Available online at:

http://journal.unila.ac.id/index.php/tropicalsoil
J Trop Soils, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2013: 141-148 141
DOI: 10.5400/jts.2013.18.2.141

Soil Erosion Prediction Using GIS and Remote Sensing on Manjunto

Watershed Bengkulu-Indonesia

Gusta Gunawan1, Dwita Sutjiningsih2, Herr Soeryantono2 and Soelistiyoweni Widjanarko2

1
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Bengkulu, Jl. W.R. Supratman No.1
Bengkulu 38371, Indonesia, e-mail: gustagunawan@yahoo.com
2
Department Civil and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Indonesia, Depok,
West Java 16424, Indonesia. *e-mail: dwita@eng.ui.ac.id, **e-mail: herr.soeryantono @ui.ac.id
Received 16 January 2012 / accepted 2 January 2013

ABSTRACT

The study aimed to assess the rate of erosion that occurred in Manjunto Watershed and financial loss using
Geographic Information System and Remote Sensing. Model used to determine the erosion is E30 models. The
basis for the development of this model is to integrate with the slope of the slope between (NDVI). The value of
NDVI was obtained from satellite imagery. Slope factor obtained through the (DEM) processing. To determine the
amount of economic losses caused by erosion used the shadow prices. The amount of nutrients lost was converted
to fertilizer price. The results showed that the eroded catchment area had increased significantly. The rate of average
annual erosion in the watershed Manjunto in 2000 was amounted to 3 Mg ha-1 yr-1. The average of annual erosion
rate in the watershed Manjunto increased 27 Mg ha-1 yr-1 in the year 2009. Economic losses due to erosion in 2009
was Rp200,000,- for one hectare. Total losses due to erosion for the total watershed area was Rp15,918,213,133, -.
The main factor causing the high rate of erosion was high rainfall, slope and how to grow crops that did not pay
attention to the rules of conservation.
Keywords: Digital elevation model, GIS, remote sensing, soil erosion, valuation erosion

INTRODUCTION evaluation (Hazarika and Honda 2001; Ande et al.

Changes in land use and deforestation have
caused increasing of soil erosion from year to year.
High rate of soil erosion caused adverse impacts on
environmental and economic aspects (Lal 1998) and
it could even spread to the social aspect (Ande et al.
2009). This is because erosion can reduce the storage
capacity of a lake or reservoir (Clark et al.2003),
lowering the quality of river water (Ananda and
Herath 2003; Lal 1998; Pimentel et al.1995),
and wash the nutrients needed by plants (Ande et
al.2009).
Soil erosion is a natural process that slough off
and land transport material through the action of
erosive agents such as water, wind, gravity, and
human disturbance (Lal 2001). However, if soil
erosion is occurring faster than necessary, then it
will have a negative impact on the environment,
economic and social. Strategic effort to reduce the
negative impacts of soil erosion is to conduct soil and
water conservation measures intensively.
The complete spatial data is requirements to support
these activities in the planning, monitoring and
J Trop Soils, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2013: 141-148
ISSN 0852-257X
2009). The data must be accurate, do not require high
cost and is collected in the long time process (Green
1992; Morgan 2005). One of the urgent data is a map
of soil erosion to evaluate the economic losses caused
by erosion. Map of soil erosion can include erosion
risk map or maps of erosion (Arsyad 2010). Erosion
risk maps are useful for land use planning, while the
erosion map is useful for planning erosion control or
reclamation of barren land.
Rapid development occurring in the technology
of Remote Sensing (RS) and Geographic Information
Systems (GIS) provide a new approach to
meet various demands related to resource modeling
(Mermut and Eswaran 2001; Salehi et al.2003)
including soil and water conservation activities
(Hazarika et al. 2009). RS in the GIS database
integration can reduce costs, time, and improve the
information detailed soil surveys for various purposes
(Green, 1992). Satellite data can be used for mapping,
monitoring and estimation of soil erosion (Hazarika
and Honda 2001). Several studies demonstrate the
potential utility of RS and GIS to assess quantitatively
the level of soil erosion (Saha et al.1991; Saha and
Pande 1993; Mongkosawat et al. 1994).
Some researchs conducted in various countries
use GIS and RS to assess the soil erosion. Some of
142 G Gunawan et al.: Soil Erosion Prediction Using GIS

