(diào)查研究重點(diǎn)工程對(duì)項(xiàng)目區(qū)土壤侵蝕的防控效果,對(duì)深入認(rèn)識(shí)和評(píng)價(jià)重點(diǎn)工程的水土保持效果,具有重要意義。

淮河流域沂蒙山區(qū)和大別山區(qū)的水土流失嚴(yán)重,是重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施的主要區(qū)域,區(qū)內(nèi)坡耕地和坡式經(jīng)濟(jì)林地(簡(jiǎn)稱“坡式林地”)是水土流失的主要源地和重點(diǎn)工程治理的主要對(duì)象[9-11],梯田工程是治理坡耕地水土流失的重要措施[4,8]。目前,已有研究[12-15]利用徑流小區(qū)觀測(cè)或樣地調(diào)查的方法,報(bào)道梯田工程措施在攔蓄地表徑流、減少土壤流失、保持土壤養(yǎng)分、增加土壤入滲以及促進(jìn)作物增產(chǎn)等方面的作用;但未見(jiàn)關(guān)于梯田工程對(duì)區(qū)域土壤侵蝕防控效果方面的報(bào)道。

筆者以淮河流域沂蒙山區(qū)和大別山區(qū),2010年實(shí)施的水土保持重點(diǎn)工程項(xiàng)目為對(duì)象,分別選取沂蒙山區(qū)沂水縣和大別山區(qū)金寨縣具有代表性的項(xiàng)目區(qū)(小流域片區(qū)),利用遙感調(diào)查與地面調(diào)查相結(jié)合的方法,分析重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施后,項(xiàng)目區(qū)土地利用結(jié)構(gòu)的變化,以及土壤侵蝕狀況的變化,闡明重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施對(duì)項(xiàng)目區(qū)土壤侵蝕的防控效果,以期為深入認(rèn)識(shí)和評(píng)價(jià)水土保持重點(diǎn)建設(shè)工程的實(shí)施效果提供依據(jù)。

1 研究區(qū)概況

研究區(qū)位于淮河流域山東省沂蒙山區(qū)沂水縣大峪小流域和安徽省大別山區(qū)金寨縣桃?guī)X小流域。

大峪小流域位于E 118°34＇～118°36＇,N 35°55＇～35°58＇,屬淮河流域沂河水系,海拔在175.0～469.2m。屬北暖溫帶季風(fēng)氣候區(qū),多年平均降水量765.1mm,降水多集中在6—9月份,占全年總降水量的75%左右,年平均氣溫12.3℃。地質(zhì)巖性多為花崗巖和片麻巖,土壤種類(lèi)以棕壤土為主。植被類(lèi)型屬于暖溫帶落葉闊葉林,流域內(nèi)坡耕地較多,且分布集中,土地產(chǎn)出率低,水土流失嚴(yán)重。該流域?qū)儆谌珖?guó)水土保持區(qū)劃[16]中的魯中南低山丘陵土壤保持功能區(qū),屬于全國(guó)水土流失重點(diǎn)防治區(qū)復(fù)核劃分[17]中的國(guó)家級(jí)重點(diǎn)治理區(qū)。

桃?guī)X小流域位于E 115°41＇～115°46＇,N 31°32＇～31°36＇,屬淮河流域史河水系,海拔在140.0～430.0m。屬北亞熱帶濕潤(rùn)氣候區(qū),多年平均降水量1 380.0mm,尤以7月份最多,年平均氣溫15.6℃。地質(zhì)巖性多為花崗巖和片麻巖,土壤種類(lèi)有地帶性黃棕壤土、非地帶性土壤水稻土等,植被類(lèi)型屬于暖溫帶落葉闊葉林向亞熱帶常綠闊葉林過(guò)渡類(lèi)型。流域內(nèi)林地(疏林地)、坡耕地和坡林地(坡式經(jīng)濟(jì)林)較多,水土流失嚴(yán)重。該流域?qū)偃珖?guó)水土保持區(qū)劃[16]中的桐柏大別山山地丘陵水源涵養(yǎng)保土功能區(qū),屬于全國(guó)水土流失重點(diǎn)防治區(qū)復(fù)核劃分[17]中的國(guó)家級(jí)重點(diǎn)預(yù)防區(qū)。

