2nd International Conference on Managing Rivers in the 21st Century:

Solutions Towards Sustainable River Basins

Deforestation Effect to the Runoff Hydrograph at Sungai Padas Catchment

JOSEPH DINOR, Master Student (M.Sc.), River Engineering and Urban Drainage Research Centre (REDAC), Engineering Campus,
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 14300 Nibong Tebal, Penang, Malaysia.
NOR AZAZI ZAKARIA, Professor & Director of REDAC, Engineering Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 14300 Nibong Tebal,
Penang Malaysia.Email: redac01@eng.usm.my
ROZI ABDULLAH, Assoc. Prof. & Lecturer, School of Civil Engineering, Engineering Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 14300
Nibong Tebal, Penang, Malaysia. Email: cerozi@eng.usm.my
AMINUDDIN AB GHANI, Assoc. Prof. & Deputy Director, REDAC Engineering Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 14300 Nibong
Tebal, Penang Malaysia. Email: redac02@eng.usm.my
Keywords: Deforestation, HEC-HMS, SCS-CN, Hydrograph estimation, Design rainfall
ABSTRACT
Deforestation activities have been widely known as one of the devastating factors to the river system and ecological system in a catchment. Severe
destructions of forest always brings about a number of interferences to the natural catchment such as increase the surface runoff in the stream and
rivers, soil erosions, sedimentation in the rivers or streams, degradation of water quality, elimination of the flora and fauna, and destruction of the
wild life habitat in the jungle. The present study is intending to develop a hydrologic model for the Sungai Padas catchment and to investigate the
effect of land cover changes to the runoff hydrograph from the catchment using HEC-HMS (Hydrologic Engineering Center-Hydrologic Modeling
System), which has been established by USACE (United State of America Corps of Engineers). Sungai Padas catchment experienced several
deforestation activities particularly of commercial loggings and agriculture at some areas such as at the upstream of Tambunan catchment, Sook
catchment, and Sipitang catchment. The analyses cover from the determination of the land cover from the topographic maps, and hydrologic analysis
such as rainfall and discharge data. The design rainfall data from the HP-26 manual (Hydrologic Procedure no.26 for Sabah dan Sarawak) was
applied to predict the runoff hydrograph for 2 year ARI (Average Recurrence Interval) within 72 hours rainfall duration. The average rainfall
distribution of this catchment was estimated using the Thiessen Polygon Method, whereas, the loss model, transform model (catchment routing),
baseflow model, and channel routing were analyzed by applying the SCS curve number, Clark Unit Hydrograph, recession method, and Muskingum
method, respectively. The evaluation of the future runoff hydrograph due to the conversion of the disturbed area into large scale agriculture such as
rubber and oil palm plantation was also carried out The results of the study that employed 2 year ARI for 72 hours duration indicated that the
simulated runoff hydrograph at JPS Beaufort discharge station increased by 5% due to the increased of deforested area (none-cultivated) by 11%. In
the case that the deforested areas (11%) are assumed to be cultivated with large scale agriculture such as rubber and oil palm plantation, the runoff
hydrograph would increase by 25%. The results imply that the higher surface runoff resulted from the conversion of deforested area into large scale
agriculture compared to the none-cultivated deforested area.
Keywords: Deforestation, HEC-HMS, SCS-CN, Hydrograph peak estimation, Design rainfall

catchment which has less altered landuses. Deforestation

activities will also lead to the decrease of catchment average
rainfall intensity and increase temperature due to the decrease of
evapotranpiration and the radiative effect of CO2 (Costa and
Foley, 1998). The effect of deforestation to the runoff peak is
also depending on the catchment profile. A study carried out by
Stednick (1996) in the United States indicated that the runoff
peak was effected by smaller percentage of land use changes at
the steeper or mountainous area compared to the plain area.
This implies that the deforestation activities have greater impact
on the runoff and water yield when practiced at the steeper
upstream area. Deforestation effect on the annual water yield is
also influenced by several factors such as the type of vegetation
cover, climate and catchment sizes (Sun and Li, 2005). The
study carried out by Sun and Li in China implies that the
differences of impact on catchment annual water yield among
different forest types were somewhat different with those from
other countries; there is a higher water yield changes in humid
regions compared to that of drier regions; and the water yield is

