Modelling Soil Erosion Using RUSLE and ArcGIS: A case study of

Naitasiri Province, Fiji.

Bhawisha Neelam Chand, Graham Koelau Lilo, Jim Tawa Biliki, Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, Pritesh Pravindra Lal

1.0 Abstract
Soil erosion occurs naturally due to factors such as precipitous slopes and frequent high
intensity rainfall and tropical cyclones that have a significant impact on land profiles and
utilization. Increased soil erosion results in the decrease in soil fertility, loss of land,
increased runoff due to rainfall, large flow of sediments, deteriorated drinking water quality,
lower groundwater recharge, more flooding, resulting in financial loss and increased costs of
rehabilitation. Soil Erosion is an environmental major setback known to have a direct impact
on agricultural and infrastructural development activities. The assessment of soil erosion and
its impact are significant in planning the coordination of agrarian activities and spanning to
infrastructural practices (Ganasri et al., 2015). Over the years, farming activities and
agricultural practices tend to be one of the major contributors in soil erosion through the
changes caused to the surface soil (Kadam et al., 2018). The proposed project aims to model
the potential risk of soil erosion in Rewa river watershed of Naitasiri province, Fiji using
RUSLE and GIS tools so as to spatialize and measure the land disintegration hazard in the
area of interest. The rainfall map, soil type map, digital elevation model, and land use - land
cover (LULC) map, will be the input data in the soil erosion model developed. The result
obtained will be classified into four different erosion risk classes. The developed soil erosion
map will be overlaid with the slope and LULC maps of the study area to explore their effects
on erosion susceptibility of the soil in the Rewa river watershed.

1 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)

2.0 Background of Project
Disintegration of soil and sedimentation present a critical issue in catchments all over the
world. In Fiji, research and scholarly works in soil disintegration have been done in the late
1980's and 1990's where the analysts have utilized the USLE technique to determine soil
losses (Printemps, 2008). However, between 1981 till date, there were no recorded studies of
RUSLE model being carried out in Fiji Islands. The disturbing pace of soil disintegration in
Fiji Islands has prompted a requirement for a practical soil model that can consider the
atmosphere and landscape factors that trigger soil disintegration.
Moreover, the Rewa River watershed district is the greatest in all of Viti Levu (takes up
around 33% of the complete land territory of Viti Levu) and has been making headlines in
terms of soil erosion and flooding; no study has been directed up until this point despite the
fact that it gets high precipitation, and the catchment has the most elevated run-off coefficient
for the significant streams in Fiji (Tamata et al., 2012). The Rewa River catchment area in
the Naitasiri province, is therefore, the area of interest for the project. An incorporated
working methodology into the Rewa waterway watershed flood issues is significant in
understanding its commitments towards its soil erosion or soil loss issues and land
debasement.
Furthermore, since the conceptual and physical are very complicated in terms of data
collection and other parameters that are vital in computing soil losses, the empirical model
(RUSLE) will be used as it gives the most satisfactory results (Mercer, 2019).
The Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) model uses a combination of four
factors, rainfall intensity (R), the topography factors (LS), which are determined utilizing
hypothetical conditions extricated from rain gauge data and digital elevation models (DEMs).
Moreover, two weighted ostensible components were resolved from query tables which
represent land use (C) and soil erodibility (K) (Mercer, 2019). Field water sampling,
comparison of the model and site inspections and reconnaissance was done properly in order
to validate the model.
Additionally, RUSLE model is increasingly prudent, simple to work with and doesn't include
a great deal of labourers; making it a progressively appropriate strategy for surveying soil
disintegration (Sujatha et al, 2018). The model records for essential variables adding to the
erosion without the requirement for broad info parameters. RUSLE is a blend of empirical
and procedure-based plan and has an advantage over USLE in terms of its ideal utilization of
the database. RUSLE factors permit greater adaptability in figuring soil loss by computing
them definitely into sub factors. It likewise permits to gauge deposition through sediment
transport (Yoder et al, 2004 cited in Biswas & Pani, 2015).
Nonetheless, this research is sought to investigate the Naitasiri Province of Fiji and use
RUSLE model supplemented by ArcGIS instruments for digitization and assortment of
quantitative information on soil disintegration. Upon data collection, results from RUSLE
(Renard et al., 1997) will indicate how rainfall, soil erodibility, topographic, cover
management, and soil conservation practice factors affect soil erosion activities in the study
area. Additionally, this project will draw conclusions on soil erosion activities in Naitasiri
Province, propose mitigation measures for better land conservation and an adaptation
framework will be developed for the communities affected by soil erosion.

2 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)

3.0Literature Review
Soil erosion occurs naturally due to factors such as precipitous slopes, frequent high intensity
rainfall and tropical cyclones that have a significant impact on land profiles and utilization.
Human induced activities have also contributed to soil erosion over the years by degrading
valuable farming lands through changes to the surface soil (Kadam et al., 2018; Pimentel and
Burgess, 2013). As a result of this, ecosystems such as rainforests, agrarian (Pimentel and
Burgess, 2013) and infrastructural development activities tend to experience a decline in their
quality and efficiency. Increased soil erosion can result in a decrease in soil fertility, loss of
land, increased runoff due to rainfall, large flow of sediments, deteriorated drinking water
quality, lower groundwater recharge and more flooding leading to financial loss and
increased costs of rehabilitation. In watershed areas, runoffs from precipitous slopes greatly
harm surface areas of arable lands to the extent that sustainable land management and
conservation becomes difficult. This also leads on to pollutions such as heavy sediments
flowing into rivers or reservoirs (Tadesse et al., 2017).
Over the years, there have been discussions on situation of Viti Levu in terms of soil losses
and flooding (Tamata et al., 2012) with subsequent sediment deposition from surface runoffs
and erosion reducing the efficiency of agrarian activities through poor soil fertility. In a
report on Soil Erosion in Fiji – Problems and Perspectives attained by the Fiji Broadcasting
Corporation, about 50 tonnes of soil per hectare are taken away by erosion annually
(Regional Assessment of Soil Change in the Southwest Pacific, 2015). Given the globally
accepted level for soil erosion per hectare annually set at 13 tonnes per hectare each year for
tropical countries, it is evidently a threat to sustainable land management activities.
Additionally, the alarming rate of soil erosion in Fiji Islands has led to a need for a viable soil
model that can consider the climate and landscape factors that trigger soil erosion. Soil
modelling are classified as empirical, physical and conceptual (Sujatha and Sridhar, 2018).
Moreover, the Naitasiri Province is located north of Suva and is home to the Medrausucu
mountain ranges and the five river systems
that feed the Rewa River. The province
arguably holds all of the Rewa river’s
watershed and is a very important
contributor to Fiji’s economy with high
yield of agricultural products such as Dalo
and Cassava. In 2016, a diagnosis and
action plan released by the Pacific
Community (SPC) for a better farming and
ranching practices in Ra province alluded
to the yield of Dalo and Cassava farms of
Naitasiri province with about 5800 and
7900 crops per year respectively (figure 2).
Figure 1. Map of Naitasiri Province
(Source: www.citypopulation.com, 2020)
Land degradation is closely associated with soil erosion and the latter being also the key
variable in its assessment. Consistently, sufficient assessment of land degradation involves
the understanding that erosion of soil is virtually universal and with it exists a need for a
proper assessment to elevate land management and related sustainable activities. Muñoz-
Rojas et. al (2017) stated that the loss of soil could have serious impacts on the amount and
3 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)
 quality of soil scheme services, with serious economic, social, and political implications. Soil
Mapping could help mitigate these impacts by way of an indication measure used by
communities, relevant government authorities or decision makers to farmers. Soil mapping
generally uses GIS techniques to map areas of potential soil related wearing activities.
Henceforth, Soil mapping is important as a correct assessment tool with GIS for the
development of these vulnerable areas and paving a path for land restoration (Prasuhn et al.,
2013). Soil mapping utilizing GIS and Remote sensing depict vulnerable areas through maps
by combining data sources for the assembly and creation of error-free erosion risk maps at a
monthly temporal scale (Panagos 2012) and through soil models.
Of the three accessible categories of models, the empirical model is claimed to be the best
model, since it gives satisfactory result (Mercer 2019, p.15). Based on the study of Mercer
(2019), conceptual and physical models are very complicated in terms of obtaining field data,
and other parameters that are required to compute the soil loss. De vente et al. (2017)
mentioned that the performance of existing, models is extremely variable and depends on the
realm wherever they were applied and therefore the state of affairs they were applied to.
Thus, the time frame of this study makes these two models inappropriate to be used in Fiji.
There are many empirical models accustomed to estimate eroding by water (Rojas, 2017).
Mercer (2019) has listed nine models.
Table 1. Different models listed by Mercer (2019)
Model type Predictive capability Study applicability
soiLOSS This computer program can display similar prediction This computer program, developed by
as the RUSLE model. It comprises of RUSLE Rosewell (1993) is out of date.
parameters but are limited to Australian landscape
only.
ozMUSLE Produce result that has 20% - 40% improvement over This model has not gain popularity in
the soiLOSS model Australia and its success in new studies is
uncertain (Mercer,2018).
SWAT As stated by Pandey et al (2016 cited in Mercer,2018), This model is limited to gauge system
this model incorporates RUSLE parameters are widely only since it requires stream flow. More
used in ecosystem health. so, the model requires broad experience
to yield better result.
PERFECT As mentioned by Littleboy et al (1992 cited in The model only suits densely cropped
Mercer,2018), the model is accurate only in annual areas and is not applicable in the
scale erosion. Minnamurra catchment, Australia.
AnnAGNPS Taguas et al (2008 cited in Mercer,2018) has stated Model requires broad experience while on
that Gully erosion is accounted for, in this model the other hand it is not widely used in
hence, making it more accurate than Sheet wash Australia. Hence, not suitable for
limited model like RUSLE. Minnamurra catchment, Australia.
SedNet Suitable for large catchment areas of 3000km 2 and This model is inappropriate for areas less
above. than 3000 km2
CERAT This model has been widely used in NSW, Australia Poor maintenance of its website has
hindered the accessibility of the model to
users since the mid-2019
WEPP Use to predict spatial spreading of eroded soil, Require extensive data and time hence not
sediment yield, runoff volume and soil – water suitable for the time frame of this project
balance.
RUSLE Predict sheet erosion and while neglecting gully RUSLE model is appropriate for the
erosion. Produce better erosion result with less input Minnmurra catchment since can identify
data. Simms (2007 cited in Mercer, 2018) has stated the main trend occurring within the it
the RUSLE can outclass more complex models. requires less data input.

4 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)

From the listed nine models, the RUSLE model was chosen, based on the fact that it requires
fewer input data compared to SWAT or WEPP (Mercer ,2018). According to Mercer (2018),
The model suits the study since it is accessible in Australia and its parameters can incorporate
well with ArcGIS.
Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) model has gained popularity over the world,
since it was first developed in the 60s and 70s (Mercer, 2019). Its recognition has been rooted
from the ability of the model to produce successful and desirable result when implemented in
different environmental conditions (Sujatha & Sridhar,2018). According to Sujatha et al
(2018), RUSLE model is more economical, easy to work with and does not involve a lot of
workers; making it a more suitable method of assessing soil erosion.
Furthermore, a comparative study was carried out by Mondal et al (2016) along the Narmada
river basin in India. The research was conducted to find and evaluate a suitable empirical
method that can be used to compute soil loss in a watershed. USLE, RUSLE and Morgan-
Morgan-Finney (MMF) models were tested on different soil types, land use and slope to find
their rate of erosion. The outcome of the study shows the rate of erosion for RUSLE, USLE
and MMF, as 19,956,900 t/ha/yr, 17,212,000 t/ha/yr and 11,528,248 t/ha/yr respectively. The
result from the three models were compared and validated with a previous sedimentation data
(19,039,076 t/ha/yr) obtained from the same place in 2009.The outcome of the validation for
the RUSLE, USLE and MMF model shows 4.80%,39.45% and 9.60% variation from the
recorded data respectively. Since RUSLE model has a less error (4.80%), the study concluded
in favour of RUSLE model as the suitable model. Also, Spaeth et al., (2003), has confirmed
that the RUSLE method shows less error between the observed and predicted soil loss when
compared with the USLE method.
Studies have proven that the model has been successfully used in numerous watersheds
around the globe like the mountainous watershed in Palar river, India
(Sujatha&Sridhar,2018) Tata valley in Romania (Matache, Barbu, Badulescu, Petrescu &
Mircea,2019) and the Doviraj watershed in West Iran (Fathizad, Karimi&Alibakshi, 2014).
The success of the model in the above three cases can be measured in terms of the erosion
map that was produced. RUSLE model is an upgraded version of the USLE model proposed
by Wischemeier and Smith in 1978 (Osei & Kabwe, 2018). According to Chadli (2016), the
model has the same parameters as the USLE.
RUSLE model is mathematically categorical as:
A=R x K x LS x C x P.
Where A is the mean year soil loss (t/ha/yr), R is the runoff erosivity factor, LS is gradient
length or slope steepness (topography factor), C is the cover management factor & P is
conservation practice factor.
Rainfall runoff erosivity factor:(R)
Osei et al (2018) define the rainfall runoff erosivity factor as the impact of raindrops on the
surface of the earth. This study in the Copperbelt province of Zambia has used the (Lee and
Lee, 2000) equation: R=38.5+0.35 Pr to quantify R, where Pr is the mean yearly rainfall.
Another study conducted along the Minnamurra River Catchment, NSW, Australia by Mercer
(2019) has another approach known as the Wischmeier and Smith (1978). Mathematically
modelled as:
j
1
R= ∑ (EI ¿¿ 30)i ¿
n i=1
5 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)
Where E is the total kinetic energy (MJ/ha), n being the total number of years, I30 being the
maximum intensity in 30 minutes (mm/hr) and j being for the total number of storms. Shit et
al (2015) and Sujatha et al (2018), used the modified Wischmeier and Smith (1978) equation
known as the Arnoldus (1980) method to compute for the rainfall erosivity factor which is
expressed as:
2
12
[ 1.5 log10 ( pip )−0.08188 ]
R=∑ 1.735 x 10
i=1

