186: Water and Forests

GRAHAM JEWITT
School of Bioresources Engineering and Environmental Hydrology, University of KwaZulu-Natal,
Pietermaritzburg, South Africa

Years of research in various parts of the world has highlighted the interaction between forests and water. Forests
impact on the hydrological cycle affecting processes such as interception, transpiration, infiltration, groundwater
recharge, and runoff. These inevitably manifest themselves as impacts on the water resource, both positive and
negative. In this article, the role of forests in the hydrological cycle is described, and the potential impacts for
water resources are considered.

INTRODUCTION Land Use Impacts on Water Resources – Science,

Approximately 70% of the Earth is covered by water and of
the remaining land surface, over 30% by forest. Humans,
forests, and water have a relationship that dates back for
millennia. Throughout these times, both forest and water
resources have been utilized by humans, often with a focus
on one to the detriment of the other. Forests produce
many goods and services that are utilized by humans.
These include “traditional” commercial functions such as
production of wood and other raw materials, as well as more
difficult-to-value functions such as “biodiversity” that are
fundamental to the to ecosystem integrity. Calder (1996)
suggested that on a global scale, the largest land-cover
change in terms of area, and “arguably also in terms of
hydrologic effects, is from deforestation and afforestation”.
It is well accepted that forests influence the hydrolog-
ical cycle affecting both the quantity and quality of a
catchment’s water resources. The degree to which forests
influence the hydrological cycle, the need to supply water
resources to fulfill environmental and societal needs, and
the associated management issues for both resources has
evoked much controversy. The removal of forests for agri-
cultural and industrial purposes has been blamed for both
flood and drought, whilst in other regions, the establish-
ment of commercial forestry has been blamed for reduc-
ing flow in rivers, and its establishment is controlled by
water-specific legislation. Perhaps, because of the historical
relationship between trees, forests, and humans, strong per-
ceptions, both public and scientific exist (see Chapter 187,
Social and Political Factors, Volume 5).
In essence, two broad schools of thought developed
around the relationships between forests and water. A
notion that has become entrenched in some quarters is
that the complex of forest soil, roots, and litter acts as a
“sponge” soaking up water during rainy spells and releasing
it evenly during dry periods. The proponents emphasize
that forests are “good” for water supplies and reinforce
perceptions that forests “improve” water resources by
recharging groundwater, maintaining baseflows, improving
water quality, and moderating floods. Despite insufficient
experimental data to support these perceptions, and the
publication of many findings to the contrary, these are
entrenched in policies and operational frameworks of many
development agencies, foresters, and water managers.
The contradictory view is probably most effectively
stated by Hamilton and King (1983) who suggested that
“roots” may be more appropriately labelled a pump rather
than a “sponge” and that “roots certainly do not release
water in the dry season but rather remove it from the
soil in order that the trees may transpire and grow”. They
added that “major floods occur because too much rain falls
in too short a time, or over too long a time. In either
case, the rainfall exceeds the capacity of the soil mantle
to store it and the stream channel to convey it”. In effect,
they provided a thorough synthesis of issues that had been
debated for over a 100 years, but were pioneers in an
era of important advances in forest hydrology that have
occurred over the past 25 years and which have improved

Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences. Edited by M G Anderson.

 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
2 LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT

the state of hydrological knowledge in the field. However, Table 1 Estimated extent (1996) of the global forest area
contradictory results and difficulties in the measurement of (http://www.unep-dwcmc.org/forest/homepage.
some variables mean that a conclusive interpretation of how htm)
forests influence water resources is not always possible. 1996 Forest 1996 Protected
The strong perceptions and misconceptions that exist are Region area (km2 ) forest area (km2 )
symptomatic of problems in natural resource management, Africa 5 683 130 496 927
where the use of scientific information can degenerate into Australasia 1 493 234 125 619
simple application of generalized values and a widespread Caribbean 53 847 7899
belief is allowed to pass as fact. The result is that many Central America 901 984 88 096
aspects of land cover and water resource decision making Continental S and 1 707 679 192 461
SE Asia
are based more on perceived wisdom (myth) than scien- Europe 1815396 144 832
tifically established reality (Calder, 1999). These general- Far East 1 456 027 77 401
izations are seldom explicitly tested and are often applied SE Asia 1 468 360 247 497
inappropriately to address specific problems at local scales Middle East 167 661 6386
over short time periods. The consequence is that a body of North America 8 453 988 699 956
Russia 8 257 159 150 637
“pseudo-fact” is generated in a self-reinforcing mode that South America 8 429 459 874 924
seldom challenges theory, and eventually forms a barrier
World 39 887 924 3 112 835
to effective, scientifically based management and perpet-
uates inappropriate paradigms or myths (Gunderson et al.,
1995). The failure of many individuals and organizations to hectare), and that are harvested in less than 20 years
understand the relationships between forest and water has (Cossalter and Pye-Smith, 2003). The rapid growth rates
led to the “misuse of both money and land” (Cossalter and of such plantations imply high water use by them, and the
Pye-Smith, 2003). typically short (6–12 year) crop rotations are intended to
The subdiscipline of “forest hydrology” considers the optimize this.
scientific basis for these perceptions, whilst many of these It is estimated that forest plantations cover approximately
misperceptions are explored in Chapter 187, Land Use 10 million ha worldwide and that this area is growing at a
Impacts on Water Resources – Science, Social and rate in the order of 1 million ha per year (UNEP, 1996;
Political Factors, Volume 5. Cossalter and Pye-Smith, 2003).

Forests Around the World Invasive Alien Plants

A recent United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
estimates that worldwide, there is approximately 40 million
km2 of forest, with just over 3 million km2 in International
Union for Conservation (IUCN) recognized areas (Table 1).
This encompasses 25 different forest types, divided into
tropical and nontropical, and includes both indigenous
and exotic forest plantations, as well as “sparse trees
and parkland”, in which canopy cover ranges from only
10–30%.
Forest Plantations
There is an ongoing discussion worldwide of the potential
environmental impacts of the large-scale establishment of
forest plantations. The growing of trees to provide for
industrial needs, in particular, pulp and fiber for paper
production and charcoal for steel production, has become
a major business over the past 30 years. The expansion of
so-called fast-wood plantations has been particularly rapid
in a few key countries in both the developed and the
developing world (FAO, 2003; Cossalter and Pye-Smith,
2003). Fast-wood plantations are defined as intensively
managed commercial plantations, set in blocks of a single
species that produce industrial round wood at high growth
rates (mean annual increment of no less than 15 m3 per
Invasive Alien Plants (IAPs) have been identified as a major
biodiversity and water resources problem worldwide. In the
case of stands of IAPs made up of tree species, these may
have similar characteristics to forests, and particularly in
semiarid regions they have often been shown to use more
water than the land cover they invade (Calder and Dye,
2001). For example, it has been suggested that IAPs are
causing the loss of almost 7% of the annual flow in South
Africa’s rivers each year (Versfeld et al., 1998). Water
resources issues are especially highlighted in semiarid
regions and much of the focus in this regard has been
on IAPS growing in riparian zones, where it is believed
that plants transpire more water than their counterparts
elsewhere in the catchment (Mack and d’Antonio, 1998;
Dye et al., 2000), especially where dense stands develop
(Sala et al., 1996). This has reportedly led to reduction of
flow levels in places by up to 50% (Higgins and Richardson,
1996; Mack and d’Antonio, 1998).
A Brief History of Forest Hydrology
Although most discussions around the topic of forests
and water credit the work of European and American
researchers with the first comprehensive studies of the