the researchers who conducted the study
on erosion in other countries is Hazarika and Honda
(2001), mapping the threat of soil erosion in the
catchment area of Northern Thailand Ao Mae. Ande
et al.(2009) using the approach to estimating erosion
Morgan and Finney model (MMF) in Southwestern
Nigeria. Kefi and Yoshino (2010) assessed the risk
of erosion on agricultural productivity using RUSLE,
remote sensing and GIS in a catchment area in
Tunisia.
However, erosion mapping using GIS and RS
in Indonesia have not been conducted intensively
(Arsyad 2010), especially in areas outside Java.
Arsyad stated (2010) , that the only result of soil
erosion map, published was the mapping performed
by Dames (1955) using traditional methods in the
river flow strip (DAS) of Central Java. In Indonesia,
application of GIS to evaluate land degradation first
was performed by Lanya (1996). Rate
of erosion has done by identifying morphological
changes in the soil in situ.
The purpose of this research was to evaluate
the risk of erosion occurring in the watershed area
Manjunto-Bengkulu and its economic losses by using
GIS and Remote Sensing. The basis of this model
selection is an area of research that is still dominated
by forests and to evaluate the erosion
traditionally will take a long time and high costs
(Hazarika and Honda 2001; Kefi and Yoshino 2010).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study Site
The research was conducted in the Manjunto
watershed. It is located in the District of Mukomuko,
Bengkulu Province, Indonesia, at 02°10’30'’ -
02°30’15“ South Latitude and 101°5’30" -
107°35’00" East Longitude. Manjunto watershed
area that was dominated by forests, watershed area
was 79,581 ha (Figure 1). Based on data from BMG
(Meteorological and Geophysical Agency)

12345678 123456789 12345678 123456789

12345678
101 o
0’0”E 123456789
102 o
0’0”E 12345678
103 o
0’0”E 123456789
104 o
0’0”E
12345678 123456789 12345678 123456789

1234 123
1234 123
1o0’0”S

1o0’0”S
1234
1234 123
123
1234 123
1234 123
1234 123

1234
1234 123

2o0’0”S
1234 123
2o0’0”S

1234 123
1234 123
1234 123
1234
1234 123
1234

1234
1234
3o0’0”S

1234 123
3o0’0”S

1234 123
1234 123
1234 123
1234 123
1234

1234
1234 123
4o0’0”S

4o0’0”S

1234 123
1234
1234 123
1234 123
123
1234 123
1234 123
12345678901234567890
12345678901234567890
12345678901234567890
Manjunte Watershed
12345678901234567890

1234567890123
1234567890123
1234567890123
Kilometers
1234 123 1234512345 123456 123456 1234567 1234567
1234 123 1234512345 123456 123456 1234567 1234567
1234 123 12345
2 5 12345 123456 123456 1234567 1234567 123
5o0’0”S

5o0’0”S

1234 0
123 12345 50
12345 100
123456 150
123456 200
1234567
250
1234567 123
1234 123
1234
1234 123
123
1234 123
1234 123

123456789 1234567890 123456789 123456789

123456789 1234567890 123456789 123456789
123456789 1234567890 123456789 123456789
123456789
101 o
0’0”E 1234567890
102 o
0’0”E 123456789
103 o
0’0”E 123456789
104 o
0’0”E

Figure 1. The location of Manjunto Watershed.

 J Trop Soils, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2013: 141-148 143

