Land useandlandcoveranalysisofjharkhand

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233996702
Land Use and Land Cover Analysis of Jharkhand Using Satellite Remote
Sensing
Article · August 2012
CITATIONS
4
READS
6,965
5 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Remote Sensing for mineral exploration View project
NWDPRA View project
Neeraj Sharma
Jharkhand Space Application Centre
24 PUBLICATIONS   58 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Nishi Kullu
Jharkhand Space Application Centre
SEE PROFILE
Ayyemperumal THILLAI Jeyaseelan
National Remote Sensing Centre
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Nishi Kullu on 16 September 2019.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology
Volume 1, Issue 2, August 2012, Pages
__________________________________________________________________________________________
© STM Journals 2012. All Rights Reserved
Page 1
Land Use and Land Cover Analysis of Jharkhand Using Satellite Remote Sensing
N. K. Sharma1
*, J. B. Lamay2
, N. J. Kullu3
, R. K. Singh4
, A. T. Jeyaseelan5
1
Scientist, 2
Scientific and Technical Assistant, 3
Scientific and Technical Assistant, 4
Cartographer,
5
Director, Jharkhand Space Applications Center, Department of IT, Government of Jharkhand,
Ranchi-834004, India
*Author for Correspondence E-mail: sharmank@rediffmail.com
1. INTRODUCTION
One of the principal prerequisites for
preparation of development plan of any area is
information on existing land use patterns and
pattern of changes in land use over a period of
time [1]. Knowledge of the present distribution
and area of different land use/land cover
(LU/LC) as well as information on their
changing proportions is required by planners
to develop sustainable land use systems for
regional development [2–6].
Land use refers to, “man’s activities on land
which are directly related to the land” [1] and
land cover, on the other hand describes, “the
vegetation and artificial constructions covering
the land surface” [7]. As per definition given
by FAO, land cover is the observed (bio)
physical cover on the earth’s surface [8]. Land
use is characterized by the arrangements,
activities and inputs people undertake in a
certain land cover type to produce, change or
maintain it [8]. Land use defined in this way
establishes a direct link between land cover
and the actions of people in their environment.
In the present study, LU/LC classification has
been attempted for Jharkhand state adopting
standard LU/LC classification system
generated by the Department of Space under
Natural Resources Census Mission at 1:50,000
scale [9].
2. STUDY AREA
The Jharkhand state is one of the newly
established states of the Indian Union carved
out of the state of Bihar in November, 2000.
The total geographical area is 79,714 km2
and
ABSTRACT
IRS P6 LISS III data was used to delineate different land use/land cover classes of Jharkhand using
visual interpretation technique. Tone and texture were found most important for interpretation of
different objects. A total of 42 classes of different land use/land cover categories were interpreted.
Agricultural land with current fallow and forest areas dominated the landscape of Jharkhand by
occupying 49% and 30% of total geographical area, respectively. Built-up (urban and rural) with
industrial and mining area occupied 5% of total geographical area. Wasteland and forest scrub
occupied 9% and 5% of total geographical area. The study concluded that forest scrub and open scrub
classes of forest and wasteland category can be taken under forest plantation to increase the area under
forest cover. Agriculture production may be increased by increasing rabi crop production through
enhanced irrigation facilities by construction of dams and rain water harvesting. Land use/land cover
map generated in the present study will be useful for decision makers, planners, academicians and
researchers.
Keywords: LISS III, LULC, visual interpretation, kharif crop, forest cover