2 研究方法

在研究區(qū)內(nèi),以2010年實(shí)施的重點(diǎn)工程項(xiàng)目區(qū)為對(duì)象,于2009年和2013年4月份,利用2.5m分辨率的SPOT5正射影像和1∶1萬(wàn)地形圖為基礎(chǔ)資料,基于“3S”技術(shù)平臺(tái),采用土壤侵蝕3因子(土地利用類(lèi)型、地面坡度和植被蓋度)綜合評(píng)判法[18]和實(shí)地調(diào)查驗(yàn)證相結(jié)合的方法,分析重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施前后項(xiàng)目區(qū)土壤侵蝕狀況的變化。項(xiàng)目區(qū)為小流域片區(qū),以下稱沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū)和大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū)。

依據(jù)GB/T 21010—2007《土地利用現(xiàn)狀分類(lèi)》[19],水利部SL 665—2014《北方土石山區(qū)水土流失綜合治理技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)》[18],結(jié)合項(xiàng)目區(qū)土地利用的實(shí)際情況,劃分項(xiàng)目區(qū)土地利用類(lèi)型,建立不同土地利用類(lèi)型的遙感影像解譯標(biāo)志,在ARCgis 10.2平臺(tái)上,利用人機(jī)交互式解譯方法,獲得不同土地利用類(lèi)型的面積與空間分布狀況。

依據(jù)水利部頒布的技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[18],劃分地面坡度等級(jí),基于項(xiàng)目區(qū)數(shù)字高程模型(DEM)和實(shí)地調(diào)查,獲得不同等級(jí)地面坡度的面積與空間分布;基于項(xiàng)目區(qū)遙感影像提取歸一化植被指數(shù)(NDVI)[20-21],經(jīng)實(shí)地調(diào)查和計(jì)算,獲得不同級(jí)別林草蓋度的面積與空間分布?；陧?xiàng)目區(qū)土壤侵蝕3因子的空間分布狀況,按技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中土壤面蝕強(qiáng)度分級(jí),獲得重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施前后項(xiàng)目區(qū)總體和不同土地利用類(lèi)型的侵蝕強(qiáng)度分布。依據(jù)技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中土壤水蝕強(qiáng)度分級(jí)的土壤侵蝕模數(shù)范圍,取其平均值,利用不同侵蝕強(qiáng)度的面積進(jìn)行加權(quán)平均,估算項(xiàng)目區(qū)總體和不同土地利用類(lèi)型區(qū)的平均侵蝕模數(shù)。

土壤侵蝕面積消減率為土壤侵蝕消減面積(重點(diǎn)工程前后侵蝕面積之差)與原有土壤侵蝕面積之比,土壤侵蝕模數(shù)降低率為土壤侵蝕模數(shù)降低值(重點(diǎn)工程前后侵蝕模數(shù)之差)與原有土壤侵蝕模數(shù)之比。

3 結(jié)果與分析

3.1項(xiàng)目區(qū)土地利用類(lèi)型的變化

3.1.1土地利用類(lèi)型與工程實(shí)施措施的劃分 在依據(jù)國(guó)家標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[19]進(jìn)行Ⅰ、Ⅱ級(jí)土地利用分類(lèi)的基礎(chǔ)上(表1),結(jié)合項(xiàng)目區(qū)重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施的主要措施和土地利用變化的實(shí)際情況,參照水利部頒布的技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[18],將土地利用Ⅱ級(jí)類(lèi)中的旱地分為坡耕地和梯田,果園分為坡式經(jīng)濟(jì)林(簡(jiǎn)稱坡式林地)和階式經(jīng)濟(jì)林地(簡(jiǎn)稱階式林地),林地中的其他林地具體為疏林地,農(nóng)村道路為生產(chǎn)道路,水工建筑用地為排蓄水設(shè)施用地。同時(shí),將重點(diǎn)工程項(xiàng)目區(qū)實(shí)施的防治措施分為4種類(lèi)型,即坡耕地梯田工程、坡林地水平階工程、疏林地封禁補(bǔ)植和排蓄水工程。