Introduction

In general, land cover or land use changes usually result in the

changes of the catchment hydrologic responses to the rainfall.
Also, land use disruption such as deforestation activities causes
many adverse impacts to the water quality and quantity as many
bared areas at the upstream are exposed to the rainfall. The
cleared areas will no longer capable to absorb and retain some
amount of moisture from the rainfall, which play as an
important role to reduce the surface runoff and to maximize the
soil retention capacity within the subsoil surface. This factor
will result to the shorter time of concentration of the catchment.
A study conducted by Costa et.al (2002) at the Tocantins River,
Porto National with the area of study around 175, 360 sq.km.,
indicates that in large river basin, the two most likely drivers of
long-term discharge modification are precipitation variability
and changes in landuse in the upstream catchment. It has also
indicated that the hydrograph peak from the catchment which
has more altered landuses occurs earlier than that from the
351

Rivers07
June 6-8, 2007, Riverside Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

the hydrologic modeling in Sungai Padas catchment using the

HEC-HMS 2.2.2. Several model most sensitive parameters have
been analyzed by performing some sensitivity analyses such as
initial loss, Soil Conservation Service Curve Number (SCS CN)
value, the catchment storage coefficient (R), recession constant
of the baseflow, and Muskingum-K for the channel routing. The
time of concentration (tc) values of the catchment were selected
based on the comparison results from five (5) methods such as
Izzard, Kerby, Kirpich, Kinematic wave, and Bransby William
formulas. The model was calibrated using the rainfall and
streamflow data of May 1991 and validated using the rainfallrunoff event of June 1992. Both data used in the calibration and
validation process were consisted of multiple rainfall events,
which have produced the annual highest runoff hydrograph
peak within the range of events. The rainfall temporal
distribution calculation was performed based on the DID
Hydrological Procedure No.1 (HP-1). The DID Hydrological
Procedure No.26 (HP-26) which has been designed for Sabah
and Sarawak state was adopted as the design rainfall guideline
within 72-hours duration. The deforestation analysis was then
performed using the calibrated model, rainfall temporal
distribution and the design rainfall informations. The
deforestation analysis has been carried out by applying at 2 year
within the 72-hours duration period.

consistent in both small and large catchment due to the

deforestation effect, but there is a large fluctuation in
streamflow responses to forest cover changes in smaller
catchments.
Bruijnzeel (1990) pointed out that the changes
in infiltration associated with the land use changes overrides the
effect of reduced evaporation, then a shift in the streamflow
regime may be expected with increased peaks during the rainy
season and lowered flows during the dry season. Deforestation
increases surface runoff and catchment response to rainfall is
highly variable and unpredictable (Hibbert, 1965). The removal
of forest almost invariably leads to higher streamflow and
reforestation of open land generally reduces the overall
streamflow (Bosch and Hewlett, 1982). Studies about
deforestation effects to the runoff were leading to one general
conclusion that it causes the increase of runoff hydrograph.
2

Methodology

The study process (Figure 1) started with the collection of

rainfall data, discharge data, topography maps, land-cover, and
soil map. The rainfall data, discharge data, catchment
delineations, and land-cover map are derived from Sabah
Department of Irrigation and Drainage (Sabah DID), whereas
the soil map was acquired from Sabah Department of
Agriculture (Sabah DOA). These informations are applied for

DATA COLLECTION

DETERMINATION OF THE CATCHMENT PARAMETERS

USING HEC-HMS MODEL

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF THE

HEC-HMS MODEL PARAMETERS

MODEL CALIBRATION

MODEL VALIDATION

ANALYZING THE CATCHMENT RAINFALL

HISTORICAL DATA TO DETERMINE THE
CATCHMENT RAINFALL TEMPORAL DISTRIBUTIONS
ACCORDING TO THE HP-1 PROCEDURE

DETERMINE THE CATCHMENT DESIGN

RAINFALL TEMPORAL DISTRIBUTIONS
USING THE HP.26 FOR
2, 5, 10, AND 20 YEARS ARI

CATCHMENT RESPONSE ANALYSIS

ANALYSIS RESULTS

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

END

Figure 1 Research Methodology

352

DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE

RAINFALL DURATION (e.g. 24 and 72-hours)
ACCORDING TO THE
TIME OF CONCENTRATION VALUE

2nd International Conference on Managing Rivers in the 21st Century:

