This article was downloaded by: [ ]

On: 16 November 2012, At: 10:57

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,
London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of
Remote Sensing
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tres20
Hydrologic response of
a watershed to land use
changes: A remote sensing
and GIS approach
T. Sharma, P. V. Satya Kiran, T. P. Singh, A. V.
Trivedi & R. R. Navalgund
Version of record first published: 25 Nov 2010.
To cite this article: T. Sharma, P. V. Satya Kiran, T. P. Singh, A. V. Trivedi & R.
R. Navalgund (2001): Hydrologic response of a watershed to land use changes: A
remote sensing and GIS approach, International Journal of Remote Sensing, 22:11,
2095-2108
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01431160117359
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/
terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study
purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,
reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any
representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to
date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should
be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not
be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or
damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

int. j. remote sensing, 2001, vol. 22, no. 11, 20952108
Hydrologic response of a watershed to land use changes: a remote
sensing and GIS approach
T. SHARMA*, P. V. SATYA KIRAN, T. P. SINGH,
A. V. TRIVEDI and R. R. NAVALGUND
Remote Sensing Applications Area, Space Applications Centre (ISRO),
Ahmedabad380053, India
Department of Civil Engineering, L.D. College of Engineering,
Ahmedabad380009, India
Remote Sensing and Communications Centre, Sachivalaya Building,
Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India
(Received 10 April 1998; in nal form 30 June 1999)
Abstract. In the arid and semi-arid tropics, low annual rainfall together with
high intensity rains has resulted in excess runoV, soil erosion and low moisture
intake leading to poor crop yields. Therefore, adoption of soil and water conserva-
tion measures is necessary for the optimal utilization of natural resources and to
increase the productivity of land on a sustainable basis. Remote sensing and GIS
techniques can be used for generating development plans for the watershed area
in consonance with the production potential and limitation of terrain resources,
and can also be used for assessing the impact of these measures before actual
implementation in the eld. This paper describes a case study for the Jasdan
taluka (district ) of Rajkot in Gujarat, India. The aims are to prioritize watersheds
on the basis of runoV generated, expressed as yield, due to existing land use
conditions; to suggest soil and water conservation measures; and to evaluate the
hydrologic response of these measures on runoV. The Soil Conservation Service
Curve Number (CN) method was used for computing the runoV; subsequently
runoV yield in percentage was calculated for prioritizing the watersheds. Satellite
and other collateral data were used to identify the problems and potential in the
watersheds and recommend measures for soil and water conservation. The impact
of these measures was assessed by computing runoV under alternative land use
and management practices. It was found that the runoV yield decreased by 42.88%
of the pre-conservation value for the watershed.
1. Introduction
The deterioration of natural resources is as old as the rst man who cut the rst
tree to practise arable farming. In Indias post-independence period, the increase in
agriculture using excessive irrigation, over-application of fertilizers and bringing
more area under cultivation has led to serious erosion hazards, waterlogging, chan-
ging watercourses, and soil salinity and alkalinity. In India, 75% of the total cropped
*Currently on leave from ISRO. Present address: Department of Geography, 2171984,
West Mall, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, V6T 1Z2, Canada;
e-mail: tara@geog.ubc.ca
International Journal of Remote Sensing
ISSN 0143-1161 print/ISSN 1366-5901 online 2001 Taylor & Francis Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk /journals
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

