## 5 Discussion
### Discussion of Soil Erosion Priorities  
Despite the advantages of the geospatial techniques in processing raster and vector data and running mathematical models, the toolboxes of this software still contain gaps during morphometric analysis processing [9]. They require various datasets, including digital elevation models, topographic maps, stream orders shapefiles, and sub-basin delineation. These data should all be projected in the same coordinate systems. The applied morphometric parameters in the aerial, linear, and relief aspects, as described previously, were recognized as erosion force assessment factors and have been applied for sub-basin prioritization. The authors in [8; 9; 37] highlighted that morphometric parameter aspects such as the drainage texture, bifurcation ratio, drainage density, overland flow length, ruggedness number, relief ratio, and stream frequency are directly proportional to the erodibility forces. Thus, the first level is described by the morphometric parameters providing the largest values, while the lowest morphometric parameter values indicate the last level of the erodibility factor. Conversely, other morphometric parameter aspects of basin characterization such as the compactness coefficient, elongation ratio, form factor, and circularity ratio present an opposite relationship with the linear morphometric aspects. Therefore, the first level or class of the erodibility factor provides the morphometric parameters representing the minimum value, and the last class describesthe morphometric parameters with the highest values. Following Ref. [9], the weightages technique applied in this study was assigned to 30% for linear morphometric aspects, 40% for areal morphometric aspects, and 30% for relief morphometric aspects. These weightages were distributed equally with the two linear aspects, seven areal aspects, and two relief aspects. These various weightages were applied to these three different morphological parameter aspects to prevent the calculations from focusing only on the areal aspects. This was because it provided seven parameters in comparison with the other two aspects that had only two parameters for each. The general assessment of soil erosion suggests that higher soil erosion levels (high priorities) provide small numbers, whereas low priorities of soil erodibility are given high numbers in values reflecting a low condition in terms of soil erosion risk. All fifteen sub-basins of the Wadi Al-Lith basin were provided with a soil erosion priority level from 1 to 15 due to the characteristics of every single morphometric parameter. Each priority level was then assigned by its related weightage, and the final sum of all the applied morphometric parameters for every sub-basin was the general compound level or class for a given sub-basin. Due to the computed class of compound ranks, the sub-basins were recognized as a soil erosion priority level. The largest numerical result in terms of compound rank was assigned the lowest class of priorities, class 15, providing conditions for low vulnerability in terms of soil erosion. On the other hand, the compound rank lowest numerical value was assigned to the highest level of soil erosion priority (class 1), providing the most vulnerable conditions in terms of soil erosion risk. Finally, the fifteen soil erodibility classes of all of the sub-basins were classified into five priority ranks including low, moderate, and high. The analysis of the morphometric parameters provides significant insight into landscape and landform characteristics and their natural conditions. In particular, examining the morphometric areal, linear, and relief aspects of catchments aids in understanding and assessing the geomorphological and hydrological conditions of the given watersheds [28; 32]. Complete and comprehensive modeling of morphometric results could help accurate decision makers to go through precious development plans, particularly in terms of water resources and soil erosion management.