有關(guān)坡式林地、疏林地、排蓄水設(shè)施用地的具體含義詳見(jiàn)文獻(xiàn)[9,18]。本文所稱的“階式林地”,是大別山項(xiàng)目區(qū)對(duì)坡式經(jīng)濟(jì)林地(多為板栗林分)實(shí)施水平階整地工程改造后的經(jīng)濟(jì)林地;“排蓄水工程”包括梯田工程、水平階工程配套修建的坡地排水溝、沉砂池和蓄水池,以及在溝道內(nèi)修建的小型堰壩。

3.1.2重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施后土地利用結(jié)構(gòu)的變化 由表2和表3看出,在重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施以前(2009年),2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)的土地利用結(jié)構(gòu)具有明顯差別。在沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū)(表2和圖1(a)),土地利用類(lèi)型以坡耕地面積比例較大,為項(xiàng)目區(qū)的72.3%。大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū)(表3和圖2(a)),以疏林地和坡耕地較多,分別占項(xiàng)目區(qū)面積的43.4%和35.8%,另有占項(xiàng)目區(qū)面積14.7%的坡式林地。這表明2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)需要重點(diǎn)治理的主要對(duì)象(土地利用類(lèi)型)不同,在沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū)主要為面積較大的坡耕地,而在大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū),既有坡耕地和坡式經(jīng)濟(jì)林地,還有面積較大的疏林地。

表1　項(xiàng)目區(qū)土地利用類(lèi)型及重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施措施Tab.1 Types of land use and measures of the national key project in project area

表2　沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū)不同土地利用類(lèi)型面積變化轉(zhuǎn)移矩陣Tab.2 Transfermatrix of area changes of different land use types in Dayu project region of Yimengmountain hm2

2013年重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施以后,2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)的土地利用結(jié)構(gòu)發(fā)生了明顯變化(圖1和圖2、表2和表3)。在沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū),主要是將占地比例較大的坡耕地修建為水平梯田,梯田占地比例增加到90.0%。在大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū),主要是將坡耕地和坡式林地改造為水平梯田和階式林地,兩者占地比例增加到49.5%。同時(shí),2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)生產(chǎn)道路和攔蓄水設(shè)施都有不同程度的增加。這種土地利用結(jié)構(gòu)的變化,反映出2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)實(shí)施的防治措施有所不同,但都有利于項(xiàng)目區(qū)水土保持設(shè)施條件和土壤侵蝕狀況的改善。

3.2項(xiàng)目區(qū)土壤侵蝕狀況的變化

3.2.1項(xiàng)目區(qū)總體土壤侵蝕狀況的變化 2013年水土保持重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施后,2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)的土壤侵蝕狀況發(fā)生了明顯改善(圖3和圖4、表4和表5),表現(xiàn)為土壤侵蝕面積、侵蝕強(qiáng)度和侵蝕模數(shù)均有較大幅度降低。在沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū),土壤侵蝕面積比由96.4%降低到10.7%,土壤侵蝕面積消減率為88.9%,侵蝕強(qiáng)度全部降低為輕度侵蝕等級(jí),侵蝕模數(shù)降低到243 t/(km2·a),侵蝕模數(shù)降低率為76.7%。在大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū),土壤侵蝕面積比由90.3%降低到21.4%,土壤侵蝕面積消減率76.3%,侵蝕強(qiáng)度降低為輕度等級(jí)為主,占侵蝕面積的88.6%,侵蝕模數(shù)降低到314 t/(km2·a),侵蝕模數(shù)降低率為72.1%。

表3　大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū)土地利用類(lèi)型變化轉(zhuǎn)移矩陣Tab.3 Transfermatrix of area changes of different land use types in Taoling project region of Dabiemountain hm2

圖1　沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū)重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施前(a)后(b)土地利用類(lèi)型變化Fig.1 Change of land use types before(a)and after(b)the national key project in Dayu project region of Yimengmountain

圖2　大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū)重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施前(a)后(b)土地利用類(lèi)型變化Fig.2 Change of land use types before(a)and after(b)the national key project in Taoling project region of Dabiemountain