Mukomuko district of Bengkulu province, the
average rainfall of the study region was 3,329.70
mm yr -1 and average annual temperature was
23.0 oC. Based on Soil Survey Staff (1998) the most
dominant soil type in research site are Endoaquepts,
Udifluvents, and Eutrudepts.
Preparation of Soil Map
Preparation of Soil Map was based on map of
land units and land sheet of Sungai Penuh (0813)
Sumatra 1:250.000 Scale. Classification of Each soil
mapping unit was classified according to the spread
of the predominant soil types in quantitative and was
grouped into different classes or soil mapping unit.
Slope Principles maps were made by
calculating the slope based on the transformation of
the difference between the elevation from west to
east through the process of reduction
(derivation) partially with respect to the x axis (map
dx) and the difference between the elevation from
north to the south which is a partial decrease in the
y-axis (the map dy). Data contour lines
and elevation points were taken from the DEM
(digital elevation model). DEM used as the input
the slope class was into performed different classes
as follows: 0-8% (flat), 8-15% (wavy), 15-25%
(hilly), 25-45% (mountainous) and > 45% (steep).
Digital Image Processing was used to Produce
Land Cover Map. Land cover information was
obtained through the interpretation of Landsat 7 ETM
path 126/row 062 July 22, 2000 acquisition date and
Spot 4 path 355/row 271 May 17, 2009 acquisition
date. The steps in the identification way to produce
land cover maps are available in Figure 2.
Estimated Erosion with E30 Model
To estimate the rate of erosion that occured in
each soil mapping unit (SMU), the following equation
(Hazarika and Honda 2001) is used:
E = E30 (S S30 )
0. 9
[1]
Where E = rate of annual soil erosion in the
watershed of Manjuto (Mg ha-1 yr-1), S = gradient or
slope (percent), S30 = Value of Tan 30o and E30 is
the level of erosion that occurs on a slope of
30o. E30 values were obtained from the following
equation 2 (Hazarika and Honda 2001):
  LogE − LogE max  
E 30 = exp   min
 ⋅ ( NDVI − NDVI ) + LogE max  [2]
− NDVI min
min

DEM Bengkulu area with 30 m resolution ASTER   NDVI max  

GDEM was downloaded from version 2. After the The maximum (Emaks) and minimum (Emin)
interpolation process and change the vector data to of erosion values were obtained from the data made
raster processed with the help of Arc Gis 9.3, then by the Public Works Department of Bengkulu

1234567890123456789012345678901
1234567890123456789012345678901 12345678901234567890123456789012 123456789012345678901
1234567890123456789012345678901
1234567890123456789012345678901 12345678901234567890123456789012 123456789012345678901
The image
image will
willprocess
process 12345678901234567890123456789012
Reference image 123456789012345678901
1234567890123456789012345678901
The
1234567890123456789012345678901
12345678901234567890123456789012
12345678901234567890123456789012
Reference image DEM
123456789012345678901
123456789012345678901
DEM
123456789012345678901

12345678901234567890123456789012
12345678901234567890123456789012
12345678901234567890123456789012
Rectification
12345678901234567890123456789012
12345678901234567890123456789012
Rectification

12345678901234567890123
12345678901234567890123 12345678901234567890123456789
12345678901234567890123 12345678901234567890123456789
12345678901234567890123
Corrected image
12345678901234567890123 12345678901234567890123456789
Watershed Boundary
12345678901234567890123 12345678901234567890123456789
12345678901234567890123456789
Corrected image
12345678901234567890123 12345678901234567890123456789
Watershed boundary

1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
Overlay + Croping
1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
Overlay + Croping
1234567890123456789012345

1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345 1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
Field survey 1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345 1234567890123456789012345
Research Site
Field survey
1234567890123456789012345 1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
Research site
1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345

1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345 1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
Land Cover Map 1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345 Land 1234567890123456789012345
Land Identification
1234567890123456789012345 1234567890123456789012345
Land cover crop map
1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
Land identification
1234567890123456789012345
cover classification 1234567890123456789012345

Figure 2. Land cover identification procedures.

