Assessing Soil Vulnerability Index classification with respect to rainfall characteristics

The Soil Vulnerability Index (SVI) uses widely available inputs from the SSURGO database to classify cropland into four levels of vulnerability to sediment and nutrient losses: Low, Moderate, Moderately High, and High. Previous work has identified inconsistencies in SVI assessments across the United States, possibly because neither precipitation amount nor intensity were included in the development of SVI. This study aimed to determine if rainfall characteristics influence the SVI classification and which ones are most critical. The objec-tives were to (1) evaluate the impact of precipitation characteristics on land vulnerability to sediment loss, and (2) evaluate if rainfall characteristics alter the degree of agreement between the simulated sediment yield and SVI classification. The study focused on four Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) watersheds in Ohio, Missouri, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania for which sediment yields were simulated using previously calibrated models. The models were run with input precipitation data from these four watersheds. In addition, in order to examine a wider range of precipitation characteristics, model runs were made for the same four watersheds utilizing precipitation data from two CEAP areas in Georgia and Maryland. Sediment yields for all the cropland units in four of the watersheds were simulated using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool or the Annualized Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution Model using 1985 to 2014 precipitation data from all six areas as inputs. Similarities and differences between precipitation characteristics such as precipitation amount, intensity, and rainfall erosivity R-factors were compared with the similarities and differences in simulated sediment loss. Results confirmed that SVI is a useful tool for relative ranking of cropland at risk of erosion within a region, as SVI and the model-based vulnerability classifications agreed for 55% to 100% of the watersheds' subunits. However, model-based classification of field vulnerability could shift due to changes in precipitation characteristics. Thus, the range of soil loss for each vulnerability class can shift from one region to another. The results suggest that precipitation intensity or annual R-f actor may help improve the correspondence between vulnerability and the range of expected soil loss.