effects of forests on the water cycle, the history of forest
hydrological research in China can be traced back to the
mid-period of the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644)(Xinxiao,
1991). The earliest forest hydrology studies in Europe
are reported to have been undertaken in Switzerland,
reported by Engler (1919), and cited by McCulloch and
Robinson, 1993). A major work by Zon (1927), in which the
available literature on forest influences was summarized,
preceded a period of “unparalleled research” (Lee, 1980;
p. 16) not only in Europe and America, but also in
East Africa (Blackie et al., 1979), South Africa (Nänni,
1970; Scott et al., 2000), and Australia (Best et al., 2003).
Kittredge, (1948) published his highly influential book
“Forest Influences” that became a major reference work.
Bruijnzeel (2004) reports that a heated debate on the
hydrological role of forests took place in the 1930s and
1940s in the forestry journal of the former Dutch East
Indies (Tectona). In the past 40 years, major text book
contributions to the subject have been made by Hewlett and
Nutter (1969), which were later revised by Hewlett (1982)
and Lee (1980) and more recently by Chang (2002), as
well as chapters and sections in the myriad hydrological
text books that exist. However, the work by Hewlett –
Principles of Forest Hydrology (Hewlett, 1982) probably
remains the most prescribed forest hydrology text, and the
review of forested catchment experiments by Bosch and
Hewlett (1982) remains one of the most cited hydrological
publications. Forest hydrology studies have been at the
forefront of development of many hydrological theories.
Perhaps, the most well known of these is the “variable
source area” concept of runoff generation (Hewlett and
Hibbert, 1967) proposed in 1965 at the International Forest
Hydrology Symposium held at Penn State University.
Prior to 1980, the vast majority of forest hydrology
studies were focused on water balance approaches such
as paired catchment or split sample experiments. These
studies were inevitably “input–output” type studies, with
the result that critical processes such as transpiration and
soil-water uptake had to be inferred, rather than measured.
Arguably, the most significant advance in the studies of
forest hydrology over the past 25 years have been allied
with the advances in computing power and microcomputing
techniques, which have provided the opportunities for the
development of techniques and methodologies which allow
the study of these processes representing internal catch-
ment storages and fluxes and a more sophisticated study of
“whole tree” water use. By 1993, at the “Water Issues in
Forests Today” symposium held in Canberra, Australia, it
was felt that the need for such process studies had been
widely accepted as a new paradigm in forest hydrology
(O’Loughlin and Dunin, 1993), and recent literature shows
that researchers have undertaken detailed hydrological pro-
cess studies in both forested and nonforested catchments as
part of this new paradigm. Energy balance approaches using
WATER AND FORESTS 3
Bowen Ratio and Eddy Covariance, and more recently
scintillation techniques has allowed more spatially and tem-
porally detailed measurements of total evaporation, whilst
sophisticated heat pulse and isotope studies have allowed
for direct estimation of the transpiration component of
the hydrological cycle. Advances with soil-water measure-
ment instruments, such as neutron moisture meter and time
domain reflectrometry have informed scientists about root
uptake patterns and groundwater recharge beneath forests.
Furthermore, advances in tracer studies are providing the
impetus for the development on new theories of soil water
and runoff generation (Bonell, 1998), whilst advances in
remote sensing techniques provide opportunities for large-
scale estimates of total evaporation.
Some argue that these process studies have been under-
taken at a vast expense, resulting in many publications,
but have done little to enhance the applicability of the sci-
ence in a water resources management context and they
at least need revisiting to address issues that are now rele-
vant (e.g. DeWalle, 2003). In particular, the complexities of
scaling results from detailed hydrological process studies at
an experimental site to the catchment have slowed some of
the expected progress in this regard. However, there have
been notable cases where such process studies have had
a direct influence on water resources planning decisions
as highlighted in Section “Forests and water resources”
below.
THE IMPACT OF FORESTS ON THE
HYDROLOGICAL CYCLE
The influences of land cover on the hydrological cycle
are well known (see Chapter 117, Land Use and Land
Cover Effects on Runoff Processes: Urban and Sub-
urban Development, Volume 3–Chapter 120, Land Use
and Land Cover Effects on Runoff Processes: Fire,
Volume 3). Forests, as a tall and often evergreen land
cover, typically with deep root systems, litter layers, and
secondary canopies occupy a particular niche in studies
of land cover on hydrological functioning. The subdis-
cipline of forest hydrology has as its focus the way in
which forests influence the hydrological cycle. As high-
lighted above, “modern” scientific understanding on forest
hydrology has evolved from almost 100 years of research
from forests based on paired catchment, water balance, and
more recently detailed hydrological process studies. The
vast majority of these studies indicate decreased runoff
from areas under forests as compared with areas under
shorter land covers. Furthermore, research has highlighted
the potential for differences in water use between dif-
ferent forest and tree types, and the rapid increase in
the area of forest plantations since the 1960s has high-
lighted the importance of different growth stages in tree
water use.
4 LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT
Partitioning of Precipitation in Forests
Figure 1 provides a forest hydrology perspective of the
hydrological cycle. In particular, the key water partitioning
points of the hydrological cycle are highlighted, that is, the
points where land cover in general, and forest in particular,
are likely to impact on the hydrological processes that affect
the way in which incoming precipitation is partitioned:
1. At the canopy level, incoming precipitation is parti-
tioned into vertically orientated fluxes, that is, upward
represented by evaporating water (interception loss and
transpiration from the stomata) and downward repre-
sented by throughfall, stemflow, and canopy drip ulti-
mately forming net precipitation once passing through
the litter layer.
2. At the soil surface, net precipitation is partitioned
horizontally into runoff and vertically into infiltration,
as well as water vapor through direct evaporation from
the soil or litter layer.
3. At the root zone, upward water fluxes are generated,
that is, direct evaporation from the soil, but more
importantly uptake of water by the root system for
transpiration. In this zone, water is also partitioned
both into downward percolation, ultimately providing
groundwater recharge, and horizontally into “inter-
flow”, provided by unsaturated flow that moves downs-
lope to eventually form runoff.
Precipitation
Infiltration
Surface runoff
Soil moisture
Subsurface flow
Groundwater percolation
Root uptake
Water
partitioning points
Groundwater
Figure 1 The key water partitioning points in the forest hydrology cycle. A color version of this image is available at
http://www.mrw.interscience.wiley.com/ehs
A perspective of the hydrological cycle that is becoming
increasingly popular when considering water in the con-
text of food and fiber production classifies water vapor
and liquid water as green water and blue water respec-
tively (Falkenmark et al., 1999). Blue water is the runoff
originating from the partitioning of precipitation at the
plant canopy and land surface (eventually reaching the
river network and forming streamflow), and the parti-
tioning of soil water (forming baseflow and groundwater
recharge). Green water is water vapor and is represented
by the flow of water to the atmosphere as evaporation
from soil, lakes, and water intercepted by canopy sur-
faces and transpiration by vegetation i.e. Total Evaporation
(ET). As highlighted in Figure 2, which illustrates the
expected differences in ET from grassland and forested
catchments on the basis of equations derived from over
250 experimental catchments worldwide, in most forested
catchments, green water flow greatly exceeds blue water
flow (Zhang, 1999).
To the landowner, the benefits most commonly associ-
ated with green water use are the production of biomass
resulting from the movement of water through agricultural
crops and timber by transpiration. To others, forests offer
attractive recreational areas and secondary products such
as firewood or honey production. Such benefits can be con-
sidered “ecosystem goods and services”, which foresters
in particular, and society in general, derive from the land
that is utilized (Jewitt, 2002a). The role of land cover in
Solar radiation
Precipitation
Interception
Transpiration
Fog interception
Through fall
Evaporation
Stem flow
Litter interception
Streamflow
Groundwater