where pi is the monthly rainfall and p is the yearly rainfall. Therefore, the selection of a
suitable method to estimate the value of R, used in the above examples depend on the
availability of rainfall data.
Soil erodibility factor: (k)
Mercer (2019) describes soil erodibility as the probability of various soil types to erode. Rate
of erosion on different types of soil is governed by the availability of organic matters, soil
texture and soil strata (Osei et al., 2018). Shit et al (2015) has projected the value of soil
erodibility factor, using the Wischmeier et al (1971) model with the establishment of soil
texture according to US department of Agriculture (USDA) textural classification. The K
factor for different classes of soil was estimated from USDA (1978) nomograph. Metin,
Adnan & Turgay (2018), also used erodibility nomograph to estimate the K factor.

Figure 2. USDA –textural classification

(Source:USDA-soil-classification/image, 2020)

6 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)

 Figure 3. USDA –nomograph (Source: USDA-nomograph, 2020)

Topography factors (LS)

The topography factor comprises of slope length and slope steepness (Mercer, 2019). Slope
length (L) is defined by Shit et al (2015) as the length in which flow initially starts and
decreases when the slope becomes flat or runoff becomes concentrated in an open channel.
Shit et al (2015) has cited that the rate of erosion increases proportionally with topography
factors. Osei et al (2018) justified this relationship by stating that the increase in slope will
result in increased velocity, which means an increase in the rate of soil loss. Additionally, the
topography factors can be generated from the digital elevation model (DEM), in ArcGIS
using the McCool model (Shit et al, 2015):

L=(λ /22.13)m

S=10.8sin θ+ 0.03 for θ ≤ 5 degree

S=16.8sin θ+ 0.5 for θ>5 degree

S=21.91sin θ+0.5 for θ ≤10 degree

Where L is defined as the slope length (m), λ being the field slope (m), 22.13 being the
RUSLE unit plot length (m), S being the slope and m being the dimension exponent.

Another useful method was the watershed DEM and spatial analyst tool in ArcGIS that was
successfully used in West Bengal, India (Osei et al.,2018) and Palar Sub-watershed, South
India (Sujatha,2018).
7 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)
 LS=Power ¿

where S is the slope or gradient

Crop management factor (C)

Crop management factor is an indication of vegetation effect on soil erosion (Fathizad et al

2014). Vegetation reduces intensity of rainfall on the soil (Amsalu & Mengaw, 2014). Areas
with high vegetation are less likely to experience soil erosion compared to areas with less or
no vegetation (Shit et al., 2015). The Mondal et al (2016) confirmed that the agriculture and
fallow land experiences high rate of erosion (12.21% and 15.61% respectively), whereas
vegetation shows less erosion (5.32%). Land Used and Land Cover (LULC) map with five
classes of land uses were used by Osei et al (2018) to derive the cover management value
with the aid of lee guidebook (2006).
Table 2. Cover management factor

Land Use C factor

Forest 0.054
Cropland 0.300
Bare land 0.500
Water 0.002
Built-up 0.003

Shit et al (2015) adopted the Normal Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) method to
compute the crop management factor.
NDVI
[
C=exp − a
b−NDVI ]
where a & b are dimensionless variables used to define the shape of the Curve with relation
to NDVI and cover management.
Conservation Practice factor (P)
Lastly, the conservation practice factor is dimensionless ratio of soil loss under a given
support practise upon the soil loss if crops were planted up and down the slope (Chadli,
2016, p.6). Benavidez et al (2018 cited in Mercer,2018) has mentioned that the value of P
shall be equal to one when no conservation practise is done. P value tend to decrease as
conservation practices becomes more effective. The study of Sujatha et al (2018) at Palar
sub-division watershed in India has derived P factor from a table, obtained from the study of
Schwab et al (1996).
Table 3. P factor values adopted from the study of Schwab et al (1996).

Land Use Slope (°) P factor

Agriculture 1-4 0.11
5 -10 0.09
11 - 20 0.18
21 - 40 0.00
>40 0.2
Plantation all 0.13
All 1.00

8 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)

4.0Research Gap
In Fiji, researches in soil erosion have been done in the late 1980’s and 1990’s in which the
researchers have used the USLE method to determine soil losses (Printemps, 2008). CRISP
has mapped potential erosion risks in North Viti Levu using USLE (Universal Soil Loss
Equation) and GIS model with focus on Coral Reefs which are sensitive to erosion in 2008.
Although, the Rewa river watershed region is the biggest in all of Viti Levu (takes up about
one-third of the total land area of Viti Levu) and has been making a headline in terms of soil
losses and flooding; no study has been conducted so far although it receives high rainfall, and
the catchment has the highest run-off coefficient for the major rivers in Fiji. Within the
watershed area are two major tributaries feeding the river which have different kinds of land
use activities ranging from chicken farms to hydro (Tamata et al., 2012). An integrated
working approach into the Rewa river watershed flood problems is important in
understanding its contributions towards its soil erosion or soil loss problems and land
degradation (Tamata et al., 2012). The study aims at developing a Soil Erosion map using
RUSLE (Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation) and GIS demarcating the areas prone to
erosion risks in Naitasiri province. Further, mitigation measures would be proposed, and an
adaptation framework developed for the communities affected by soil erosion.

5.0 Research Objectives

The objectives of this research are:
 To explore the Rewa river watershed characteristics Naitasiri Province of Fiji.
 Analyse soil profile variation of all seasons using particle size distribution, organic
matter content and bulk density determined according to USDA (2004).
 Extraction of raw data for soil erosion modelling using ArcGIS tools for digitization.
 Analyse the results for modelling and categorise the study area into various classes
based on potential for erosion risk.
 Conclusion and recommendation of mitigation measures based on the susceptibility
to erosion considering the community practices.

9 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)

6.0Methodology

Figure 4: Portrays the step by step methodology for the project.

10 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)

7.0Project Plan

Figure5: Depicts Microsoft Project Gantt Chart which displays the schedule for the project.

11 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)

References:
 Amsalu, T. and Mengaw, A. (2014) GIS Based Soil Loss Estimation Using RUSLE
Model: The Case of Jabi Tehinan Woreda, ANRS, Ethiopia. Natural Resources, 5,
The Case of Jabi Tehinan Woreda, ANRS, Ethiopia’, Scientific Research, [Online].
 Ankita, P.D. and Kazuo, N, (2014). ‘Modeling hydrological response to land use
Change in watersheds of viti levu island, fiji’, Journal of Environmental Research
and Development, 8(3), [Online], pp. 492-503.
 Boyle, M. Innovative training to reduce soil erosion and boost crops. Fiji
Broadcasting Corporation. 2018 Jul 16.
 Chadli, K., 2016. Estimation of soil loss using RUSLE model for Sebou watershed
(Morocco). Modeling Earth Systems and Environment, [Online] 2(2).
 Clarke W.C., Morrison R. J. (1987) Soil Erosion in Fiji-Problems and Perspectives,
Suva, Fiji, pp.52-54.
 FAO, (2015). ‘Regional Assessment of Soil Change in the Southwest Pacific’, Status
of the World’s Soil Resources | Main Report, [Online].
 Fathizad, H., Karimi, H., & Alibakhshi, S. M. (2014). The estimation of erosion and
sediment by using the RUSLE model and RS and GIS techniques (Case study: Arid
and semi-arid regions of Doviraj, Ilam province, Iran). International Journal of
Agriculture and Crop Sciences. [Online].
 Ganasri, B.P. and Ramesh, H, (2015). ‘Assessment of soil erosion by RUSLE model
using remote sensing and GIS - A case study of Nethravathi Basin’, Geoscience
Frontiers, [Online] pp 953-961.
 Kadam, K.A., Umrikar, B.N. and Sankhua, R.N, (2018). ‘Assessment of Soil Loss
using Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE): A Remote Sensing and GIS
Approach’, Remote Sensing of Land, 2(1), [Online] pp.65-75.
  Mercer, K., 2019. Faculty of Science, Medicine & Health - Honours Theses |
University of Wollongong Thesis Collections | University of Wollongong. [Online]
Ro.uow.edu.au.
 Metin, D., Adnan, B. and Turgay, D., 2018. Estimating of rainfall soil losses in Oltu
Anzav Watershed. African Journal of Agricultural Research, [online] 13(44),
pp.2526-2541. [Accessed 25 March 2020].
 Mondal, A., Khare, D. and Kundu, S. (2016). ‘A comparative study of soil erosion
modelling by MMF, USLE and RUSLE’, Geocarto International, [Online] 33(1),
pp.89-103.
 Munoz-Rojas, M., Pereira, P., Brevik, C.E. and Miller, A.B, (2017) ‘Soil Mapping
and Process Modeling for Sustainable Land Use Management’, pp. 375-386.
 Osei, P., & Kabwe, G. (2018). Soil Erosion Risk Detection Based on Revised
Universal Soil Loss. Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies & Management,
11(3), 376–390.
 Pimentel, D. and Burgess, M, (2013). ‘Soil Erosion Threatens Food Production’,
Agriculture, 3(3), [Online], pp. 443-463.
 Printemps, J. (2008). Mapping Potential Erosion Risks for North Viti Levu (Fiji)
using the USLE Model and a GIS. [Online] Noumea: CRISP.
 Ram, A.R., Brook, M.S. and Cronin, S.J, (2019) ‘Engineering geomorphological
investigation of the Kasavu landslide, Viti Levu, Fiji’, Landslides, 16, [Online],
pp.1341-1351.
 Renard K.G, Foster G.R, Weesies G.A, McCool D.K, Yoder D.C. (1997). Predicting
soil erosion by water. A guide to conservation planning with the Revised Universal
Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). Agriculture Handbook No. 703, USDA-ARS.

12 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)

  Shit, P. K., Nandi, A. S., & Bhunia, G. S. (2015). Soil erosion risk mapping using
RUSLE model on jhargram sub-division at West Bengal in India. Modeling Earth
Systems and Environment, 1(3), 1–12. [Online].
 SPC, (2016). ‘Better farming and ranching practices in ra province - diagnosis and
action plan’, RESCCUE, [Online].
 Sujatha, E. and Sridhar, V., 2018. Spatial Prediction of Erosion Risk of a Small
Mountainous Watershed Using RUSLE: A Case-Study of the Palar Sub-Watershed in
Kodaikanal, South India. Water, 10(11), p.1608.
 Tadesse, L., Suryabhagavan, V.K., Sridhar, G. and Legesse, G, (2017). ‘Land use and
land cover changes and Soil erosion in Yezat Watershed, North Western Ethiopia’,
International Soil and Water Conservation Research, [Online] pp.85-94.
 Tamata, B.U., Comley, J. and Tokalauvere, L, (2012) ‘The need for an integrated
approach to understanding and managing coastal change in river delta areas’, The
Journal of Pacific Studies, 32, pp.11–24.
 USDA (2004): Soil Laboratory methods. Soil Survey Investigation. Report No 42
version 4 .0 November 2004.

13 (Submitted by: Kunaal Kavitesh Nand, 2017140832)