Prioritization of sub-watersheds based on morphometric and land use analysis using remote sensing and GIS techniques

Research Article


Watershed prioritization has gained importance in natural resources management, especially in the context of watershed management. Morphometric analysis has been commonly applied to prioritization of watersheds. The present study makes an attempt to prioritize sub-watersheds based on morphometric and land use characteristics using remote sensing and GIS techniques in Kanera watershed of Guna district, Madhya Pradesh. Various morphometric parameters, namely linear and shape have been determined for each sub-watershed and assigned ranks on the basis of value/relationship so as to arrive at a computed value for a final ranking of the sub-watersheds. Land use/land cover change analysis of the sub-watersheds has been carried out using multi-temporal data of IRS LISS II of 1989 and IRS LISS III of 2001. The study demonstrates the significant land use changes especially in cultivated lands, open scrub, open forest, water bodies and wastelands from 1989 to 2001. Based on morphometric and land use/land cover analysis, the sub-watersheds have been classified into three categories as high, medium and low in terms of priority for conservation and management of natural resources. Out of the seven sub-watersheds, two sub-watersheds viz., SW1 and SW6 qualify for high priority, whereas SW7 has been categorised as medium priority based on the integration of morphometric and land use change analysis.


Watershed Priority Land use change Morphometry 


  1. AIS & LUS (1990) Watershed Atlas of India, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation. All India Soil and Land Use Survey, IARI Campus, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  2. Amba Shetty, Nandagiri L, Thokchom S and Rajesh MVS (2005) Land use-land cover mapping using satellite data for a forested watershed, Udipi district, Karnataka state, India. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 33(2): 233–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arun PS, Jana R and Nathawat MS (2005) A rule based physiographic characterization of a drought prone watershed applying remote sensing and GIS. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 33(2): 189–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biswas S, Sudhakar S and Desai VR (1999) Prioritization of sub-watersheds based on Morphometric Analysis of Drainage Basin, District Midnapore, West Bengal. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 27(3):155–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chauhan HB and Nayak S (2005) Land use/land cover change near Hazira region, Gujarat, using remote sensing satellite data. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 33(3): 413–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chopra R, Dhiman RD and Sharma PK (2005) Morphometric Analysis of Sub-watersheds, District Gurdaspur, Punjab. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 33(4): 531–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Green K, Kempka D and Laekly L (1994) Using remote sensing to detect and monitor land cover and land use changes. Photogramm. Engg. and Remote Sensing 60(3): 331–337Google Scholar
  8. Horton RE (1932) Drainage basin characteristics. Trans. Am. Geophysc. Union 13:350–361Google Scholar
  9. Horton RE (1945) Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins: Hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 56:275–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jaiswal RK, Saxena R and Mukherjee S (1999) Application of remote sensing technology for land use/land cover change analysis. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 27(2): 123–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Joshi PK, Rawat GS, Padaliya H and Roy PS (2005) Land use/land cover identification in an Alpine and arid region (Nubra valley, Ladakh) using satellite remote sensing. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 33(4): 371–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kam TS (1995) Integrating GIS and remote sensing techniques for urban land-cover land-use analysis. Geocarto International 10(1): 39–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. King RB (2002) Land cover mapping principles: a return to interpretation fundamentals. Int. J. Remote Sensing 23(18): 3523–3545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Luque SS (2000) Evaluating temporal changes using multispectral scanner and thematic mapper data on the landscape of natural reserve; the New Jersey Pine barrens, a case study. Int. J. Remote Sensing 21(13): 2589–2611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mahajan S and Panwar P (2005) Land use changes in Ashwani Khad watershed using GIS techniques. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 33(2): 227–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Miller VC (1953) A quantitative geomorphic study of drainage basin characteristics on the Clinch Mountain area, Virgina and Tennessee, Proj. NR 389-402, Tech Rep 3, Columbia University, Department of Geology, ONR, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Minakshi Chaurasia R and Sharma PK (1999) Land use/land cover mapping and change detection using satellite data- A case study of Dehlon block, district Ludhiana, Punjab. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 27(2): 115–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nag SK (1998) Morphometric analysis using remote sensing techniques in the Chaka sub-basin, Purulia district, West Bengal. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 26(1&2): 69–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nautiyal MD (1994) Morphometric analysis of drainage basin, district Dehradun, Uttar Pradesh. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 22(4): 252–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nooka Ratnam K, Srivastava YK, Venkateshwara Rao V, Amminedu E and Murthy KSR (2005) Check dam positioning by prioritization of micro-watersheds using SYI model and morphometric analysis- Remote Sensing and GIS perspective. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 33(1): 25–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. NRSA (1995) Integrated Mission for Sustainable Development, Technical Guidelines, National Remote Sensing Agency, Department of Space, Government of India, HyderabadGoogle Scholar
  22. Schumn SA (1956) Evolution of drainage systems and slopes in badland, at Perth Amboy, New Jersey. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 67:597–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shamsudheen M, Dasog GS and Tejaswini NB (2005) Land use/land cover mapping in the coastal area of North Karnataka using remote sensing data. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 33(2): 253–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Smith KG (1950) Standards for grading textures of erosional topography. Am. Jour. Sci. 248:655–668Google Scholar
  25. Solanke PC, Srivastava R, Prasad J, Nagaraju MSS, Saxena RK and Barthwal RK (2005) Application of remote sensing and GIS in watershed characterization and management. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 33(2): 239–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Srinivasa VS, Govindainah S and Home Gowda H (2004) Morphometric analysis of sub-watersheds in the Pavagada area of Tumkur district South India using remote sensing and GIS techniques. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 32(4): 351–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Srivastava VK (1997) Study of drainage pattern of Jharia coal field (Bihar), India, through remote sensing technology. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing 25(1): 41–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Strahler AN (1957) Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 38:913–920Google Scholar
  29. Strahler AN (1964) Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins and channel networks, In: VT Chow (ed), Handbook of Applied Hydrology. McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, Section 4–11Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Society of Remote Sensing 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Akram Javed
    • 1
  • Mohd Yousuf Khanday
    • 1
  • Rizwan Ahmed
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of GeologyAligarh Muslim UniversityAligarhIndia
  2. 2.Forest Survey of IndiaDehradunIndia

Personalised recommendations