1600
Annual total evaporation (mm)
1200
800
400
0
0 500
Figure 2 Relationship between annual total evaporation and rainfall for different vegetation (After Zhang, 1999,
Reproduced by permission of the Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, CSIRO, Canberra, Australia). A
color version of this image is available at http://www.mrw.interscience.wiley.com/ehs
the catchment is of critical importance in this regard, as it
partitions rainfall between water vapor flows to the atmo-
sphere as evaporation and transpiration (green water), and
the flow of water to rivers and groundwater (blue water). In
arid and semiarid areas, runoff to rivers (i.e. blue water pro-
duction) is generally less than 10%. Thus, a small change
in the partitioning of rainfall by land cover, which is typi-
cally the case when forest plantations are established, can
have a relatively large impact on runoff.
The Soil – Vegetation– Atmosphere Continuum
Forests and water cannot be considered in isolation, as
the influences of forestry on water are largely dependent
on the soil and climate conditions as well as the physio-
logical characteristics of the tree itself. Although it may
be useful to isolate different components of forest water
use, it must always be recognized that these processes are
part of a continuum. The fundamental importance of the
soil–vegetation–atmosphere relationship and the hydrolog-
ical role thereof has been increasingly highlighted in recent
years, as process studies in forests have gained impetus,
leading some to state that “Climate-Soil-Vegetation dynam-
ics is the core of hydrology” (Rodriguez-Iturbe, 2000). Tree
water use is driven by above (leaf area and pattern) and
below ground (rooting depth and pattern) structure, and the
rate at which water is used (interception and transpiration)
that is further controlled by atmospheric and soil condi-
tions. The role of soil properties in controlling infiltration,
root water uptake, and evaporation from the soil as well
as percolation of water through the soil and groundwater
recharge coupled with an increase in studies of “whole tree
WATER AND FORESTS 5
Forest
Grassland
Mixed veg.
Unknown
Forest trend line
Grass trend line
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Annual rainfall (mm)
water use” and water use efficiency is probably the most
topical research aspect in forest hydrology today.
The main reasons for water use differences between
forests and other land covers and different tree genera
and species are related to physiological differences, that
is, canopy and root structure. In assessing water use by
different forest genera and species, a number of general
points emerge:
• Different tree types have varying rates of transpiration
under conditions of adequate available soil water (Bosch
and Smith, 1989; Wullschleger et al., 1998; Lands-
berg, 1999).
• Some trees maintain near-optimal rates of transpiration,
even at relatively low soil-water content (Russel, 1973;
Pryor, 1976; Landsberg, 1999). Others, however, are
generally more conservative water users and reduce
transpiration rates at higher soil-water contents and
different atmospheric demands than other species.
• The distribution of roots differs with both age and
tree type (Sherry, 1971) and in the case of man-made
forestry plantations, will be affected by the method of
site preparation used (Boden, 1984).
• The density of the trees’ canopy will affect the amount
of rainfall intercepted at the canopy level (Crockford
and Richardson, 1990a).
• The thickness and nature of the litter layer on the forest
floor will differ according to climatic conditions as well
as tree type and age. The older the forest, the greater the
build up of litter, and the higher the litter interception
is likely to be.
6 LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT
Total Evaporation
Total Evaporation (ET) can be considered the consumptive
use of water by a forest. It consists of the transpiration
of water by plants and the evaporation of water from the
soil and of the rain water intercepted by the forest canopy.
ET depends on both climatic factors such as solar radia-
tion, temperature, air humidity, and wind velocity as well
as plant physiology factors, such as leaf characteristics
(leaf area, evergreen versus deciduous), albedo, tree canopy,
and rooting characteristics. Current scientific understand-
ing indicates that in both wet and dry climates, evaporation
from forests is likely to be higher than that from shorter
crops (Calder, 1998) Trees form aerodynamically rough
surfaces to the wind providing a high degree of turbulent
mixing within the forest canopy. This results in the mainte-
nance of high vapor pressure deficits and correspondingly
high rates of transport of water vapor from the leaf surface
to the atmosphere, and may result in evaporation from the
canopy at rates in excess of reference potential evaporation
during wet conditions (Calder, 1990). In the dry season and
periods of drought, several studies have highlighted the fact
that transpiration from forests is likely to be greater than
other catchment land covers (Calder, 1990; Dye, 1996a),
because of the generally greater depth and extent of their
roots compared to other shorter land covers and the result-
ing greater access to soil water. Furthermore, litter is an
important factor when considering the water balance of a
forest, since it will both prevent a certain fraction of rainfall
from entering the soil by intercepting it, and simultaneously
will reduce soil-water evaporation losses and prevent over-
land flow.
Because of their size, longevity, and the deep rooting
nature of trees and the fact that many forests grow in
inaccessible areas, direct estimation of total evaporation
from forests is particularly difficult. Typically, ET is either
determined directly on the basis of microclimatic studies
above the canopy, or indirectly by solving the water balance
at tree, plot, or catchment scale. Conversely, in many
studies, catchment runoff is calculated as the difference
between precipitation and ET, or measured at the level
of the streams coming from the upstream catchment area.
Calder (1998) has suggested a “limits approach” to focus
attention on the different processes that are hypothesized
to control evaporation in temperate and tropical climates
and wet and dry areas within these, and thus aid selection
of which measurements are undertaken or which models
should be used to estimate these. These limits are presented
in Table 2.
Interception
When the forest canopy is closed, the interception of
precipitation by forests is a major component of the
influence that forests exert on the hydrological cycle.
Interception by forest canopies has been considered to be
Table 2 Principal limits and controls on evaporation for
different land uses in different climates (After Calder, 1998)
Principal limits on evaporation
Temperate climate
Land use Dry Wet
Tall crop Physiology Advection
Soil moisture
Short crop Soil moisture Radiation
Radiation Physiology
Tropical climate
Land use Dry Wet
Tall Crop Soil moisture Raindrop size
Tree size Physiology
Short crop Soil moisture Radiation
one of the most thoroughly researched topics in hydrologic
literature (Gray, 1970; Crockford and Richardson, 1990a).
A detailed description of the interception process is found
in Chapter 43, Evaporation of Intercepted Rainfall,
Volume 1.
Interception loss from forests depends upon the atmo-
spheric condition driving the evaporation process and rain-
fall characteristics, but also on the density and nature of the
forest stand. Usually, depending upon management prac-
tices, older trees have denser canopies, correspondingly
higher canopy storage capacities, and higher interception
loss from younger stands. It has also been noted that water
droplet size affects the rate at which canopy storage capac-
ity is reached. Thus, both raindrop size as well as canopy
characteristics influence the drop size as it passes through
the forest. In the case of forests with low leaf area, inter-
ception characteristics may be closely related to the drop
size of the incident rain (Calder, 1996).
Significant differences in interception between evergreen
and deciduous trees can be expected. For example, mature
pines have a very dense canopy with high leaf area,
are usually evergreen, have high surface tension between
needles, and usually occur in temperate regions where
rainfall of low intensity and small drop size is common
and have been shown to have high values of interception
loss (Crockford and Richardson, 1990b). Interception loss
is estimated as 25–50% in conifer stands and 15–30% in
deciduous forests. In semiarid regions and in forests of the
tropical moist zone where high intensity convective storms
are typical, the percentages of interception are variable,
but are usually lower than in the temperate regions. In
semiarid Mpumalanga, South Africa, Dye (1996a) believed
that this reflects the less frequent, more intense rainfall
characteristic of summer rainfall regions and concluded that
transpiration, rather than interception from dry canopies
was the dominant evaporation process in South African
plantations. This conclusion can be extended to presume
that the limit on ET in this situation is available soil
moisture (Table 2).

