Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Assessment of Soil Erosion in the Fragile Himalayan Ecosystem of Uttarakhand, India Using USLE and GIS for Sustainable Productivity


Affiliations
1 ICAR-National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning, Regional Centre, IARI Campus, New Delhi 110 012, India
2 ICAR-National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning, Amravati Road, Nagpur 440 033, India
3 ICAR-Agricultural Scientists Recruitment Board, KAB-I, Pusa, New Delhi 110 012, India
 

In this study, we assess quantitative soil loss in the Himalayan ecosystem of Uttarakhand, India using universal soil loss equation and geographic information system. The analysis shows that about 359,000 (6.71%), 473,000 (8.84%) and 1,750,000 ha (32.72%) area is under moderately severe (15–20 tonne ha–1 year–1), severe (20–40 tonne ha–1 year–1) and very severe (40–80 tonne ha–1 year–1) soil loss respectively. It clearly indicates that about 48.3% area of the state is above the tolerance limit of 11.2 tonne ha–1 year–1 of soil loss. This explains the need to undertake appropriate soil and water conservation measures to mitigate the topsoil loss in this fragile Himalayan ecosystem. Based on the degree of severity of soil loss, appropriate soil and water conservation measures need to be adopted on priority basis. The agriculture practices should be diversified with farm-forestry, agro-horticulture and/or agro-forestry to minimize soil loss in cultivated areas of the state. Such conservation programmes help mitigate accelerated soil erosion, restore the fragile ecosystems and generate employment opportunities for the needy.

Keywords

Conservation Measures, Erodibility, Fragile Ecosystems, Geographic Information System, Universal Soil Loss Equation.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Mandal, D. and Sharda, V. N., Assessment of permissible soil loss in India employing a quantitative bio-physical model. Curr. Sci., 2011, 100, 383–390.

  • Barrow, C. J., Land Degradation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1991.

  • Sfeir-Younis, A., Soil conservation in developing countries. Western Africa Projects Department/The World Bank, Washington, DC, USA, 1986.

  • Dhruvanarayana, V. V. and Ram Babu, Estimation of soil erosion in India. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 1983, 109, 419–434.

  • Lal, R., Soil erosion impact on agronomic productivity and environment quality: critical reviews. Plant Sci., 1998, 17, 319–464.

  • Mahapatra, S. K., Rana, K. P. C., Sidhu, G. S. and Walia, C. S., Assessment of degradation status of Jammu & Kashmir soils for their amelioration. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 2000, 48, 572–576.

  • Cox, C. and Madramootoo, C., Application of geographic information systems in watershed management planning in St. Lucia. Comput. Electron. Agric., 1998, 20, 229–250.

  • Erdogan, E. H., Erpul, G. and Bayramin, I., Use of USLE/GIS methodology for predicting soil loss in a semiarid agricultural environment. Environ. Monit. Assess., 2007, 131, 153–161.

  • Gong, J., Geography Information System, Science Publishing, Beijing, China, 2001.

  • Guobin, F., Shulin, C. and Donald, K. M., Modelling the impacts of no-til practice on soil erosion and sediment yield with Russle, SEDD and Arc View GIS. Soil Till. Res., 2006, 85, 38–49.

  • Lim, K. J., Sagong, M., Engel, B. A., Tang, Z., Choi, J. and Kim, K. S., GIS based sediment assessment tool. Catena, 2005, 64, 61–80.

  • Mitasova, H., Hofierka, J., Zlocha, M. and Iverson, L. R., Modeling topographic potential for erosion and deposition using GIS. Int. JGIS, 1996, 10, 629–642.

  • Molnar, D. K. and Julien, P. Y., Estimation of upland erosion using GIS. Comput. Geosci., 1998, 24, 183–192.

  • Reddy, G. P. O., Maji, A. K., Chary, G. R., Srinivas, C. V., Tiwary, P. and Gajbhiye, K. S., GIS and remote sensing applications in prioritization of river sub basins using morphometric and USLE parameters – a case study. Asian J. Geoinform., 2004, 4: 35–49.

  • Wu, Q. and Wang, M., A framework for risk assessment on soil erosion by water using an integrated and systematic approach. J. Hydrol., 2007, 337, 11–21.

  • Yitayew, M., Pokrzywka, S. J. and Renard, K. G., Using GIS for facilitating erosion estimation. Appl. Eng. Agric., 1999, 5, 295–301.

  • Bhattacharrya, T., Ram Babu, Sarkar, D., Mandal, C. and Nagar, A. P., Soil erosion of Tripura, a model for soil conservation and crop performance. NBSS Publication No. 97, NBSS&LUP, Nagpur, 2002.

  • Challa, O., Kurothe, R. S. and Gajbhiye, K. S., Soil erosion in Maharashtra. NBSS Publ. No. 82, NBSS&LUP, Nagpur, 2001.

  • Kurothe, R. S., Soil erosion map of Gujarat. Indian J. Soil Converv., 1997, 25, 9–13.

  • Narain, P., Ram Babu, Ram Mohan Rao, M. S., Sehgal., J., Batta, R. K., Sarkar, D. and Thampi, C. J., Soil erosion map of West Bengal. Indian J. Soil Conserv., 1993, 21, 6–10.

  • Reddy, G. P. O., Kothare, R. S., Sena, D. R., Harindranath, C. S., Naidu, L. G. K., Sarkar, D. and Sharda, V. N., Soil Erosion of Goa. NBSS Publ. No. 155, NBSS&LUP (ICAR), Nagpur, 2013, p. 54.

  • Reddy, G. P. O. et al., Assessment of soil erosion in tropical ecosystem of Goa, India using universal soil loss equation, geostatistics and GIS. Indian J. Soil Conserv., 2016, 44, 1–7.