144 G Gunawan et al.: Soil Erosion Prediction Using GIS
province. The maximum erosion value was 242 Mg
ha-1 yr-1 and the minimum erosion value was 0.1
Mg ha-1 yr-1. NDVI (normalized difference
vegetation index) was calculated using equation 3.
To avoid negative values and facilitate the
processing of digital data, NDVI values were
obtained from recording image made re-scale (re-
scale), so the NDVI equation is as follows (Panuju
et al. 2009).
 B − B3  
NDVI =  4  + 1 x100
B
 4 + B3   and volume of surface runoff. Small slope will
Where NDVI is a vegetation× index that reflects
the level of greenness of vegetation× condition
(Malingreau 1986). Band 4 (B4) and Band 3 (B3)
are a channel on satellite images that record the
infrared spectral (IR/IR) and near infrared (Near
Infra Red/ NIR).
Erosion Valuation
The valuation methods used to estimate
economic losses due soil erosion are presented in
Figure 3. The economic losses due to erosion were
determined by replacement cost technique (Dixon
et al. 1994). Nutrients (N, P, K) were converted
with a purchase cost of fertilizers (Urea, SP36, KCl).
123456789012345678901234
123456789012345678901234
123456789012345678901234
Soil erosion Map
123456789012345678901234
Soil erosion Map
123456789012345678901234
123456789012345678901234567890121
123456789012345678901234567890121
123456789012345678901234567890121
123456789012345678901234567890121
The content of NPK in
The content of NPK in
123456789012345678901234567890121
123456789012345678901234567890121
123456789012345678901234567890121
Each
Soil Mapping Unit
123456789012345678901234567890121
Each Soil Mapping Unit
123456789012345678901234567890121
123456789012345678901234567890121
1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
Fertilizer prices in
1234567890123456789012345
Fertilizer prices in
1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
the Market
1234567890123456789012345
the Market
1234567890123456789012345
1234567890123456789012345
Figure 3. The steps of erosion valuation to estimate economic losses.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The slope Map
Slope map of DEM was processed with the
help of Arc Gis 9.3 which is presented in Figure 4.
Data were processed by GIS contained information
on slope and the number of pixels or extensive
information. Information about slope is presented in
Table 1.
The mayor study site had the slope above 8%.
[3] The Slope factor will influence the speed
provide more opportunities the rain water to
infiltration so that runoff volume will reduce. In the
other side, a low percentage of slope will reduce
runoff velocity so that its ability to erode and
transport the soil will be small.
Table 1. The slope of the Manjunto Watershed.
Slopes Percentages
Pixel number Area (ha)
(%) (%)
0-8 229,478.90 20,923.887 26.292
8 - 15 350,398.70 31,949.351 40.147
15 - 25 166,219.00 15,155.848 19.045
25 - 45 62,160.86 5,667.827 7.122
> 45 64,529.12 5,883.765 7.393
Total 872,786.60 79,580.678 100.000
123456789012345678901234
123456789012345678901234
123456789012345678901234
Soil Mapping Unit
123456789012345678901234
Soil Mapping Unit
123456789012345678901234
1234567890123
1234567890123
overlay
overlay
1234567890123
1234567890123
1234567890123456789012345678
1234567890123456789012345678
1234567890123456789012345678
Soil erosion in Each
Soil erosion in Each
1234567890123456789012345678
1234567890123456789012345678
1234567890123456789012345678
1234567890123456789012345678
Soil Mapping Unit
Soil Mapping Unit
1234567890123456789012345678
1234567890123456789012345678
1234567890123456789012345678
1234567890123456789012345678901212
1234567890123456789012345678901212
1234567890123456789012345678901212
N,P,K Lost In
1234567890123456789012345678901212
N, P, K Lost In
1234567890123456789012345678901212
1234567890123456789012345678901212
1234567890123456789012345678901212
Each Soil Mapping Unit
1234567890123456789012345678901212
Each Soil Mapping Unit
1234567890123456789012345678901212
12345678901234567890123456
12345678901234567890123456
12345678901234567890123456
NPK Value
NPK Value Lost In In
12345678901234567890123456
12345678901234567890123456
12345678901234567890123456
12345678901234567890123456
Soil Mapping
Soil Mapping Unit Unit
12345678901234567890123456
12345678901234567890123456
12345678901234567890123456
12345678901234567890123456789012123456
12345678901234567890123456789012123456
12345678901234567890123456789012123456
Value loss due to erosion
Value loss due to erosion
12345678901234567890123456789012123456
12345678901234567890123456789012123456
12345678901234567890123456789012123456
12345678901234567890123456789012123456
of the watershed of Manjuto
of the watershed of Manjuto
12345678901234567890123456789012123456
12345678901234567890123456789012123456
12345678901234567890123456789012123456
 J Trop Soils, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2013: 141-148 145

12345678 1234567 123456789 123456789 1234567 12345678 123456789

12345678
12345678 1234567
1234567 123456789
123456789 123456789
123456789 1234567 12345678 123456789
730000
12345678
740000
1234567
750000
123456789
760000
123456789 1234567
770000
1234567
12345678
780000
12345678
123456789
790000
123456789
12345678
12345678 123456789
123456789
12345678
9760000
12345678 123456789
9760000
123456789

