Interception loss has an important influence on the water yield of forested areas. Nevertheless, in most studies stemflow is not measured, therefore the question of how to determine the feasibility of optimizing interception and stemflow parameters simultaneously by matching daily simulated throughfall to fortnightly measurements of cumulative throughfall is an important one. By applying a daily empirical interception model, a goodness fit of 2·2 mm/day is obtained between observed and simulated cumulative throughfall. However, by applying the simple but robust Linking Test, it was shown that the parameters are non-unique and falsely linked, i.e. inter-relationships between different vegetation parameter sets give similar throughfall but non-unique net precipitation. The Linking Test investigates the causes of obtaining falsely linked parameters and shows that objective equifinality is not the source of the problem. Objective equifinality occurs when an inappropriate objective function is used. The Linking Test also shows that falsely linked parameters are not caused by measuring throughfall on a non-daily basis (termed frequency sampling equifinality). By expanding the interception model to the second degree, it was found that the non-uniqueness is due to the inherent nature of interception and stemflow functions that behave similarly and therefore can easily compensate each other (termed similarity equifinality). It is also shown that a simple daily empirical exponential interception model developed for conifers in the uplands of the United Kingdom is suitable to model interception in Pinus radiata plantations in the Mediterranean climate of southern Australia by using only daily gross precipitation data and two parameters.