  • Sahoo, A. K., Sarkar, D., Sah, K. D., Maji, A. K. and Dhyani, B. L., Soil erosion of Bihar. NBSS Publ. No. 126, NBSS&LUP, Nagpur, 2005.

  • Singh, A. and Singh, M. D., Effects of various stages of shifting cultivation on soil erosion from steep hill slopes. Indian For., 1978, 106, 115–121.

  • Singh, S. P. et al., Soils of Uttar Pradesh for optimizing land use. NBSS Publ. No. 68 (Soils of Indian Series), NBSS&LUP, Nagpur, 2003, p. 91.

  • Maji, A. K., Reddy, G. P. O. and Sarkar, D., Acid soils of India – their extent and spatial distribution. NBSS Publ. No. 145, NBSS&LUP, Nagpur, 2012, p. 138.

  • Zingg, R. W., Degree and length of land slope as it affects soil loss in runoff. Agric. Eng., 1940, 21, 59–64.

  • Musgrave, G. W., Quantitative evaluation of factors in water erosion – a first approximation. J. Soil Water Conserv., 1947, 2, 133–138.

  • Wischmeier, W. H. and Smith, D. D., Predicting rainfall-erosion losses for cropland east of the Rocky Mountains-Guide for selection of particles for soil and water conservation. Agricultural Handbook No. 282, United States Department of Agricutlure, 1965.

  • Wischmeier, W. H. and Smith, D. D., Predicting rainfall erosion losses – a guide to conservation planning. Agricultural Handbook No. 537, USDA, 1978.

  • Moore, T. R., An initial assessment of rainfall erosivity in East Africa. Technical Communication 11, Department of Soil Science, University of Nairobi, Kenya, 1978.

  • Hudson, N. W., Soil Conservation, Batsford, London, UK, 1981.

  • Wenner, C. G., Soil Conservation in Kenya, Ministry of Agriculture, Nairobi, 1981.

  • Singh, G., Babu Ram and Chandra, S., Soil loss prediction research in India. ICAR Bulletin No. T-12/D-9, Central Soil and Water Conservation Research and Training Institute, Dehradun, 1981.

  • Ram Babu, Tejwani, K. G., Agarwal, M. C. and Chandra, S., Rainfall erosion potential and iso-erodent map of India. Central Soil and Water Conservation Research and Training Institute, Dehradun, Bull. No. 2, 1978, pp. 1–47.

  • Raghunath, B., Khullar, A. K. and Thomas, P. K., Rainfall energy map of India. Indian J. Soil Conserv., 1982, 10, 1–17.

  • Wischmeier, W. H., Johnson, C. B. and Cross, B. V., A soil erodibility homograph for farm land and construction sites. J. Soil Water Conserv., 1971, 26, 189–193.

  • Singh, G., Sastry, G. and Bharadwaj, S. P., Watershed responses to conservation measures under different agro-climatic regions of India. Indian J. Soil Conserv., 1990, 18, 16–22.

  • Kurothe, R. S., Determination of ‘C’ and ‘P’ factors of the USLE for important crops and management practices in Vasad region. Annual Report, Central Soil and Water Conservation Research and Training Institute, Dehradun, 1991–92, pp. 100–101.

  • Mannering, J. V., The use of soil tolerance as strategy for soil conservation. In Soil Conservation Problem and Prospects (ed. Morgan, R. P. C.), John Wiley, Chichester, UK, 1981, pp. 337–349.

  • ICAR, Handbook of Agriculture, Sixth (Revised) Edition. Directorate of Information and Publications of Agriculture, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi, 2009.


Abstract Views: 267

PDF Views: 99




  • Assessment of Soil Erosion in the Fragile Himalayan Ecosystem of Uttarakhand, India Using USLE and GIS for Sustainable Productivity

Abstract Views: 267  |  PDF Views: 99

Authors

S. K. Mahapatra
ICAR-National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning, Regional Centre, IARI Campus, New Delhi 110 012, India
G. P. Obi Reddy
ICAR-National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning, Amravati Road, Nagpur 440 033, India
Ritu Nagdev
ICAR-National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning, Regional Centre, IARI Campus, New Delhi 110 012, India
R. P. Yadav
ICAR-National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning, Regional Centre, IARI Campus, New Delhi 110 012, India
S. K. Singh
ICAR-National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning, Amravati Road, Nagpur 440 033, India
V. N. Sharda
ICAR-Agricultural Scientists Recruitment Board, KAB-I, Pusa, New Delhi 110 012, India

Abstract


In this study, we assess quantitative soil loss in the Himalayan ecosystem of Uttarakhand, India using universal soil loss equation and geographic information system. The analysis shows that about 359,000 (6.71%), 473,000 (8.84%) and 1,750,000 ha (32.72%) area is under moderately severe (15–20 tonne ha–1 year–1), severe (20–40 tonne ha–1 year–1) and very severe (40–80 tonne ha–1 year–1) soil loss respectively. It clearly indicates that about 48.3% area of the state is above the tolerance limit of 11.2 tonne ha–1 year–1 of soil loss. This explains the need to undertake appropriate soil and water conservation measures to mitigate the topsoil loss in this fragile Himalayan ecosystem. Based on the degree of severity of soil loss, appropriate soil and water conservation measures need to be adopted on priority basis. The agriculture practices should be diversified with farm-forestry, agro-horticulture and/or agro-forestry to minimize soil loss in cultivated areas of the state. Such conservation programmes help mitigate accelerated soil erosion, restore the fragile ecosystems and generate employment opportunities for the needy.

Keywords


Conservation Measures, Erodibility, Fragile Ecosystems, Geographic Information System, Universal Soil Loss Equation.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv115%2Fi1%2F108-121