12345
12345
12345
N
12345
12345678
12345678
123456789
123456789
9750000 12345 9750000
12345
12345
1234
1234
W
12345
12345 E
1234

123456
123456
123456
S
123456
123456
12345678 123456789
12345678
12345678
9740000
123456789
123456789
9740000

1234567890123
1234567890123
1234567890123
Legend
12345678
12345678 1234567890123
1234567890123 123456789
12345678 12345678 123456789
9730000
12345678 12345678 123456789
9730000
12345678
12345678
123456789
0-3
12345678
12345678
12345678
3-8
12345678
123456789
123456789
123456789
8-15
12345678901
123456789
12345678901
12345678901
15-25
12345678
12345678 12345678901
12345678901 123456789
12345678 12345678901 123456789
12345678 123456789
9720000 123
123
1234
1234 123
123 12345
12345 123456
123456 12345
12345 12345
12345123456789012345
123456789012345 12345678901
25-45
12345678
12345678901 123456789
9720000
123
5 1234
0 123
5 12345
10 123456
15 12345
20 12345123456789012345
2 5 Kilometers 12345678
12345678 1234567
>45
12345678 1234567
1234567
1234567

1234567
1234567 1234567
1234567
1234567
1234567
1234567
1234567
1234567
1234567
1234567
1234567
1234567
1234567
1234567
730000 1234567
740000 1234567
750000 1234567
760000 1234567
770000 1234567
780000 1234567
790000

Figure 4. The slope map of Manjunto Watershed.

730000 740000 750000 760000 770000 780000 790000

9760000 9760000
N

W E
1 9750000
9750000 2
S 3
6
9
10
11
12
9740000 13 9740000
15
16
19
20
21
24
9730000 25 9730000
27
28
29
33
40
42
9720000 43 9720000
45
48
5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 3 5 Kilometers 50
52

730000 740000 750000 760000 770000 780000 790000

Figure 4. Soil map of Manjunto Watershed.

Soil Map Unit Endoaquepts, Udifluvents, and Eutrudepts with the

proportion of each land unit varied.
The results of the identification of classes of
each unit of land by the spread of the dominant soil Land Cover Identification
types are presented quantitatively in Figure 5.
Based on the identification of land cover in 2000
From the preparation of soil map units, the
and 2009, the conversion of land use and the
dominant soil types at the study site are known
reduction of forest from deforestation were shown.
146 G Gunawan et al.: Soil Erosion Prediction Using GIS

123456 123456 123456 12345 123456 123456 1234567

123456 123456 123456 123456 12345 123456 123456 1234567 12345 12345 123456 12345 12345 123456 1234
123456 123456 123456 123456 12345 123456 123456 1234567
730000 740000 750000 760000 770000 780000 790000 12345 12345 123456 12345 12345 123456 1234
12345 123456 12345
730000 740000 750000 760000 770000 780000 790000
123456 12345 123456 12345
123456
9760000
1234 12345
9760000
123456
9760000 12345
9760000
1234
N 123456
123 1234
12345 123 1234
W E 12345
12345 123456
12345 12345 123456 12345
12345
9750000
1234 12345
9750000
123456
9750000 12345
9750000
12345 1234 123456
1234
S

12345 12345 12345

12345 12345 123456 12345
12345
9740000 12345
9740000 123456 12345
12345 12345 9740000
12345
9740000

12345 1234567 12345

12345 1234567
Legend : 12345 123456 12345
12345 1234567890 12345 123456 12345678 12345
9730000
1234567890
Primary Forest 9730000 9730000
12345678 9730000
1234567890 12345678
1234567
12345678
Legend :
1234567890
Secondary Forest
12345678
1234567
Primary Forest
1234567890
Village
1234567890
Mixed Farms 12345678
1234567
12345678
Secondary Forest
1234567890
Dry Field 12345678
Mixed Farms
1234567890 12345678
Dry Field
1234 1234567890
Estates
12345 123456 12345678 12345
1234 1234567890 12345 123456 12345678 12345
Paddy Fields Village
1234
9720000 1234567890
Shrubs 12345
9720000 9720000 123 123 123 123 123 123 123 123456 12345678
Estates 9720000
1234 123 12 123 12 123 123 123 123
1234567 1234567890
1234567890
Open Land 12345 123
5 123
123 0
123 123
5
123 123
10
123 123
15 123
123 123 123
20 25
123123456
Kilometers
123456
12345678
Paddy Fields
12345678
Shrubs
5 0 5 10 15 20 1234567
25 30 Kilometers
Water Body
12345678
12345678
Open Land
River
1234 12345 12345 1234 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 123456 12345 12345 12345 1234
1234
730000 12345
740000 12345
750000 1234
760000 12345
770000 12345
780000 12345
790000 12345
730000
12345
740000
123456
750000
12345
760000
12345
770000
12345
780000
1234
790000

