Table 13. Criteria and rating ofland qualities for cashew (LUT IV). 
27 
SI. 
Land Quality 
Suitability Class 
No. 
5/ 
s 2 
N 
1. 
Texture 
Loam, clay loam 
Sandy clay loam, 
silty clay 
Clay, ^ilty clay sandy 
clay ldamy sand 
Coarse sand 
2. 
Drainage 
Well drained 
Moderately 
well drained 
Poorly drained somewhat 
excessively drained 
Excessively 
drained 
3. 
Soil depth 
Deep to very deep 
Moderately deep 
Shallow 
Very shallow 
4. 
Gravelliness / stoniness 
Low 
Moderate 
High 
Very high 
5. 
Inherent fertility 
High 
Medium 
Low 
Very low 
6. 
Relief 
Normal 
Sub-normal 
Concave 
Excessive 
7. 
Slope 
Nearly level to gentle 
Undulating 
Moderate to sleep 
Very steep 
8. 
Erosion hazards 
None to slight 
Moderate to steep 
Severe 
Very severe 
9. 
Risk of flooding 
Very low 
Low 
Moderate 
High 
Table 14. Area under different land suitability classes for different land utilization types. 
Suitability class 
Soil Unit Area (ha) 
% of Total Area 
LUT-I (wheat) 
S, : Highly suitable 
P, M 
10,726.47 
19.68 
S 2 : Moderately suitable 
L 
14,727.15 
27.03 
S 3 : Marginally suitable 
K 
10,009.71 
18.37 
P 
N : Not Suitable 
A, D, G 
17,375.76 
31.89 
LUT-I I (Paddy) 
S, : Highly suitable 
K 
10,009.71 
18.38 
S 2 : Moderately suitable 
M 
10,726.47 
19.68 
S 3 : Marginally suitable 
L, P 
14,727.15 
27.26 
ave 
N : Not Suitable 
A, D, G 
17,375.76 
31.89 
I 
JUT-111 Forestry 
(Eucalyptus, Akskmoni) 
S| : Highly suitable 
P, L 
25,453.62 
46.71 
S 2 : Moderately suitable 
D. 0, M 
13,408.20 
24.61 
S 3 : Marginally suitable 
G, A 
3.888.27 
7.14 
N : Not Suitable 
S, K 
10,089.00 
18.52 
Terent 
imatic 
LUT-IV (Orchard) 
ild be 
S, : Highly suitable 
L, P 
25,345.80 
46.51 
water. 
S 2 : Moderately suitable 
M 
107.82 
0.20 
and 
S 3 : Marginally suitable 
D 
13.408.20 
24.61 
es. 
N : Not Suitable 
A, K, G 
13,977.23 
25.65