T. Sharma et al. 2096
area is unirrigated and it accounts for 42% of the total crop production. The rainfall
in these areas exhibits wide variations in time and space, introducing an element of
risk, uncertainty and instability in crop production. This is primarily due to the
monsoon nature of rainfall and its inadequacy to meet the demands. In the semi-
arid tropics, the rains are of high intensity and, together with the lack of organic
matter like the black soils of India, results in excess runoV, poor moisture intake
and loss of precious topsoil due to water erosion. This is further aggravated by high
prevailing temperatures leading to greater evaporation losses. Hence, accurate and
timely mapping, monitoring and assessment of conditions in the watershed area are
essential for assessing land and water resources and their optimum utilization for
sustainable development.
In dryland agricultural areas productivity is lower due to inadequate moisture
availability at crucial stages of crop growth. Soil and water conservation measures
have been long practised to protect the productive lands. These measures are sug-
gested based on terrain characteristics like land use, soils, slope, hydrogeomorpho-
logy, etc. Remote sensing and GIS techniques have been used recently to arrive at
cost-eVective plans for conservation and development measures for watersheds (Singh
et al. 1996, Rao 1996, Sharma 1997). However there is a necessity to assess the
impact of various potential conservation measures on runoV yield before implementa-
tion of the plans. This study was aimed at assessing the impact of these measures
on runoV from a region.
The objectives of this study were to prioritize watersheds on the basis of runoV
yield, to generate development plans suitable to the terrain and production potential
of local resources, and to evaluate the hydrologic impact of these plans/land use
changes on runoV.
2. Study area
The study area forms part of the Jasdan taluka (district ) of Rajkot in Gujarat
and lies between latitudes 22 02 N and 22 12 N and longitudes 71 09 E and
71 16 E, covering an area of 8916 ha. It falls in a drought-prone region and is
characterized by erratic rainfall over space and time, and poor and shallow soil
conditions. Agricultural activities are largely limited to the kharif season (July
October) although some areas are irrigated through wells and tanks. The principal
crops in the kharif season are groundnut, cotton and millets. The principal crops in
the rabi (NovemberApril ) season are wheat and sorghum. A substantial area of the
taluka is degraded and lying as waste. The study area is part of the drainage basin
of the river Bhadar. Seven sub-watersheds ranging from 687 ha to 3000 ha were
delineated using drainage information from Survey of India (SOI ) toposheets.
3. Data used
Information related to land use and hydrogeomorphology was derived from
satellite images of IRS 1B LISS-II sensor. IRS 1B LISS-II sensor has a spatial
resolution of 36 m and operates in four spectral bands: blue (0.450.52 mm), green
(0.520.59 mm), red (0.620.68 mm) and near infrared (0.770.86 mm) regions. False
colour composite (FCC) images of near-infrared, red and green bands were used for
visual interpretation and derivation of required information. Daily rainfall data were
obtained from three rain gauge stations of the Water Resources Investigation depart-
ment, Government of Gujarat. Information on soils was obtained from maps gener-
ated by the National Bureau of Soil Survey and Landuse Mapping, while information
on slope and drainage was derived from SOI toposheets at 1:50 000 scale.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

Hydrologic response of a watershed to land use change 2097
4. Model used for estimation of runoV
RunoV is dened as the net liquid water supplied to channels at time-scales
comparable with the duration of the storm after evaporation, interception, surface
retention, inltration and percolation to underlying aquifers. Inltration is usually
the main factor aVecting the amount of water available for runoV (Bras 1990).
The Curve Number (CN) model developed by the Soil Conservation Service
(SCS) of USDA (1968) was used for estimating runoV in a watershed. Most of the
parameters that aVect runoV are incorporated in this model. Some of the parameters
of this model are amenable to remote sensing. Hence this model was chosen for this
study. The SCS CN model is as follows:
Q
(P I )2
(P I S)
(1)
Where, Q runoV value in mm; P precipitation in mm; I initial abstraction
in mm; S potential maximum retention and is given as
S
254 000 254
CN
(2)
The runoV curve number CN is a function of land use, treatment and condition;
inltration characteristics of the soils; and antecedent moisture condition. McCuen
(1982) discusses the use of the SCS runoV model in detail.
5. Methodology
The watersheds were prioritized on the basis of runoV yield. SCS Curve Number
method was used to estimate the runoV. Information on land use, hydrogeomorpho-
logy, soils and slope derived from satellite data and other sources were integrated
using ARC/INFO software to suggest conservation measures in the area. Finally a
post-conservation scenario of runoV yield was generated for impact assessment of
these measures. The detailed tasks carried out were as follows:
1. Preparation of thematic maps pertaining to land use, soils, hydrogeomorpho-
logy, slope, rainfall, drainage, watershed and water bodies.
2. Generation of a database for thematic layers using ARC/INFO GIS on an
IBM RS 6000 system.
3. Computation of annual runoV, expressed as runoV yield on a sub-watershed
basis and generation of the pre-conservation scenario.
4. Prioritization of watersheds for conservation measures.
5. Generation of action plans for conservation of soil and water.
6. Generation of the post-conservation runoV scenario.
5.1. Generation of thematic maps
5.1.1. Land use map
Visual interpretation of IRS LISS-II, geocoded, false colour composite images
(gure 1) on 1:50 000 scale acquired during October 1994 and February 1995, was
performed for identication of diVerent land use/land cover classes. Multi-date data
were taken in order to identify and delineate the boundaries of the cropland in the
kharif and rabi seasons. The interpreted details were checked on the ground to verify
the interpretation. The agricultural land was further classied as double cropped
area, single cropped area, and fallow area. The double cropped area is mainly located
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