(A) (B)

Figure 6. Land cover map in the year 2000 (A) and 2009 (B).

1234 12345 123456 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 123456 12345 12345 12345 12345 123456
12345 1234 12345 123456 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 123456 12345 12345 12345 12345 123456
12345 1234
730000
12345
740000
123456
750000
12345
760000
12345
770000
12345
780000
12345
12345
790000
12345 12345 12345
730000
123456
740000
12345
750000
12345
760000
12345
770000
12345
780000
12345
123456
790000
12345
9760000 9760000
12345
9760000 9760000
12345
12345
12345
N 123
1234 123
12345 1234 123 12345 123
N
12345
12345 1234
W 123
E 12345 12345 123 123 12345
12345
9750000 123 12345
9750000 12345
9750000 123
W 123 12345
9750000
E
12345
12345
12345
S 123
123
123
S
12345 12345 12345 12345
12345 12345
9740000 12345 12345
12345
9740000
12345 12345
9740000
12345
9740000

1234 12345 12345 12345

1234 12345 12345 12345
1234
9730000
12345678
12345678
123456789012 12345
9730000
12345
9730000 123456789
123456789
123456789012 12345
9730000
Legend : Legend :
12345678
123456789012 123456789
123456789012
123456789012
0-14.4 ton ha yr
123456789012
-1

14.5-35.3 ton ha yr
-1
-1 -1
123456789012
0-14.4 ton ha yr
123456789012
-1

14.5-35.3 ton ha yr
-1
-1 -1

123456789012
35.4-61.0 ton ha yr -1 -1
123456789012
35.4-61.0 ton ha yr -1 -1

123456789012 -1 -1
123456789012
61.0-94.0 ton ha yr -1 -1

12345 12345 12345 123456789012 12345

61.0-94.0 ton ha yr
-1 -1 -1 -1

12345 1234123 12341234 123412345

123451234567 12345 12345
123451234
12345
>95 ton ha yr >95 ton ha yr
12345
9720000 1234123 12341234 123412345
20 12345 1234567 12345
9720000 1234 123 123 12 1234 123 123 123456789 12345
9720000
1234
5 123
0 1234
5 1234
10 1234
15 12345123451234567
25 Kilometers 9720000
1234
5 123
123 123
0 5
123 12
10
12 1234
15 123
20 123
25 123456789
Kilometers
1234 123 123123456789

1234 12345 123456 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 123456 12345 12345 12345 12345 1234
1234 12345 123456 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 123456 12345 12345 12345 12345 1234
1234
730000
12345
740000
123456
750000
12345
760000
12345
770000
12345
780000
12345
790000
12345
730000
123456
740000
12345
750000
12345
760000
12345
770000
12345
780000
1234
790000

(A) (B)
Figure 7. Map of average annual erosion in the year 2000 (A) and 2009 (B).

Land cover changed on every class of land uses reaches of the basin’s land use types, namely Field
are shown in Figure 6. The total area of forest / moor. Factors causing the high rate of erosion are
significantly reduced, while the plantation or estates a way of farming that pays little attention to the
area increased significantly. Changes in land use rules of conservation and high rainfall.
were influenced by the local livelihoods which were
the majority as a farmer. Economic Loss Due to Erosion

