Cited by 100Hydrology and Watershed Management StudiesPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsForest Management and Policy

Managing Forests for Increased Regional Water Yield in the Southeastern U.S. Coastal Plain

McLaughlin, Daniel L., Kaplan, David A., Cohen, Matthew J.·2013·JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association

Abstract

With growing populations fueling increased groundwater abstraction and forecasts of greater water scarcity in the southeastern United States, identifying land management strategies that enhance water availability will be vital to maintaining hydrologic resources and protecting natural systems. Management of forested uplands for lower basal area, currently a priority for habitat improvement on public lands, may also increase water yield through decreased evapotranspiration ( ET ). To explore this hypothesis, we synthesized studies of precipitation and ET in coastal plain pine stands to develop a statistical model of water yield as a function of management strategy, stand structure, and ecosystem water use. This model allowed us to estimate changes in water yield in response to varying management strategies across spatial scales from the individual stand to a regional watershed. Results suggest that slash pine stands managed at lower basal areas can have up to 64% more cumulative water yield over a 25‐year rotation compared to systems managed for high‐density timber production, with the greatest increases in stands also managed for recurrent understory fire. Although there are important uncertainties in the magnitude of additional water yield and its final destination (i.e., surface water bodies vs . groundwater), this analysis highlights the potential for management activities on public and private timber lands to partially offset increasing demand on surface and groundwater resources.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jawr.12073

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The impacts of wildland fire on water quality and quantity at the regional scale are poorly understood.

    “The impacts of wildland fire on water quality and quantity at the regional scale are poorly understood18”

    From Burned forests impact water supplies (2018) · cites this paper as [18]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McLaughlin, D. L., Kaplan, D. A., & Cohen, M. J.
Affiliations
University of Florida (US)
Corresponding author
McLaughlin, Daniel L.
Venue
JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-06-05
Volume
49
Issue
4
Pages
953-965
ISSN
  • 1093-474X (ISSN-L)
  • 1752-1688
OpenAlex
W2007550234
Cited by
100
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3
FWCI
2.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association (publishedVersion)
Funders
Rayonier, Inc.
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
Keywords
forest management, water yield, evapotranspiration, basal area, forest structure, understory fires, groundwater pumping, water scarcity, watershed modeling

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review