Solutions Towards Sustainable River Basins

The Study Area

3.1 Geographical Features

Padas
Catchment

The research has been carried out for Sungai Padas catchment,
located at the south-western part of Sabah, lies between
latitude 030 30(N) and 060 10(N) and longitude 1150 10(E)
and 1160 50(E). The catchment is the second largest
catchment in Sabah, which comprises of five (5) districts
include Tambunan, Keningau, Tenom, Sipitang, and Beaufort
district. The fraction of the catchments has been divided into
152 smaller subcatchments according to the geographical
topography features. The total area of the catchment is
approximately 8,668 km2. There are three (3) major river
tributaries which lead to the catchment division into three river
systems, they are Sungai Pegalan catchment, Sungai Sook
catchment, and Sungai Padas catchment (upstream). The
cathmnent area has been divided into six (6) subcatchments for
the study purposes as shown in Figure 2, this includes Sub-A,
B, C, D1, D2, and E. Primary and secondary forests are the
main vegetation cover of the catchment area (Figure 3). The
primary forest is the undisturbed natural forest which is mostly
covering the hilly and mountainous area at the upstream,
whereas secondary forest is the disturbed forest due to some
deforestation activities such as loggings and agriculture which
are mainly dominating the downstream at the lower elevation
area. The Sungai Padas catchment valley is mainly subjected to
some agriculture activities such as paddy plantations, mix types
of crops and some large scale agricultures such as oil palm and
rubber. Urbanization areas are very small within the catchment
and they particularly located at the plain area near to the
downstream. Small towns within the catchment are located at
Tambunan, Keningau, Tenom, and Beaufort town. Smaller
towns are located Ansip, Biah, and Kemabong town.
In general, the catchment is mostly dominated by
mountainous and hilly region with steep geographical surface
conditions particularly at the upstream areas. Most hilly region
catchment rises up to 1230 m (4050 ft) above sea level. At the
western part of the catchment the Crocker Range rises up to
1548 m (5080 ft) a.s.l. (above sea level). Witti Range and
Maitland Range are lying as the catchment border at the
eastern and south-eastern part of the catchment (Figure 4).
Sungai Pegalan and Sungai Padas proper is the major tributary
of the Sungai Padas. Sungai Sook is the main tributary of the
Sungai Pegalan where they joined near Biah town. Sungai
Pegalan confluenced with the Sungai Padas at Tenom and
continues flowing northwest, between the Crocker Range
valley and the Tenom gorge to Beaufort. The river meanders
across the Klias Peninsula and finally discharged at the river
mouth to the Brunei Bay.

Padas Downstream
Catchment
(Sub-E)
(519 sq.km)

Pegalan Upstream
Catchment
(Sub-A)
(2,238 sq.km)

Pegalan Downstream
Catchment
(Sub-D2)
(664 sq.km)

Sook Catchment
(Sub-B)
(1,733 sq.km)

Padas Mid-Catchment
Catchment
(Sub-D1)
(267 sq.km)

Padas Upstream
Catchment
(Sub-C)
(3,248 sq.km)

LEGEND
Pegalan Upstream Catchment
Sook Catchment
Padas Upstream Catchment
Mid-Padas Catchment
Pegalan Downstream Catchment
Padas Downstream Catchment

10

20

30

40

50

KM

Figure 2 Sungai Padas catchment subcatchments

Tambunan
Town

N
W

E
S

Keningau
Town

Ansip
Town

Beaufort
Town

Biah
Town

Tenom
Town

Kemabong
Town

3.2 Rainfall and Discharge Gauging Stations

LAND COVER (1984-1995)

