forest cover and land use changes: a study of bezera ...ijirssc.in/pdf/1464788349.pdf · in south...

International Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Science Society and Culture(IJIRSSC) Vol: 2, Issue:1, (June Issue), 2016 ISSN: (P) 2395-4345, (O) 2455-2909 © IJIRSSC

www.ijirssc.in Page 323

Forest Cover and Land Use Changes: a Study of

Bezera Development Block, Assam,India

Bishwajit Das1, Dr.Lakhimi Gogoi

2

1Assistant Professor, Department of Geography

1Narangi Anchalik Mahavidyalaya, Narangi, Guwahati, Assam

[email protected]

[email protected]

ABSTRACT : Rapid population growth and subsequent demand of agricultural land and

forest products such as firewood, fodder timber and lumber has accelerated deforestation

process in many developing tropical countries. Scientific interest in tropical deforestation and

its impact on livelihood. Understanding changes in landscapes pattern requires in-depth

knowledge of both biophysical and socio-economic patterns and processes. Human use and

management of land i.e., how people use landscape as a source of livelihood, shelter,

recreation and/or industry, are powerful forces shaping patterns and dynamics in human

occupied landscapes. Studies have shown that there remain only few landscapes on the earth

that is still in their natural states. Anthropogenic activities have altered the earth’s surface

significantly and associated with profound effect upon the natural environment. The study aims

to investigate forest cover changes in the area of Bezera Development Block over spatial and

temporal scale and to find out and explain the underlying causes behind the changes.This has

resulted an observable pattern of land use/land cover change over time.

Keywords: Forest Cover, land use, Landsat image, Remote sensing and GIS.

____________________________________________________________________________

I. Introduction: Deforestation in the tropics is a major driver of global environmental change, with

significant consequences in store for global climate, biodiversity, and the maintenance of a

range of ecosystem services [1],[2]. A variety of mechanisms have been put in place to curtail

and manage these transformations, of which the establishment of protected area networks has

been perhaps one of the most visible. By the end of the 20th century, over 100,000 protected

area reserves had been established across the world, covering about 9% of the Earth’s land

surface [3]. This expansion has been especially rapid in the past few decades, with protected

areas now viewed as one of the last remaining bastions of refuge against an almost unstoppable

tide of deforestation.

In South Asia, where tropical forests coexist with some of the highest densities of human

populations in the world, most forested areas are found in human-dominated landscapes, and

most protected areas are embedded in landscapes that have been inhabited by humans for



millennia [4]. As with other regions of the world, the strict exclusionary policies that were

adopted by most parks, when combined with a generally unsympathetic administration,

exacerbated park–people conflicts—giving rise to problems for local communities as well as

for park administrators [5],[6].Biodiversity continued to be lost at a rapid pace despite

extensive efforts to curtail habitat degradation.

The subcontinent of India exemplifies these tensions between conservation and

development. Between 1975 and 1998, the number of national parks in India increased from 5

to 85, and the number of wildlife sanctuaries increased from 126 to 448 (Ministry of

Environment and Forests, 1998). Five percent of the country’s land surface is currently under

protection, largely located in areas of dense human populations. Thus, areas that are set aside

as parks frequently contain settlements located within their boundaries. These communities

find themselves subject to strict restrictions on the harvest of forest products that are significant

component of their traditional livelihood. The process of park creation further puts these, often

tribal, low-income villages, out of the scope of most development agencies, since development

and infrastructure activities are not permitted within the park. Thus, in a somewhat paradoxical

situation, even while attention has been paid to creating H. Nagendra et al. / Applied

Geography 26 (2006) 96–112 97 alternative sources of livelihood for communities located

adjacent to the park boundary, the park villages that are most disadvantaged by park

establishment are often left unaided. An often perceived solution for dealing within the

problems of people within parks is to resettle them outside the protected area [7], [8]. In

developing nations through the world, resettlement has been used frequently, with little regard

for the social consequences and in some cases even for the long-term viability of the park

[9],[8],[10].Communities living within forests can be an essential component of forest

conservation, by actively engaging with forest management activities and defending their

territories against poachers and loggers [11], [12]. In order to determine whether such

resettlement is in fact essential, we need to understand the extent to which people within parks

impact the long-term viability of these regions. Empirical studies that evaluate the

II. Objectives of the Study: The main objectives of this paper is to –

quantify forest cover and land use changes of the area

analyse the rate of change of forest cover and land use between 1991 to 2010.

III. Methodology:

The study was based on both primary and secondary information. For the collection of

primary data about the traditional muga culture, a questionnaire has been prepared .Total

number of two hundred data has been collected randomly from the study area. The primary

data were collected randomly from the field by adopting interview method. A questionnaire

was designed for collecting the data.

Map work has been done with the help of Geographical Information System software, as it helps

to bring out the information explicitly. The conclusions of the study have been drawn on the basis of

findings derived from the analysis of both primary and secondary data and also from personal

observations in the field.


www.ijirssc.in 25

IV. Study Area :

Bezera Development Block lies between 26⁰13′ N to 26⁰18′ North latitude and 91⁰40′ E

to 91⁰44′ East longitude. The block is situated on the northern side of the river Brahmaputra.

Western side of the block is surrounded by Kamalpur block, northern side is surrounded by

Bihdia Jajikona block. The eastern side of the block is bordered by Barnadi which is a tributary

of the river Brahmaputra. The block occupies an area of 119.97 square kilometer. National

Highway 31 and 52 passes through the block.

Fig.1: Location map of study area

V. Results and Discussion: In the study the Landsat images are downloaded from the internet. Two Landsat images

for the year 1991 and 2010 are taken in the study of land use/ land cover changes in the area of



Bezera Development Block. The satellite imageries are classified into different land use/ land

cover classes. To convert the image data into thematic data with giving more importance in the

forest cover in the area of Bezera Development Block supervised classification method was

used.

For the land use/ land cover classification Landsat TM and ETM+ images were used.

Supervised classification was used to prepare land use map because it has higher accuracy over

unsupervised classification.

Land use refers to ―man’s activities on land‖ which are related to land. It is devoted to

the vegetation and artificial constructions covering the land surface (Anderson et al, 1990).

Land cover is related to the type of feature present on the surface of the earth. As per the

topographical map prepared by Survey of India, 1967, the land use and land cover of Bezera

Development Block area have been identified considering 6 categories of land use.

Remote sensing and GIS techniques are used to identify and demarcate the land use

category and land use land cover change. The Bezera Development Block boundary map is

superimposed on the satellite imageries to identify and demarcate the land use category

through digital data in GIS techniques. The results are presented with the help of maps, charts,

tables and graphs using appropriate computer assisted procedures.

The Landsat V TM image was taken for the year 1991. The result of classified images

shows that forest is the major land use which is surrounded by the settlement, agricultural land,

water bodies, grassland etc. Open mixed jungle, dense forest are seen in the forested area. The

total geographical area of the block was 119.97 square kilometer of which the agricultural land

covered the area of 47.38 square kilometer, forest region covered the area of 19.34 square

kilometer, water body such as rivers, beels etc. covered the area of 7.82 square kilometer,

settlement area covered the area of 39.45 square kilometer, grassland covered the area of 4.06

square kilometer and the remaining 1.92 square kilometer was under plantation in the year

1991. The land use/ land cover status is given in table 1 below and land use/ land cover map

for the year 1991 is shown in the figure 2.

Table 1: Land use/ land cover, 1991

S.N. Land use/Land cover Status (Area)

Sq. km %

1. Forest Cover 19.34 16.12

2. Water Bodies 7.82 6.52

3. Agricultural Land 47.38 39.49

4. Grassland 4.06 3.38

5. Plantation 1.92 1.60

6. Settlement 39.45 32.88



Fig 2: Land use/ land cover (1991)

For the classification of 2010 image, Landsat ETM+ satellite image of date 11/2/2010

was used. The land use/ land cover status is given in the table 2 and the map showing land use/

land cover is given in the figure 3. Open mixed jungle and dense forest still remain one of the

land use/ land cover types consisting of 14.45 sq. kilometer (12.04%) of the total area of

119.97 sq. kilometer. Forest areas have decreased to 12.04% in the year 2010. Water bodies

have also been decreased occupying 4.52% of the total area in 2010. Agricultural land of the

study area have been decreased to 33.59% 0f the total area in 2010. Grassland areas have been

decreased to 2.89% of the total area while plantation has increased to 3.62% of the total

geographical area. The settlement areas have also been increased to 43.34% of the total area.



Table 2: Land use/ Land cover, 2010

Fig 3: Land use/ Land cover (2010)

The comparison of land cover maps of 1991 and 2010 showed the considerable changes

in forest cover, agricultural land and settlement (table 3). However, there is a negligible or little

change in water bodies, grassland and plantation. The forest area has decreased from 16.12% in

the year 1991 to 12.04% in the year 2010 while the settlement area has increased from 32.88%

in the year 1991 to 43.34% in the year 2010. Similarly, water body and grassland have

decreased by 2% and 0.49% respectively whereas little improvement has been seen in

plantation area with an increase of 2.02%. There is a decrease in agricultural land from 39.49%

in the year 1991 to 33.59% in the year 2010.

S.N. Land use/ Land cover Status (Area)

Sq. km. %

1 Forest Cover 14.45 12.04

2 Water Bodies 5.42 4.52

3 Agricultural Land 40.3 33.59

4 Grassland 3.47 2.89

5 Plantation 4.34 3.62

6 Settlement 51.99 43.34



Table 3: Land use/ Land cover change between 1991-2010

Man plays an important role in changing the landscape of the earth. Man can change the

land use/ land cover through their activities. In the area of Bezera Development Block there are

different human activities which influence in the change of the land use/ land cover. In the

study area, the human activities like agriculture, construction of roads, houses; animal grazing

in the forest area, collection of firewood from the forest, collection of different tree species like

Sal, Segun, Gomari etc., expansion of industries specially brick industry near the forest area

etc. are the main causes of changing land use/ land cover. Deforestation is done by the local

people of the study area. Encroachment of the forest area leads to the land use/ land cover

change. Some households are occupying the forest area. The households having forest area are

shown in percent in the table 4 below-

Fig 4: Land use/ Land cover change in percent between 1991-2010

S.N. Land use Land use/ land

cover

(1991)

Land use/ land

cover

(2010)

Land use/ land

cover change

Sq. km. % % Sq. km. % Sq. km. %

1 Forest cover 19.34 16.12 14.45 12.04 - 4.89 - 4.08

2 Water bodies 7.82 6.52 5.42 4.52 - 2.4 - 2

3 Agricultural

land

47.38 39.49 40.3 33.59 - 7.08 - 5.9

4 Grassland 4.06 3.38 3.47 2.89 - 0.59 - 0.49

5 Plantation 1.92 1.60 4.34 3.62 2.42 2.02

6 Settlement 39.45 32.88 51.99 43.34 12.54 10.46



Table 4: Households having forest area

Fig 5: Households having forest area

The people near the forest area collect tree like Sal, Segun, Gomari etc. from the forest

area. But not all people are involved in the collection of tree from forest. 21.74% are not

involved in the collection of tree from the forest and 78.26% people near the forest area collect

forest product like tree, firewood from the forest.

Besides, 67.39% domesticated animals graze in the forest area. Cattle such as cow, goat,

bullock etc. are grazed in the forest area. So cattle grazing in the forest area reduces the growth

of small trees and thus changed the growth of forest.

82% households near the forest area are involved in the collection of firewood from the

forest while the other 17.39% are not involved in the collection of firewood.

The collected data from the study area about timber used in last 5 years from forest show

the following figure 6-

Fig 6: Timber used in last five years

Forest area Households (%)

< 1 bigha 15.22

1 – 4 bigha 26.09

>4 bigha 2.17

No forest area 56.52



The percentages of income from forest related products are shown in the table 5 below-

Table 5: Household’s income from forest

Fig 7: Household’s income in rupees from forest

Besides socio-economic factors the natural calamity specially storm is one of the causes

of land cover change. According to the people of the study area storm has destructed many big

trees in the last 20 years.

The jungle area of the households near the forest area is burned in the forest fire.

Six major land cover types were delineated using satellite data namely, forest cover,

agricultural land, water bodies, grassland, plantation and settlement. The change analysis maps

show that the major changes were taken place in the forest area coverage due to more

anthropogenic activities. It is seen that the forest area is converted to constructed areas.

The result obtained from the GIS mapping shows that there is a considerable change in

the forest cover. Satellite image analysis for the year 1991 and 2010 revealed that this period of

20 years were completely under the influence of human activities in terms of land use/ land

cover change.

The result of classified images shows that forest is the major land use which is

surrounded by the settlement, agricultural land, water bodies, grassland etc. Open mixed

jungle, dense forest are seen in the forested area. The total geographical area of the block was

119.97 square kilometer of which the agricultural land covered the area of 47.38 square

kilometer, forest region covered the area of 19.34 square kilometer, water body such as rivers,

beels etc. covered the area of 7.82 square kilometer, settlement area covered the area of 39.45

Income in rupees

(per month)

Households (%)

< 1000 78.26

1000-2000 17.39

>2000 4.35



square kilometer, grassland covered the area of 4.06 square kilometer and the remaining 1.92

square kilometer was under plantation in the year 1991.

For the classification of 2010 image, Landsat ETM+ satellite image of date 11/2/2010

was used. The land use/ land cover status is given in the table 2 and the map showing land use/

land cover is given in the figure 3. Open mixed jungle and dense forest still remain one of the

land use/ land cover types consisting of 14.45 sq. kilometer (12.04%) of the total area of

119.97 sq. kilometer. Forest areas have decreased to 12.04% in the year 2010. Water bodies

have also been decreased occupying 4.52% of the total area in 2010. Agricultural land of the

study area have been decreased to 33.59% 0f the total area in 2010. Grassland areas have been

decreased to 2.89% of the total area while plantation has increased to 3.62% of the total

geographical area. The settlement areas have also been increased to 43.34% of the total

area.The changed forest area is shown in the table 6 below-

Table 6: Changed forest area

The proximate causes behind the changes of forest cover are : (a) expansion of the

habited area of the villages which are near the forest area, (b) fragmentation of land into small

parts among two or more sons in the family, (c) expansion of small industries like brick

industry near the forest area namely Barbaka, Mandakata etc., (d) flow of migrants and illegal

encroachment in the study area, (e) fuel wood gathering from the forest area, (f) collection of

trees from the forest, (g) cattle grazing in the forest area.

V. Conclusion:

An indepth study of ―The Forest cover and Land use Changes : A Study of Bezera

Development Block, Assam‖ was done by using the Remote Sensing and GIS techniques and

socio-economic data for land cover change detection. The study was carried out by using

Landsat satellite image and GIS to monitor changes in the forest. The result of the study using

Landsat imagery suggest that the most of the forest cover has been under human pressure

degrading its originality over the years. The underlying causes for the forest cover change are

the influences of the human activities such as agricultural activities, expansion of brick

industry near the forest area, cattle grazing in the forest area, cutting of trees in the forest area

etc. One of the reasons of the increase of households is the fragmentation of land into many

plots in the name of the sons of the family and it has resulted the destruction of forest. These

findings suggest that income status of households is one of the indicators of the forest

dependency while the poor people are basically dependant on forest for firewood, fodder for

cattle etc. The work is concluded with the following suggestions.

1. The increasing destruction of forest should be controlled through planning.

2. The changes in land use/ land cover should be allowed according to the planning

objectives and purposes.

Forest area (1991) Forest area (2010) Change

Sq. km. % Sq. km. % Sq. km. %

Forest cover 19.34 16.12 14.45 12.04 - 4.89 - 4.08



3. The people of the study area should be aware of the forest conservation policy and

should follow the policy.

4. The people of the study area should take plantation program occasionally.

5. The people should attend training related to forest conservation.

References :

[1] Geist, H. J., & Lambin, E. F. (2002). Proximate causes and underlying driving forces

of tropical deforestation. BioScience, 52, 143–150.

[2] Rindfuss, R. R., Walsh, S. J., Turner, B. L., II, Fox, J., & Mishra, V. (2004).

Developing a science of land change: Challenges and methodological issues.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 101, 13976–13981.

[3] Green, M. J. B., & Paine, J. (1997). State of the world’s protected areas at the end of

the twentieth century. Paper presented at IUCN World Commission on protected areas

symposium on protected areas in the 21st century: From islands to networks, 24–29

November 1997, Albany, Australia.

[4] Gadgil, M., & Guha, R., (1992). This fissured land—an ecological history of India

(272pp.). New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

[5] Agrawal, A., & Ostrom, E. (2001). Collective action, property rights, and

decentralization in resource use in India and Nepal. Politics and Society, 29, 485–514.

[6] McLean, J. (2000). Conservation and the impact of relocation on the Tharus of

Chitwan, Nepal. Himalayan Research Bulletin, 19, 38–44.

[7] Ghate, R. (2003). Global gains at local costs: Imposing protected areas: Imposing

restricted areas in India. Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 10,

377–395.

[8] McLean, J., & Straede, S. (2003). Conservation, relocation and the paradigms of park

and people management— a case study of Padampur villages and the Royal Chitwan

National Park, Nepal. Society and Natural Resources, 16, 509–526.

[9] McLean, J., & Straede, S. (2003). Conservation, relocation and the paradigms of park

and people management— a case study of Padampur villages and the Royal Chitwan

National Park, Nepal. Society and Natural Resources, 16, 509–526.

[10] West, P. (1994). Introduction: Resident peoples and protected areas—Part III. Society

and Natural Resources, 7, 303–304.

[11] Schmidt-Soltau, K. (2003). Conservation-related resettlement in central Africa:

Environment and social risks. Development and Change, 34, 525–551.

[12] Schwartzman, S., Moreira, A., & Nepstad, D. (2000). Rethinking tropical forest

conservation: Perils in parks. Conservation Biology, 14, 1351–1357.

forest cover and land use changes: a study of bezera ...ijirssc.in/pdf/1464788349.pdf · in south...

Documents