T. Sharma et al. 2098
Figure 1. IRS-1B LISS-II false colour composite of the study area.
in areas lying below the Alan Sagar tank where suYcient water is available for
irrigation through wells and canals. Wasteland was classied into two categories,
namely wasteland with scrub and wasteland without scrub. Besides this, habitation
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

Hydrologic response of a watershed to land use change 2099
and water bodies were also demarcated. Figure 2 shows the land use map of the
study area.
Visual interpretation techniques led to classication of cropped lands to one class
considering the monsoon period alone (since rainfall is largely predominant over
this period ). However canopy of crop is highly dynamic in nature and its extent and
changes with time also vary from crop to crop. Hence this factor was taken into
consideration by combining the interpreted land use map with cropping pattern
maps and crop calendars. After ground study using the cropping pattern map and
crop calendars, ve crops (groundnut, cotton, sorghum, millets and vegetables) were
identied in total and their spatial distribution was carefully studied. Some of these
crops are present in small quantities in limited areas. Crops that did not exceed
about 10% in any of the main regions were not included in the analysis. Finally,
three crops, groundnut, cotton and sorghum, which account for about 90% of the
cropped area, were considered and accordingly the cropped area was reclassied.
5.1.2. Hydrogeomorphology
Using standard visual interpretation techniques and satellite images of IRS
LISS-II geocoded products of two seasons, seven hydrogeomorphological units
were mapped and veried with ground checks: Pediment inselberg complex,
Pediment-basalt, Pediment-sandstone, Buried pedimentbasaltshallow, Buried
pedimentbasaltmedium, Valley ll and Flood plains.
5.1.3. Soils
The soil map prepared by the National Bureau of Soil Survey and Landuse
Planning (NBSSLUP) was used for the study. The soil units on the soil map are the
associations of sub-groups. In all ve sub-group associations are available in the
study area. The sub-group associations present are:
1. Soils of hilly terrain: Typic UstochreptsVertic Ustochrepts
2. Soils of Pedimentundulating: Lithic UstorthentsLithic Ustorthents
3. Soils of pediment on gently sloping surface: Lithic UstochreptsLithic
Ustorthents
4. Soils of dissected Piedmont plain: Lithic UstochreptsVertic Ustochrepts
5. Soils of Piedmont plain with narrow valleys: Vertic UstochreptsVertic
Ustochrepts
Soil properties, i.e. eVective depth, clay in surface layer, average clay in the prole,
inltration, permeability, soil texture, etc., inuence the generation of runoV from
rainfall. The soil map and report prepared by NBSSLUP together with the hydro-
logical soil classication system developed by the Soil Conservation Service was
used for classifying soils into diVerent hydrological soil groups. In this classication
system, soils are classied as A, B, C or D hydrologic soil group depending on their
properties. Category A soils have lowest runoV potential and category D soils have
highest runoV potential. In this study, soil sub-groups Lithic Ustochrepts of dissected
piedmont plain and Vertic Ustochrepts were grouped in category B while Typic
Ustochrepts, Lithic Ustochrpets of undulating pediment and Lithic Ustochrepts of
pediment on gently sloping were classied as group C hydro-soils.
5.1.4. Drainage, sub-watershed and surface water body map
A drainage map of the area was prepared using SOI topographical maps
at 1:50 000 scale. The drainage map was later used to delineate sub-watershed
boundaries. The surface water bodies were delineated using satellite imagery.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