Farmstead
Large scale agriculture
Logged forest
NOT INCLUDED
Primary forest
Secondary forest
Urban
Wetland agriculture

Five (5) rainfall stations were selected based on the availability

and the goodness of recorded data, as shown in Table 1. The
weighted rainfall average for the catchment was estimated using
the Thiessen polygon method, denoted as dash line in Figure 5.
There are four (4) discharge stations located at the outlet of each
subcatchment of A, B and C. The final discharge station is
located at the catchment most downstream at Beaufort (Figure
5). The discharge stations are summarized as shown in Table 2.

10

20

30

40

50 Kilometers

Figure 3 Sungai Padas geographical features

353

Rivers07
June 6-8, 2007, Riverside Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

Padas
Catchment

Sg. Pegalan

Sg
.P

eg
ala
n

RG(5663001)

RG(5357003)
RG(5361002)

DG(5357403)

DG(5261401)
Sg
.P

DG(5261402)

as
ad

Sg.Sook

RG(5163002)

Sg. Padas
Sg. Sook
RG(4959001)
DG(4959401)

TELUK
BRUNEI

Sg.Pad
as

Sg. Padas

LEGEND
Rainfall Gage Station
Discharge Gage Station
Thiessen Line
Main River
Subcatchment boundary
Sub-Subcatchment boundary
TOTAL CATCHMENT AREA = 8,668 sq.km
0

10

20

30

40

50

KM

Figure 4 Topographical features

Table 1 Rainfall Stations

Rainfall Station
Tambunan Agriculture
Keningau Meteorologic
Sook
Kemabong
JPS Beaufort

Station
Number
5663001
5361002
5163002
4959001
5357003

Elevation
(m)
680
290
350
228
9.4

Figure 5 Rainfall and discharge gages

N
W

E
S

Table 2 Discharge Stations

Discharge
Station

Station
Number

Elevation
(m)

Sub A

Ansip

5261401

262

Sub B

Biah

5261402

258

Sub C

Kemabong

4959401

228

JPS Beaufort

5357403

9.4

Catchment

Padas
catchment

3.3 Land Cover

LAND COVER (Before 1984)
Farmstead
Large scale agriculture
NOT INCLUDED
Primary forest
Secondary forest
Urban
Wetland agriculture

Figure 6 and 7 show the landcover pattern before and after the
year 1984. It is obviously seen that the deforestation area at the
catchment has been increased. The primary forest areas are
reduced after the year 1984 due to the deforestation activities
especially from logging works. The percentage of conversion of
primary forest area into disturbed forest area at Sungai Padas
catchment was approximately 11%. Disturbed forest includes
all deforested areas such as secondary forest, logged forest and
bared areas as displayed on the topographic maps.

10

20

30

40

50 Kilometers

Figure 6 Sungai Padas catchment land cover (Before 1984)

354

2nd International Conference on Managing Rivers in the 21st Century:

Solutions Towards Sustainable River Basins

3.4 Soil Types

types (Figure 9). The soil type information indicated that the
most dominant parental soil types within the Sungai Padas
catchment is consisted of sandstone and mudstone that is
classified into soil Type-B. The area of Subcatchment-C and
Subcatchment-D1 and D2, are consisted of parent material soil
from sandstone, mudstone, and alluvium, which are classified
into Type-C soil. Soil classes imply the soil infiltration rate,
according to the SCS soil classification standard. Soil Type-B
and C has the moderate infiltration rates, which potentially to
produce moderate runoff (USDA).

