GIS based spatial distribution mapping and suitability evaluation of groundwater quality for...

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

GIS based spatial distribution mapping and suitability evaluationof groundwater quality for domestic and agricultural purposein Kaithal district, Haryana state, India

Sanjay Kumar Goyal • B. S. Chaudhary •

Omvir Singh • G. K. Sethi • Praveen K. Thakur

Received: 30 July 2009 / Accepted: 11 January 2010 / Published online: 4 February 2010

� Springer-Verlag 2010

Abstract Groundwater is a major resource for meeting

huge domestic and agricultural requirements of Kaithal

district in Haryana. Therefore, evaluation of its quality in

terms of suitability for domestic and agricultural sectors is

necessary for sustainable management of the resource. The

present study has analyzed pre- and post-monsoon physico-

chemical data of groundwater samples from bore wells

spread over the entire district. Spatial distribution maps

were generated for hydrogen ion concentration, total dis-

solved solids, total hardness, electrical conductivity,

sodium adsorption ratio, residual sodium carbonate and

percent sodium using the geographic information system.

Furthermore, the study area was demarcated into different

groundwater quality zones for domestic and agricultural

use by applying various national and international stan-

dards. It was observed from the study that the groundwater

was predominantly hard, alkaline and saline in nature.

However, it was within safe limits for domestic use. Fur-

ther, it was also experienced from the analysis that in about

two-third parts of the district, groundwater was in

desirable-to-permissible quality class for agricultural use

but hazardous for soil as well as for crops in the remaining

part. Also, a moderation in water quality was observed

after the monsoon season, which can be attributed to a

possible dilution due to groundwater recharge.

Keywords Groundwater quality � Kaithal � GIS �Spatial distribution � Domestic � India

Introduction

The demand for fresh water has increased significantly

throughout the world due to population growth, socioeco-

nomic development, technological and climatic changes

(Alcamo et al. 2007). Groundwater is a replenishable

resource which is used for domestic, agricultural and

industrial purposes in most parts of the world. The suitability

of groundwater for a particular use depends upon its quality,

which is determined by solutes and gases dissolved as well

as matter suspended or floating in it (Todd and Mays 2005).

The lack of clean drinking water is adversely affecting the

general health and life expectancy of the people in many

developing countries (Nash and McCall 1995). Moreover,

poor water quality for irrigation is a constant threat to crop

yield as well as soil physical conditions (Ayers and Westcot

1994; Patel et al. 2004; Marechal et al. 2006).Therefore,

groundwater quality plays a major role in planning water

supply, water quality management, public health manage-

ment, and environmental management.

Various investigations have shown that groundwater is

highly susceptible to pollution from natural as well as

anthropogenic factors (Kovar and Krasney 1995; Appelo

and Postma 1996; Jain and Sharma 2000). In India, there

has been deterioration in groundwater quality due to over-

S. K. Goyal (&) � B. S. Chaudhary

Department of Geophysics, Kurukshetra University,

Kurukshetra 136119, India

e-mail: [email protected]

O. Singh

Department of Geography, Kurukshetra University,

Kurukshetra 136119, India

G. K. Sethi

M.L.N. College, Yamuna Nagar 135003, India

P. K. Thakur

Indian Institute of Remote Sensing, Dehradun 248001, India

123

Environ Earth Sci (2010) 61:1587–1597

DOI 10.1007/s12665-010-0472-z

exploitation of groundwater, indiscriminate use of chemi-

cals in agriculture, and untreated effluents from industrial

and domestic sectors (Palaniswami and Ramulu 1994;

Datta et al. 2000). Therefore, the evaluation and analysis of

chemical composition of groundwater is necessary to

determine its suitability for different uses. Heath (1998)

classified the suitability of groundwater for domestic use

on the basis of hydrogen ion concentration (pH), total

dissolved solids (TDS) and total hardness (TH). Numerous

studies (Richards 1954; Wilcox 1955; Lloyd and Heathcote

1985) have determined the suitability of irrigation water

from its sodium adsorption ratio (SAR), residual sodium

carbonate (RSC), electrical conductivity (EC) and percent

sodium (PS).

Geographic information system (GIS) is an efficient and

effective tool in solving problems where spatial data are

important. Therefore, it is widely used for assessment of

water quality and developing solutions for water resources

related problems (Chaudhary et al. 1996).