圖3　沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū)重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施前(a)后(b)土壤侵蝕強(qiáng)度變化Fig.3 Change of soil erosion before(a)and after(b)the national key project in Dayu project region of Yimengmountain

圖4　大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū)重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施前(a)后(b)土壤侵蝕強(qiáng)度變化Fig.4 Change of soil erosion before(a)and after(b)the national key project in Taoling project region of Dabiemountain

表4　重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施前后項(xiàng)目區(qū)總體土壤侵蝕狀況的變化Tab.4 Change of total soil erosion in project before and after the national key project

表5　項(xiàng)目區(qū)不同土壤侵蝕強(qiáng)度變化轉(zhuǎn)移矩陣Tab.5 Transfermatrix of changes of different soil erosion intensity in project region_______________%

上述結(jié)果表明,2項(xiàng)目區(qū)對(duì)土壤侵蝕狀況的改善程度有所不同,以沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū)的大于大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū)。其原因與2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)實(shí)施的防治措施配置不同,以及不同防治措施對(duì)土壤侵蝕防控效果的差別有關(guān)。

3.2.2不同措施類(lèi)型區(qū)土壤侵蝕的變化 由表6可知,重點(diǎn)工程項(xiàng)目區(qū)實(shí)施的不同防治措施(坡耕地梯田工程、坡式林地水平階工程、疏林地封禁補(bǔ)植),對(duì)土壤侵蝕的防控效果有一定差別。在坡耕地梯田工程實(shí)施后,沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū)和大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū)的土壤侵蝕面積消減率達(dá)到96.5%和79.5%,侵蝕模數(shù)降低率達(dá)到82.5%和83.8%,侵蝕模數(shù)值降低至214～282 t/(km2·a)。在疏林地封禁補(bǔ)植區(qū),2項(xiàng)目區(qū)的土壤侵蝕面積消減率為36.9%和68.1%,侵蝕模數(shù)降低率為39.5%和55.2%,侵蝕模數(shù)降低到414和382 t/(km2·a)。坡式林地實(shí)施水平階工程后,大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū)土壤侵蝕面積消減率為90.4%,侵蝕模數(shù)降低率為70.3%,侵蝕模數(shù)降低至238 t/(km2·a)。

表6　重點(diǎn)工程不同措施類(lèi)型區(qū)土壤侵蝕狀況的變化Tab.6 Change of soil erosion in differentmeasures in the national key project

上述結(jié)果表明,不同防治措施對(duì)土壤侵蝕的控制程度,以梯田工程措施和水平階整地措施明顯大于封禁補(bǔ)植措施。

4 討論與結(jié)論

大別山區(qū)和沂蒙山區(qū)屬于不同的氣候區(qū),其水土保持主導(dǎo)基礎(chǔ)功能[16]分別屬于水源涵養(yǎng)保土功能區(qū)和土壤保持功能區(qū),水土流失重點(diǎn)防治分區(qū)[17]分別屬于國(guó)家級(jí)的重點(diǎn)預(yù)防區(qū)和重點(diǎn)治理區(qū),因而在水土流失的發(fā)生特點(diǎn)及防治需求上有所不同[9]。在沂蒙山區(qū),水土流失的主要源地是規(guī)模較大的坡耕地以及坡式梯田;而在大別山區(qū),水土流失源地除了坡耕地之外,還有較大面積的疏林地和坡式林地[9-11]。研究結(jié)果表明,2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)在防治措施類(lèi)型及配置規(guī)模上有所差別:沂蒙山區(qū)大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū),以實(shí)施梯田工程措施治理坡耕地為主,梯田工程面積占項(xiàng)目區(qū)面積的72.3%;大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū),以疏林地封禁補(bǔ)植措施面積較大,占項(xiàng)目區(qū)面積的43.4%,坡耕地梯田工程和坡式林地水平階工程面積占項(xiàng)目區(qū)的35.8%和14.7%。表明2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)的防治措施及配置,反映了沂蒙山區(qū)和大別山區(qū)的水土流失防治特點(diǎn)[9,16-17],具有區(qū)域代表性和典型性。