Soil types as provided by the Department of Agriculture (DOA)

of Sabah are classified according to the Food and Agriculture
Organization-United Nations Educations, Scientific and
Cultural Organization (FAO-UNESCO). Some countries are
using the Textonomy soil classification system in which soil
types are classified into four major soil classes, that is A, B, C,
and D. The most abundant soil types in Sungai Padas catchment
are soil class B, C and D (Figure 8) based on the parental soil

N
N
W

Sub_a-e(simple).shp
Soilmap_combined.shp
Acic igneous rocks
Alluvium
Alluvium & alluvium derived fr. basic or ultrabasi
Alluvium & peat
Alluvium derived from ultrabasic rocks
Alluvium, sandstone & mudstone
Basic igneous rodks & alluvium
Basic intermediate igneous rocks
Calcareous alluvium
Collovium, sandstone & mudstone
Limestone
Mudstone & alluvium
Mudstone & sandstone
Mudstone, sandstone & miscellaneous rocks
Sandstone
Sandstone & mudstone
Sandstone, mudstone & alluvium
Sulphidic alluvium, sulphidic peat & alluvium
Ultrabasic igneous rocks

Padas_soil.shp
B
C
D

Figure 9 Parental soil types at Sungai Padas catchment

(Source: Department of Agriculture, Sabah, Malaysia)

Figure 8 Soil classification at Sungai Padas catchment

ANALYSIS RESULTS

4.1 Calibration and Validation

The calibration and validation results are evaluated using R2

values as shown in Figure 12 and 13, respectively. Table 3
summarizes the model parameters that have been used in the
analysis.

The HEC-HMS model has been calibrated and validated by

applying the rainfall and runoff data of May 1991 (Figure 10)
and June 1992 (Figure 11), respectively.

355

Rivers07
June 6-8, 2007, Riverside Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH AT BIAH DISCHARGE STATION

(May 1991 - Calibration)

RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH AT ANSIP DISCHARGE STATION

(May 1991 - Calibration)
140

140
Observed

Observed

120

Simulated

100

Discharge (cms)

Discharge (cms)

120

80
60
40
20

Simulated

100
80
60
40
20

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

50

100

150

200

RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH AT KEMABONG DISCHARGE STATION

(May 1991 - Calibration)

300

350

400

450

RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH AT JPS BEAUFORT DISCHARGE STATION

(May 1991 - Calibration)
1200

800

Observed

Observed

700

1000

Simulated

600

Discharge (cms)

Discharge (cms)

250

Time (h)

Time (h)

500
400
300
200

Simulated

800
600
400
200

100

0
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Time (h)

Tim e (h)

Figure 10 Calibration results for the Sungai Padas HEC-HMS model

RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH AT BIAH DISCHARGE STATION
(June 1992 - Validation)

RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH AT ANSIP DISCHARGE STATION

(June 1992 - Validation)
300

140
Observed

Observed

120

Simulated

200

Discharge (cms)

Discharge (cms)

250

150
100
50

Simulated

100
80
60
40
20

0
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

50

100

150

200

250

Time (h)

350

400

450

500

550

600

RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH AT BEAUFORT DISCHARGE STATION

(June 1992 - Validation)

RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH AT KEMABONG DISCHARGE STATION

(June 1992 - Validation)
1200

800
700

Observed

600

Simulated

Observed
1000
Discharge (cms)

Discharge (cms)

300
Time (h)

500
400
300

Simulated

800
600
400

200
200

100
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

Time (h)

Time (h)

Figure 11 Validation results for the Sungai Padas HEC-HMS model

Hydrograph Volume Comparison at Beaufort Discharge Station

(May 1991 - Calibration)

Hydrograph Peak Comparison at JPS Beaufort Discharge Station

(May 1991 - Calibration)

450

1200

Simulated (1 x 106 m3)

Simulated (cms)

400

R2 = 0.9435

1000
800
600
400
200

R2 = 0.9832

350
300
250
200
150
100
50

0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

Observed (cms)

100

200

300

400

500

600

Observed (1 x 106 m3)

(b)

(a)
2

Figure 12 The R Values for hydrograph peak (a) and volume (b) at JPS Beaufort discharge station from the HEC-HMS model calibration for
Sungai Padas catchment
356

2nd International Conference on Managing Rivers in the 21st Century:

Solutions Towards Sustainable River Basins

Hydrograph Peak Comparison at JPS Beaufort Discharge Station

(June 1992 - Validation)

