The Method of Determining Surface Water Erosion Influence On

10.1515/sggw-2016-0024

Annals of Warsaw University of Life Sciences – SGGW Land Reclamation No 48 (4), 2016: 313–328 (Ann. Warsaw Univ. Life Sci. – SGGW, Land Reclam. 48 (4), 2016)

The method of determining surface water erosion inﬂ uence on agricultural valorization of soils with usage of geoprocessing techniques and spatial information systems

BARBARA PRUS, TOMASZ SALATA, KRZYSZTOF GAWROŃSKI Department of Spatial Management and Landscape Architecture, University of Agriculture in Kraków

Abstract: The method of determining surface wa- Geoprocessing techniques used for the analyses ter erosion inﬂ uence on agricultural valorization of environmental elements of farming production of soils with usage of geoprocessing techniques space were applied in the paper. The analysis of and spatial information systems. The aim of the spatial distribution of researched phenomena was paper is to propose methodical solutions concern- elaborated in Quantum GIS programme. ing synthetic agricultural analysis of production space which consists in combined (synthetic) Key words: soil agricultural quality and usability, – in spatial and statistical contexts – analysis and multi-criteria spatial analysis, erosive factors, evaluation of quality and farming utility of soils in environmental aspect of planning of rural space, connection with soils erosive risk level. The paper soil protection categories, erosive risk degrees, is aimed at presentation of methodology useful in high degree of soil protection and erosion factor such type of analyses as well as demonstration (HDSP.E factor) to what extent the areas of farming production space being subject to restrictive protection are INTRODUCTION exposed to destructive effect of surface water erosion. Own factor (HDSP.E) was suggested, which Farming production space areas in south- is a high degree synthesis of soil protection in connection with degrees of surface water erosion eastern Poland according to Baran- risk. The proposed methodology was used for de- -Zgłobicka (2012) “are characterised by tailed spatial analyses performed for Tomice – the an extensive land use mosaic”. The au- Małopolska rural commune (case study). The area thor explains the reason of such situation model elaborated for the proposed methodology’s purpose faced with soils mechanical composition by claiming that “the lack of ownership’s allowed to make a model of surface water erosion changes during the twentieth century has in five-grade scale. Synthetic evaluation (product led to the preservation of family-based, of spatial objects on numerous thematic layers) of extensive agriculture, characterised by quality and farming utility of soils and also zones of surface water erosion risk allowed to assign very high land fragmentation with mo- spatial distribution of HDSP.E factor (abbrevia- saic crops”. Herzog (1998) defines such tion of high degree of soil protection combined historically determined lands’ structure with erosion). The analyses enabled to determine proportional contribution of the most valuable “as a traditional agro forestry system”. resources of farming production space that are Land surface shape which is one of the subject to soil erosion negative phenomenon. main factors that influence erosion phe- 314 B. Prus, T. Salata, K. Gawroński nomena and also determines both the gathers factors that change in the course way of land’s usage and cultivation dif- of time. So, due to land usage modifi- ficulties is also not without significance cations, degrees of soil erosion risks (Cebecauer and Hofierka 2008, Korele- also change (Bakker et al. 2005, Prus ski 2008, Morgan 2009). and Salata 2013, Prus and Salata 2014). The research showed that Małopolska On one side, decrease of farm produc- is the region which is characterized in tion and connected with it set-aside phe- Poland by the highest percentage of are- nomenon of lands (Majchrowska 2013) as at risk of surface water erosion (Józe- which in turn are automatically covered faciuk and Józefaciuk 1987, Wawer 2007, by arborous and shrubby vegetation can Drzewiecki et al. 2014). But on the other be observed (Poławski 2009), whereas hand, it can be noticed that “a diverse on the other hand, we observe acreage land use mosaic is one of the most effi- consolidation which causes elimination cient methods of preventing soil erosion” of balks, woodlots and mid-field shrubs (Boardman and Poesen 2006). However, (Pašakarnis and Maliene 2010). the fact that “since Poland’s accession Problems of proper management of to the European Union in 2004, local environment