在重點(diǎn)工程對(duì)2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)總體土壤侵蝕的防控效果上,沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū)的土壤侵蝕面積消減率和侵蝕模數(shù)降低率為88.9%和76.7%,高于大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū)的76.3%和72.1%。這與2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)防治措施配置不同,以及不同防治措施對(duì)土壤侵蝕防控效果的差別有關(guān)。在2個(gè)項(xiàng)目區(qū)內(nèi),梯田工程措施的土壤侵蝕防控效果較高,侵蝕模數(shù)降低率為82.5%和83.8%,而封禁補(bǔ)植措施的土壤侵蝕防控效果相對(duì)較低,侵蝕模數(shù)降低率為39.5%和55.2%;因此,在項(xiàng)目區(qū)總體土壤侵蝕防控效果上表現(xiàn)為,梯田工程規(guī)模較大的沂蒙山大峪項(xiàng)目區(qū)高于梯田工程規(guī)模相對(duì)較小的大別山桃?guī)X項(xiàng)目區(qū)。這表明梯田工程實(shí)施規(guī)模較大的重點(diǎn)工程項(xiàng)目區(qū),對(duì)土壤侵蝕的防控效果較高。

需要說(shuō)明的是,本研究結(jié)果還局限于重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施初期(3年)對(duì)項(xiàng)目區(qū)土壤侵蝕的防控效果。隨著重點(diǎn)工程實(shí)施年限增加,封禁補(bǔ)植措施下,疏林地的林草植被狀況會(huì)不斷改善[22-24],對(duì)土壤侵蝕防控作用會(huì)逐漸增大,項(xiàng)目區(qū)總體的土壤侵蝕防控效果也會(huì)提高,但不同年限防控效果的具體變化還需進(jìn)一步研究。坡式林地是淮河流域大別山區(qū)水土流失的主要源地之一,目前有關(guān)坡式林地水土流失治理效果的報(bào)道還很少。研究結(jié)果表明,坡式林地實(shí)施水平階工程后的土壤侵蝕模數(shù)降低率為70.3%,林地侵蝕模數(shù)可降至238 t/(km2·a)。關(guān)于其他區(qū)域的坡式林地治理,對(duì)水土流失的控制效果,還需要開(kāi)展調(diào)查研究。

[1] 劉震.強(qiáng)化建設(shè)管理精心組織實(shí)施扎實(shí)開(kāi)展國(guó)家水土保持重點(diǎn)工程建設(shè)[J].中國(guó)水土保持,2008(5):5. Liu Zhen.Strengthening the management of construction and organize and implement carefully for national key project construction of soil and water conservation[J].Soil and Water Conservation in China,2008(5):5.(in Chinese)

[2] 周宜萍,張聲林.關(guān)于進(jìn)一步實(shí)施好贛州市國(guó)家水土保持建設(shè)工程的思考[J].中國(guó)水土保持,2013(11): 11. Zhou Yiping,Zhang Shenglin.On further implementation of Ganzhou city national construction of soil and water conservation engineering thinking[J].Soil and Water Conservation in China,2013(11):11.(in Chinese)

[3] 王輔強(qiáng).國(guó)家水土保持重點(diǎn)建設(shè)工程遼寧省項(xiàng)目區(qū)的防治成效與建設(shè)經(jīng)驗(yàn)[J].中國(guó)水土保持,2014(12): 9. Wang Fuqiang.Prevention and treatment effectof the projectarea in Liaoning province and construction experience of national key project construction of soil and water conservation[J].Soil and Water Conservation in China, 2014(12):9.(in Chinese)

[4] 史志剛.安徽省大別山項(xiàng)目區(qū)國(guó)家水土保持重點(diǎn)建設(shè)工程實(shí)施成效與經(jīng)驗(yàn)[J].中國(guó)水土保持,2013(1): 16. Shi Zhigang.Positive effects and experience in Dabie mountain in Anhui province of national key project[J]. Soil and Water Conservation in China,2013(1):16. (in Chinese)

[5] 元月貴.山西省國(guó)家水土保持重點(diǎn)工程項(xiàng)目實(shí)施的主要途徑及其效益分析[J].水土保持通報(bào),2009,29 (1):192. Yuan Yuegui.Main approaches and benefit of the national key project implementation for soil and water conservation of Shanxi province[J].Soil and Water Conservation Bulletin,2009,29(1):192.(in Chinese)