T. Sharma et al. 2100
F
i
g
u
r
e
2
.
L
a
n
d
u
s
e
m
a
p
p
r
e
p
a
r
e
d
f
r
o
m
s
a
t
e
l
l
i
t
e
d
a
t
a
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

Hydrologic response of a watershed to land use change 2101
5.1.5. Thiessen weighted rainfall region map
A Thiessen weighted rainfall region map was prepared using the sub-watershed
map and information on rain gauge locations obtained from the Water Resources
Investigation Department. This was used to estimate average depth of rainfall over
the watersheds from point rainfall data.
5.2. Estimation of runoV
The procedure for estimation of runoV in the watershed involved generation of
a hydro-soil cover complex (HSCC) units map, assigning curve numbers, computa-
tion of curve numbers on a sub-watershed basis, integration of the HSCC map with
antecedent moisture condition (AMC), and database generation and analysis in GIS
using ARC/INFO software. It was carried out in the following steps:
1. Deciding the antecedent moisture condition.
2. Generation of a hydro-soil cover complex map.
3. Integration of the hydrosoil cover complex map with AMC.
4. Assigning the actual curve number CN values.
5. Calculation of potential maximum retention, S.
6. Calculation of initial abstraction, I .
7. Calculation of daily runoV on a sub-watershed basis.
8. Calculation of runoV yield.
Antecedent moisture condition (AMC) is ve days moisture condition of the soil
before occurrence of a storm and it is known to have signicant eVect on both
volume and rate of runoV. AMC for each of the days was calculated by considering
the cumulative rainfall values of the prior ve days. This was classied into three
categories depending on the antecedent 5-day rainfall in the growing season: AMC-I
( 35 mm rainfall), AMC-II (3552.5 mm rainfall ) and AMC-III ( 52.5 mm rainfall ).
Modied land use/ land cover and hydrologic soil maps were overlaid to generate
the hydrologic soil cover complex HSCC map. The HSCC map was further overlaid
with the sub-watershed boundary to perform calculations on a sub-watershed basis.
Curve numbers were assigned to each HSCC unit considering the average antecedent
moisture condition. The sub-watersheds having more than one CN value were
identied and assigned a single CN value by calculating the weighted average of the
curve numbers. The CN values of AMC-II were redesigned to the actual AMC
(I/II/III ) depending on the prior 5-day rainfall. Table 1 shows the CN values adopted
in the pre-conservation scenario.
Initial abstraction, I , was calculated for all the sub-watersheds depending on
the AMC using INFO of ARC/INFO GIS according to the following formula:
I 0.3S for AMC-I
0.1S for AMC-II and III (3)
where Swas calculated using equation (2). For example, if the amount of precipitation
is less than or equal to 0.3S in the case of AMC-I or 0.1S in the case of AMC II/III,
then there will be no runoV. Therefore, runoV is calculated for a rainfall greater than
0.3S (for AMC-I ) or 0.1S (for AMC II/III ).
Equation (1) was then used to compute the runoV value Q (mm) on a daily basis.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

