No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

numerous studies to observed values for soil loss and sediment delivery from cropland plots, forest roads, irrigated lands and small watersheds. A number of different techniques for evaluating WEPP have been used, including one recently developed where the ability of WEPP to accurately predict soil erosion can be compared to the accuracy of replicated plots to predict soil erosion. In one study involving 1,594 years of data from runoff plots, WEPP performed similarly to the Universal Soil Loss Erosion (USLE) technology, indicating that WEPP has met the criteria of results being "at least as good with respect to observed data and known relationships as those from the USLE," particularly when the USLE technology was developed using relationships derived from that data set, and using soil erodibility values measured on those plots using data sets from the same period of record. In many cases, WEPP performed as well as could be expected, based on comparisons with the variability in replicate data sets. One major finding has been that soil erodibility values calculated using the technology in WEPP for rainfall conditions may not be suitable for furrow irrigated conditions. WEPP was found to represent the major storms that account for high percentages of soil loss quite well -a single storm application that the USLE technology is unsuitable for -and WEPP has performed well for disturbed forests and forest roads. WEPP has been able to reflect the extremes of soil loss, being quite responsive to the wide differences in cropping, tillage, and other forms of management, one of the requirements for WEPP validation. WEPP was also found to perform well on a wide range of small watersheds, an area where USLE technology cannot be used.

No abstract