resources should be taken agriculture has received considerable into consideration already at the stage of financial assistance enabling significant spatial planning in communes (Staniak changes in land use structure, including 2009, Gawroński et al. 2016). The Act of land consolidation” (Baran-Zgłobicka et spatial planning and development puts al. 2010, Zgłobicki 2012) can be danger- special emphasis on waters management ous. The arable lands previously used and protection of agricultural and forest in the form of lands mosaic and now lands. Even the legal definition of spatial concentrated in bigger acreages without order (the Spatial Planning Act 2003) balks and mid-field woodlots are more describing that it is such a space shape exposed to the surface water erosion which creates harmonious unity, says phenomenon (Van Dijk 2007). Fedorow- that it should consider habitat condi- icz-Jackowski (1998) classifies erosive tionings and demands. Habitat demands factors into two following categories: should be understood as environmental (A) factors relatively stable: erosivity dangers of natural and anthropogenic of the climate, the erodibility of the soil, origin. They constitute physiologi- topography (slope length and slope an- cal barriers of spatial character which gle); (B) factors susceptible to change: should be taken into account at the stage man’s activities (land cover and land of preparing conditionings and devel- use, including conservation practices). opment approaches of the commune’s The factors that belong to category A spatial development as well as the lo- rarely change. However, category B cal plan of spatial development and The method of determining surface water erosion inﬂ uence... 315 also during planning distributions in thetic) – in spatial and statistical terms the process of space development. The – analysis and evaluation of quality Spatial Planning Act (2003) imposes and agricultural usability in connection an obligation to consider conditionings with soils erosive risk level. The paper that result in particular from the state is aimed at presentation of methodology of environment and farming production useful in analyses of that type as well as space while writing up planning condi- showing to which extent areas of farm- tionings elaborations. On the other side, ing production space that are subject to environment and its resources protection restrictive protection are exposed to sur- rules and also trends and rules of farm- face water erosion effect. Geoprocess- ing production space shaping should be ing techniques and spatial information taken into consideration. That is why system Quantum GIS were used in the two research matters raised in the paper paper. The authors also proposed their – both soil quality and usability in the own factor (HDSP.E) which makes high area of farming production space and degree synthesis of soil protection in also erosive risk – have to be noticed connection with risk degrees of surface and respected at the stage of local plan- water erosion. Proposed methodology ning. Drzewiecki (2014) preparing the was used to detailed spatial analyses map of urgency grades of erosion con- performed for Tomice – the Małopolska trol procedures for Małopolska province rural commune (the case study). communes also presents such require- ment. However, there are known cases MATERIAL AND METHODS of conflicts between various require- The surveys were carried out in the area ments of the local community, the repre- of Tomice – the Małopolska rural com- sentatives of which are self-government mune (41.5 km2) located in Wadowice authorities that concern area usage func- county. It includes six evidence premises: tions and environment protection de- Lgota, Radocza, Tomice, Witanowice, mands (Stachowski 2008). This conflict Woźniki and Zygodowice. From the increases in a particular way when the mentioned issues perspective, it is worth area is subject to strong suburban pres- to point out that this commune is situ- sure which especially affects communes ated within the limits of the Carpathian (locations) in the immediate vicinity of Foothills. The Skawa river flows through the cities (Dylewski 2006, Poniży 2008, its grounds dividing the commune into Mrozik et al. 2012). two parts. The eastern part (right-bank) The aim of the paper is to propose includes the western frontiers of the methodical solutions that concern syn- Wieliczka Foothills which covers the thetic analysis of farming production Draboża Plateau. Even and wide hills cut space which consists in combined (syn- with narrow and deep valleys’ network 316 B. Prus, T. Salata, K. Gawroński

(Lgota, Witanowice, Woźniki and Zygo- state was constituted with data exposed dowice places) are characteristic for this in lands and buildings evidence for area. The left-bank western part, which 2013. Farming production space result- includes two premises: Tomice and Ra- ed from selection of arable lands from docza, is located in the area of the Silesian the map of land use on the soil valua- Foothills. It is the part that also covers the tion-class areas. wide valley of meandering Skawa river. Presenting in general proposed me- The bigger part of the commune’s farm- thodical solutions, two-stage tests were ing production space is occupied by fish- performed. Within the first stage, farming farms (Łopatecki 2011). At present, ing production space resources were farming production space covers about comprehensively analyzed taking qual- 73% of the commune’s area (agricultural land) which testifies to rural character ity and agricultural usability and also of the commune’s places. Forest areas as connected with that lands protection into well as mid-field woodlots are the next consideration. The second stage was con- 13% of the area. Watercourses and reser- nected with the analysis of risk grades voirs occupy up to 5.3% of the area. for soils in danger of surface water ero- Within the frames of the most cur- sion basing on the area numeric model rent analysis of erosive phenomena in and also knowledge of soils mechanical Małopolska, the area of Tomice com- composition. In the end, the product of mune was qualified in three-grade scale spatial objects located on ultimate lay- of anti-erosive actions urgency: (1) very ers from two stages was performed, re- urgent, (2) urgent, (3) less urgent, to the ceiving percentile collation of land pro- second grade which means that it is the tection categories confronted with risk ground where preventive actions should grades of farming production space by be taken immediately (Drzewiecki et al. surface water erosion. 2014). The very urgent degree of anti- To provide the first stage of proposed erosive actions occurs when over 25% methodical solutions with details, the of agricultural land areas is subject to analysis of farming production space high grades of erosion, The urgent degree means that 10–25% of agricultur- resources was performed to assess al land of productive space is situated soils quality and agricultural usability in the forth or fifth grade of erosive risk, by a combined analysis and evaluation whereas the less urgent grade means that of land classification categories as well only below 10% of farm lands is influ- as soils agricultural usability complexes. enced by erosive phenomena actions Soils production capabilities were as- (Józefaciuk and Józefaciuk 1975). signed in the three-stage scale using The research base concerning the a synthetic factor which enables farming analysis of farming production space production space valorisation: The method of determining surface water erosion inﬂ uence... 317

(xypxyp++++++ ) ( ) ... ( xyp ) s = 1112 22 nnn +++ 2(pp12 ... pn ) where: ments of agricultural production area x – score for the first feature (soil-agri- allowed to classify the lands of Tomice cultural complexes); commune and assign the following three y – score for the second feature (land categories of environmental and agricul- classification categories); tural protection grades: p – area of respective plot’s fragment; ● lands with the highest grade of envi- 1,..., n – responsible for the part of plots ronmental and agricultural protection; which was divided. ● lands with moderate grade of environmental and agricultural protec- The next element of the first stage tion; consisted in dividing of farming produc- ● lands with low grade of environmen- tion space into three categories of pro- tal and agricultural protection. tection (after Koreleski et al. 1998): the The assumption was accepted that first group – the lands that are subject to the lands with the highest grade of en- special protection which are so-called vironmental and agricultural protection unalterable resources, the second one – are altogether singled out by the highest areas with high grade of protection (their factor of soils quality and agricultural us- use for non-agricultural and non-forest ability, optimal moisture content and also purposes is permissible in case of lack they are so-called national resources for of proper lands of the lowest category) the future. In turn, the lands that are dis- and the third one which is composed of tinguished by lowest grade of protection lands with moderated protection – the are not subject to any protection. The usage purpose of these resources can be areas of the weakest production quality changed into non-agricultural and non- and defective moisture content were in- -forest. cluded there. The second element of the first stage The second stage of analyses includ- of analyses consisted in testing of soil ed preparing a model of potential sur- ground-water relations with reference to face water erosion on the basis of falls agricultural possibilities of production study which illustrates proper classes of areas. The analysis was performed on slopes and mechanical composition of the basis of soil-agricultural complexes soil top layer. The falls study was gener- knowledge. ated with help of a kriging method us- The combined, synthetic analysis of ing Gaussian curve function by means above mentioned environmental ele- of SAGA GIS programme, on the basis 318 B. Prus, T. Salata, K. Gawroński of numerical land model prepared with The result of this operation was mul- resolution of 5 m2. Source data to gener- tiplied by layer C (falls’ class) and the ate the land numerical model came from layer of soils moisture content (D). two independent information sources These operations allowed to identify SRTM in WGS84 system for the area (separate) the areas which are showed in of Southern Poland and from the topo- the present paper as HDSP factor (dem- graphic map in scale 1 : 10 000 in 1992 onstrated in the next chapter). The for- system. In order to acquire data from the mula is as follows: topographic map, all altitudinal points in the commune’s area were digitalized HDSP=⋅⋅⋅{}[] (A B) C D together with the zone of 200 m beyond its borders. where: Geoprocessing techniques were used for the purpose of cartographic spatial A – lots/farms borders; analyses. They are GIS operations used B – land classification and usage borders; for processing data stored in GIS work- C – falls’ classes; ing spaces. Geographic objects over- D – soils moisture content categories. laying, objects’ selection and analysis, Objects generated on the resultative checking topology and data conversion layer of the water erosion model and are included in basic geoprocessing op- defined as the smallest areas with ho- erations. Using geoprocessing methods, mogenous surface conditions comprise combined data that include information three topic maps imposed on each other from three different categories (terrain and related to the area usage, soils qual- falls, land classification categories and ity and terrain grade. borders of lots/farms from the Lands and The product of resultative layers Buildings Evidence) were generated. from two stages of the analysis allowed Tools from the geoprocessing method to generate the model illustrating catego- which is processing geometric objects ries of grounds natural and agricultural that have any spatial connection be- protection in connection (confrontation) tween each other were followed. In this with the five-grade scale of surface water case, the matrix product tool also called erosion (Fig.1) referring to classification multiplication was used. It consisted in presented in papers by the Józefaciuk creating geometric objects that included and Fedorowicz-Jackowski (Józefaciuk the shared space (A × B) of objects lo- and Józefaciuk 1996, Fedorowicz-Jac- cated on layers A (lots’ borders) and B kowski 1998). (land classification and usage borders). The method of determining surface water erosion inﬂ uence... 319

