Soil loss tolerance limits for planning of soil conservation measures in Shivalik–Himalayan region of India

Bhattacharyya, Pratap; Bhatt, V. K.; Mandal, Debashis

doi:10.1016/j.catena.2007.10.001

Cited by 26 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It was assumed that the general relationships between a given indicator and the soil functions were relatively constant. The relationship is expressed in the shape of an indicator's scoring curve (Karlen and Stott, 1994;Andrews et al, 2002). Thus use was made of an increasing logistic curve, "more is better", as for infiltration, organic carbon, and fertility; and a lower asymptotic curve, "less is better", as for bulk density (Grossman et al, 2001).…”

Section: Scoring Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This capacity has been quantified through the adjusted soil loss tolerance limits (SLTL), or adjusted T values (Mandal et al, 2006), which are dynamic, discrete and site-specific values estimated with the help of easily recorded minimum data sets. This approach led to the mapping of adjusted T values for different agroecological regions and physiographic zones of India (Bhattacharyya et al, 2008;Lakaria et al, 2008;Jha et al, 2009;Lakaria et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Identification of areas vulnerable to soil erosion risk in India using GIS methods

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper attempts to provide information for policymakers and soil conservation planners in the form of district-wise soil erosion risk (SER) maps prepared for the state of Telangana, India. The SER values for each district were computed by extracting the information on grid-wise soil erosion and soil loss tolerance limit values existing on the country-scale in a GIS environment. The objectives of the study were to (i) identify the areas of the state with a high erosion risk, and (ii) identify areas with an urgent need of conservation measures. The results reveal that around 69 % of the state has a negligible risk of soil erosion above the tolerance limits, and does not call for immediate soil conservation measures. The remaining area (2.17 M ha) requires conservation planning. Four districts, viz. Adilabad, Warangal, Khammam, and Karimnagar are the most risk-prone with more than one-quarter of their total geographical areas showing net positive SER values. In order to obtain a clearer picture and categorize the districts based on their extent of vulnerability, weighted erosion risk values were computed. Adilabad, Warangal, and Khammam were identified as the worst-affected districts in terms of soil erosion, and therefore are in need of immediate attention of natural resource conservation.

show abstract

Section: Scoring Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of areas vulnerable to soil erosion risk in India using GIS methods

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In India, the default soil loss tolerance limit is set at 11.2 Mg ha −1 yr −1 for soil conservation activities. Scholars who examined related topics suggested that criteria should be established to determine the T value limits, and that these values should differ for each soil series (Bhattacharyya et al, 2008). William and Smith (1964) proposed a notion model of an estimated T value in relation to the strength of both soil properties and soil formation rates (William and Smith, 1964).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating of the spatial heterogeneity of soil loss tolerance and its effects on erosion risk in the carbonate areas of southern China

Bai

Wang

et al. 2017

Solid Earth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Soil loss tolerance (T value) is one of the criteria in determining the necessity of erosion control measures and ecological restoration strategy. However, the validity of this criterion in subtropical karst regions is strongly disputed. In this study, T value is calculated based on soil formation rate by using a digital distribution map of carbonate rock assemblage types. Results indicated a spatial heterogeneity and diversity in soil loss tolerance. Instead of only one criterion, a minimum of three criteria should be considered when investigating the carbonate areas of southern China because the "one region, one T value" concept may not be applicable to this region. T value is proportionate to the amount of argillaceous material, which determines the surface soil thickness of the formations in homogenous carbonate rock areas. Homogenous carbonate rock, carbonate rock intercalated with clastic rock areas and carbonate/clastic rock alternation areas have T values of 20, 50 and 100 t/(km 2 a), and they are extremely, severely and moderately sensitive to soil erosion. Karst rocky desertification (KRD) is defined as extreme soil erosion and reflects the risks of erosion. Thus, the relationship between T value and erosion risk is determined using KRD as a parameter. The existence of KRD land is unrelated to the T value, although this parameter indicates erosion sensitivity. Erosion risk is strongly dependent on the relationship between real soil loss (RL) and T value rather than on either erosion intensity or the T value itself. If RL > > T , then the erosion risk is high despite of a low RL. Conversely, if T > > RL, then the soil is safe although RL is high. Overall, these findings may clarify the heterogeneity of T value and its effect on erosion risk in a karst environment.

show abstract

“…To keep soil loss under a defined threshold is the point of the alliance. In particular, these efforts have intensified in the last half century and have provided much more to the adoption of the concept of soil loss tolerance [1,3,[32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47]. This is defined as the maximum permission level of soil loss from an area that will not cause any yield reducing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable Land Use Planning Model in Rural Basins

Karaş¹

2016

River Basin Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soil erosion is a common problem that complicates watershed management in Turkey and around the world. The main objective of soil conservation work carried out in basins is to ensure sustainable watershed management. The first operation is to define the current situation in the basin. The initial and fundamental objective of erosion estimation based on existing data is generally deciding how to overcome the problem. However, the treatments carried out in most soil conservation studies are similar to each other. Any common, known, or defined methodology about erosion problems in watersheds has not been improved-until now. Considering this problem, the Sustainable Land Use Planning (SLUP) model was developed to determine soil conservation precautions, to set priorities for decision makers and to produce a common solution for rural watershed in Turkey. While the estimated average soil loss was determined to be 7.66 t ha −1 per year, some land use changes were proposed and land use management priorities were set in the direction of the model results to gain sustainable management in the Çelikli basin. At the end of the study, it was showed that the soil loss can be reduced about the rate of 91.2% applying the SLUP model.

show abstract

Soil loss tolerance limits for planning of soil conservation measures in Shivalik–Himalayan region of India

Cited by 26 publications

References 11 publications

Identification of areas vulnerable to soil erosion risk in India using GIS methods

Identification of areas vulnerable to soil erosion risk in India using GIS methods

Evaluating of the spatial heterogeneity of soil loss tolerance and its effects on erosion risk in the carbonate areas of southern China

Sustainable Land Use Planning Model in Rural Basins

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About