Impact of land use change on water quality of Jhang District Punjab, Pakistan

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/12/2018
Views (261) Download (10)

Impact of land use change on water quality of Jhang District Punjab, Pakistan

Abdur Rehman, Muhammad Mobeen, Sidra Bashir, Muhammad Rauf, Fahad Ullaha, Tehmina Aziz, Taswar Abbas, Omar Riaz
J. Bio. Env. Sci.13( 6), 174-182, December 2018.
Certificate: JBES 2018 [Generate Certificate]


The study was proposed to examine the land use changes and its impacts on ground water quality in Jhang District, Punjab, Pakistan. The land use change was detected by classifying Landsat TM (Thematic Mapper) from USGS. Satellite images of 1987, 1998 and 2015 with 30m, 15m and 15m resolution were used for classification. The study area was classified into four major categories i.e. barren, residential, vegetation and sites near water. Equal proportion of groundwater samples were collected from each land use class from study area. Groundwater samples were analyzed and their parameters were grouped on the basis of land use classes. The selected groundwater quality parameters of four land use classes were compared and contrasted with each other for calculating land use change impacts on ground water quality. The analyses revealed that from 1987 to 2015 agricultural land has significantly been decreased with the extension of built up areas in and around the urban centers while groundwater quality was found rapidly deteriorating in the urban settlements or around them. It was observed that the vegetative and sites around water have adequate quality of groundwater as compared to the areas near built-up and barren. The extension in built-up areas is responsible for loss in vegetation land use which results in degraded water quality. Land use analysis revealed the present research is a pioneer work in this region. The findings of the study are useful for future land use planning. It can help urban and settlement planner for their decision making.


Ayele. 2011. Land use/land cover change and impact of Jatropha on soil fertility. The case of Meso and Mieso and BatI Districts, Ethiopia, Soil and water conservation engineering. Haramaya University.

Bottomley BR. 1998. Mapping rural land use & land cover change In Carroll County, Arkansas utilizing multi-temporal Landsat Thematic Mapper satellite imagery. Diss Arkansas: University of Arkansas.

Briassoulis H. 2006. Analysis of land use change – Theoretical and modeling approaches. Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University. /08.05.2008.

Clesceri LS, Greenberg AE, Eaton AD. 1998. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. APHA, AWWA, WEF, Baltimore, MD.

Daniel GBKenneth MJThomas RLDavid MT. 1999. Land Cover Trends: Rates, Causes and Consequences of Late-Twentieth Century U.S. Land Cover Change.

Goetz SJ, Smith AJ, Jantz C, Wright RK, Prince SD, Mazzacato ME, Melchior B. 2003. Monitoring and predicting urban land use change: Application of multi- resolution multi-temporal satellite data. IGRASS’03 proceedings 2003 IEEE International 3, 1567-1569.

Jain R, Nuttall HE. 1993. CTC – colloid transport code and simulation. J.F. McCarthy and F.J. Wobber (Eds.), Manipulation of Groundwater Colloids for Environmental Restoration. Lewis Publishers, Ann Arbor, MI pp. 247-252.

Jensen JR. 1996. Introductory Digital Image Processing. Page 316 in A Remote Sensing Perspective, Second eds. Prentice-Hall: New Jersey.

Loeb SL. 1988. Evidence of land use impacts on water quality within the Lake Tahoe Basin in Conservation District. Pages 4-25.

Perry J, Vanderklein E. 1996. Water quality management of a natural resource. Pollution. Environmental Science and Technology 32, 130-133.

Tong ST, Liu AJ. 2006. Modelling the hydrologic effects of land-use and climate changes. International Journal of Risk Management 6, 344-368.

Verbyla, David L. 1995. Satellite Remote Sensing of Natural Resources. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton.

Yuan D, Elvidge CD. 1998. NALC land cover change detection pilot study: Washington D.C area experiments. Remote sensing of environment 66: 166-178.