Main Article Content

Abstract

A study under highly fragile ecosystem was conducted at Sabhawala watershed area in Doon Shiwalik hills of Uttarakhand. The Uttarakhand state is particularly sensitive to forest land disturbing activities. Steep slopes, high rainfall and weak geology of the Uttarakhand state accentuate the land degradation and soil erosion process at much faster rate than in the plains. In the head water reaches the sediment is flushed with the high velocity currents. But when it reaches the relatively terrain foothills. Its debris carrying capacity diminishes and the debris starts accumulating on the river bed causing change of river course and flooding its bank. To assess survival percentage of different species for effective vegetative barriers for channelization of Shiwalik torrents, controlling and management of torrent flow, runoff, erosion control, various vegetative barriers species as Vitex negundo, Arundo donax, Ipomea carnea, Dendrocalamus Strictus etc were established during the study period. The protective  vegetative barrier plant species used as lpomoea carnea recorded the height survival percentage as Ipomea carnea,(90%) having the growth 150 cms followed by Vitex negund (86%) along with 111.0 cms growth  Pennisetum purpureum (Hybrid Napier) (84 %) with 113.5 growth height , Jatropha curcas(83 %) with 110.5 growth height,    Arundo donax  (70%) with 100.0 cms height growth, The protective vegetative barriers measures were provided a base root technology for conservation and management of relative torrential watershed in Doon  Shiwalik Himalayan region.  

Keywords

Torrent vegetative barriers Bio-engineering methods Shiwalik region

Article Details

How to Cite
Kamboj, N. (2010). Effects of vegetative barriers for channelization of shiwalik torrent at Sabhawala in Doon Valley. Environment Conservation Journal, 11(3), 99–102. https://doi.org/10.36953/ECJ.2010.110319

References

  1. Burdak K.J.M, 1982. Selection of desert tolerance grass and shrub species for protection of soil upper layer in desert region. Soil conservation and management vol-2 pp 352-360.
  2. FAO .1981. Torrent control terminology. FAO Conservation Guide No.6. FAO, Rome. pp. 1-23.
  3. Hettinger, Hubert. 1976. Torrent control in the Mountains with respect to the Tropics. FAO, Rome" Conservation Guide No.2: 119-134.
  4. Juyal, G.P., Vittal, N and Sastry, G. 2005.Studies on performance and score around spur- A review, In Torrent Menace – Challenges and Opportunities, Eds. G.Sastry, V.N. Sharda, G.P.Juyal and J.S.Sharma, CSWCRTI, Dehradun, pp 283-319.
  5. National Commission on Agriculture 1976. Report of National Commission on Agriculture, Part V Chap. 17 and 18. Ministry of Agri. & Irrign., New Delhi.
  6. Saha, B., Samra, J.S. and Mittal, S.P. 1994. Studies on the effect of roots of different grasses on water transmission characteristics of soil. Annual Report, CSWCRTI, Dehradun. pp. 47.
  7. Samra, J.S. and Sharma, N.K. 1995. Soil binding factor above and below ground phytomass of three perennial grasses for stream course stabilization. Ind. Jr.Soil Cons. 23(1):39-43.
  8. Sharma, B.D., Sidhu, P.S., Kumar, R. and Sawhney, J.S., 1997. Characterization, classification and landscape relationships of Inceptisols in North-West India, J India Soc.Soil Sci., 45(1): 167-174.
  9. Gorrie, M. 1957. Torrent types and torrent correction. J. soil & water conservation in India, 5(3):120-128.
  10. Dhyani, B.L., Babu, R., Ram, S., Katiyar, V. S., Arora, Y. K., Juyal, P. and Vishwanathan, M. K. 1993. Economic analysis of watershed management programme in Outer Himalayas: A Case study of operational research project, Fakot. Indian J. Agrtc. Econ. 48(2): 237-245.
  11. Das, D. C. 1985. Problem of soil erosion and land degradation in India. Nat. Symp. Soil Conservation and Watershed Management, DOAC-ICAR-IASWC, lead paper: 1-24, New Delhi.