FIGURE 1. The spatial relationships of phenomena: of soil protected areas and high degrees of terrain falls (own study)

RESULTS allowed to classify Tomice commune The analysis of farming production lands in three categories (Fig. 2). The space resources regarding their first derived category included the protection grounds with the highest grade of natural and agricultural protection, the next Performed surveys allowed to confirm one – with the average grade of protec- the fact that spatial analysis, regarded tion and the third category of grounds as computer-aided is a very flexible and defined as the areas with the low pro- effective procedure to derive new infor- tection grade. The lands with the high- mation. Besides, GIS technology ena- est grade of protection are characterized bles to visualize any result of the analy- by: the highest factor of soils quality and sis and to compare results obtained in usability in terms of agriculture, optimal global, national, regional or local scales moisture content conditions and also the with each other (Fedorowicz-Jackowski fact that they were classified as so called 1998, Gotlib et al. 2007, Prus and Salata national resources for the future (Kore- 2013, Prus and Salata 2014). leski 1998). The lands classified to the As was mentioned in the previous category of the natural and agricultural chapter, the first stage of the analyses protection average grade have in most based on synthetic estimation of farm- cases high quality and usability evalua- ing production space chosen elements tion, however, they are characterised by 320 B. Prus, T. Salata, K. Gawroński

FIGURE 2. Valorization of resources of Tomice commune’s farming production space (own study in Quantum GIS programme) defective ground–water conditions. The Zygodowice (37.1%) and Witanowice lands of lower land classification catego- (21.2%). The smallest percentage of ries which do not need restrictive protec- lands with the highest protection grade tion belong here. The lowest classified was reported in Lgota (9.7%) and in category of lands of farming production turn in the communal places: Tomice space with respect to protection is the area (11.7%) and Radocza (14.9%). At the of the weaker production quality which is same time, it was stated that the second characterised by improper air–water rela- lands category being subject to the aver- tions in the soils. This category can be age protection is situated most often in the land resource for the future disposal Radocza, whereas the lowest percentage for the purposes of investment politics of the same category lands was noted in of the commune’s authorities (Koreleski Woźniki. The lowest protection category 1998, Prus and Salata 2014). of lands with weak agricultural and nat- Performed tests allow to state that ural values is located in the significant about 21% of Tomice commune’s area area of Lgota, Radocza, Witanowice belongs to the category of the most and Tomice places. It is guidance for valuable lands from the natural and the commune’s authorities as this area agricultural points of view. Their sig- is the provision of farming production nificant percentage is located in places space which in the future politics of the characterized by the extensively agricul- commune’s authorities can be allocated tural character, i.e. in Woźniki (38.7%), to investment purposes (Staniak 2009). The method of determining surface water erosion inﬂ uence... 321

Further analyses take into account general, 88.5% of agricultural lands of only the lands which are the most Tomice commune farming production valuable from natural and agricultural space are at risk of surface water erosion points of view and these qualified to the which makes up more than 58% of the first category of lands of farming pro- general area of the commune. Great ero- duction space. sive differentiation is, as surveys show, a characteristic feature of Małopolska The analysis of surface water erosion Province (Józefaciuk and Józefaciuk 1996, Drzewiecki et al. 2014), where the The second stage of performed analy- object of research is located. ses included defining potential grades Almost 12% of farming production of threat of surface water erosion. The space in Tomice commune was classi- analysis indicates great level’s diver- fied as the area sensitive to erosion in sity (grades) of erosive risk in the whole the fourth and fifth grade (Fig. 4). Areas commune’s area (Fig. 3). The tests show with the biggest risk of surface water that the wide and flat area that includes erosion are located in Witanowice and the valley of meandering Skawa River is Woźniki (over 11% of the general area the land not covered by erosive risk. In in each place).

FIGURE 3. The spatial model of the potential threat of surface water erosion in Tomice (own study) 322 B. Prus, T. Salata, K. Gawroński

Grades of soil erosion risk: 0 – no erosion, 1 – very weak, 2 – weak, 3 – moderate, 4 – strong, 5 – very strong. FIGURE 4. The percentage of the potential threat of surface water erosion in Tomice (own study) The potential threat of surface water identifier EX – which stands for soils erosion in the highest grades appears in with features to the high grade of their the commune’s places with varied relief. protection, however located in the area Fourth and fifth grades of surface water where surface water erosion takes place. erosion intensity levels need excluding Classifier X accepts values equal to the arable lands from agricultural produc- risk grades of surface water erosion. For tion as well as implementation of radical example, HDSP.E0-2 indicates the lands anti-erosive procedures, the way of us- of the high protection grade located in age change included. the erosive areas in the range of zero to second grade of erosion intensity grade (weak erosion). Synthetic analysis of farming Calculated HDSP.E factor for the test- production space resources ed commune demonstrates great diversi- confronted by potential area threat ties in individual places (Table). What is with surface water erosion, HDSP.E factor crucial, it determines which percentage of the most valuable resources of farm- Complex analysis of environmentally ing production space is endangered by valuable resources of farming produc- the surface water erosion phenomenon tion space confronted by the degrees in the third, fourth and fifth degree. Spa- of erosion risk allowed to determine tial distribution of HDSP.E factor in in- HDSP.EX factor (high degree soil pro- dividual places of Tomice commune was tection). This factor received additional presented in Figure 5. The method of determining surface water erosion inﬂ uence... 323

On the basis of the proposed HDSP. area

% in E factor’s formula, spatial analyses were general performed in the result of which it was stated that the valuable lands of farming area % in HDSP HDSP r erosion (degrees production space are located in the areas with big surface water erosion threats (ha) Area (Table). In Tomice commune, about 63% of the most valuable grounds are situ- area % in ated in the range of the effect of the first general and second degrees of erosion which ac- counts for nearly 13% of the general area area % in HDSP HDSP of the commune. About 30% of the valuable land is included in the third degree (ha) Area (moderate erosion) which is over 6% of the general commune’s area. The fourth area % in

general degree of surface water erosion is risky only for 6% of naturally valuable lands. area % in The grounds of the most valuable farm- HDSP HDSP ing production space in this erosion category are located in about 1% of the gen- (ha) Area eral area of the commune. The fact that only 1% of the most valuable resources area % in

general which means about 0.2% of the general commune’s area is affected by the fifth area % in

HDSP HDSP and the strongest surface water erosion is definitely satisfying.

(ha) In conclusion, it should be stated Area that obtained results confirm Drze- wiecki’s postulate (2014) about urgent area % in

general necessity to consider areas endangered with surface water erosion for the anti- (ha) area

HDSP HDSP erosive programmes and also planning documents which are implementation of the local planning politics. As authors General area (ha) stress, it has particular meaning due to ground masses losses (Koreleski 2005), impediments for agriculture (Józefaciuk niki 571.23 220.81 38.7 141.56 64.1 24.8 54.98 24.9 9.6 20.05 9.1 3.5 4.21 1.9 0.7

ź and Józefaciuk 1987, Stankiewicz and Specification LgotaRadoczaTomiceWitanowice 492.43 957.84Wo 142.82 946.86 47.80 766.86Zygodowice 200.81 14.9 9.7 89.90Total: 419.81 21.2 94.22 11.7Mean 155.94 28.80 113.02 66.0 37.1 56.3 60.3 67.67 4 155.02 75.3 93.52 9.8 858.07 11.9 5.8 60.0 41.07 73.31 – – 8.8 16.26 28.8 22.3 36.5 34.0 19.85 538.80 54.13 4.3 22.1 7.7 – 3.3 – 34.7 12.42 2.6 6.91 12.9 20.7 2.05 6.2 – 4.8 1.77 4.3 7.72 – 259.60 1.3 2.0 0.7 4.9 0.4 – 62.8 2.05 0.62 0.2 1.8 0.69 13.0 1.0 0.4 0.60 – 0.58 1.4 – 0.2 0.7 0.1 50.92 0.4 0.1 30.2 0.1 – 0.1 6.2 – – 8.75 5.9 – 1.2 – – 1.0 0.2 of HDSP.E factor: 0–2, 3, 4 and 5) of HDSP.E TABLE. Specification of farming production space areas environmentally valuable and at the same time endangered by surface wate TABLE. Source: Own study. 324 B. Prus, T. Salata, K. Gawroński

FIGURE 5. Spatial distribution of HDSP.E factor illustrating farming production space resources confronted with erosive risk degrees (own study)

Mioduszewski 2012), shaping of lands the point of view of lands economy led of agricultural usage (Mazur 2009) as by self-government units authorities. well as the fact that Małopolska Provi- In particular, these surveys can be an nce is evaluated as the most degraded indication for the commune’s authori- area and at the same time endangered by ties which areas that account for farm- anthropogenic influence on the environ- ing production space can be in future ment (Fedorowicz-Jackowski 1998). intended for investment purposes. Submitted in the present paper meth- SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS od of defining surface water erosion Concluding performed research, it can influence on agricultural soils valorisation which was analysed in spatial terms be stated that the issue that concerns needs using geoprocessing techniques combined quality analysis of agricul- as well as GIS systems which work very tural soils usability and the level of sur- well in such type of analyses with spa- face water erosion intensity is especially tial character. The analysis of natural important both in context of special pro- and agricultural resources of production tection of soils that compose national space faced with surface water erosion resources for the future and also from risk zones allowed to allocate areas that The method of determining surface water erosion inﬂ uence... 325 are valuable in terms of agriculture unal- usage of studies from the range of en- terable resources which are endangered vironment protection while preparing by erosion. The areas of agricultural pro- planning documents. The change of area duction space that are valuable naturally purpose needs detailed analysis includ- and agriculturally and at the same time ing areas’ physiological conditionings should be particularly protected are sit- identification and cataloguing which uated mostly in the north part of the will make presumption and also, from commune in Woźniki and Zygodowice the other hand, restrictions for the future places. In the south of the commune, lands management. Soils quality and in Lgota, Witanowice and Tomice loca- agricultural usability together with ter- tions, the big percentage of farming pro- rain falls have got especially important duction space areas qualified to the low- meaning. The areas of farming produc- est protection category can be observed. tion space and particularly these with The reason of that situation can be soils high production opportunities are pro- that are slightly deficient in terms of tected by the Act of protection of agri- air–water conditions that occur there as cultural and forest grounds from 1995. well as the low value of soils quality and At the same time, this document requires agricultural usability factor. These soils combating the erosion phenomenon if belong to the weakest land classification the visible results of its actions appear categories in the commune. in the area that is used agriculturally. Moreover, it can be stated that in case Moreover, nature protection problem- of changing agricultural areas into an- atic including farming production space other purposes, spatial politics of Tomice protection takes place within particular commune should tend to assigning for agreements of local spatial planning investment purposes the area of farming acts which are conditionings and spa- production space qualified to the low- tial management trends study and also est natural and agricultural protection the local spatial plan. Detailed environ- category (with moderated preventive mental analyses are also carried out in activities) in the first place. Therefore, so-called eco-physiological elaborations the grounds of such type can be defined that are prepared for local spatial plans as the ones the usage purpose of which purposes. So it can be postulated that the can be changed. Because of that, they problematic which concerns combined can be intended for investment targets evaluation of agricultural quality of soils in the future. usability as well as surface water erosion Nature protection has many aspects intensity level should also be taken into common with planning and spatial man- consideration in above mentioned plan- agement problematic. One of them is ning elaborations in spatial terms. 326 B. Prus, T. Salata, K. Gawroński

Acknowledgment GAWROŃSKI K., PRUS B., SALATA T. 2016: Wybrane aspekty ekologiczne realizacji po- Research was a part of project DS 3371/ lityki przestrzennej na obszarach wiejskich /KGPiAK/2016 financed by the Minis- – studium przypadku [Chosen ecological as- try of Higher Education. pects of spatial planning in rural areas – case study]. Inf. Ekol. Ter. Wiej. PAN Kom. Tech. Infr. Wsi, Kraków 1, 1, 131–146. REFERENCES GOTLIB D., IWANIAK A., OLSZEWSKI R. BAKKER M.M., GOVERS G., KOSMAS C., 2007: GIS. Obszary zastosowań [GIS. Use VANACKER V., Van OOST K., ROUNSEV- area]. Wyd. Nauk. PWN, Warszawa. ELL M. 2005: Soil erosion as a driver of land HERZOG F. 1998: Streuobst: a traditional agro- use change. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 105, forestry system as a model for agroforestry 467–481. development in temperate Europe. Agrofo- BARAN-ZGŁOBICKA B., ZGŁOBICKI W. rest. Syst. 42, 61–80. 2012: Mosaic landscape of SE Poland: JÓZEFACIUK CZ., JÓZEFACIUK A. 1975: Ko- should we preserve them? Agroforest Syst. mentarz do instrukcji w sprawie inwentary- 85, 351–365. zacji gruntów zagrożonych erozją [Comment BOARDMAN J., POESEN J. 2006: Soil erosion to anti-erosion soil protection stocktaking in- in Europe: major processes, causes and con- struction]. IUNG, Puławy. sequences. In: J. Bordman, J. Poesen (Eds), JÓZEFACIUK A., JÓZEFACIUK Cz. 1987: Soil erosion in Europe. Wiley & Sons, Chich- Ocena wodnej erozji gleb terenów wyżyn- ester, 479–487. nych Polski na tle warunków przyrodniczo CEBECAUER Y., HOFIERKA J. 2008. The con- rolniczych [Estimation of water erosion of sequences of land-cover changes on soil ero- soils on Upland areas in Poland against the sion distribution in Slovakia. Geomorphology background of natural and agricultural condi- 98, 187–198. tions]. Roczniki Gleboznawcze 38, 51–58. DRZEWIECKI W., WĘŻYK P., PIERZCHALSKI JÓZEFACIUK Cz., JÓZEFACIUK A. 1996: The M., SZAFRAŃSKA B. 2014: Quantitative erosion mechanism and methodological in- and Qualitative Assessment of Soil Erosion dicators for the research on erosion. Biblio- Risk in Małopolska (Poland). Supported by teka monitoringu środowiska. Wyd. IUNG, an Object-Based Analysis of High-Resolu- Puławy. tion Satellite Images. Pure Appl. Geophys. KORELESKI K., GAWROŃSKI K., MAGIE- 171, 867–895. RA-BRAŚ G. 1998. Ochrona i kształtowania DYLEWSKI R. 2006: Żywiołowe rozprzestrze- środowiska [Conservancy and cultivation of nianie się miast. Narastający problem aglo- environment]. Wyd. AR w Krakowie, Kraków. meracji miejskich w Polsce [Irrepressible KORELESKI K. 2005: Wybrane zagadnienia spreading of cities. Escalating problem of city przeciwerozyjnej ochrony gleb w świetle wy- agglomerations in Poland]. In: S. Kozłowski mogów zrównoważonego rozwoju [Selected (Ed.), Problemy rozprzestrzeniania się miast problems of antierosion soil protection in the w świetle doświadczeń krajów UE i USA light of sustainable development]. Acta Agro- [Problems of cities’ spreading in the light of physica 5, 49–55. experiences of EU countries and USA]. KUL, KORELESKI K. 2008: Wpływ czynników tere- PAN Kom. Człowiek i Środowisko, 27–38. nowych na natężenie erozji wodnej na przy- FEDOROWICZ-JACKOWSKI W. 1998: Assess- ment of Soil Erosion Risk in Poland. PHARE- kładzie wsi górskiej [The influence of field Multi-Country Environment Programme. factors on the intensity of water erosion ex- MARS and Environmental Related Applica- emplified by a mountain village]. Infr. Ekol. tions. Proc. 1994-1996 Results Conference, Ter. Wiej. PAN Kom. Tech. Infr. Wsi, Kraków Bratislava, 10–11.12.1998, 67–77. 3, 5–12. The method of determining surface water erosion inﬂ uence... 327