Litter Interception Most forest stands have a forest
floor of accumulated debris through which rainfall must
pass before it enters the soil. Litter is usually regarded
as beneficial to the forest system. Litter may play an
important role in increasing infiltration rates in forest soils
and may also protect the soil from temperature and moisture
extremes as well as providing protection from erosional
forces such as raindrop impact (Metz, 1958; Schutz, 1990).
Litter also constitutes a critical source in the nutrient cycle
and is a key to maintaining productivity in plantation
systems. In many forests, but in particular in tropical and
subtropical forests, tree roots use water and nutrients from
the lower levels of the litter layer and as the forest stand
matures, the importance of the litter layer in the nutrient
cycle increases until it may eventually replace the mineral
soil as the principal source of nutrients (Schutz, 1990).
As rainfall passes through the litter layer, some rainfall
is retained and part later returned to the atmosphere by
evaporation. The litter layer may have important effects
on surface runoff, sediment yield and, as mentioned pre-
viously, infiltration into and evaporation from the soil.
Researchers have shown that moisture intercepted by lit-
ter is governed primarily by moisture holding capacity and
initial storage capacity of the litter, and by the evaporative
demand following the rainfall event (Rowe, 1955; Helvey
and Patric, 1965). Litter interception values range from 2%
of mean annual precipitation (MAP) in temperate deciduous
forests (Blow, 1955) to 4% in mature pine forests (Rowe,
1955; Bernard, 1963; Helvey, 1967). Pathak et al. (1985)
estimated litter interception to be approximately 12% of
MAP in a Himalayan forest.
Transpiration
The rate at which forests transpire is a function of the
available radiant energy, atmospheric demand, windspeed,
the nature of the rooting system, and the amount of water
available in the soil as well as resistance imposed by the
vegetation through stomatal conductance and the surface
area of the leaves exposed to the atmosphere (Landsberg,
1999). In an undisturbed landscape, it is likely that the
structure and leaf area of the vegetation will tend towards
being optimal to utilize available water (Specht, 1972).
Essentially, transpiration is the process whereby water
is evaporated through the stomata on the leaves of plants
(see Chapter 104, Satellite-Based Analysis of Ecologi-
cal Controls for Land-Surface Evaporation Resistance,
Volume 3). Transpiration is both a result of, and a funda-
mental component of the photosynthesis process. In order
to assimilate carbon, plants need to open their stomata. As
the internal cells of the stomata are coated with water, the
relative humidity within the stomata is assumed to be high,
resulting in a vapor pressure deficit between the interior
of the leaf and the surrounding atmosphere and thus, the
movement of water from the leaf to the atmosphere. Thus,
WATER AND FORESTS 7
many of the tree and climatic characteristics that affect
evaporation of water intercepted by the tree canopy also
affect the transpiration process. Forest species vary consid-
erably in physiological characteristics such as height, leaf
area, stomatal resistance, whether deciduous or not, with
the result that the amount of energy available to drive the
evaporation and transpiration processes varies considerably
between tree types. In this regard, researchers have high-
lighted the strong relationship that exists between leaf area
and transpiration rates (Calder, 1998; Landsberg, 1999).
Furthermore, the amount of water that is available for tran-
spiration depends on the texture and depth of the soil and
the ability of the plant to extract it. The drier the soil, the
greater the tension between soil and water particles and
the more difficult it is for trees to extract water result-
ing in reduced transpiration rates. The ability of plants to
extract water from the soil varies according to root depth
and pattern, as well as other physiological aspects, with
the result that different tree types reduce their transpiration
rates at different soil-water tensions (Russel, 1973; Pryor,
1976). Furthermore, the depth to which water is extracted
corresponds to the rooting depth of the tree. In many cir-
cumstances, trees with deep roots can extract water that is
unavailable to other plants. Initially, water is almost exclu-
sively extracted from the surface layers; as the soil dries
out, water is extracted from increasingly deeper levels of
the soil profile (Richards and Caldwell, 1987).
Rates of transpiration from plants and the tree physiolog-
ical factors that affect them are much debated. Coniferous
vegetation has also been reported to close stomata when
the surrounding atmosphere is dry, even if soil moisture
is freely available. However, in the case of fast-growing
eucalypt species, stomatal conductance and transpiration
have been shown to be most strongly related to predawn
leaf water potential and, thus, to soil moisture content
(Mielke et al., 1999; White et al., 2000). Experiments and
measurements based on porometer measurements of leaf
conductance and rates of soil moisture depletion have high-
lighted differences in transpiration rates between species
(Chang, 2002). In South Africa, Dye (Pers. Comm., 2003)
have evidence that slow growing indigenous forest trees
of the Podocarpus genus have much lower transpiration
rates than commercially grown plantation species such as
Eucalyptis grandis. However, although there may not be
consensus regarding differences in stomatal conductance
in trees, it is accepted that leaf area varies considerably
and that these differences are likely to be more important
than differences in stomatal responses (Landsberg, 1999).
Periodic soil-water stress is also known to cause long-term
adaptive reductions in leaf area, stomatal conductance, and
sapwood structure and these may limit the rate of water
use even in seasons when soil water is plentiful (Eamus
et al., 2000).
8 LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT
A phenomenon that has received some attention in recent
years is that of “hydraulic lift”, which is described as the
movement of water from lower and wetter soil layers to
upper drier layers. This results from the flow of water
extracted from the deeper soil layers by the “trees” tap
root, down the “trees” lateral roots, and extruded into the
upper soil layers during the night when transpiration has
ceased (Richards and Caldwell, 1987). This phenomenon
is not typical of all tree types, but where it does occur,
transpiration rates may increase as water becomes more
readily available to the upper layers of the soil.
Infiltration, Drainage, and Recharge
Typically, forest soils have a high infiltration capacity. This
is due both to the presence of above ground vegetation
and litter that protect the soil from compaction caused by
raindrop impact and because of the well-structured porous
and highly permeable soils that are found to exist in forested
areas. It is the forest floor rather than the canopy that is most
important in controlling infiltration rates in forest stands
(Hornberger et al., 1997). However, it is also true that the
forest canopy and litter reduce the mechanical effect of
water drops that in turn protects and maintains the surface
soil structure. High proportions of stemflow are common
in many forest tree types and associated with this are high
infiltration rates of the water flowing down the tree trunk
to the soil surface.
In forest plantations, certain site preparation techniques,
for example, deep soil ripping or the construction of
terraces can substantially increase infiltration. However, the
infiltration capacity can also be reduced by management
practices associated with logging activities or fire.
Movement of Water in the Soil
The downslope movement of water in the unsaturated zone
(often called interflow ) is believed to play a very important
role in the generation of both low flows and high flows
(Rice and Hornberger, 1998; Lorentz et al., 2003). It is
clear from isotopic signatures that substantial portions of the
storm hydrograph consist of pre-event water (Bonell, 1998).
In addition, forest soils are often characterized by high
levels of macropore development (Bonell, 1993; Lorentz
et al., 2003) and it is generally accepted among forest
hydrologists that preferential flow within these macropores
is a significant component of the hydrological functioning
in forested catchments. Macropores form pathways where
roots have rotted, or where cracks in the soil or animal bur-
rows exist, and can form extensive networks, with the result
that subsurface flow in these situations is transported in sat-
urated form within these areas of the unsaturated soil matrix
(see Chapter 111, Rainfall Excess Overland Flow, Vol-
ume 3–Chapter 191, Environmental Flows: Managing
Hydrological Environments, Volume 5). Johnston (1987)
reports that recharge of groundwater can also be positively
affected by such preferential flow and provides evidence of
recharge rates that increase from a range of 2.2–7.2 mm
year−1 to 50–100 mm year−1 .
Drainage and Groundwater Recharge
It is difficult to define the groundwater recharge compo-
nent of the hydrological cycle, and often this perspective
depends upon the scale at which associated processes are
observed (Lorentz et al., 2003). There has been much
research on the hydrological functioning of the unsaturated
zone, both in humid and arid regions. Important differences
between them, such as the fact that the unsaturated zone is
usually deeper in arid and semiarid areas lead to different
interactions with land cover. Forests influence groundwater
levels by direct abstraction of water from the phreatic sur-
face where this is accessible to tree roots, but perhaps more
importantly by impacting the rate of recharge of percolating
water to the groundwater table, as tree roots abstract water
from the unsaturated zone during the transpiration process.
Whilst these two processes are probably most significant,
the interaction of forests and groundwater is highly com-
plex and depends upon the nature and type of vegetation, as
well the position of the landscape as illustrated in Figure 3.
Forests are widely reported to have deep roots that can
access groundwater directly. However, because hydrologi-
cal studies tend to focus on the upper portion of the soil
profile, there are very few studies that substantiate this
perspective. Consequently, some authors believe that the
ability of trees to dry out soil profiles to great depths or
access groundwater directly is “not generally appreciated”
(Le Maitre et al., 1999).
FORESTS AND WATER RESOURCES
The processes associated with the key precipitation parti-
tioning points highlighted above inevitably manifest them-
selves as impacts on the water resource. It is now gener-
ally accepted that forest cover has a negative impact on
total water yield from a catchment. However, the impact
of forests on low flows and on floods is highly contro-
versial as has been highlighted by several authors (e.g.
McCulloch and Robinson, 1993; DeWalle, 2003; Robin-
son et al., 2003). The following sections serve to high-
light the water resources impacts and benefits associated
with forests.
Runoff and Catchment Yield
Many years of research in forested catchments worldwide
has highlighted the major role that vegetative cover has
on the total evaporation component of the hydrological
cycle and the resulting catchment runoff. In some cases,
this has resulted in the development of government policy
specific to forests. For example, in South Africa, concern
 WATER AND FORESTS 9

