WP as per WS

14
By :- Dr. ANOOP BHALLA IFS APCCF(WP)

description

In Chhattisgard state a new concept of working plan prepration.

Transcript of WP as per WS

Page 1: WP as per WS

By :-

Dr. ANOOP BHALLAIFS

APCCF(WP)

Page 2: WP as per WS

AIM

Enhancement of decreasing Productivity of flora & fauna for ecologically sustainable forest management ( SFM).

Page 3: WP as per WS

OBJECTIVES

1 . Improving Soil Moisture table in forest areas by increasing “Recharge Capacity ” of the Catchment.

2 To enhance the current low productivity of Forest flora caused due to Soil moisture stress .

3 . Decreasing Surface Run off from forest area.

4 . Recharge of Ground water table(especially the forest crop growth zone).

5 . To enhance the capacity of Discharge Zone to increase the agriculture productivity of fringe forest area.

Page 4: WP as per WS

AVERAGE SCENARIO OF A DIVISION

1 . Avg. Total Area of the forest division – 1400 Sq km or 140000 ha.

2 . Avg. no. of Milli watersheds (Equivalent to Felling Series) in Div – (Only Forest Area).

3 . Avg. Area of Milli watersheds (Equivalent to Felling Series) in Div – (Only Forest Area).

4. Avg. no. of Micro watersheds (Equivalent to Coupes) in Div – (Only Forest Area).

5. Avg. Area of Micro watersheds (Equivalent to Coupes) in Div – (Only Forest Area).

6.Treatment cycle – 20 years

7. No. of coupes per year treated – 100

8. Total Area to be treated in a year in a Division – 7000 ha

9. Avg. treatment cost per ha – Rs 4000 per ha

10. Total treatment cost in a year / division – 7000X4000 = 28000000 or 2.8 cr.

11. Cost for all of the state – 2.80 @ 32 = 89.60 or 100 cr.

Page 5: WP as per WS

SCENARIO OF THE FOREST PRODUCTION MATCHES IN THE STRATA

1 . Young to middle aged crop.

2 . Conversion decrees.

3 . Water as a limiting factor for SFM.

4 . Hence watershed management should become basic for SFM.

Page 6: WP as per WS

HOW IT GETS INCORPORATED IN WORKING PLAN

At the outset before working plan revision starts ,the Division’s milliwatershed are prescribed by WPO from the angle of aims/objects(Criteria shown in next page) –

a) Separate integrated watershed management working plan - >25 degree , BD rich , soil erosion area.

b) This is not the end but it beginning – Watershed management become integral part of all working circles.

a) In each working circle ,we propose two parallel felling series -1)Sillviculture FS

2) Water Shade FS

Page 7: WP as per WS

WATERSHED TREATMENT

1) A separate manual prepared for details of scientific & technical technologies for treatment.

2) GIS based software prepared for proper site based treatment map.

Page 8: WP as per WS

PARAMETERS FOR PRIORITIZING OF WATERSHEDS (IN ORDER OF

PRIORITY)

Slope Percentage .

Rills & Streams .

Forest Cover.

Geo-morphological Formations.

Soil Types.

Any site specific misc(like Eco tone, BD richness, Ecologically fragile zones etc).

Page 9: WP as per WS

WEIGHTED PERCENTAGE OF PARAMETERS OF WATERSHEDS

Slope Percentage . 30 – 55%

Rills & Streams .

Forest Cover. 20 - 30 %

Geo-morphological Formations. 15 - 20%

Soil Types. 10 - 15%

Any site specific misc(like Eco tone, BD richness, Ecologically fragile zones etc). 0- 5%

Page 10: WP as per WS

Rating For Slope Factor :-

Description Slop Value Rate

Very Steep Sloping >25% 1

Mod Steep to Steep 10-25% 17

Moderately Sloping 5-10% 34

Very Gently Sloping 0-5% 51

Page 11: WP as per WS

Rating For Vegetation Factor :-

Class Values Value Rate

Scrub Canopy density less than 10%

1

Open Forest Canopy density between 10% and 40%

10

Mod Dense Forest Canopy density between 40% to 70%

20

Very Dense Forest Canopy density of 70% and above

30

Page 12: WP as per WS

Rating For Geomorphology Factor :-

Alluvium 1

Sandstone 1

Basalt 7

Granite 14

Gneiss 14

Granite/Gneiss 14

Page 13: WP as per WS

Rating For Soil Factor :-

Value Value Rate

C, SiCL in flat area 1

SL, S 5

SC, CL, SCL, L, SiL, Si 10

C, SiCL 15

C (Clay), SiCL (Silty clay loam), SC (Sandy clay), CL (Clay loam), SCL (Sandy clay loam),

L (Loam), SiL (Silty loam), Si (Silt), SL (Sandy loam), S (Sandy).

Page 14: WP as per WS

Rating Of Watersheds in terms of priority for reducing surface Runoff :-

Description Rating Sum Class

Extremely Susceptible 0-16 1

Very Highly 17-24 2

Highly Susceptible 25-29 3

Moderately Susceptible 30-48 4

Slightly Susceptible 49-64 5

Insignificantly Susceptible more then 65 6