Soil Erosion Mapping To know the economic losses resulting from

soil erosion, stacking overlap between the maps
The value of soil erosion that occured at each of erosion with soil map units that have attribute
pixel based on the calculation results by using values of nutrient was carried out content (N, P and
equation 1 is presented in the form of annual rate K) on each Soil mapping unit. The results showed
soil erosion maps (Figure 7). that the amount of nutrients loss (N, P, K) on average
Eroded watershed area increased when for 1 hectare of land were : 13 kg ha-1, 1.54 kg
compared to conditions in 2000. Total amount of lost ha-1, 10.1 kg ha-1 respectively. If the fertilizer price of
land in the watershed Manjunto in 2000 was at urea was Rp2,500 kg-1, TSP was Rp2,400 kg-1 and
1,399,209 Mg and in 2009 amounted to 23,004,391 KCL was Rp7,000 kg-1, so the economic losses that
Mg (Figure 7). Erosion rate of the annual average occured in the watershed Manjunto during 2009
in 2000 was 3 Mg ha-1 yr-1, and in 2009 was 27 Mg amounted to USD 200,000 ha-1. Number of losses
ha-1 yr-1. High erosion was occured in the lower for the entire watershed area was
 J Trop Soils, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2013: 141-148
Rp15,918,213,133,-. Losses due to erosion at the
study site were high when compared with other
countries.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the analysis of erosion evaluations
which were conducted in year 2000 and 2009, some
conclusions were obtained. The total area of the
eroded basin had increased significantly from year
to year. Total amount of soil lost by erosion in the
watershed of Manjunto in 2000 amounted to
1,399,209 Mg and in 2009 increased to 23,004,391
Mg. The average erosion rate in 2000 was 3 Mg
ha -1 yr -1 and in 2009 increased to 27 Mg ha -1
yr-1. Economic losses that occured in the watershed
of Manjunto during 2009 amounted to USD 200,000
ha -1 and the total losses amounted to
Rp15,918,213,133, -.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We wish to thank the Institute of Space and
Aeronautics Chairman for his help in providing data
for this study. We also wish to thank the Head of the
Faculty of Engineering, University of Indonesia. This
paper is part of the Doctoral Dissertation
Research in Faculty of Engineering, University
of Indonesia.
REFERENCES
Aksoy E, G Ozsoy and MS Dirim. 2009. Soil mapping
approach in GIS using Landsat satellite imagery and
DEM data. Afr J Agric Res 4: 1295-1302.
Ananda J and G Herath. 2003. Soil erosion in developing
countries: a socio-economic appraisal. J Environ
Manage 68: 343-353.
Ananda J, G Herath and A Chisholm. 2001. Determination
of yield and Erosion Damage Functions Using
Subjectivly Elicited Data: application to Smallholder
Tea in Sri Lanka. Aust J Agric Resour Ec 45: 275-289.
Ande OT, Y Alaga and GA Oluwatosin. 2009. Soil erosion
prediction using MMF model on highly dissected
hilly terrain of Ekiti environs in southwestern
Nigeria. Int J Phys Sci 4: 053-057.
Arnold JG, BA Engel and R Srinivasan. 1998. A continuous
time grid cell watershed model. Proc. of application
of Advanced Technology for management of Natural
Resources.
Arsyad S. 2010. Konservasi Tanah dan Air. IPB Press.
Bogor-Indonesia (in Indonesian).
Asdak C.1995. Hydrology and Watershed Management.
Gadjah Mada University Press, Yogyakarta.
Barlin RD and ID Moore. 1994. Role of buffer strips in
management of waterway pollution: a review.
Environ Manage 18: 543-58.
147
Brough PA.1986. Principle of Geographical Information
Systems For Land Resources Assessment. Oxford
University Press, 194p.
Clark B and J Wallace. 2003. Global connections:
Canadian and world issues. Toronto, Canada:
Pearson Education Canada, Inc.
Cochrane T A and DC Flanagan. 1999. Assessing water
erosion in small watershed using WEPP with GIS
and digital elevation models. J Soil Water Conserv
54: 678 685.