Hydrograph Volume Comparison at JPS Beaufort Discharge Station

(June 1992 - Validation)
700

900
800

600
Simulated (1 x 106 m3)

R2 = 0.8129

Simulated (cms)

700
600
500
400
300
200

R2 = 0.9876

500
400
300
200
100

100

0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

100

200

300

400

500

600

Observed (1 x 106 m3)

Observed (cms)

(b)

(a)

Figure 13 The R2 values for hydrograph peak (a) and volume (b) at JPS Beaufort discharge station from the HEC-HMS model validation for
Sungai Padas catchment
Table 3 Model Parameters of the HEC-HMS Model for Sungai Padas Catchment

Subcatchment
Area (km2)
SCS-CN
Ia (mm)
Imp. (%)
tc (h)
Storage Coeff. (h)
Muskingum-K
Muskingum-X
Reccesion Ratio
Channel length (km)
Channel slope (m/m)

A
2238
49
7.6
6.2
19.56
60
0.5
0.2
0.2
98.6
0.05

B
1733
57
4.2
1
23.98
90
0.3
0.2
0.2
94.8
0.01

C
3248
46
12
1
26.23
30
0.3
0.2
0.2
105.87
0.01

D1
267
52
1.8
0.5
13.88
50
1
0.2
0.2
32.71
0.001

D2
664
50
3.2
0.5
13.92
50
1
0.2
0.2
46.41
0.001

E
519
47
2.2
5
10.48
50
1
0.2
0.2
26.97
0.005

SCS-CN = Soil Conservation Service Curve Number

= Initial abstraction
Ia
tc
= Time of concentration

The SCS-CN values in Table 3 are adjusted at certain

percentage to fulfill the local condition according to Equation 1
(Hassan, 2006).
CN ' = CN ( I ) + [(CN ( III)

CN ( I ) ) * x %]

4. 2 Deforestation Effect Analysis

The HEC-HMS model hydrograph simulation analysis results
at JPS Beaufort discharge station are shown in Figure 14, for
ARI ranging from 2 to 20 years ARI within 72 hours duration.
The results shown in Figure 14 are the comparisons of
hydrograph resulted from different land cover pattern before
and after 1984 (based on Figure 6 and 7), in which
deforestation activities have been carried out within the
catchment. Figure 15 also shows the runoff hydrograph
analysis results, but due the conversion of deforested area into
agriculture. The results shown in Figure 15 are the comparison
between deforested area with none-cultivated and cultivated
with large scale agriculture.

(1)

whereby,
CN
= Adjusted Curve Number
CN(I) = Curve Number value for AMC(I)
CN(III) = Curve Number value for AMC(III)
x%
= Percentage of adjustment
The time of concentration value (tc) was estimated using the
Kirpich method (Equation 2).

t c = 0.0078 *

0.77
L
0.385
S

1
16

(2)

whereby,
tc = time of concentration (h)
L = length of overland flow (m)
S = slope (m/m)
357

Rivers07
June 6-8, 2007, Riverside Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

Hydrograph at JPS Beaufort (72h, 2yrs)

Q (cms)

1000
800
600
400
200
0
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Design Rainfall (72h, 5yrs)

<1984 (Qpeak = 2457.30 cms)
>1984 (Qpeak = 2558.10 cms)

2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0

50

100

150

Time (h)
Hydrograph at JPS Beaufort (72h, 10yrs)

2000
1500
1000
500
0
0

50

100

150

4000

350

0
10
20
30
40

Design Rainfall (20y, 24h)

<1984 (Qpeak = 3773.50 cms)
>1984 (Qpeak = 3911.30 cms)

3500
3000
Q (cms)

Q (cms)

2500

300

4500

Rainfall (mm)

3000

250

Hydrograph at JPS Beaufort (72h, 20yrs)

0
10
Design Rainfall (72h, 10yrs)
20
<1984 (Qpeak = 2893.70 cms)
30
>1984 (Qpeak = 3011.30 cms)
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
200
250
300
350
400

3500

200
Time (h)

2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0

50

100

150

200

Time (h)

250

300

350

50
60
70
80
90
100
400

Rainfall (mm)