T. Sharma et al. 2102
Table 1. Curve numbers (CN) adopted for diVerent HSCC units for AMC-II,
pre-conservation scenario.
Curve number for
Land use/land cover hydro-soil group
Sl.
no. Level I Level II Level III B C
1. Agriculture Cultivated Groundnut 78 85
Cotton 80 87
Sorghum 79 86
Fallow Untilled 86 91
2. Wasteland Land with scrub 85 90
Land without scrub 87 92
3. Habitation Urban 86 91
4. Water bodies Reservoir/streams 95 95
The runoV yield was estimated using the following equation:
Yield (%)
Runoff 100
Rainfall
(4)
These daily values were used to calculate the annual yields. After having estimated
the annual yield for all the sub-watersheds over a seven year period, mean annual
yield for each sub-watershed was calculated.
5.3. Generation of action plans for soil and water conservation
The procedure adopted for the generation of action plans was the same as that
used by the Integrated Mission for Sustainable Development Project (IMSD 1995).
DiVerent thematic maps generated were overlaid in a GIS environment to produce
composite land development units (CLDU). Each CLDU was analysed individually
to study the problems in that area and criteria-based actions were suggested for soil
and water conservation. The main problems in this area are:
d
Rainfall is scanty and erratic over time and space.
d
Low productivity due to limited soil moisture availability at critical growth
stages of the crop.
d
Large areas under wasteland.
d
Scarce fodder resources for feeding the existing livestock population.
d
Meagre availability of vegetation cover to meet the fuel requirements.
d
Poor ground water resources.
d
Absence of any planned measures other than the Alan Sagar tank to harvest
rainwater and recharge the ground water regime.
The above-mentioned problems were considered for suitable treatment. Depending
on the resource potential and problems in each CLDU, a specic action was
suggested. The eVect of the suggested new land use on runoV was then studied.
6. Results and discussion
6.1. Pre-conservation runoV scenario
The pre-conservation runoV yield was computed for each CLDU and then
averaged to give the value for sub-watersheds (gure 3). Wastelandrocky and
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

Hydrologic response of a watershed to land use change 2103
F
i
g
u
r
e
3
.
P
r
e
-
a
n
d
p
o
s
t
-
c
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
r
u
n
o
V
p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
i
n
s
u
b
-
w
a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

T. Sharma et al. 2104
wastelands with and without scrub, were seen as producing high runoV. The other
inuencing factor was rainfall. There was considerable localization in rainfall distribu-
tion in the study area. Sub-watersheds SWS-4, SWS-5 were predominantly occupied
by wastelands had less inltration and were observed to be generating high runoV.
Sub-watersheds SWS-7 and SWS-6 were also observed to be producing high runoV
but this was mainly due to high rainfall rates prevailing in these areas.
6.2. Prioritization of watersheds
Sub-watersheds were prioritized using runoV yield values for soil and water
conservation measures. RunoV yield, expressed as percentage of rainfall, is more
realistic in reecting the hydrologic response of a watershed in comparison with the
runoV depth alone. The yields were observed to be ranging from 13 to 22%. Sub-
watersheds producing higher yield were given higher priority. The mean annual
runoV yield obtained for the entire watershed was 18.22%.
6.3. Recommendations for developmental measures
The CLDUs generated were categorized into eight classes with unique character-
istics of land use, hydrogeomorphology, soils and slope as shown in table 2. After
consultation with subject experts, various activities related to soil and water conserva-
tion and land use were suggested for each of these eight CLDU classes. Figure 4
shows the diVerent actions suggested for land resources development. Agro-
horticulture was suggested in single cropped areas with moderate ground water
prospects, while agro-silviculture was proposed for single crop areas with poor
ground water potential. Contour cultivation was suggested for all agricultural areas.
In order to improve the soil moisture regime, eld bunding/contour bunding were
recommended depending on the slope class. Land with scrub and poor to moderate
ground water prospects was identied for aVorestation with staggered trenches. Land
without scrub and poor to moderate ground water prospects was recommended for
fuel and fodder plantations with staggered trenches. Silvipasture was suggested for
wastelands with very poor water prospects.
6.4. Post-conservation runoV scenario
RunoV yield for the post-conservation scenario was estimated with the recom-
mended new land use and management practices. The runoV under recommended
measures was computed again with modied curve numbers CN (table 3) after
integrating the land resources development plan with the hydrologic soil group map.
Table 4 gives a comparison of runoV yield for pre-conservation and post-conservation
scenarios for seven sub-watersheds. Sub-watersheds 1, 4 and 5 showed a marked
decrease in runoV yield. Sub-watersheds 4 and 5 had large areas of wasteland which
were recommended for silvipasture. This practice increases the inltration rate most
eVectively. Areas under double crops and those recommended for multiple land-use
systems also showed a signicant reduction in runoV. The runoV yields in the post-
conservation scenario were observed to range from 8.20 to 15.98% and the annual
mean yield for the entire watershed was calculated to be 10.41%. It is observed that
after conservation the yield decreases by 42.88% of the value at pre-conservation
for the whole watershed.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