ŁOPATECKI G. 2011: Gmina Tomice – krok po STACHOWSKI P. 2008: Miejscowe planowanie kroku... [Tomice Commune – step by step...]. i zagospodarowanie przestrzenne na przykła- Wyd. Urzędu Gminy Tomice, Tomice. dzie terenu w otulinie Parku Krajobrazowego MAJCHROWSKA A. 2013: Abandonment of ag- „Puszcza Zielonka” [Local spatial planning ricultural land in Central Poland and its eco- and spatial management based on the exam- logical role. Ekologia 32 (3), 320–327. ple of the “Zielonka Forest” Scenic Park]. MAZUR A. 2009: Wpływ procesów erozyjnych Rocznik Ochrony Środowiska 10, 575–592. na kształtowanie terenów użytkowanych STANIAK M. 2009: Zrównoważony rozwój rolniczo [Influence of erosion processes on obszarów wiejskich w aspekcie środowisko- shaping the landscape on areas that are used wym [Sustainable development of rural areas by agriculture]. Teka Kom. Arch. Urb. Stud. in environmental aspect]. Woda – Środowisko Krajobr. – OL PAN, 64–70. – Obszary Wiejskie 27, 187–194. MORGAN R.P.C. 2009: Soil erosion and conser- STANKIEWICZ J., MIODUSZEWSKI W. 2012: vation. Wiley & Sons, Chichester. Przestrzenna ocena niekorzystnych uwarun- MROZIK K., BOSSY M., ZARĘBA K. 2012: kowań gospodarowania na terenach rolni- Polityka przestrzenna gmin wiejskich na tle czych [Spatial assesment of adverse man- zmian zagospodarowania przestrzennego wy- agement conditions in agricultural areas]. nikających z suburbanizacji [Spatial policy in Woda – Środowisko – Obszary Wiejskie 12, rural communes in relation to land use chan- 239–256. ge resulting from suburbanisation]. Rocznik Ustawa z dnia 27 marca 2003 r. o planowaniu i za- Ochrony Środowiska 14, 761–771. gospodarowaniu przestrzennym [The Spacial PAŠAKARNIS G., MALIENE V. 2010: Towards Planning Act]. Dz.U. 2003 nr 80, poz. 717. sustainable rural developmnet in Central and Van DIJK T. 2007: Complications for traditional Eastern Europe: applying land consolidation. land consolidation in Central Europe. Geofo- Land Use Policy 27, 545–549. rum 38, 505–511. POŁAWSKI Z.F. 2009: Zmiany użytkowania WAWER R. 2007: Erozja wodna aktualna w ziemi w Polsce w ostatnich dwóch stule- Polsce według województw w oparciu o ciach [Land use changes in Poland during Corine CLC2000 [Actual water erosion risk last two centuries]. Teledetekcja Środowiska in Polish administrative regions based upon Corine Land Cover 2000]. Inżynieria Ekolo- 42, 69–82. giczna, 18, 104–105. PONIŻY L. 2008: Presja urbanizacyjna i jej wpływ na zmiany przestrzennej struktury Streszczenie: Metoda określenia wpływu erozji użytkowania ziemi na wybranych obszarach wodnej powierzchniowej na waloryzację rolniczą podmiejskich Poznania [Urbanisation pres- gleb z wykorzystaniem technik geoprocessingu sure and its effect on the spatial structure of oraz systemów informacji przestrzennej. Celem land use in selected suburban areas of Poznań pracy jest propozycja rozwiązań metodycznych city]. Prob. Ekol. Kraj. 22, 335–342. dotyczących syntetycznej analizy rolniczej prze- PRUS B., SALATA T. 2013: Analiza zasobów strzeni produkcyjnej, polegającej na przestrzen- rolniczej przestrzeni produkcyjnej w polity- nej i statystycznej analizie oraz ocenie jakości ce przestrzennej gminy Tomice [Analysis of i przydatności rolniczej gleb w powiązaniu resources for agricultural production area in z poziomem zagrożenia erozyjnego gleb. Praca land policy of District Tomice]. Infr. Ekol. ma na celu prezentację metodyki przydatnej do Ter. Wiej. PAN Kom. Techn. Infr. Wsi, 3, 145– tego typu analiz oraz wykazanie w jakim stopniu –157. obszary rolniczej przestrzeni produkcyjnej podle- PRUS B., SALATA T. 2014: Influence of physi- gające restrykcyjnej ochronie (o wysokiej jakości ographic conditions on the quality of agricul- i przydatności bonitacyjnej) są narażone na nisz- tural production area. Geomat. Env. Eng. 8, czące działanie erozji wodnej powierzchniowej. 4, 55–65. W szczególności autorzy opracowali współczyn- 328 B. Prus, T. Salata, K. Gawroński nik (HDSP.E) stanowiący syntezę wysokiego określenie procentowego udziału najbardziej cen- stopnia ochrony gleb w połączeniu ze stopniami nych zasobów rolniczej przestrzeni produkcyjnej zagrożenia erozją wodną powierzchniową. Za- podlegających niekorzystnemu zjawisku erozji proponowana metodyka zastosowana została do gleb. Przeprowadzona analiza może stanowić szczegółowych, wielokryterialnych analiz prze- podstawę do prawidłowego gospodarowania za- strzennych wykonanych dla małopolskiej gminy sobami środowiska przyrodniczego w procesie wiejskiej Tomice (studium przypadku). Autorzy miejscowego planowania przestrzennego, może postawili sobie za cel dokonanie łącznej oceny także być wskazówką, w jaki sposób niwelo- mierzalnych zasobów rolniczej przestrzeni pro- wać konflikty przestrzenne wynikające z funkcji dukcyjnej, rozumianej jako grunty rolne zdefinio- użytkowania terenu w konfrontacji z potrzebami wane ustawą o ochronie gruntów rolnych i leśnych, ochrony środowiska. W pracy zastosowano tech- oraz stref powstałych w wyniku analizy terenu pod niki geoprocessingu, które wykorzystano do ana- kątem występowania zjawiska erozji wodnej po- liz przestrzennych elementów środowiskowych wierzchniowej. Podstawowe analizy wykonano rolniczej przestrzeni produkcyjnej. Analizę prze- na podstawie informacji dotyczących jakości strzennego rozmieszczenia badanych zjawisk i przydatności rolniczej gleb oraz wynikających opracowano w programie Quantum GIS. z badania tego zagadnienia kategorii terenów rolniczej przestrzeni produkcyjnej, które są najbardziej cenne pod względem rolniczo-przyrodni- MS received July 2016 czym. Opracowany na potrzeby zaproponowanej metodyki numeryczny model terenu w konfrontacji ze składem mechanicznym gleb pozwolił na Authors’ address: wykonanie modelu erozji wodnej powierzchnio- Barbara Prus, Tomasz Salata, wej w pięciostopniowej skali. Syntetyczna oce- Krzysztof Gawroński na (iloczyn obiektów przestrzennych na wielu Katedra Gospodarki Przestrzennej i Architektury warstwach tematycznych) jakości i przydatności Krajobrazu rolniczej gleb oraz stref zagrożenia erozją wod- Uniwersytet Rolniczy w Krakowie ną powierzchniową pozwoliła na wyznaczenie ul. Balicka 253c, 30-149 Kraków, Poland przestrzennego rozmieszczenia współczynnika e-mail: [email protected] HDSP.E (skrót: ang. high degree of soil protec- [email protected] tion combined with erosion). Analizy umożliwiły [email protected]