Kaithal district of Haryana, India, is an agriculture

dominated area. The general cropping pattern of the district

is rice–wheat. Due to limited availability of surface water,

huge irrigation requirements for paddy are met largely by

drawing water from aquifers. Moreover, there is indis-

criminate use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides to

increase production. Owing to prevailing conditions, there

is growing concern for the quality of groundwater thus

making it necessary to evaluate its suitability for sustain-

able management of this precious resource.

Objectives

The study has been carried out with the following main

objectives:

1. To assess the pre-monsoon (June) and post-monsoon

(October) groundwater quality.

2. To demarcate the study area into different groundwater

quality suitability zones for domestic as well as

agricultural use conforming to the latest quality

standards.

3. To study the effect of monsoon recharge on ground-

water quality.

Study area

The Kaithal district forms a part of the upper Ghaggar

basin in the vast Indo-Gangetic alluvial plain. The district

is located between 29�320 to 30�120N latitude and 76�080 to

76�450E longitude and covers an area of about 2,284 km2

(Fig. 1). The general elevation of the area ranges from 217

to 252 m above mean sea level showing a gentle slope

from northeast to southwest. The climate of the district is

sub-tropical monsoon type. The temperature starts rising

from March and continues till June end. May and June are

the hottest months with the daily maximum temperature at

about 40�C. During winters, the temperature starts

decreasing by the middle of November. January is the

coldest month. The average annual rainfall in the district is

about 528 mm and almost 80% of the total annual rainfall

occurs during the monsoon period (July–September). The

net irrigated area in the district in 2007–2008 was

1,331 km2, out of which, 521 km2 (40%) was irrigated by a

network of distributaries and minors of the Western Jam-

una Canal (WJC) and 1,852 km2 (60%) by tube wells. The

average density of tube wells in the district in 2007–2008

was more than 25 tube wells per km2, putting high pressure

on the groundwater resources of the district (State statis-

tical abstract 2009).

Materials and methods

Collection of data and determination of groundwater

quality parameters

Periodic groundwater quality data [pH, EC, TDS,

(Ca2? ? Mg2?), Na?, HCO3-

, CO32- and Cl-] for 79

observation wells in Kaithal district pertaining to pre- and

post- monsoon for the year 2007 were obtained from

Groundwater Cell, Department of Agriculture, Kurukshe-

tra. Other collateral data related to quality standards

(national and international), groundwater depth etc. were

collected from published literature. Further, total hardness

(TH), sodium adsorption ratio (SAR), residual sodium

carbonate (RSC) and percent sodium (PS) were calculated

from ionic concentrations (meq/l) of (Ca2? ? Mg2?), Na?,

HCO3-, CO3

2- and Cl- using the following standard

procedures.

TH ¼ CaþMgð Þ � 50 ð1Þ

SAR ¼ Naffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

ðCaþMgÞ=2p ð2Þ

PS ¼ Naþ K

CaþMgþ Naþ K� 100 ð3Þ

RSC ¼ CO3 þ HCO3

� �

� CaþMgð Þ ð4Þ

The suitability of groundwater for domestic use was

determined on the basis of pH, TH and TDS and by

comparing them with the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS)

recommendations. Further, groundwater suitability for

irrigation was classified in terms of EC, SAR, RSC and

PS by applying United States Salinity Laboratory (USSL),

and European Economic Community (EEC) criteria.

1588 Environ Earth Sci (2010) 61:1587–1597

123

Delineation of study area and preparation of water

quality maps

The boundary map of Kaithal district was digitized with the

help of Survey of India topographical maps using Inte-

grated Land and Water Information System (ILWIS) 3.3

software. Further, locations of 79 observation wells were

also digitized to prepare a well location map of the Kaithal

district (Fig. 2). The data pertaining to groundwater quality

parameters discussed in the preceding section were

attached with an already generated well location point map

in the form of an attribute table. Further, point interpola-

tions, using the moving average method (inverse distance)

in ILWIS software, were performed to obtain spatial dis-

tribution maps for these parameters. These maps were

classified into various suitability zones for domestic and

Fig. 1 Study area

Environ Earth Sci (2010) 61:1587–1597 1589

123

agricultural use by applying the slicing procedure of the

software. Areas under different quality zones were deter-

mined by generating histograms for the sliced maps.

