Advertisement

Environmental consequences of dam construction: a case study from Saudi Arabia

  • Abdelazeem Sallam
  • Abdulrahman Bader Alharbi
  • Adel R. A. Usman
  • Qaiser Hussain
  • Yong Sik Ok
  • Mohammad Alshayaa
  • Mohammad Al-Wabel
Original Paper
  • 208 Downloads

Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess the variation in the vegetation cover as a result of the construction of Wadi Baish Dam, Saudi Arabia by the remote sensing techniques and geographic information system. The variations in soil physical and chemical properties as well as irrigation water quality were also investigated. The results show that the soil morphological, physical, and chemical characteristics were affected by dam construction. The data reveal that area under the green cover in Wadi Baish declined from 23.7 km2 in 2005 to 13.3 km2 in 2013 before and after the construction of Baish Dam, respectively. Moreover, soil salinity level (ECe) and the sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) were increased following the dam construction. In addition, soil texture, soil organic matter content, and soil macro-(P and K) and micro-(Fe, Mn, Zn, and Cu) nutrient availability were changed after dam construction. In the surface layer of soil, the clay content decreased from 156–211 (before the dam construction) to 56–106 g kg−1 (after the dam construction). However, the sand content increased from 279–344 to 869–944 g kg−1 before and after dam construction, respectively. The soil organic matter content decreased from 6.8–11.0 to 0.5–7.2 g kg−1. It was concluded that the dam construction raised the salinity level in soil and underground water level and thus caused negative environmental and agricultural changes. A proper management is necessary after dam construction to improve soil fertility and prevent soil and water from salinization in Wadi Baish, Saudi Arabia.

Keywords

Baish Dam Negative impacts Vegetative cover Soil properties Irrigation water quality 

Notes

Funding information

The authors extend their appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research, King Saud University for funding this work through the International Research Group Project IRG-14-14.

Supplementary material

12517_2018_3387_MOESM1_ESM.docx (384 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 384 kb)