1200

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
400

3000

Q (cms)

Design Rainfall (72h, 2yrs)

<1984 (Qpeak = 1303.10 cms)
>1984 (Qpeak = 1370.80 cms)

Rainfall (mm)

1400

Rainfall (mm)

Hydrograph at JPS Beaufort (72h, 5yrs)

0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
400

1600

Time (h)

Figure 14 Hydrograph changes due to deforestation

Hydrograph at JPS Beauf ort (72h, 2yrs)

Hydrograph at JPS Beaufort (72h, 5yrs)

1000

25
30
35
40
45
50
400

800
600
400
200
0
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

20

2500
2000

40

1500

60

1000
80

500
0
0

50

Time (h)

Design Rainfall (72h, 2yrs)

(1984-1995) Discharge (Qmax = 1370.80)
Future Discharge (Qmax = 1703.70)

3500

40

2000
60

1500
1000

Q (cms)

Q (cms)

2500

Rainfall (mm)

20

3000

80

500
0
100

150

200

250

300

350

Design Rainfall (72h, 10yrs)

(1984-1995) Discharge (Qmax = 3011.30)
Future Discharge (Qmax = 3531.60)

150

200

250

300

350

100
400

Time (h)

Hydrograph at JPS Beaufort (72h, 20yrs)

50

100

Design Rainfall (72h, 5yrs)

(1984-1995) Discharge (Qmax = 2558.10)
Future Discharge (Qmax = 3036.70)

Hydrograph at JPS Beaufort (72h, 10yrs)

4000

Rainfall (mm)

1200

3000

100
400

5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Design Rainf all (20y, 24h)

(1984-1995) Discharge (Qmax = 3911.30)
Future Discharge (Qmax = 4498.90)

Time (h)

350

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
400

Rainfall (mm)

Q (cms)

1400

3500

Q (cms)

1600

Rainfall (mm)

0
5
10
15
20

1800

Time (h)

Figure 15 Hydrograph changes due to agriculture

Table 4 Maximum runoff simulation results from different landuses (72-hours, 2-years ARI)

RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH
PEAK INCREASE
(%)

RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH
VOLUME INCREASE
(%)

DISCHARGE
STATION

CATCHMENT

DEFORESTED
AREA
(or LARGE
SCALE
AGRICULTURE)
(%)

Ansip

13.88

3.45

1.67

3.46

1.69

Biah

32.09

6.32

2.21

6.54

2.30

Kemabong

23.03

5.75

41.88

6.09

47.08

JPS Beaufort

A,B,C,D1,D2 & E

10.92

4.94

24.29

5.02

22.35

Due to
Deforestation
Activities

Due to
Large
Scale
Agriculture

Due to
Deforestation
Activities

Due to
Large
Scale
Agriculture

358

2nd International Conference on Managing Rivers in the 21st Century:

Solutions Towards Sustainable River Basins

4.

The highest runoff hydrograph peak resulted from the design

rainfall within the duration of 72-hours for 2-years ARI are
summarized in Table 4. The deforestations activities which
have been carried out during 1984 to 1995 lead to the decrease
of primary forest area by 11% within the Sungai Padas
catchment. The decrease of 11% of the primary forest area
causes the runoff peak and volume was increased by 5%, in the
condition which none-cultivated disturbed forest area. The
runoff peak and volume are increased by 25% and 22%
respectively when the deforested areas are converted into
agriculture (e.g. rubber and oil palm). The values of runoff
hydrograph as estimated at the JPS Beaufort discharge station
indicate that the increase of hydrograph peak is higher due to
the conversion of land use from deforested area into large scale
agriculture than the non-cultivated deforested area does.

5.

6.
7.
8.

9.
5

Conclusion
10.