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 2
it lies between 21o
58/
to 25o
20/
north latitude
and 83o
20/
to 87o
57/
east longitude (Figure 1).
There are 211 community blocks and 32,615
revenue villages. Jharkhand has three main
seasons, viz., (i) summer season (March to
May), (ii) rainy season (June to October) and
(iii) winter season (November to February).
About 9% of the area in the state is irrigated.
The state receives rainfall 1200–
1600 mm/annum, of which 82.1% is received
during the period June to September and the
rest 17.9% in the remaining months. Major
rivers of the state are Swarnarekha, Sone,
Barakar, Damodar, Ajay, South Koyal, Shankh
river, North Koyal, Brahmani and Bansloi.
Fig. 1: Location Map of Jharkhand.
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS
IRS P6 LISS III data of year 2005–2006
covering three season, viz., rabi (Jan–Mar),
kharif (Aug–Nov), and zaid (Apr–May) was
used to delineate different land use/land cover
classes. Entire Jharkhand state has been
covered in 15 scenes of IRS P6 LISS III. Geo-
referenced IRS P6 LISS III data of Jharkhand
was received from NRSC in digital format.
This data has a spatial resolution of 23.5 m
with four spectral bands, two in the visible,
one in near infrared and one in the SWIR
region. Swath of sensor is 141 km. Survey of
India (SOI) topographic maps were used for
generation of different base layers, viz., roads,
railways, settlements, drainage and notified
forest boundaries. These layers have been used
for planning and carrying out the ground truth.
Arc/GIS and ERDAS IMAGINE software
were used for interpretation of satellite images.
A reconnaissance survey was carried out
before starting the onscreen interpretation by
taking the hard copy print outs of satellite
images and SOI topographic maps. Transects
in different directions had been followed to
collect ground truth points and to generate the
interpretation keys for different LU/LC
classes. The areas visited in the field were
marked on the satellite images identified with
the help of topographic maps and global

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 3
positioning system (GPS). The interpretation
keys were generated based on the
reconnaissance survey carried out prior to
visual interpretation (Table I). Detailed
schematic representation of methodology has
been presented in Figure 2.
Fig. 2: Methodology Followed for Interpretation of Different LU/LC Classes.
The satellite image was displayed on the
computer screen at 1:35,000 scale for on-
screen visual interpretation. Different elements
of visual image interpretation used were color,
height, size, shape, texture, pattern, shadow
and association. According to Jensen [10], best
results are often achieved using a synergistic
combination of both visual and digital image
processing. Therefore, image displayed for
interpretation was enhanced using digital
image processing techniques before starting
the interpretation, which highlighted some of
the LU/LC features improving the visible
quality of the image to a big extent. However,
in general, increasing the brightness made the
image more clear and understandable.
Normalized difference vegetation index
(NDVI) was used to differentiate the forest
areas with scrub forest. This index was also
found useful to demarcate the waterbodies.
Tone and texture were found most important
for interpretation to identify different objects.
The interpretation was started with rabi season
satellite data and the layer of rabi season
interpreted data was generated for the whole
state. This layer was overlaid on kharif season
satellite images to update the agriculture class
mainly by (i) delineation of kharif crop
polygons and (ii) updation of rabi season crop
to show double crop area. The updation
procedure was followed with zaid season
images to map more than two crop areas. The
water-spread of different waterbodies and
reservoirs was also marked from different
seasons showing the dynamics of water-
spread. The results obtained were compared
with other LU/LC statistics reported for
Jharkhand.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 4
Table I: Interpretation Key for Different Land Use/Land Cover classes.
LU/LC
Category
Tone Size Shape Texture Pattern Association
Built-up land
Bluish green
Small to
big
Irregular
Coarse and
mottled
Clustered to
scattered
Surrounded by agricultural
lands, forest cover, wastelands,
rivers, roads, rail, etc.
Built-up land
Very dark to
dark bluish
green
Small in
width
Regular
Smooth to fine Linear Built-up, developed areas
around, etc.
Built-up
mining/industri
al area
Blackish
green
Small to
big
Irregular
coarse
Contiguous to
noncontiguous
Forest and built up
Rabi crop Bright red to
red
Small to
big
Regular to
irregular
Medium to
smooth
Contiguous to
noncontiguous
Proximity to
rivers/canals/streams and
settlements
Kharif crop
Bright red,
dull red
Small to
big
Regular to
irregular
Medium to
smooth
Contiguous to
noncontiguous
Proximity to
rivers/canals/streams and
settlements and lowland areas
Zaid crop
Bright red to
dark red
Small Regular to
irregular
Medium to
smooth
Contiguous to
noncontiguous
Restricted to proximity of
rivers/canals/streams
Fallow land greenish
blue
Small to
big
Regular to
irregular
Medium to
smooth
Contiguous to
noncontiguous
Amidst or near to crop land
Deciduous
forest
Different
tones of red
Varying
in
size
Irregular
Smooth to
medium
depending on
crown
Contiguous to
noncontiguous With different forest types
Forest scrub
Red to dark
red
Varying
in
size
Regular to
irregular
coarse
Contiguous to
noncontiguous
Forest fringes
Tree clad areas
Red to dark
red
Varying
in
size
Regular to
irregular
coarse
Contiguous to
noncontiguous
Near villages, forest areas
Scrub land
Light red to
dark red
Varying
in
size
Regular to
irregular
coarse
Contiguous to
noncontiguous
With built-up areas, stony waste
Barren
rocky/stony
waste
Greenish blue
Varying
in
size
Irregular
Very coarse to
coarse
Linear to
contiguous and
dispersed
Mined areas and
quarried sites,
boulders
Reservoir/lake/
tank/canal
Light blue to
dark
blue
Small,
medium
to
large
Regular to
irregular
Smooth to
mottled
Dispersed
Low lands, reservoirs with hilly
terrain and rivers, near
settlements and arable lands
River/Stream Light blue to
dark
blue
Long,
narrow to
wide
Irregular, sinuous
Smooth to
medium
Contiguous, non-
linear to
dendritic/sub-
dendritc
Hill slopes, flood plains,
uplands, etc.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 5
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A total of 42 classes of different land use/land
cover (LU/LC) categories were interpreted in
Jharkhand state. Different sub-classes of major
LU/LC classes were merged together to show
the composition of total geographical area of
Jharkhand (Figure 3). Agricultural land with
current fallow and forest areas dominated the
landscape of Jharkhand by occupying 49% and
30% of total geographical area, respectively.
Land holding size is comparatively small in
Jharkhand due to undulating terrain. Built-up
(urban and rural) with industrial and mining
area occupies 5% of total geographical area.
Wasteland and forest scrub occupies 9% and
5% of total geographical area. LU/LC map has
been presented in Figure 4.
Fig. 3: Land Use/Land Cover Composition of Jharkhand.
Fig. 4: Land Use/Land Cover Map of Jharkhand.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 6
Agricultural land was found as the most
dominating class of land use in Jharkhand,
which occupied 31610.51 km2
area (40% of
total geographical area). Sub-categories in
agriculture were rabi crop, kharif crop, zaid
crop, double crop, more than two crops, and
aquaculture/pisciculture (Figure 5). Kharif was
recorded as the dominating crop and occupied
24722.86 km2
, which was 78% of total
agricultural area. Rabi crop, two crop area and
more than two crop area occupied 5%, 15%
and 1% of total agriculture land, respectively.
However, zaid crop shared less than 1% of
total agricultural land. Current fallow occupied
7308.10 km2
area.
Fig. 5: Composition of Different Classes under Agriculture Category with Respect to Total
Geographical Area.
Built-up land occupies a total of 5% of total
geographical area. This is further divided into
three sub-categories, viz., urban, rural and
industrial/mining areas. Urban area occupies
650.68 km2
(0.81% of total geographical area)
and 17.81% of total built-up area. Rural area
occupies 3.35% of total geographical area.
However, rural settlements dominate the built-
up class by occupying 73.27% of total built up
area. Industrial/mining occupies 0.41% of total
geographical area and 8.91% of total built-up
area (Figure 6).
Fig. 6: Composition of Different Classes under Built-Up Category with Respect to Total
Geographical Area.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 7
Forest area has been demarcated as dense
forest, open forest, forest scrub and tree clad
area. Tree clad area represents the forest area
outside the notified forest boundary and the
village forest area. Forest category excluding
forest scrub occupies 23955.89 km2
(30% of
total geographical area) (Figure 7). Forest
scrub occupies 5.43% of total geographical
area.
Fig. 7: Composition of Different Classes under Forest Category with Respect to Total Geographical
Area.
Fig. 8: Composition of Different Classes under Wasteland Category with Respect to Total
Geographical Area.
Wasteland mainly includes stony waste, dense
scrub, open scrub and shallow gullied land,
occupying 931.62 km2
, 2194.34 km2
,
3868.23 km2
and 106.16 km2
area, respectively
(Figure 8). Waterbodies and wetlands include
mainly streams, lakes/ponds, reservoirs/tanks,
canals and wetlands inland natural exhibited
presence over 2% (1885.98 km2
) of total
geographical area (Figure 9). In lakes and
reservoirs, kharif, rabi and zaid extent was
demarcated showing the water-spread in
different seasons.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 8
Fig. 9: Composition of Different Classes under Waterbody Category with Respect to Total
Geographical Area.
Area statistics for different LU/LC classes
obtained in the present study (LU/LC-50K)
were compared with the land use statistics
published by the Directorate of Statistics &
Evaluation (DSE), Government of Jharkhand,
for the year 2004-05 [11]. The comparison has
been shown in Figure 10. Total agricultural
land including current fallow was taken to
determine the area under agricultural land.
Forest area was compared with the area
published in the State of Forest Report by
Forest Survey of India based on the digital
processing of IRS-P6 LISSS III data of
November-December 2004 [12]. Forest in
LU/LC-50K was categorized in dense forest,
open forest (within notified forest boundary)
and tree clad area (outside notified forest
boundary). As per the present study, the forest
cover of Jharkhand was 30% of total
geographical area. However, FSI reported
28.34% area under forest cover. The
difference in area statistics may be due to
inclusion of village woodland/forest also in
forest cover in the present classification. The
percent forest cover in different districts has
been compared with district forest cover and
has been shown in Figure 11.
Fig. 10: Districtwise Comparison of Area Statistics of Agriculture with Area Statistics Reported by
Directorate of Statistics and Evaluation.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 9
Fig. 11: Districtwise Comparison of Area Statistics of Forest Classes with Area Statistics Reported in
State of Forest Report.
The present analysis exhibited more than 30%
area under kharif crop. However, rabi crop
covered approximately 2% of the geographical
area only as majority of the area is under rain-
fed condition. This clearly shows that total
agriculture production may be increased
multifold with an increment of area under
irrigation. In the forest category, a total of
5.4% area has been categorized under forest
scrub class. This area can be converted into
open forest and dense forest category by the
extensive plantation program to meet the aim
of 33% area under the forest cover at national
level. Further, open scrub category of
wasteland which occupies 4.8 % of total
geographical area can be taken under
plantation of different tree species as per the
land suitability.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors are thankful to National Remote
Sensing Centre, Department of Space,
Hyderabad, for funding and technical
guidance.
REFERENCES
1. Clawson Marion, and Stewart Charles L.
Land Use Information. A Critical Survey
of U.S. Statistics Including Possibilities
for Greater Uniformity. Baltimore, Md.
The Johns Hopkins Press for Resources
for the Future, Inc. 1965. 402p.
2. Di Gregorio A. Technical Report on the
Land Cover Mapping of Lebanon. FAO
Project NECP/LEB/001/SAU. 1991.
3. Reichert P., and Di Gregorio A.
Preparation of a Forest Cover Map and
Reconnaissance Forest Inventory of
Albania. Technical Report of FAO Project
GCP/ALB/002/IDA. 1995.
4. Thompson M. A. South African Journal of
Science. 1996. 92. 34–42p.
5. Planning for Sustainable Use of Land
Resources: Towards a New Approach.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 10
FAO Land and Water Bulletin No. 2.
1995.
6. FAO. Africover Land Cover
Classification. Environment and Natural
Resources Service (SDRN). 1997. 76p.
7. Burley Terence M. Prof. Geographer,
1961. 13(6). 18–20p.
8. FAO. Africover Land Cover
Classification. Rome. 1997.
9. Anonymous. Manual of National Land
Use Land Cover Mapping Using Multi-
Temporal Satellite Data. Land Use
Division, NRSA, Hyderabad, 2006.
10. Jensen J. R. Remote Sensing of
Environment-An Earth Resource
Perspective. Dorling Kindersley (India)
Pvt. Ltd. licenses of Pearson Education in
South Asia. 2009.
11. http://desjharkhand.nic.in. Directorate of
Statistics & Evaluation, Govt. of
Jharkhand website (accessed on 6 April,
2009).
12. State of Forest Report. Forest Survey of
India, Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun. 2005.
View publication stats
View publication stats

Land useandlandcoveranalysisofjharkhand

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (18)

Semelhante a Land useandlandcoveranalysisofjharkhand

Semelhante a Land useandlandcoveranalysisofjharkhand (20)

Último

Último (20)

Land useandlandcoveranalysisofjharkhand