B Afforestation ( or conversion of short herbaceous vegetation to a dense

vigorous vegetation) will increase evaporative losses and reduce
recharge (B vs A). Conversely deforestation is likely to increase
recharge (B to A). Pumping of groundwater (C) may reduce discharge
and so affect riparian or wetland vegetation (D). Bush clearing will
reduce evaporative losses and increase recharge (F vs E). Pumping
from rivers or alluvial aquifers (G) can affect riverine vegetation by
lowering groundwater levels. Large phreatophytes along rivers or
groundwater zones (H) can depress the groundwater locally causing,
A for instance, diurnal dips in discharge hydrographs. Plantations of trees
with access to a near-surface water table, or exploitation of such
groundwater,can cause a draw-down and this may reduce the size of
C adjacent wetlands and their plant composition (I and J).
E
D
F

H I
G
J

Figure 3 Some typical interactions between vegetation and groundwater (Drawing on ideas developed by Le Maitre
et al., 1999). A color version of this image is available at http://www.mrw.interscience.wiley.com/ehs

regarding the impact of forest on available water resources highlighted a reduction in runoff from areas converted
has led to legislation controlling the establishment of to forest plantations, a summary of which is shown in
commercial forest plantations since 1972. Under a new Figure 4.
National Water Act promulgated in 1998, forest plantations Peel et al. (2001) have highlighted the role that changes
have been declared “Stream Flow Reduction Activities”, in ET may play in affecting variability in runoff. On
and as such landowners are required to apply for a water use the basis of an analysis of several catchments worldwide,
licence before planting plantation forests. This legislation they concluded that the variability of annual runoff is
has been informed by many years of paired catchment 1–9% higher for catchments with evergreen, as opposed
and forest hydrology process studies, all of which have to deciduous cover and presented the equation (for annual

1000 1. Westfalia D,83% Eucalyptus grandis

2. Mokobulaan A, 100% Eucalyptus grandis
3. Mokobulaan B, 100% Pinus patula
Annual reduction in streamflow (mm)

4. Cathedral Peak III,86% Pinus patula

800 5. Lamprechtsbos B, 84% Pinus patula
6. Bosboukloof, 57% Pinus Radiata
7. Biesiesvlei, 98% Pinus Radiata

600
1 4

400
2 7
6
5
200
3

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Years after afforestation

Figure 4 Streamflow reduction measured from six different paired catchment studies in South Africa with different
extents of forest (Dye and Bosch, 2000,  South African Institute of Forestry)
10 LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT
values) below:


MAP
Cvr = Cvp (1)
MAP − AET
Where
Cvr – coefficient of variation of annual runoff,
Cvp – coefficient of variation of annual precipitation
MAP – mean annual precipitation
AET – annual total evaporation
The implications are that any change in ET in a catch-
ment will alter the variability of runoff (assuming that
precipitation is unchanged). Furthermore, if ET is increased,
Cvr will also increase. As a change in land cover is the only
significant change in ET that may be expected, Peel et al.
(2001) concluded that any change in land cover that tran-
spires more than the original will result in an increase in
runoff variability, as well as a decrease in annual runoff.
This is an issue of particular concern when tall evergreen
tree plantations are planned in catchments with predomi-
nately grassland cover, and in addition to the well-known
concerns in South Africa, which has led to calls for cau-
tion in the establishment of forest plantations elsewhere
in the world (e.g. Vertessy et al., 2003). The considera-
tion of runoff reduction as well as increased variability is
especially important when considering a potential reduc-
tion in water resources yield from a catchment. Peel et al.
(2002) made use of the Gould–Gamma procedure to high-
light the impact that such land-cover change could have on
yield–storage relationships based on annual runoff from a
catchment. According to this method, constant regulated
yield (D), is a ratio of mean annual flow from a reservoir
equal in size to the mean annual inflow into the reservoir
with a reliability of 95% is defined as:
1.12
D =1− (2)
1 – 1.67Cvr −2
Thus, storage yield is dependent upon both the amount
and the variability of runoff with the implication that
changes in catchment land cover that increase the variability
of runoff must also reduce the yield and the reliability of
that yield: a critical concern for water resources planners.
In South Africa, the invasion of large areas of a catchment
by forest species IAPs has been shown to reduce the yield
from water supply systems considerably (Versfeld et al.,
1998; Gorgens and van Wilgen, 2004). Yield considerations
provide a useful input to decision making. However, the
provision of annual storage yield is only one of many
considerations in water resources planning. In this regard,
the consideration of periods of low flows when direct
abstractions from a river, or when environmental minimum
flows are specified, is critical.
Low Flows
Low flows are a normal, seasonal part of the natural
hydrologic regime. Low flows are distinct from drought,
though the effects are often similar (Smakhtin, 2001). In the
absence of an adequate store of water, the low flow period
is critical when considering competing water user needs,
as it is in these periods that most conflict arises between
different users, water supply schemes fail, river ecosystems
are stressed, and water pollution issues are highlighted. As
highlighted in the introduction to this article, it has often
been suggested that forests behave as “sponges”, retaining
rainwater that is slowly released following a rainfall event
or wet season and thus maintain or regulate river flows.
However, recent advances in hydrological process studies,
particular those which examine the interconnection between
surface and ground water have highlighted the fallacy of
this argument. Although many definitions of low flow exist,
the key issue in the context of forest hydrology studies
is an emerging body of work that highlights the role of
accumulated soil moisture flow in the unsaturated zone, in
addition to groundwater, in the generation of low flows
(Kendall and McDonnell, 1998; Lorentz et al., 2003). The
basis for the assumption that forests “store water” is the
high infiltration rate that is often found on forested soils,
and the specific hydraulic properties of many organic rich
forest soils. However, it is increasingly recognized that the
transpiration demand of the forest and their deep roots that
provide access to soil moisture deep in the profile mean
that forests are more likely to have a negative, rather than
positive impact on low flows from a catchment. Conversely,
the most significant change following deforestation is an
increase in “dry weather” streamflow (delayed flow) that
arises from a decrease in total evaporation (Bonell, 1998).
Observations from South Africa and India indicate that
increased dry period transpiration reduces low flows. Smith
and Scott (1992), analyzing results from five of the
South African catchment studies, concluded that percentage
reductions in low (dry season) flow as a result of afforesta-
tion were actually greater than the reduction in annual flow.
In South Africa, estimates of low flow reduction are consid-
ered more important in assessing applications for licences
for commercial plantations than the estimated reduction
in Mean Annual Runoff (MAR) (Jewitt, 2002b). In India,
Sikka et al. (2003), focusing on the Nilgiri catchment in
southern India, identified reductions in low flows in the
driest months of the year when comparing streamflow from
a grassland catchment with that from a catchment afforested
with Eucalyptus globulus. In Fiji, the planting of Pinus radi-
ata in a dry grassland area is reported to have resulted in
a 65% reduction in dry season flows (Kammer and Raj,
1979) cited by FAO (1991). Conversely, observations from
many parts of the world have highlighted the increase in dry
season flows following deforestation (Bruijnzeel, 2004).