References

  1. Adamson PT (2006) An evaluation of land use and climate change on the recent historical regime of the Mekong. Final Report to the Mekong River Commission, Integrated Basin Flow Management Program. Mekong River CommissionGoogle Scholar
  2. Alawode AO, Garba IK, Garba SA, Muhammed M, Kudu D (2014) The socio-economic characteristics of communities at the downstream sector of Jebba Dam, Nigeria. Ethiop J Environ Stud Manag 7(1):12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Al-Harbi KM (2010) Monitoring of agricultural area trend in Tabuk region—Saudi Arabia using Landsat TM and SPOT data. The Egyp J Remote Sens Space Sci 13:37–42Google Scholar
  4. Al-Turki AM, Al-Faraj AS, Sallam A, Khalil JA, Al-Malik AS (2009) Survey of soil resources and water quality evaluation in Southern Tohama plains, Saudi Arabia (AT-23-51). King Abdul Aziz City for Sciences and Technology (KACST), Riyadh. Part (1 and 2)Google Scholar
  5. Amissah-Arthur A, Mougenot B, Loireau M (2000) Assessing farmland dynamics and land degradation on Sahelian landscapes using remotely sensed and socioeconomic data. Int J Geogr Inf Sc 14(6):583–599.  https://doi.org/10.1080/136588100415756 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carney D (1998) Sustainable rural livelihoods: what contribution can we make? (ed.) London: Department for International DevelopmentGoogle Scholar
  7. Duflo E, Pande R (2007) Dams. Q J Econ 122(2):601–646.  https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.122.2.601 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gatsis I, Parchardis IS, Pavlopoulos A (2005) Monitoring and mapping of land cover changes using spot images with emphasis in deforestation and desertification: a case study in Corinthos area. N.E. Peloponnese, S. Greece (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology, Rhoodes Island, GreeceGoogle Scholar
  9. Geotz S, Wright R, Smith A, Zinecker E, Schaub E (2003) IKONOS imagery for resource management: tree cover, impervious surfaces, and riparian buffer analyses in the mid-Atlantic region. Remote Sens Environ 88:195–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Guo Q, Li J, Chen Y, Jiang W (2007) Application of remote sensing and GIS in obtaining agricultural information. Workshop on Intelligent Information Technology Application, Zhang Jiajie, China, pp 2–3.  https://doi.org/10.1109/IITA.2007.61 Google Scholar
  11. Hamdi H, Abdelhafez S (2001) Agriculture and soil survey in Egypt. In: Zdruli P Steduto P, Lacirignola C, Montanarella L (eds.). Soil resources of Southern and Eastern Mediterranean countries. Bari: CIHEAM, 2001. p. 111–125. (Options Méditerranéennes: Série B. Etudes et Recherches; n. 34)Google Scholar
  12. Hoa lTV, Nhan NH, Wolanski E, Cong TT, Shigeko H (2007) The combined impact on the flooding in Vietnam’s Mekong River delta of local man-made structures, sea level rise, and dams upstream in the river catchment. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 71:110–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Khalifa HE, Moussa HA (2017) Soil and agriculture after the Aswan high dam. In: Satoh M, Aboulroos S (eds) Irrigated agriculture in Egypt. Springer, Cham.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30216-4_5 Google Scholar
  14. McManus J, Bajabaa S (1998) The importance of air escape processes in the formation of dish-and-pillar and teepee structures within modern and Precambrian fluvial deposits. Sediment Geol 120(1-4):337–343.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0037-0738(98)00039-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Modaihsh AS, Mahjoub MO, Sallam AS, Ghoneim AM (2015) Evaluation of soil degradation in Al-kharj Centre, Saudi Arabia using remote sensing. Intern J Remote Sens Geosci 4:1–7Google Scholar
  16. Nesbitt HJ (2005) Water used for agriculture in the Lower Mekong Basin. In: Comission, M. R. (ed.) MRC discussion paper. VientianeGoogle Scholar
  17. Page AL (1996) Methods of soil analysis, (Ed.) Part 1 and 2, American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
  18. Poret-Peterson AT, Ji B, Engelhaupt E, Gulledge J (2007) Soil microbial biomass along a hydrologic gradient in a subsiding coastal bottom land forest: implications for future subsidence and sea-level rise. Soil Biol Biochem 39(2):641–645.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2006.09.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Prathumratana L, Sthiannopkao S, Kim KW (2008) The relationship of climatic and hydrological parameters to surface water quality in the lower Mekong River. Environ Intern 34(6):860–866.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2007.10.011
  20. Roberts TR (2001) Downstream ecological implications of China’s Lancang hydropower and Mekong NAVIGATION projectGoogle Scholar
  21. Rouchdi M, Chahboun S, Ramdane A, Hammoudo M, Rahou A (2008) Change detection of irrigated crop land using satellite imagery. The Intern. Arch. Photogram. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf Sci 37, 939–942Google Scholar
  22. Seeboonruang U (2012) Impacts of reservoir on groundwater level and quality in a saline area, Nakhon Panom province, Thailand. APCBEE Procedia 4:16–21.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcbee.2012.11.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Soil Survey Staff (1993). Soil survey manual. USDA Agric., Handb. 18. U. S. Gov. Print. Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  24. Soltanpour PN, Schwab AP (1977) A new soil test for simultaneous extraction of macro- and micronutrients in alkaline soils. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 8(3):195–207.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00103627709366714 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Strobl E, Strobl R (2009) The distributional impact of dams: evidence from cropland productivity in Africa. Cahier de recherché:2009–2016Google Scholar
  26. Syvitski JPM, Harvey N, Wolanski E, Burnett WC, Perillo GME, Gornitz V (2005) Dynamics of the coastal zone. In: Crossland C, Kremer H, Lindeboom H, Marshall Crossland J, le Tissier M (eds) Coastal fluxes in the Anthropocene. Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-27851-6_2
  27. Tahmiscioğlu MS, Anul N, Ekmekçi F, Durmuş N (2007) Positive and negative impacts of dams on the environment. International Congress on River Basin Management, 759–769, 22–24 March 2007, Antalya TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  28. Wildi W (2010) Environmental hazards of dams and reservoirs. NEAR curriculum in natural environmental science. Terre & Environnement 88:187–197Google Scholar
  29. Wu H, Zeng G, Lianga J, Zhang J, Cai Q, Huang L, Li X, Zhu H, Hu C, Shen S (2013) Changes of soil microbial biomass and bacterial community structure in Dongting Lake: impacts of 50,000 dams of Yangtze River. Ecol Eng 57:72–78.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2013.04.038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Soil Sciences Department, College of Food and Agricultural SciencesKing Saud UniversityRiyadhSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.Department of Soils and Water, Faculty of AgricultureAssiut UniversityAssiutEgypt
  3. 3.Department of Soil Science & Soil Water ConservationPir Mehr Ali Shah Arid Agriculture UniversityRawalpindiPakistan
  4. 4.Korea Biochar Research Center, O-Jeong Eco-Resilience Institute (OJERI) & Division of Environmental Science and Ecological EngineeringKorea UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea
  5. 5.Department of Agriculture Extension and Rural Sociology. College of Food and Agricultural SciencesKing Saud UniversityRiyadhSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations