MODEL OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES APPLICATION BASED ON DISTRICT SPATIAL PLANNING IN MAMASA WATERSHED, SOUTH SULAWESI

*Sri Malahayati Yusuf  -  Bogor Agricultural Institute, Indonesia
Kukuh Murtilaksono  -  Bogor Agricultural Institute, Indonesia
R.K. Astuti  -  Bogor Agricultural Institute, Indonesia
Syaiful Arifin  -  Bogor Agricultural Institute, Indonesia
Received: 13 Jan 2017; Published: 13 Oct 2017.
Open Access License URL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0

Citation Format:
Abstract

Depletion of watershed carrying capacity cannot be omitted from mismanagement of the watershed. The integration between SWAT model and remote sensing data are able to identify, assess, and evaluate watershed problem as well as a tool to apply the mitigation of the problem. The aim of this study was to arrange the scenario of watershed management, and decide the best recommendation of sustainable watershed management of Mamasa Sub Watershed. The best recommendation was decided by hydrology parameters, e.i. surface runoff, sediment, and runoff coefficient. Hydrology characteristics of Mamasa Sub Watershed was analyzed based on land use data of year 2012 and climate data for period of 2010-2012. The scenarios were application of bunch and mulch in slope 1-15%; bunch terrace (scenario 1), mulch and strip grass in slope 15-25% (scenario 2), alley cropping in slope 25-40% (scenario 3), and combination scenario 1, 2, 3 with agroforestry in slope > 40% (scenario4). Surface runoff value of Mamasa Sub Watershed is 581.35 mm, while lateral flow, groundwater flow, runoff coefficient, and sediment yield of 640.72 mm, 228.17 mm, 0.29, and 187.213 ton/ha respectively. Based on the scenario’s simulation, the fourth scenario was able to reduce surface runoff and sediment yield of 33.441% and of 51.213%, while the runoff coefficient declined to 0.194. Thereby, the fourth scenario is recommended to be applied in Mamasa Sub Watershed so that the sustainability in the watershed can be achieved. 

Keywords: Determining model of potential location for TOD; GIS; expert system; grid

Article Metrics:

  1. Arnold, J. G., Moriasi, D. N., Gassman, P. W., Abbaspour, K. C., White, M. J., Srinivasan, R., Jha, M. K. (2012). SWAT: Model Use, Calibration, and Validation. Transactions of the ASABE, 55(4), 1491–1508. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.42256

  2. Cibin, R., Athira, P., Sudheer, K. P., & Chaubey, I. (2013). Application of distributed hydrological models for predictions in ungauged basins: a method to quantify predictive uncertainty. Hydrological Processes, 28(4), 2033–2045. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9721

  3. Daniel, E. B. (2011). Watershed Modeling and its Applications: A State-of-the-Art Review. The Open Hydrology Journal, 5(1), 26–50. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874378101105010026

  4. Department of Forestry. (2010). Arrangement of integrated watershed management planning of Saddang Watershed.

  5. Department of Forestry. (2010). Characteristics of Saddang Watershed.

  6. Douglas-Mankin, K. R., Srinivasan, R., & Arnold, J. G. (2010). Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) Model: Current Developments and Applications. Transactions of the ASABE, 53(5), 1423–1431. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.34915

  7. Emam, A. R., Kappas, M., Nguyen, L. H. K., & Renchin, T. (2016). Hydrological Modeling in an Ungauged Basin of Central Vietnam Using SWAT Model. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2016-44

  8. Gassman, P. W., Sadeghi, A. M., & Srinivasan, R. (2014). Applications of the SWAT Model Special Section: Overview and Insights. Journal of Environment Quality, 43(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2013.11.0466

  9. Getahun, E., & Keefer, L. (2016). Integrated modeling system for evaluating water quality benefits of agricultural watershed management practices: Case study in the Midwest. Sustainability of Water Quality and Ecology, 8, 14–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swaqe.2016.06.002

  10. Her, Y., Chaubey, I., Frankenberger, J., & Smith, D. (2016). Effect of conservation practices implemented by USDA programs at field and watershed scales. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 71(3), 249–266. https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.71.3.249

  11. Himanshu, S. K., Pandey, A., & Shrestha, P. (2016). Application of SWAT in an Indian river basin for modeling runoff, sediment and water balance. Environmental Earth Sciences, 76(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-6316-8

  12. Jang, S. S., Ahn, S. R., & Kim, S. J. (2017). Evaluation of executable best management practices in Haean highland agricultural catchment of South Korea using SWAT. Agricultural Water Management, 180, 224–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.06.008

  13. Krysanova, V., & White, M. (2015). Advances in water resources assessment with SWAT an overview. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2015.1029482

  14. Liu, Y., Yang, W., Leon, L., Wong, I., McCrimmon, C., Dove, A., & Fong, P. (2016). Hydrologic modeling and evaluation of Best Management Practice scenarios for the Grand River watershed in Southern Ontario. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 42(6), 1289–1301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2016.02.008

  15. Moriasi, D. N., Steiner, J. L., & Arnold, J. G. (2011). Sediment Measurement and Transport Modeling: Impact of Riparian and Filter Strip Buffers. Journal of Environment Quality, 40(3), 807. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2010.0066

  16. Neitsch, S. L., Arnold, J. G., Kiniry, J. R., & Williams, J. R. (2011). Soil and water assessment tool theoretical documentation version 2009.

  17. QIU, L., ZHENG, F., & YIN, R. (2012). SWAT-based runoff and sediment simulation in a small watershed, the loessial hilly-gullied region of China: capabilities and challenges. International Journal of Sediment Research, 27(2), 226–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1001-6279(12)60030-4

  18. Shi, Y., Xu, G., Wang, Y., Engel, B. A., Peng, H., Zhang, W., Dai, M. (2017). Modelling hydrology and water quality processes in the Pengxi River basin of the Three Gorges Reservoir using the soil and water assessment tool. Agricultural Water Management, 182, 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.12.007

  19. Srinivasan, R., Zhang, X., & Arnold, J. (2010). SWAT Ungauged: Hydrological Budget and Crop Yield Predictions in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. Transactions of the {ASABE}, 53(5), 1533–1546. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.34903

  20. Sunandar, A. D., & Suhendang, E. (2014). Hendrayanto; Jaya, INS; Marimin. Land use optimization in Asahan watershed with linear programming and SWAT model. Int. J. Sci. Basic Appl. Res, 18, 63–78.

  21. Suryavanshi, S., Pandey, A., & Chaube, U. C. (2017). Hydrological simulation of the Betwa River basin (India) using the {SWAT} model. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 62(6), 960–978. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2016.1271420

  22. Yusuf, S. M., Murtilaksono, K., Harjianto, M., & Herlina, E. (2016). The Utilization of Satellite Imagery Data to Predict Hydrology Characteristics in Dodokan Watershed. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 33, 36–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2016.03.054

  23.  


Last update: 2021-03-02 14:49:37

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2021-03-02 14:49:41

No citation recorded.