[6] 邵子玉.義縣國(guó)家水土保持重點(diǎn)建設(shè)工程成效及做法[J].中國(guó)水土保持,2015(6):71. Shao Ziyu.Positive effects and experience in Yi County of national key project[J].Soil and Water Conservation in China,2015(6):71.(in Chinese)

[7] 陳文祥.國(guó)家水土保持重點(diǎn)建設(shè)工程水土流失綜合治理:以長(zhǎng)汀縣鄭坊河小流域?yàn)槔齕J].亞熱帶水土保持,2011,23(2):33. Chen Wenxiang.Comprehensive rehabilitation of soil erosion of national key project in Changting county Zhengfang River watershed as an example[J].Subtropical Soil and Water Conservation,2011,23(2):33.(in Chinese)

[8] 范彥淳,杜慧娟.河南省國(guó)家水土保持重點(diǎn)建設(shè)工程成效及做法[J].中國(guó)水土保持,2013(8):4. Fan Yanchun,Du Huijuan.Results and practices in Henan province of national key project[J].Soil and Water Conservation in China,2013(8):4.(in Chinese)

[9] 中華人民共和國(guó)水利部,中國(guó)科學(xué)院,中國(guó)工程院.中國(guó)水土流失防治與生態(tài)安全:北方土石山區(qū)卷[M].北京:科學(xué)出版社,2010:24-49. The Ministry ofWater Resources of the People’s Republic of China,Chinese Academy of Sciences,China Engineering Academy.China’s prevention and control of soil erosion and ecological security:volume of soil in the north mountain region[M].Beijing:Science Press,2010:24-49.(in Chinese)

[10] 姚孝友,劉霞,張光燦.淮河流域坡耕地水土流失特點(diǎn)與綜合整治模式[J].中國(guó)水土保持科學(xué),2012,10 (1):94. Yao Xiaoyou,Liu Xia,Zhang Guangcan.Characteristics of soil and water loss and the comprehensive control patterns of slope farm land in Huaihe River Basin[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation,2012,10(1): 94.(in Chinese)

[11] 姚孝友,肖幼,顧洪,等.淮河流域水土保持生態(tài)修復(fù)機(jī)理與技術(shù)[M].北京:中國(guó)水利水電出版社, 2011:16-30. Yao Xiaoyou,Xiao You,Gu Hong,et al.Soil and water conservation ecological restoration mechanism and technology in Huaihe River Basin[M].Beijing:China Water Power Press,2011:16-30.(in Chinese)

[12] 徐勇,安祥生,楊波,等.黃土高原坡改梯綜合效益分析:以燕溝流域?yàn)槔齕J].中國(guó)水土保持科學(xué),2010,8 (1):1. Xu Yong,An Xiangsheng,Yang Bo,etal.Synthetic analyses of effects of farmland terracing on the Loess Plateau:a case study of Yangou Watershed[J].Science of Soil and Water Conservation,2010,8(1):1.(in Chinese)

[13] 陳維杰.豫西山丘區(qū)構(gòu)建徑流聚集工程體系研究[J].中國(guó)水土保持科學(xué),2008,6(4):89. Chen Weijie.Research on the construction of the system of surface runoff gathering project in western mountain areas of Henan Province[J].Science of Soil and Water Conservation,2008,6(4):89.(in Chinese)

[14] 張永濤,王洪剛,李增印,等.坡改梯的水土保持效益研究[J].水土保持研究,2001,8(3):9. Zhang Yongtao,Wang Honggang,Li Zengyin,etal.Soil and water conservation benefits of terracing on the slope [J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2001,8 (3):9.(in Chinese)

[15] 楊紹兵,王克勤,陳志中.坡耕地反坡水平階對(duì)土壤水N、P垂直再分配的影響[J].中國(guó)水土保持科學(xué), 2011,9(1):56. Yang Shaobing,Wang Keqin,Chen Zhizhong.Effect of horizontal stage on vertical redistribution of the soilwater N and P on the sloping land[J].Science of Soil and Water Conservation,2011,9(1):56.(in Chinese)

