the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Observed evidences of shallow groundwater resources threatened by multi-decadal re-greening practices in the Sahel
Abstract. Re-greening initiatives in drylands in response to desertification processes represent a key contributing policy for mitigating climate change impacts, restoring biodiversity, and sustainable land management. However, their long-term impact on surface or groundwater resources are rarely assessed and remains poorly documented at a global scale. This study examines how pioneering (1970s–1990s) re-greening and soil and water control (SWC) efforts have affected both surface water drainage and groundwater dynamics within a transboundary watershed of ~3,000 km2 in the central Sahel, West Africa. Using original field data, water table surveys (1960s–2020s) and a series of historical aerial photographs (1950s–1970s) supplemented with high resolution satellite imagery (1980s–2020s), trends in land use, land cover and hydrological changes were reconstructed. First, a marked decrease (1.6 fold) in the drainage network density was delineated in the upstream part of the basin in response to the development of SWC agricultural techniques, that resulted in lower hortonian runoff through gullies to the downstream river valley. Since groundwater recharge was shown to be mostly indirect through the river network, lower runoff entailed lower groundwater recharge. Second, dense reforestation schemes by non-indigenous phreatophyte trees (Azadirachta indica) took place through the main valley to control aeolian erosion processes, inadvertently increasing evapotranspiration discharge fluxes from the initially shallow (< 8 m below ground level) water table. Both of these processes (lower aquifer recharge, higher groundwater uptake by trees) contributed to a long-term plurimetric (3 to 6 m) drop in the piezometric levels, reducing storage or even causing a near dry-up of the alluvial aquifer. Overall, these results highlight a Sahelian trade-off that is relevant for SDG 15 and the flagship African Great Green Wall initiative: while re-greening and SWC practices may improve land conditions, they may also threaten locally fragile groundwater resources.
- Preprint
(1930 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(1114 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 04 Sep 2026)
- RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4118', Anonymous Referee #1, 05 Aug 2026 reply
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4118', Anonymous Referee #2, 14 Aug 2026
reply
General comment
This study examines the long-term effects of vegetation restoration policies in the Sahel region on groundwater dynamics. While it is known that artificial vegetation restoration in arid regions has both positive and negative aspects, there are few studies that have examined its long-term impacts. Therefore, this study can be considered a valuable contribution that demonstrates the hydrological impacts of vegetation changes and soil and water control policies based on changes in vegetation, microtopography, and groundwater levels. In particular, the assessment of negative impacts, such as a decline in groundwater levels, is expected to be beneficial for future policy-making.
However, there are several concerns regarding the hydrological impacts of the regreening practices concluded in this study.1)I understand that soil and water conservation (SWC) reduces erosion and affects the drainage network; however, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim that regreening contributes to a decline in the groundwater level. While factors such as climatic influences (e.g., fluctuations in rainfall), population growth, and dam construction are likely also at play, the extent of the impact attributable to regreening has not been examined. Consequently, there is a concern that the conclusion may be drawn without sufficient support.
In particular, I recommend evaluating the effects of regreening and climate on water yield. As a reference study, Sun et al. (2026) in the Water Resources Research assessed the impact of reforestation and climate change on water supply in China. I believe such a quantitative analysis is necessary.Sun, G., Zhang, Y., Hao, L., Song, Z., Duan, K., Sun, S., et al. (2026). Large-scale forestation aggravates water supply decline: Mounting challenges to forest management in China. Water Resources Research, 62, e2025WR043189. https://doi.org/10.1029/2025WR043189
2) Changes in vegetation cover are expected to alter evapotranspiration, which in turn leads to changes in groundwater levels and runoff; however, these changes are likely attributable not only to the Valley but also to evapotranspiration across the entire watershed. While changes in vegetation cover are shown for each landscape (Plateau, Valley, Slope) (Table S1, S2), it is necessary to quantify the extent of these changes resulting from regreening practices from the perspective of the entire watershed and to evaluate whether they correlate with changes in groundwater levels.
3) Regarding the reduction in surface runoff and erosion caused by soil and water conservation (SWC), the change in drainage network length is used as an indicator. While this is not a problem in itself, since only changes in values for the entire watershed are shown, it is unclear how SWC is affecting these changes. I believe it is necessary to show the drainage network length changes for each landscape type (Plateau, Valley, Slope). Tables S1 and S2 show changes in vegetation cover for each landscape type. Similarly, I think it would be better to present data on the areas where SWC was implemented within each landscape type. Based on that, whether the changes in drainage network length correspond to these areas should be demonstrated.
Furthermore, drainage network length corresponds to gully erosion and is thought to correlate with flood runoff. The authors should use water runoff data to verify whether changes in drainage network length directly correspond to runoff rates.4) It is believed that runoff, particularly baseflow, corresponds to fluctuations in the groundwater level—can it be verified? If possible, I think it would be better to include a long-term hydrograph. It would be even better if flow data were available for both the upstream and downstream areas.
Since these points are crucial to this paper, I believe these issues need to be addressed before the paper can be published; therefore, I have determined that a major revision is required.
Specific Comments
Line 119. The percentage of the total watershed area accounted for by each topographic category (Plateaus, Slope, Valley) should be shown here. It would also be helpful to show the percentages for the Upstream and Downstream areas in the same way.Line 291. Please briefly describe the methods for measuring flow rate and groundwater level.
Line 329. It would be easier to understand if, in addition to changes in vegetation cover ratio in Plateau, Slope, and Valley, changes in land cover and land use relative to the total watershed area were shown. Ideally, it would be clearer to show changes in the percentage of land area occupied by land uses such as woody vegetation, farmland, and residential areas relative to the total area.
Line 515. While “Drainage network length” for the entire watershed are shown, what about fluctuations in drainage network length within the Plateaus, Slope, and Valley areas? It is unclear whether changes in vegetation and soil water conservation (SWC) practices in each of these areas correspond to fluctuations in the drainage network.
Line 540. I think preventing flooding during heavy rainfall tends to reduce water loss caused by flooding and has the effect of increasing groundwater recharge. Therefore, I do not believe it will lead to a decline in the groundwater level.
Line 544. How much area was covered, and what percentage of the entire watershed’s vegetation was restored?
Line 556-562. The annual river flow is shown, but I think it would be clearer to also illustrate the continuous changes in water flow. Specifically, whether stormflow has increased or baseflow has decreased is important to understand how the regreening initiative has affected runoff processes—. Additionally, confirming whether changes in the groundwater table correspond to changes in baseflow would be beneficial.
Figure 1. The captions do not include explanations for a) and b)
Figure 5. Compared to the 1983 image, the 2014 image appears to have lower resolution—is that comparable? Could this difference affect the identification of the drainage network?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4118-RC2
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 187 | 41 | 10 | 238 | 23 | 9 | 7 |
- HTML: 187
- PDF: 41
- XML: 10
- Total: 238
- Supplement: 23
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 7
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
This manuscript mainly presents an interesting study on examining how pioneering re-greening and soil and water control (SWC) efforts have affected both surface water drainage and groundwater dynamics within a transboundary watershed in the central Sahel, West Africa. Overall, this research is potentially valuable for analyzing the main drivers of groundwater decline in this region. However, several important methodological and validation issues need to be addressed before the manuscript can be considered for publication.
Major comments