Results and discussion

Evaluation of groundwater quality for domestic use

The results of chemical analysis of groundwater were

compared with the domestic water standards of BIS (BIS

1998) to arrive at conclusions (Tables 1 and 2). The BIS

standards reveal that for domestic use the pH values of the

groundwater should range between 6.5 and 8.5. The pH

values for different observation wells during the pre- and

post-monsoon period for the year 2007 in the Kaithal dis-

trict were found to be between 6.9–9.5 and 6.6–9.0,

respectively. The pre-monsoon pH distribution map of the

study area demonstrated that 98.5% area of the Kaithal

district had hydrogen ion concentration in desirable range

(Fig. 3). However, a small area (1.5%) in the southern part

of the district, was in non-permissible range with pH

Pnt 1

Pnt 2

Pnt 3Pnt 4

Pnt 5

Pnt 6

Pnt 7

Pnt 8

Pnt 9

Pnt 10

Pnt 11

Pnt 12

Pnt 13

Pnt 14

Pnt 15

Pnt 16

Pnt 17

Pnt 18

Pnt 19

Pnt 20

Pnt 21

Pnt 22

Pnt 23

Pnt 24Pnt 25

Pnt 26Pnt 27

Pnt 28

Pnt 29

Pnt 30

Pnt 31

Pnt 32

Pnt 33

Pnt 34

Pnt 35

Pnt 36

Pnt 37

Pnt 38

Pnt 39

Pnt 40

Pnt 41

Pnt 42

Pnt 43

Pnt 44

Pnt 45Pnt 46

Pnt 47

Pnt 48

Pnt 49

Pnt 50

Pnt 51

Pnt 52

Pnt 53

Pnt 54

Pnt 55

Pnt 56

Pnt 57

Pnt 58

Pnt 59Pnt 60

Pnt 61

Pnt 62

Pnt 63

Pnt 64

Pnt 65

Pnt 66

Pnt 67

Pnt 68

Pnt 69

Pnt 70

Pnt 71

Pnt 72

Pnt 73

Pnt 74

Pnt 75

Pnt 76

Pnt 77

Pnt 78

Pnt 79

Fig. 2 Well location map of

study area


123

Table 1 Pre-monsoon values of quality parameters (June 2007)