Authors such as Zadroga (1981) and Bruijnzeel (1990,
2001) have highlighted the hydrological significance of
tropical montane cloud forests (TMCF) and their role
in generating dry season flows through the interception
of fog. However, Bruijnzeel (2001) concluded that it is
the infiltration properties of the forest that are critical
in determining how the available water is partitioned
between runoff and recharge and that decreased dry season
flows following deforestation in areas of TMCF may not
necessarily result from the loss interception of fog, but
possibly from decreased infiltration capacity of the soil
once the forest cover has been removed. This highlights the
importance of the partitioning points illustrated in Figure 1,
and gives credence to Rodriguez-Iturbe’s assertion that
Climate-Soil-Vegetation dynamics is the core of hydrology
(Rodriguez-Iturbe, 2000) with the recognition that different
and often competing processes may dominate at different
sites and that the direction, let alone the magnitude of
the impact, may be difficult to predict for a particular site
(Calder, 1998).
Groundwater Resources
Worldwide, forests have been reported to both increase
and decrease groundwater depths (Chang, 2002). The com-
bination of complex forest plant characteristics and sub-
surface stratigraphy and soil functioning mean that gen-
eral statements in this regard are often not applicable at
local scales. However, most reports on the influences of
forests on groundwater suggest that the perception that
forests are “good” for groundwater resources is false. Some
authors have reported increases in available groundwa-
ter following deforestation (Hamilton, 1987; Ruprecht and
Stoneman, 1993) whilst others, particularly in arid and
semiarid regions, have reported a lowering in the ground-
water surface following afforestation. Hamilton and King
(1983) made a strong statement that “the overwhelming
evidence from catchment research is that following refor-
estation, groundwater levels are lowered and stream yields
are reduced, both effects being more pronounced during the
dry season or growing season”.
There is an extensive body of literature that highlights
lowering of groundwater levels in response to afforestation
(e.g. Bari and Schofield, 1992). In semiarid regions, most
notably areas of Australia, there has been extensive research
into the water resources problems associated with the rise
of saline groundwater tables in response to removal of
trees, particularly eucalyptus, to establish other forms of
agriculture. In central England, a study by Calder (1999)
showed there was no wetting of the soil profile beneath
newly planted stands of Corsican pines, whereas wetting
fronts were observed down the profile beneath stands of
indigenous oak and heath vegetation. This suggests that
large-scale establishment of Corsican pine in the area will
WATER AND FORESTS 11
have a detrimental affect on groundwater recharge, and thus
water resources in the area.
Some forest species, by way of their deep roots are
able to access the phreatic surface and directly abstract
water, especially in cases where the groundwater table
is shallow. Studies of the soil water use by trees of the
Eucalyptus family under soil-water deficits in India (Calder
et al., 1993) and Australia (Ruprecht and Stoneman, 1993)
have found that trees at some sites were obtaining most of
their soil water from the groundwater, resulting in direct
depletion of the groundwater. Conversely, there are many
reports of rising water tables following the deforestation of
parts of Australia, and reforestation is often seen as part of
the solution to salinity problems that have arisen in these
areas (Schofield, 1992.).
The issue of trees and groundwater in India has provoked
much controversy. Many impoverished rural communities
are dependent upon access to relatively shallow groundwa-
ter for their survival. However, a number of developments,
including abstractions for irrigation and large-scale estab-
lishments of eucalypt plantations, have resulted in a lower-
ing of the groundwater table, with concomitant impacts on
rural livelihoods. Shiva and Bandyopadhyay (1983), focus-
ing on the Karnataka region in southern India, described
eucalyptus as a “disastrous tree for India” highlighting, inter
alia the potential for the lowering of local groundwater
tables through a reduction in the recharge of groundwater.
The controversy has resulted in many publications, includ-
ing reviews by the British Overseas Development Agency
(ODA, now DFID) (Calder et al., 1993; Calder, 1994) and
the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO, 1989). Both
reports confirm the potential for eucalypts to lower ground-
water tables, but moderate many of the claims made by
Shiva and Bandyopadhyay (1983). Calder et al. (1993) con-
cluded that in three of the four sites studied eucalypts would
not use more water than the indigenous vegetation, but
would use more water than many of the locally produced
crops. However, in one of the sites, water use was found
to exceed rainfall, leading Calder et al. (1993) to conclude
that it was possible that the trees were using groundwater
directly. The FAO (1989) report recognized the potential for
detrimental affects on local groundwater tables, but high-
lighted the water use efficiency by eucalypts suggesting that
they consume less water for each ton of biomass produced
compared to many other species.
Flood Peaks (Volume and Timing)
It is in analyzing the role of forest on floods that some of
the most heated arguments surrounding water and forests
arise. It is often claimed that forests prevent floods and
that deforestation is a major cause of floods. A flood
is the result of many complex catchment interactions. A
catchment exhibits variable responses to similar magnitude
rainfall events because of multiple interacting processes,
12 LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT
spatial variability in the susceptibility of the catchment to
impacts, impacts of land cover and associated management
practices, and amplification or suppression of response due
to differing environmental conditions. With reference to
Figure 1, it could be expected that interception of rainfall
by forests may reduce the magnitude of flood peaks, delay
their onset by intercepting a proportion of the storm rainfall
and by creating soil moisture deficits prior to the event.
Such effects would be most significant for small storms
and least significant for the larger events. Furthermore, high
infiltration rates under natural forests may also serve to
reduce surface runoff and flood response.
However, forest hydrological studies carried out in many
parts of the world: America (Hewlett and Helvey, 1970),
South Africa (Hewlett and Bosch, 1984), United Kingdom
(Kirby et al., 1991), New Zealand (Taylor and Pearce,
1982), and Asia (Bruijnzeel and Bremmer, 1989) have all
concluded that there is little linkage between land cover
and storm flow. However, Fahey and Jackson (1997) have
shown that significant decreases of 60% in mean flood
peaks for different rainfall classes on small catchments
in New Zealand, which were converted from indigenous
tussock grasslands to pine plantations. More recently (La
Marche and Lettenmair, 2001; Robinson et al., 2003; Sikka
et al., 2003) have all concluded that the impacts of forest on
floods are only likely to be noticeable for minor events and
on small catchments. Bonell (1998) through a detailed study
of catchment runoff mechanisms has shown that floods can
occur from pristine forested drainage basins on the same
scale as from disturbed areas. When unusually heavy storms
form, floods are liable to occur whether forests are present
or not.
However, field studies generally indicate that it is often
the management activities associated with forestry such as
cultivation, drainage, road construction (Jones and Grant,
1996), and soil compaction during logging that are more
likely to influence, and may increase flood response,
than the presence or absence of the forests themselves.
Furthermore, Lee (1980) suggested that the most important
influence of forest cover on floods and flood damage “has
more to do with sedimentation and debris discharge than
with absolute volume or rate of flow” (Lee, 1980 p. 280).
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Despite improved understanding of forest hydrology pro-
cesses, there are still many calls for more research to
address forest water use issues. Arguably, however, the
area that needs most attention is the science-management
interface. Too often, the complexities of the hydrologi-
cal system have been simplified because of management
approaches that cannot adequately consider complexity, and
others whose goals are best served by promoting existing
pseudofacts. The management of both water and forests
requires a sound scientific underpinning. The investment in
forest hydrology research worldwide has provided some of
the best databases in the world in this regard. Ongoing inno-
vations in hydrological process studies will continue to add
value to this body of information. However, management of
forests and water requires not only a sound scientific base,
but also understanding, commitment, and collaboration of
the responsible and affected organizations. As is the case
in many aspects of natural resource management, scientists
and researchers have failed to ensure that the results of their
research are properly applied. The problems lie as much in
scientists’ reluctance to follow through to implementation
of their research and present and promote their findings
in management forums, as with the reluctance of man-
agement to deal with complexity. The interfaces between
these stakeholders are still inadequate, and in particular, the
satisfactory implementation of research findings into man-
agement operations is an area that needs much attention.
REFERENCES
Bari M.A. and Schofield N.J. (1992) Lowering of a shallow,
saline water table by extensive eucalypt reforestation. Journal
of Hydrology, 133, 273 – 291.
Bernard J.M. (1963) Forest floor moisture capacity of the New
Jersey pine barrens. Ecology, 44, 574 – 576.
Best A., Zhang L., McMahon T., Western A. and Vertessy R.
(2003) A Critical Review of Paired Catchment Studies with
Reference to Seasonal Flows and Climatic Variability, CSIRO
Land and Water Technical Report 25/03, CSIRO; CRC for
Catchment Hydrology Technical Report 03/4, CRC.
Blackie J.R., Edwards K.A. and Clarke R.T. (1979) Hydrological
research in East Africa. East African Agricultural and Forestry
Journal, 45, entire special edition, edited by Blackie.
Blow F.E. (1955) Quantity and hydrologic characteristics of litter
and upland oak forests in eastern Tennessee. J. Forestry, 53,
190 – 195.
Boden D.I. (1984) Early responses to different methods of site
preparation for three commercial tree species. Proceedings of
the IUFRO Symposium on Site and Productivity of Fast Growing
Plantations, Pretoria and Pietermaritzburg.
Bonell M. (1993) Progress in the understanding of runoff
generation dynamics in forests. Journal of Hydrology, 150,
217 – 275.
Bonell M. (1998) Selected challenges in runoff generation
research in forests from the hillslope to headwater drainage
basin scale. Journal of the American Water Resources
Association, 34(4), 765 – 785.
Bruijnzeel L.A. (1990) Hydrology of Moist Tropical Forests
and Effects of Conservation: A State of Knowledge Review,
UNESCO International Hydrological Programme, UNESCO:
Paris.
Bruijnzeel L.A. (2001) Hydrology of tropical montane cloud
forests. A Reassessment Landuse and Water Resources
Research, 1, 1.
Bruijnzeel L.A. (2004) Hydrological functions of tropical forests,
not seeing the soil for the trees? In Environmental Services

