uggested
soil
nservation
1easures*
, 5, 6, 14
x
, 9, 6, 14
Pts
rot er A
and 15
, 9, 10, 12,
14 and 16
9,13,14,15
16
9,13,14,15
16
10,12,13,
5 and16
10,12,13,
5 andl6
10,12 and
3. Graded
'enching.
ive
: (MPTS),
IAPRS & SIS, Vol.34, Part 7, *Resource and Environmental Monitoring", Hyderabad, India, 2002
shown that the extremely severe and very severe soil loss
classes are found in the areas of dissected ridges, plateau spurs
with steep to very steep slopes. These lands occur in the sub
basins having high drainage density, high bifurcation ratio,
high form factor and high texture ratio. The severe eroded
lands are in association with very high drainage density, very
high stream frequency and less circulatory ratio. The extremely
severe and very severe soil erosion zones in the sub basins of
1,17,5,2,18 and 4 are in association with dissected ridges,
escarpments, plateau spurs and subdued plateau with high
drainage density, stream frequency, steep to very steep slopes
and very shallow to shallow soils. Where as the slight to very
slight soil erosion zones exist mainly in rolling plains and
pediments, which are in association with very gently sloping
lands with low drainage density, low form factor, flat surfaces
and double cropped area in the sub basins of 12, 10,19 and 11.
The weighted overlay of USLE parameters in GIS is of
immense help in evaluation of landscape conservation
measures for ridge to valley treatment and rational utilization of
land and water resources at optimum level with minimum
hazard to natural resources. The soil erosion and conservation
measures information generated at sub basin level with various
classes and mapping units can be used for immediate soil and
water conservation to restore fragile geo-ecological balance of
the study area. The approach of the present study will also
helpful in the areas of natural resource management,
environmental planning and management and hazards
monitoring and mitigation. The field validation of project
results shows that the suggested soil conservation measures are
well in association with the existing terrain conditions and
management practices. The followed methodology suggest that
the integrated analysis of geo-spatial information on
morphometric, terrain characteristics and soil erosion
parameters were immense help in prioritization of areas and
evaluation of strategies for soil and water conservation and
management of landscape ecological balance of the study area.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors are thankful to Dr. M. Velayutham, then Director,
NBSS&LUP, Nagpur for his encouragement in carrying out
this study. The authors also thankful to Mr. Sunil Meshram,
Technical assistant for his support in GIS analysis and Ms.
Rohini Watekar for word processing.
REFERENCES
Anderson, J.R., 1976. A land use/land cover classification
system for land use with remote sensing data, USGS
Publication, Professional paper 964 pp.
Anonymous., 1990. Soils of Nagpur district, Maharashtra,
Report no. 514, NBSS&LUP, Regional Centre, Nagpur.
Biswas, S., Sudhakar, S. and Desai V.R., 1999. Prioritization of
sub watersheds based on Morphometric analysis of drainage
basin: A remote sensing.and GIS approach, Jour. Indian Sco. of
Remote sensing, Vol.27, No.3 155-166 pp.
Bhumbla, D.R. and Khare, A., 1984. Estimates of wastelands in
India. Society for Promotion of Wasteland Development, New
Delhi, 16p.
Burrough, P.A., 1986. Principles of Geographical Information
Systems for land resource assessment. Monograph on soil and
resource survey, No12.Oxford, UK, Clarendon, 193p.
659
Colwel, R.N., 1978. Remote sensing as an aid to the inventory
and management of natural resources. Can Surveyor, 32:183-
203.
Desmet, P.J.J. and Govers, G. (1996). A GIS procedure for
automatically calculating the USLE LS- factor on
topographically complex landscapes. Journal of Soil and Water
Conservation, vol. 51 (5); p 427-433.
Fournier, F., 1960. Climat et Erosion. Presses Universitaires de
France, Paris, 1.
Gawande, S.P., 1989. Watershed prioritization in the
catchments of river valley projects and flood-prone rivers. Nat.
meet.on Status of erosion (land and soil)-issues and problems.
Government of India., 1994. Indian Agriculture in Brief, 25™
edition, Ministry of agriculture, New Delhi, pp. 495.
Hamer, WI.” 1981. A ^ soil degradation assessment
methodology, FAO Project in Tech. Note No.7. Report of Soil
Cons. Consult. Soil Res. Institute, Bogor, Indonesia.
India Met Dept., 1971. Climate of Maharashtra, Pre published
Scientific Report 155 pp.
Karale, R.L., Saini, K.M. and Narula, K.K., 1988. Mapping and
monitoring ravines remotely sensed data. J. Soil Water Cons.
India, 32 (1,2): 75.
National Commission on Agriculture., 1976. Report, Ministry
of Agriculture & Irrigation, Govt. of India, New Delhi.
Sehgal, J.L and Abrol, I. P., 1994. Soil Degradation in India:
Status and Impact, Oxford and IBH publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.,
New Delhi, 110 001, India, 80p.
Sharda, V.N., 2002. Strategies for soil conservation and
watershed management in India- An overview; Resource
conservation and watershed management-Technology options
and future strategies (Eds. Dhyani et al.,) IASWC, Dehradun,
pp. 20-29.
Sharma, R., Sahai, B. and Karale., R.L. 1985. Identification of
erosion-prone areas in a part of Ukai catchment. Proc.6™ Asian.
Conf.on Remote sensing, Hyd, India p.121-126.
Singh, G., Rambabu and Subash Chandra, (1981). Soil loss
prediction research in India, ICAR Bull. T-12/D-9, CSWCRTI,
Dehradun, India.
Strahler, A.N., 1964. Quantitative geomorphology of basins
and channel networks. Handbook of Applied Hydrology,
(Ed.Ven Te Chow), McGraw Hill Book Company, Newyork.
Wischmeier, W.H. and Smith, D.D., 1978. Predicting rainfall
erosion losses - A guide to conservation planning, U.S. State
Department of Agriculture Hank book, No. 537.
Yadav, J.S.P., 1996. Land degradation and its effects on soil
productivity, sustainability and environment. Fourth U.P Bali
Memorial Lecturer, Soil Conservation Society of India, New
Delhi.