Dames TWg. 1955. The Soils of East Central Java; with
a Soil Map 1:250,000. Balai Besar Penjelidikan
Pertanian, Bogor, Indonesia.
Dixon JA, LF Scura, RA Carpenter and PB Sherman. 2004.
Economic Analysis of Environmental Impacts 2nd ed.
Eartscans Publication Ltd., London.
Fistikoglu O and NB Harmancioglu. 2002. Integration of
GIS with USLE in Assessment of Soil Erosion. Water
Resour Manage 16: 447-467.
Green K. 1992. Spatial imagery and GIS: integrated data
for natural resource management. J Forest 90: 32-36.
Hazarika MK and H Honda. 2001. Estimation of Soil
Erosion Using Remote Sensing and GIS, Its
Valuation & Economic Implications on
Agricultural Productions. The 10th International Soil
Conservation Organization Meeting at Purdue
University and the USDA-ARS Soil Erosion
Research Laboratory.
Hazarika S, R Parkinson, R Bol, L Dixon, P Russell, S
Donovan and D Allen. 2009. Effect of tillage system
and straw management on organic matter dynamics.
Agron Sustain Develop 29: 525-533. doi: 10.1051/
agro/2009024.
Honda KL, A Samarakoon, Y Ishibashi, Mabuchi and S
Miyajima.1996. Remote Sensing and GIS
technologies for denudation estimation in Siwalik
watershed of Nepal,p. B21-B26. Proc. 17th Asian
Conference on Remote Sensing, Colombo, Sri lanka.
Kefi M and K Yoshino. 2010. Evaluation of The Economic
Effects of Soil Erosion Risk on Agricultural
Productivity Using Remote Sensing: Case of
Watershed in Tunisia. International Archives of the
Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial
Information Science, Volume XXXVIII, Part 8, Kyoto
Japan.
Kefi M, K Yoshino, K Zayani and H Isoda. 2009.
Estimation of soil loss by using combination of
Erosion Model and GIS: case of study watersheds
in Tunisia. J Arid Land Stud 19: 287-290.
Lal R. 1998. Soil erosion impact on agronomic productivity
and environment quality: Critical Review. Plant Sci
17: 319-464.
Lal. 2001. Soil Degradation by Erosion. Land Degrad
Develop12: 519-539.
Lanya I. 1996. Evaluasi Kualitas lahan dan Produktivitas
Lahan Kering Terdegradasi di Daerah Transmigrasi
WPP VII Rengat Kabupaten Indragiri Hulu, Riau.
[Disertasi Doktor]. Program Pasca Sarjana IPB,
Bogor (in Indonesian).
148 G Gunawan et al.: Soil Erosion Prediction Using GIS
Mermut AR and H Eswaran. 2001. Some major
developments in soil science since the mid 1960s.
Geoderma 100: 403-426.
Mongkolsawat C, P Thurangoon and Sriwongsa.1994.
Soil erosion mapping with USLE and GIS. Proc.
Asian Conf. Rem. Sens., C-1-1 to C-1-6.
Morgan RPC, Morgan DDV and Finney HJ. 1984. A
predictive model for the assessment of erosion risk.
J Agric Eng Res 30: 245-253.
Morgan RPC. 2005. Soil Erosion and Conservation. 3rd
ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Co.
Panuju DR, F Heidina, BH Trisasongko, B Tjahjono, A
Kasno, AHA Syafril. 2009. Variasi nilai indeks
vegetasi MODIS pada siklus pertumbuhan padi.
J.Ilmiah Geomat. 15, 9-16 (in Indonesian).
Pimentel D, C Harvey, P Resosudarmo, K. Sinclair, D Kurz,
M Mc Nair, S Christ, L Shpritz, L Fitton, R Saffouri
and R Balir. 1995. Environmental and Economic
Costs of Soil Erosion and Conservation Benefits.
Science 267: 1117-1123.
Saha SK and LM Pande. 1993. Integrated approach
towards soil erosion inventory for environmental
conservation using satellite and agrometeorological
data. Asia Pac Rem Sens J 5: 21-28.
Saha SK, Kudrat M and Bhan SK.1991. Erosional soil
loss prediction using digital satellitee data and
USLE. In: S Murai (ed). Applications of Remote
Sensing in Asia and Oceania – Environmental
Change Monitoring. Asian Association of Remote
Sensing, pp. 369-372.
Salehi MH, Eghbal MK and Khademi H. 2003. Comparison
of soil variability in a detailed and a reconnaissance
soil map in central Iran. Geoderma 111: 45-56.
Soil Survey Staff. 1998. Keys to Soil Taxonomy. Eighth
Edition. United States Department of Agriculture
Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Washington, D.C.