and Land Use Change: Bridging the Gap Between Policy and
Research in Southeast Asia, Tomich T.P., van Noordwijk M.
and Thomas D.E. (Eds.), A special issue of Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment: Vol. 104/1, pp. 185 – 228,
(September).
Bruijnzeel L.A. and Bremmer C.N. (1989) Highland-lowland
interactions in the Ganges-Brahmaputra river basin: A review
of Published Literature. ICIMOD Occasional Paper, No.11.
ICIMOD.
Bosch J.M. and Hewlett J.D. (1982) A review of catchment
experiments to determine the effects of vegetation changes on
water yield and evapotranspiration. Journal of Hydrology, 55,
3 – 23.
Bosch J.M. and Smith R.E. (1989) The effect of afforestation of
indigenous scrub forest with Eucalyptus on streamflow from a
small catchment in the Transvaal, South Africa. South African
Forestry Journal, 150, 7 – 17.
Calder I.R. (1990) Evaporation in the Uplands, Wiley: New York,
p. 148.
Calder I.R. (1994) Eucalyptus, Water and Sustainability: A
Summary Report, ODA Forestry Series No. 6, ODA: London.
Calder I.R. (1996) Water use by forests at the plot and catchment
scale. Commonwealth Forestry Review, 75(1), 19 – 30.
Calder I.R. (1998) Water use by forests: limits and controls. Tree
Physiology, 18, 625 – 631.
Calder I.R. (1999) The Blue Revolution, Land Use and Integrated
Water Resources Management, Earthscan.
Calder I.R. and Dye P.J. (2001) Hydrological impacts of invasive
alien plants. Land Use and Water Resources Research, 1,
http://www.venus.co.uk/luwrr.
Calder I.R., Hall R.L. and Prasanna K.T. (1993) Hydrological
impact of Eucalyptus plantation in India. Journal of Hydrology,
150(2 – 4), 635 – 648.
Chang M. (2002) Forest Hydrology: An Introduction to Water and
Forests, CRC Press.
Cossalter C. and Pye-Smith C. (2003) Fast-Wood Forestry,
myths and realities, Centre for International Forestry Research
(CIFOR): Jakarta, p. 50.
Crockford R.H. and Richardson D.P. (1990a) Partitioning of
rainfall in a eucalypt forest and pine plantation: i the effect of
throughfall measurements in a eucalypt forest, effect of method
and species composition. Hydrological Processes, 4, 157 – 167.
Crockford R.H. and Richardson D.P. (1990b) Partitioning of
rainfall in a eucalypt forest and pine plantation: IV The
relationship of interception and canopy storage capacity, the
interception of these forests, and the effect on interception
of thinning the pine plantation. Hydrological Processes, 4,
169 – 188.
DeWalle D.R. (2003) Forest hydrology revisited. Hydrological
Processes, 17(6), 1255 – 1256.
Dye P.J. (1996a) Climate, forest and streamflow relationships in
South African afforested catchments. Commonwealth Forestry
Review, 75(1), 31 – 38.
Dye P.J. (2003) Personal Communication, Council for Scientific
and Industrial Research: Pietermaritzburg.
Dye P.J. and Bosch J.M. (2000) Water, wetlands and catchments.
South African Forest Handbook South African Institute of
Forestry, Pretoria South Africa Vol. 2, pp. 567 – 573.
WATER AND FORESTS 13
Dye P.J., Moses G., Vilikazi P., Ndlela R. and Royappen M.
(2000) A Comparison of the Water Use of Selected Invasive and
Indigenous Riparian Plant Communities, WRC Report K5/808,
Water Research Commission, Pretoria.
Eamus D., O’Grady A.P. and Hutley L. (2000) Dry season
conditions determine wet season water use in the wet-dry
tropical savannas of northern Australia. Tree Physiology, 20,
1219 – 1226.
Engler A. (1919) Untersuchungen u¨ ber den einfluss desWaldes
auf den stand der gewasser. Mitt. Schweiz. anst. forst.
Versuchswes, 12, 636.
FAO (1989) The Eucalypt Dilemna, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations.
FAO (1991) Forestry and Food Security, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations: Forestry Paper 90. ISBN
92-5-102847-8.
FAO (2003) Cross-sectoral policy impacts between forestry and
other sectors. FAO Forestry Paper No. 142. ISBN 9251049378.
Falkenmark M., Andersson L., Castensson R. and Sundblad K.
(1999) Water – A Reflection of Land Use. Options for
Counteracting Land and Water Mismanagement, Swedish
Natural Science Research Council: Stockholm.
Fahey B. and Jackson R. (1997) Hydrological impacts
of converting native forests and grasslands to pine
plantations, South Island, New Zealand. Agricultural and Forest
Meteorology, 84, 69 – 82.
Gorgens A.H.M. and van Wilgen B.W. (2004) Invasive alien
plants and water resources in South Africa: current understand-
ing, predictive ability and research challenges. South African
Journal of Science, 100(1/2), 27 – 34.
Gray D.M. (1970) Handbook on the Principles of Hydrology,
National Research Council of Canada, Water Information
Center Inc.: Water Research Building, Manhasset Isle, Port
Washington, p. 11050.
Gunderson L.H., Holling C.S. and Light S.S. (Eds.), (1995)
Barriers & Bridges to the Renewal of Ecosystems and
Institutions, Columbia University Press: New York.
Hamilton L.S. (1987) What are the impacts of deforestation in
the Himalayas on the Ganges-Brahmaputra lowlands and delta?
relations between assumptions and facts. Mountain Research
and Development, 7, 256 – 263.
Hamilton L.S. and King P.N. (1983) Tropical Forested
Watersheds: Hydrological and Soils Response to Major Uses
or Conservation, Westview Press: Boulder.
Helvey J.D. (1967) Interception by eastern white pine. Water
Resources Research, 3, 723 – 729.
Helvey J.D. and Patric J.H. (1965) Canopy and litter interception
of rainfall by hardwoods of the eastern United States. Water
Resources Research, 1, 193 – 206.
Hewlett J.D. (1982) Principles of Forest Hydrology, University of
Georgia Press.
Hewlett J.D. and Bosch J.M. (1984) The dependence of storm
flows on rainfall intensity and vegetal cover in South Africa.
Journal of Hydrology, 75, 365 – 381.
Hewlett J.D. and Helvey J.D. (1970) Effects of forest clearfelling
on the storm hydro-graph. Water Resources Research, 6(3),
768 – 782.
Hewlett J.D. and Hibbert A.R. (1967) Factors affecting the
response of small watersheds to precipitation in humid areas. In
14 LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT
Proceedings – International Symposium on Forest Hydrology,
Sopper W.E. and Lull H.W. (Eds.), Pergamon: New York, pp.
275 – 290.
Hewlett J. and Nutter W. (1969) An Outline of Forest Hydrology,
University of Georgia Press: Athens.
Higgins S.I. and Richardson D.M. (1996) A review of models of
alien plant spread. Ecological Modelling, 87, 249 – 265.
Hornberger G.M., Raffensperger J.P., Wiberg P.L. and Eshleman
K.N. (1997) Elements of Physical Hydrology, Johns Hopkins
University Press: Baltimore.
Jewitt G.P.W. (2002a) Can integrated water resources manage-
ment sustain the provision of ecosystem goods and services?
Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 27/11-22, 887 – 895.
Jewitt G.P.W. (2002b) The 8%-4% debate: commercial
afforestation and water use in South Africa. SA Forestry of
Journal, 194(2), 4 – 6.
Johnston C.D. (1987) Preferred water flow and localised recharge
in a variable regolith. Journal of Hydrology, 94, 129 – 142.
Jones J.A. and Grant G.E. (1996) Peak flow responses to clear-
cutting and roads in small and large basins, western Cascades,
Oregon. Water Resources Research, 32, 959 – 974.
Kammer R. and Raj (1979) Preliminary Estimates of Minimum
Flows in Varaciva Creek and the Effect of Afforestation on Water
Resources, Fiji Public Works Department: Technical Note 7911,
Suva.
Kendall C. and McDonnell J.J. (Eds.) (1998) Isotope Tracers in
Catchment Hydrology, Elsevier Science Publishers; p. 816.
Kirby C., Newson M.D. and Gilman K. (1991) Plynlimon
Research: The First Two Decades, Institute of (Wallingford)
Hydrology Report, No.109, Institute of (Wallingford) Hydrol-
ogy, p. 188.
Kittredge J. (1948) Forest Influences, McGraw Hill Book
Company: New York.
Landsberg J.J. (1999) Tree water use and its implications
in relation to agroforestry systems. In The Way Trees Use
Water’, Water and Salinity Issues in Agroferestry No.5. RIRDC
Publication No. 99/37,Landsberg J.J. (Ed.), RIRDC, p. 92.
Le Maitre D.C., Scott D.F. and Colvin C. (1999) A review
of information on interactions between vegetation and
groundwater. Water SA, 25, 137 – 152.
La Marche J. and Lettenmair D.P. (2001) Effects of forest roads on
flood flows in the Deschutes River, Washington. Earth Surface
Processes and Landforms, 26, 115 – 134.
Lee R. (1980) Forest Hydrology, Columbia University Press: New
York.
Lorentz S.A.L., Schulze R.E. and Hughes G. (2003) Techniques
for estimating groundwater recharge at different scales in
southern Africa. In Groundwater Recharge Estimation in
Southern Africa, Xu. X. and Beekman H.E. (Eds.), UNESCO:
Paris.
Mack M. and d’Antonio C.M. (1998) Impacts of biological
invasions on disturbance regimes. TREE, 13, 195 – 198.
McCulloch J.S.G. and Robinson M. (1993) History of forest
hydrology. Journal of Hydrology, 150, 189 – 216.
Metz L.J. (1958) Moisture held in pine litter. Journal of Forestry,
56, 36 – 37.
Mielke M., Oliva M.A., Barros N., Penchel R., Martinez C. and
Almeida A. (1999) Stomatal control of transpiration in the
canopy of a clonal Eucalyptus grandis plantation. Trees, 13,
152 – 160.
Nänni U.W. (1970) Trees, water and perspective. South African
Forestry Journal, 75, 9 – 17.
O’Loughlin E.M. and Dunin F.X. (1993) Water Issues in
Forest Today. Journal of Hydrology, (Special Issue) 150(2 – 4),
189 – 786.
Pathak P.C., Pandey A.N. and Singh J.S. (1985) Apportionment
of rainfall in central Himalayan forests (India). Journal of
Hydrology, 76, 319 – 332.
Peel M.C., McMahon T.A., Finlayson B.L. and Watson F.G.R.
(2001) Identification and explanation of continental differences
in the variability of annual runoff. Journal of Hydrology, 250,
224 – 240.
Peel M.C., McMahon T.A., Finlayson B.L. and Watson
F.G.R. (2002) Implications of the relationship between
catchment vegetation type and the variability of annual runoff.
Hydrological Processes, 16, 2995 – 3002.
Pryor L.D. (1976) Biology of Eucalypts. Edward Arnold: London,
pp 51 – 58.
Rice K. and Hornberger G.M. (1998) Comparison of
hydrochemical tracers to estimate source contributions to peak
flow in a small, forested headwater catchment. Water Resources
Research, 34(7), 1755 – 1766.
Richards J.H. and Caldwell M.M. (1987) Hydraulic lift:
substantial nocturnal water transport between soil layers by
Artemisia tridentata roots. Oecologia, 73, 486 – 489.
Robinson M., Cognard-Plancq A.L., Cosandey C., David J.,
Durand P., Fuhrer H.W., Hall R., Hendriques M.O., Marc V.,
McCarthy R., McDonnell M., Martin C., Nisbet T., O’Dea P.,
Rodgers M. and Zollner A. (2003) Studies of the impact of
forests on peak flows and baseflows: a European perspective.
Forest Ecology and Management, 186, 85 – 97.
Rodriguez-Iturbe I. (2000) Ecohydrology: A hydrologic per-
spective of climate-soil-vegetation dynamics. Water Resources
Research, 36(1), 3 – 9.
Rowe P.B. (1955) Effects of the forest floor on disposition of
rainfall in pine stands. Journal of Forestry, 53, 342 – 348.
Ruprecht J.K. and Stoneman G.L. (1993) Water yield issues in the
jarrah forest of south-western Australia. Journal of Hydrology,
150, 369 – 391.
Russel E.W. (1973) Soil Conditions and Plant Growth, Longmans:
London, p. 847.
Sala A., Smith S.D. and Devitt D.A. (1996) Water use by Tamarix
ramosissima and associated phreatophytes in a Mojave Desert
floodplain. Ecological Applications, 6(3), 888 – 898.
Schofield N.J. (1992) Tree-planting for dryland salinity control in
Australia. Agroforestry Systems, 20, 1 – 23.
Schutz C.J. (1990) Site relationships for Pinus Patula in the Easter
Transvaal Escarpment, Unpublished P.H.D. thesis. Department
of Soil Science and Agrometeorolgy, University of Natal,
PMB.
Smith R.E. and Scott D.F. (1992) The effects of afforestation on
low flows in various regions of South Africa. Water SA, 18(3),
185 – 194.
Scott D.F., Prinsloo F.W., Moses G., Mehlomakulu M. and
Simmers A.D.A. (2000) A Re-analysis of the South African
Catchment Afforestation Experimental Data, WRC Report
810/1/00, Water Research Commission, Pretoria.