[16] 中華人民共和國(guó)水利部.水利部辦公廳關(guān)于印發(fā)《全國(guó)水土保持區(qū)劃(試行)》的通知:辦水保[2012]512號(hào)[EB/OL].(2012-11-15)[2015-02-26].http:∥zwgk.mwr.gov.cn/zfxxgkm l/201212/t20121214_ 335132.html?keywords=辦水保. The Ministry ofWater Resources of the People’s Republic of China.The notice of General Office of Ministry of Water Resources about the districts of national soil and water conservation(try out):Soil conservation[2012] no.512[EB/OL].(2012-11-15)[2015-02-26].http:∥zwgk.mwr.gov.cn/zfxxgkml/201212/t20121214_ 335132.html?keywords=Soil conservation.(in Chinese)

[17] 中華人民共和國(guó)水利部.水利部辦公廳關(guān)于印發(fā)《全國(guó)水土保持規(guī)劃國(guó)家級(jí)水土流失重點(diǎn)預(yù)防區(qū)和重點(diǎn)治理區(qū)復(fù)核劃分成果》的通知:辦水保[2013]188號(hào)[EB/OL].(2013-08-12)[2015-02-26].http:∥www.swcc.org.cn/desc.asp?id=35813. The Ministry ofWater Resources of the People’s Republic of China.The notice of General Office of Ministry of Water Resources about the national soil and water conservation planning at the national level key soil and water loss prevention area and themajor control check results:Soil conservation[2013]no.188[EB/OL]. (2013-08-12)[2015-02-26].http:∥www.swcc. org.cn/desc.asp?id=35813.(in Chinese)

[18] 中華人民共和國(guó)水利部.北方土石山區(qū)水土流失綜合治理技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn):SL 665—2014[S].北京:中國(guó)水利水電出版社,2014:3-4.The Ministry ofWater Resources of the People’s Republic of China.Technical standards of comprehensive control of soil and water loss of soil in the north mountain region:SL 665-2014[S].Beijing:China Water Power Press,2014:3- 4.(in Chinese)

[19] 中華人民共和國(guó)國(guó)家標(biāo)準(zhǔn).土地利用現(xiàn)狀分類(lèi):GB/T 21010—2007[S].北京:中國(guó)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)出版社,2007:2-5. The state standard of the People’s Republic of China. Current land use classification:GB/T 21010-2007[S]. Beijing:China Standards Press,2007:2- 5.(in Chinese)

[20] Wessels K J,Prince SD,Malherbe J,et al.Can human-induced land degradation be distinguished from the effects of rainfall variability?A case study in South Africa[J].Journal of Arid Environments,2007,68(2): 271.

[21] Dymond JR,Stephens PR,Newsome P F,et al.Percentage vegetation cover of a degrading rangeland from SPOT[J].International Journal of Remote Sensing, 1992,13(11):1999.

[22] Aubert M,Alard D,Bureau F.Diversity of plant assemblages inmanaged temperate forests:a case study in Normandy(France)[J].Forest Ecology and Management,2003,175:321.

[23] 劉順生,胡續(xù)禮,袁利,等.人為干擾活動(dòng)對(duì)沂蒙山區(qū)麻櫟林群落結(jié)構(gòu)和水文性能的影響[J].中國(guó)水土保持科學(xué),2014,12(2):29. Liu Shunsheng,Hu Xuli,Yuan Li,etal.Impactof human disturbance on community structure and hydrological functions of Quercus acutissima forest in Yimeng Mountain area[J].Science of Soil and Water Conservation,2014,12(2):29.(in Chinese)

[24] 莫江明,彭少麟,Brown S,等.鼎湖山馬尾松林群落生物量生產(chǎn)對(duì)人為干擾的響應(yīng)[J].生態(tài)學(xué)報(bào),2004,24 (2):193. Mo Jiangming,Peng Shaolin,Brown S,et al.Response of biomass production to human impacts in a pine forest in subtropical China[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2004, 24(2):193.(in Chinese)

Control effects of the national key project of soil and water conservation on the soil erosion in Huaihe River Basin