Hydrologic response of a watershed to land use change 2105
T
a
b
l
e
2
.
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
f
o
r
l
a
n
d
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
p
l
a
n
.
A
c
t
i
o
n
S
r
.
N
o
.
L
a
n
d
u
s
e
/
l
a
n
d
c
o
v
e
r
H
y
d
r
o
g
e
o
m
o
r
p
h
o
l
o
g
y
S
o
i
l
S
l
o
p
e
(
%
)
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
U
s
e
1
W
a
s
t
e
l
a
n
d
w
i
t
h
/
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
s
c
r
u
b
P
(
B
a
)
,
P
(
S
S
t
)
,
P
I
C
L
U
t
h
,
L
U
c
h
,
0

1
/
1

3
S
t
a
g
g
e
r
e
d
t
r
e
n
c
h
e
s
S
i
l
v
i
p
a
s
t
u
r
e
T
U
c
h
,
V
U
c
h
2
W
a
s
t
e
l
a
n
d
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
s
c
r
u
b
B
P
-
S
L
U
t
h
,
L
U
c
h
,
0

1
/
1

3
S
t
a
g
g
e
r
e
d
t
r
e
n
c
h
e
s
F
u
e
l
a
n
d
f
o
d
d
e
r
T
U
c
h
,
V
U
c
h
3
W
a
s
t
e
l
a
n
d
w
i
t
h
s
c
r
u
b
B
P
-
S
V
U
t
h
,
T
U
c
h
,
0

1
/
1

3
S
t
a
g
g
e
r
e
d
t
r
e
n
c
h
e
s
A
V
o
r
e
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
L
U
c
h
,
L
U
c
h
4
S
i
n
g
l
e
c
r
o
p
,
f
a
l
l
o
w
P
(
B
a
)
,
P
(
S
S
t
)
,
P
I
C
V
U
t
h
,
V
U
c
h
,
0

1
/
1

3
F
i
e
l
d
/
c
o
n
t
o
u
r
b
u
n
d
i
n
g
A
g
r
o
-
s
i
l
v
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
L
U
t
h
,
T
U
c
h
5
S
i
n
g
l
e
c
r
o
p
,
f
a
l
l
o
w
B
P
-
S
T
U
c
h
,
V
U
c
h
,
0

1
/
1

3
F
i
e
l
d
/
c
o
n
t
o
u
r
b
u
n
d
i
n
g
A
g
r
o
-
h
o
r
t
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
V
U
c
h
(
L
U
t
h
)
6
S
i
n
g
l
e
c
r
o
p
V
a
l
l
e
y

l
l
,
B
P
-
M
T
U
c
h
,
V
U
c
h
,
0

1
/
1

3
F
i
e
l
d
/
c
o
n
t
o
u
r
b
u
n
d
i
n
g
D
o
u
b
l
e
c
r
o
p
V
U
c
h
(
L
U
t
h
)
7
D
o
u
b
l
e
c
r
o
p
V
a
l
l
e
y

l
l
,
B
P
-
M
T
U
c
h
,
V
U
c
h
,
0

1
/
1

3
F
i
e
l
d
/
c
o
n
t
o
u
r
b
u
n
d
i
n
g
N
o
a
c
t
i
o
n
V
U
c
h
(
L
U
t
h
)
8
W
a
s
t
e
l
a
n
d
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
s
c
r
u
b
F
l
o
o
d
p
l
a
i
n
L
U
t
h
,
L
U
c
h
0