Shiva V. and Bandyopadhyay J. (1983) Eucalyptus – a disastrous
tree for India. The Ecologist, 13, 184 – 187.
Sherry S.P. (1971) The Black Wattle, University of Natal Press:
Pietermaritzburg.
Sikka A.K., Samra J.A., Sharda V.N., Samraj P. and
Lakshmanan V. (2003) Low flow and high flow responses
to converting natural grassland into bluegum (Eucalyptus
globulus) in Nilgiris watersheds of South India. Journal of
Hydrology, 270(2003), 1 – 2.
Smakhtin V.U. (2001) Low flow hydrology: a review. Journal of
Hydrology, 240, 147 – 186.
Specht R.L. (1972) The Vegetation of South Australia,
Government Printers: Adelaide.
Taylor C.H. and Pearce A.J. (1982) Storm runoff processes
and sub-catchments characteristics in a New Zealand hill
country catchment. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 7,
439 – 447.
Versfeld D.B., Le Maitre D.C. and Chapman R.A. (1998) Alien
Invading Plants and Water Resources in South Africa: A
Preliminary Assessment, WRC Report No. TT99/98, Water
Research Commission, Pretoria, ISBN 1 86845 360.
Vertessy R.A., Zhang L. and Dawes W.R. (2003) Plantations, river
flows and river salinity. Australian Forestry, 66(1), 55 – 61.
WATER AND FORESTS 15
White D.A., Turner N.C. and Gailbraith J.H. (2000) Leaf water
relations and stomatal behavior of four allopatric Eucalyptus
species planted in Mediterranean southwestern Australia. Tree
Physiology, 20, 1157 – 1165.
Wullschleger S.D., Hanson P.J. and Tschaplinski T.J. (1998)
Whole-plant water flux in understory red maple exposed
to altered precipitation regimes. Tree Physiology, 18,
71 – 79.
Xinxiao Y. (1991) Forest hydrologic research in China. Journal
of Hydrology, 122, 23 – 31.
Zadroga F. (1981) The hydrological importance of a montane
cloud forest area of Costa Rica. In Tropical Agricultural
Hydrology, Lal R. and Russell E.W. (Eds.), J. Wiley: New York,
pp. 59 – 73.
Zhang L. (1999) Predicting the Effect of Vegetation Changes
on Catchment Average Water Balance, Technical Report
99/12, Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology,
CSIRO, Canberra.
Zon R. (1927) Forests and water in the light of scientific
investigation. U.S. National Waterways Commission, Final
Report, Appendix V, 205 – 302. 62nd Congress, 2d session
Senate Document No. 469.