The deforestation effect on the runoff hydrograph value is

rather significant. In spite of the small percentage of primary
forest are disturbed, but it has been shown that the hydrograph
peak and volume at the catchment outlet (Beaufort discharge
station) has increased by 5%. The deforestation by logging
activities particularly at the upstream near the Sook catchment
and Sipitang catchment would always contribute to the
increase of the flood peak at the downstream particularly at the
area of Beaufort. Runoff hydrograph increase was greater when
the areas are cultivated with large scale area of commercial
crops such as rubber and oil palm. The effect of runoff
hydrograph peak and volume are approximately five times
higher when the deforested areas are replanted with rubber and
oil palm compared to the none-cultivated deforested area. In
order to control the deforestation activities (especially illegal
loggings) in the catchment the state government has been
allocated some areas within this catchment as reserved and
protected areas (Environment Protection Department, 2003
(EPD)).

11.
12.

13.
14.

15.
6

References

1.

United States Army Corps of Engineer or USACE (2001).

HEC-HMS 2.2.2: Hydrologic Modeling System Users
Manual, Version 2.1. California: Hydrologic Engineering
Center.
United States Army Corps of Engineer or USACE (2000).
HEC-HMS: Technical Reference Manual. California:
Hydrologic Engineering Center.
Cunderlik, J.M. and Simonovic, S.P. (2004). Calibration,
Verification, and Sensitivity Analysis of the HEC-HMS
Hydrological Model. CFCAS Project: Assessment of
Water Resources Risk and Vulnerability to Changing
Climatic Conditions. Project Report IV.

2.
3.

16.

359

Yip, H.W. (2002), Storm Runoff Estimation of Ungauged

River Catchments Using Soil Conservation Service
Method. Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kampus Cawangan
Kejuruteraan, Sri Ampangan, Nibong Tebal, Pulau Pinang.
Hassan, J. (2006). Permodelan Sungai dan Dataran Banjir
Untuk Penjanaan Peta Risiko Banjir: Kajian Kes Sungai
Selangor. Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kampus Cawangan
Kejuruteraan, Sri Ampangan, Nibong Tebal, Pulau Pinang.
Chow, V.T. (1988), Applied Hydrology. McGraw-Hill,
Inc., USA.
Sabah Department of Agriculture (2004).
Department of Irrigation and Drainage (1983),
Hydrological Procedure No.26 (HP26), Estimation of
Design Rainstorm in Sabah and Sarawak. Ministry of
Agriculture, Kuala Lumpur: p.10-18.
Department of Irrigation and Drainage (1982),
Hydrological Procedure No.1 (HP1), Estimation of Design
Rainstorm in Peninsular Malaysia. Ministry of
Agriculture, Kuala Lumpur: p. 62-69.
Mohamed, M., L.Y. Heng, and Gopir, G. (2002). The
Surface Water Resource of Crocker Range Park, Sabah.
In: ASEAN Review of Biodiversity and Environment
Conservation (ARBEC), July/September 2002. p.1-14.
Environment Protection Department (EPD) (2003).
Environment Indicator Report, Sabah, Malaysia. Kota
Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia.
Ning SUN, Xiubin LI (2005). A Summary of the Effects of
Afforestation and Deforestation on Annual Water Yields.
Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources
Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, P.R.
China, 100101.
Randazzo, C. and Mach, M. (2004). Effects of
Deforestation on River Dynamics in a Costa Rican
Watershed. University of Washington.
Stednick, J.D. (1994). Monitoring the Effects of Timber
Harvest on Annual Water Yield. Watershed Science
Program, Department of Earth Resources, College of
Natural Resources, Colorado State University, Fort
Collins. Colorado, USA.
Costa, M.H., Foley, J.A. (1998). Combined Effects of
Deforestation
and
Doubled
Atmospheric
CO2
Concentration on the Climate of Amazonia. Institute for
Environment Studies, and Department of Atmospheric and
Oceanic Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Madison, Wisconsin. USA..
Costa, M.H., Botta, A., Cardille, J.A. (2002). Effects of
Large-Scale Changes in Land Cover on the Discharge of
the Tocantins River, Southeastern Amazonia. Department
of Agriculture and Environment Engineering, Federal
University of Vicosa (UFV), Centre for Sustainability and
the Global Environment (SAGE), Gaylord Nelson Institute
for Environment Studies, University of Wisconsin.
Madison, USA.