1
N
o
a
c
t
i
o
n
P
I
C
,
P
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
i
n
s
e
l
b
e
r
g
c
o
m
p
l
e
x
;
P
(
B
a
)
,
P
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
-
b
a
s
a
l
t
;
P
(
S
S
t
)
,
P
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
-
s
a
n
d
s
t
o
n
e
;
B
P
-
S
,
B
u
r
i
e
d
p
e
d
i
m
e
n
t

b
a
s
a
l
t

s
h
a
l
l
o
w
;
B
P
-
M
,
B
u
r
i
e
d
p
e
d
i
m
e
n
t

b
a
s
a
l
t

m
e
d
i
u
m
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

T. Sharma et al. 2106
F
i
g
u
r
e
4
.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
l
a
n
d
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
p
l
a
n
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

Hydrologic response of a watershed to land use change 2107
Table 3. Curve numbers (CN) adopted for diVerent HSCC units for AMC-II,
post-conservation scenario.
Curve number for hydro-soil group
Sl. No. Suggested land use B C
1. Double crop 75 82
2. Agro-horticulture 78 85
3. Agro-silviculture 77 84
4. AVorestation 60 73
5. Fuel and fodder 70 78
6. Silvipasture 59 75
7. Wastelandrocky 87 92
8. Habitation 86 91
9. Water bodies 95 95
Table 4. Mean annual runoV yield for pre- and post-conservation scenarios.
Yield (%)
Sl.No. Sub-watershed code Pre-conservation Post-conservation
1. SWS-1 13.85 8.20
2. SWS-2 14.98 10.62
3. SWS-3 18.55 11.30
4. SWS-4 20.61 9.51
5. SWS-5 22.12 9.92
6. SWS-6 15.14 11.46
7. SWS-7 22.03 15.98
Entire watershed 18.22 10.41
7. Conclusions
This study demonstrates the feasibility of using integrated remote sensing and
GIS for development of a watershed and for assessment of its hydrologic response
to various land use and management changes. The spatial analysis of thematic
information which can be derived from remote sensing helps in the assessment of
developmental plans before they are implemented in the eld. This approach is thus
an eVective tool for selection of the best management plan to be implemented.
In the watershed studied, the actual implementation of soil and water conserva-
tion measures recommended along with the alternative land use systems would result
in a considerable decrease (up to 55% at sub-watershed level ) in runoV, thereby
improving the soil moisture regime. Multiple agricultural production systems such
as agro-hor ticulture, agro-silviculture, etc. were found to be very eVective in conserv-
ing rainwater. After conservation measures the runoV yield was found to decrease
by 42.88% of the pre-conservation value for the entire watershed.
References
Bras, R. L., 1990, HydrologyAn Introduction To Hydrologic Science, chapt er 8 (Reading,
Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley).
IMSD, 1995, Integrated Mission for Sustainable Development Technical Guidelines (Hyderabad:
National Remote Sensing Agency).
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

Hydrologic response of a watershed to land use change 2108
McCuen, R. H., 1982, A Guide to Hydrologic Analysis using SCS Methods (Englewood CliVs,
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall).
Rao, R. S., 1996, Int egrated mission for sustainable developmentA case study of Anantpur
District. Technical volume. National Workshop on Application of RSand GISTechniques
to Integrated Rural Development, Hyderabad, June 1996.
Sharma, T., 1997, An integrated approach to sustainable development of a watershed in India,
using remote sensing and GIS. Space Applications for Sustainable Development,
Proceedings of the High-level Seminar on Integrated Space Technology Applications for
Poverty Alleviation and Rural Development, Bangkok, October 1996, ST/ESCAP/1817
(New York: UN), pp. 3542.
Singh, T. P., Sharma, A. K., Sharma, T., and Navalgund, R. R., 1996, Application of remote
sensing and GIS in integrated watershed development planning: A few case studies in
Ahmedabad district. Technical volume. National Workshop on Application of RS and
GIS Techniques to Integrated Rural Development, Hyderabad, June 1996.
Soil Conservation Service, 1968, Hydrology. In National Engineering Handbook, suppl. A,
4 (Washington, DC: US Deparment of Agriculture).
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[

]

a
t

1
0
:
5
7

1
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2