XingWei1,Hu Xuli2,Zhang Ronghua1,Liu Xia3,Yuan Li2,Du Zilong4,Zhang Guangcan1

(1.The Key Laboratory of Soil Erosion and Ecological Restoration of Shandong Province,College of Forestry,Shandong Agricultural University,271018,Tai＇an,Shandong,China;2.Soil and Water Conservation Division of Huaihe River Commission ofWater Resources Ministry,233001,Bengbu,Anhui,China;3.College of Forestry,Nanjing Forestry University,210037,Nanjing,China; 4.Hydrographic Office of Shandong Province,250002,Jinan,China)

[Background]The national key project has been implemented in the fifth period(2013—2017),taking up a lot of financial,material resources and manpower,however,the investigation and research about the control effects of the national key project on soil erosion were not conducted yet. Therefore,the study of the control effect of the national key project of soil and water conservation on soilerosion in the two project regions may provide the reference for understanding and evaluation of the national key project.[M ethods]In this study,we selected two typical project areas,Yimengmountain area of Shandong Province and Dabie mountain area of Anhui Province,in Huaihe River Basin.Using remote sensing and ground survey to study the change of soil erosion in the project status after the national key project,and analyzing the effect of soil erosion in project regionswith differentmeasures.[Results] 1)The reduction rates of soil erosion area in Dayu project region of Yimengmountain and Taoling project region of Dabie mountain were 88.9%and 76.3%respectively,the reduction rates of soil erosion modulus were 76.7%and 72.1%,and soil erosionmoduluswere 243 t/(km2·a)and 314 t/(km2·a). The effect of prevention and control of soil erosion in Dayu project region was higher than in Taoling project region,which mainly resulted from two reasons:the allocations of themeasures in 2 regionswere different,and the control effects of the differentmeasures varied.Yimengmountain and Dabiemountain belonged to two different climatic regions,correspondingly,their leading foundations of soil and water conservation were in different functional areas.Therefore,the occurrence characteristics of soil and water loss,and the prevention and controlmeasures of soil erosion were different.2)The reduction rate of soil erosion modulus in the terraced project of slope farm land on the 2 regions was 82.5%and 83.8% respectively.The reduction rate of soil erosionmodulus in the level-terrace projectof afforested slope land was 70.32%.The reduction rate of soil erosion modulus in the enclosure and replanting,and in open forest land was 39.5%,and 55.2%respectively.[Conclusions]There were great reductions of soil erosion and soil erosion modulus after the national key project implemented in the two project regions. The prevention and control effects of soil erosion with differentmeasures were different in the regions of the national key project.The effects of prevention and control of soil erosion in terrace project and levelterrace project were much better than enclosure and replanting,and terrace project better than levelterrace project.

soil erosion;the national key project of soil and water conservation;terraced project;slope forest;level-terrace project;Yimengmountain area;Dabiemountain area

S157.2

A

1672-3007(2016)02-0137-10

10.16843/j.sswc.2016.02.018

2015-09-21

2015-11-04

項(xiàng)目名稱:南京林業(yè)大學(xué)高層次人才引進(jìn)項(xiàng)目“北方土石山區(qū)坡耕地與坡林地土壤侵蝕特征及土壤物理機(jī)制”(GXL2014069);水利部全國(guó)水土流失動(dòng)態(tài)監(jiān)測(cè)項(xiàng)目“淮河流域國(guó)家級(jí)重點(diǎn)防治區(qū)水土流失動(dòng)態(tài)監(jiān)測(cè)”(SBJ2015008);水利部淮河水利委員會(huì)水土保持管理科技項(xiàng)目“淮河流域國(guó)家水土保持重點(diǎn)建設(shè)工程區(qū)水土流失問(wèn)題與防治對(duì)策研究”(HWSBC2015002)

邢偉(1990—),男,碩士研究生。主要研究方向:水土保持監(jiān)測(cè)。E-mail:xingweiwei05@163.com

簡(jiǎn)介:劉霞(1971—),女,博士,教授,博士生導(dǎo)師。主要研究方向:水土流失監(jiān)測(cè)與評(píng)價(jià)。E-mail:liuxia@njfu. edu.cn