Id Village CO3 HCO3 Cl Ca ? Mg Na pH TH TDS EC SAR PS RSC

1 Agondh 2.0 3.0 8.0 3.3 10.7 7.4 165 840 1,400 8.3 76.4 1.7

2 Badsui 2.0 3.0 6.0 3.5 8.5 7.2 175 720 1,200 6.4 70.8 1.5

3 Bhusla 2.0 4.0 10 3.8 14.2 7.5 190 1,080 1,800 10.3 78.9 2.2

4 Chaba 2.0 3.0 9.0 3.2 11.8 7.1 160 900 1,500 9.3 78.7 1.8

5 Guhla 2.0 3.0 9.0 3.2 11.8 7.3 160 900 1,500 9.3 78.7 1.8

6 Kharkan 2.0 4.0 10 3.8 14.2 7.5 190 1,080 1,800 10.3 78.9 2.2

7 KhushalMajra 2.0 3.0 8.0 3.0 13.0 7.2 150 960 1,600 10.6 81.3 2.0

8 Papsar 2.0 4.0 9.0 3.9 13.1 7.4 195 1,020 1,700 9.4 77.1 2.1

9 Peedal 2.0 4.0 12 3.5 16.5 7.5 175 1,200 2,000 12.5 82.5 2.5

10 Rasulpur 2.0 4.0 11 3.9 13.1 7.2 195 1,020 1,700 9.4 77.1 2.1

11 Mehmudpur 2.0 3.0 7.0 3.4 9.6 7.3 170 780 1,300 7.4 73.8 1.6

12 SeoMajra 2.0 3.0 9.0 3.3 10.7 7.4 165 840 1,400 8.3 76.4 1.7

13 Seontha 2.0 3.0 9.0 3.0 13.0 7.0 150 960 1,600 10.6 81.3 2.0

14 Sultania 2.0 3.0 8.0 3.0 13.0 7.1 150 960 1,600 10.6 81.3 2.0

15 Barot 4.0 3.0 6.0 3.9 21.1 7.5 195 1,500 2,500 15.1 84.4 3.1

16 Chandana 2.0 3.0 8.0 3.3 10.7 7.0 165 840 1,400 11.3 76.4 1.7

17 Chhot 4.0 4.0 9.0 3.3 34.7 8.5 165 2,280 3,800 30.6 91.3 4.7

18 Dhons 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.4 9.6 6.9 170 780 1,300 10.3 73.8 1.6

19 Dilluwala 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 13.0 7.0 150 960 1,600 13.5 81.3 2.0

20 Dhundrehri 6.0 4.0 9.0 3.5 48.5 8.9 175 3,120 5,200 40.7 93.3 6.5

21 Franswala 4.0 3.0 6.0 4.0 20.0 7.5 200 1,440 2,400 17.7 83.3 3.0

22 Jaswanti 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.2 11.8 7.1 160 900 1,500 12.3 78.7 1.8

23 Kathwar 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.2 11.8 7.0 160 900 1,500 12.3 78.7 1.8

24 Keorak 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.3 10.7 7.1 165 840 1,400 11.3 76.4 1.7

25 Kheri Gulam Ali 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 8.5 6.9 175 720 1,200 9.4 70.8 1.5

26 Kultaran 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.2 11.8 7.0 160 900 1,500 12.3 78.7 1.8

27 LadanaBaba 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.4 9.6 6.9 170 780 1,300 7.4 73.8 1.6

28 Manas 4.0 2.0 4.0 3.7 15.3 7.2 185 1,140 1,900 11.3 80.5 2.3

29 Mundri 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.7 7.3 6.9 185 660 1,100 5.4 66.4 1.3

30 Peoda 4.0 2.0 4.0 3.4 17.6 7.1 170 1,260 2,100 13.5 83.8 2.6

31 Sewan 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 13.0 7.1 150 960 1,600 13.5 81.3 2.0

32 Ujjana 2.0 3.0 6.0 3.2 11.8 7.0 160 900 1,500 12.3 78.7 1.8

33 Sajuma 4.0 2.0 9.0 3.3 18.7 7.5 165 1,320 2,200 17.7 85.0 2.7

34 Saran 4.0 4.0 9.0 3.0 37.0 8.5 150 2,400 4,000 33.7 92.5 5.0

35 Balu 6.0 4.0 16 3.7 47.3 8.7 185 3,060 5,100 38.9 92.7 6.3

36 Dumara 4.0 3.0 12 3.3 26.7 7.9 165 1,800 3,000 24.2 89.0 3.7

37 Kamalpur 4.0 5.0 16 3.8 38.2 8.6 190 2,520 4,200 31.7 91.0 5.2

38 Kheri SherKhan 4.0 3.0 12 4.0 20.0 7.8 200 1,440 2,400 17.7 83.3 3.0

39 Kheri Lamba 4.0 3.0 13 3.4 25.6 7.9 170 1,740 2,900 23.0 88.3 3.6

40 Kalasar 4.0 4.0 14 3.8 30.2 8.2 190 2,040 3,400 25.6 88.8 4.2

41 Kolekhan 4.0 4.0 15 3.7 31.3 8.4 185 2,100 3,500 26.7 89.4 4.3

42 Mataur 4.0 3.0 12 3.3 26.7 8.1 165 1,800 3,000 24.2 89.0 3.7

43 Ramgarh 4.0 5.0 18 3.5 40.5 8.6 175 2,640 4,400 30.6 92.0 5.5

44 Simla 4.0 3.0 15 3.3 26.7 8.1 165 1,800 3,000 20.8 89.0 3.7

45 Bhana 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 13.0 7.0 150 960 1,600 13.5 81.3 2.0

46 Jakhauli 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.4 9.6 6.9 170 780 1,300 10.3 73.8 1.6

47 Mandwal 4.0 4.0 11 3.7 31.3 8.3 185 2,100 3,500 26.7 89.4 4.3

48 Rohera 4.0 4.0 9.0 3.7 31.3 8.5 185 2,100 3,500 26.7 89.4 4.3


123

exceeding 8.5. High concentrations of carbonates and

bicarbonates in groundwater in this part may presumably

be the cause for high pH values.

The observed minimum, maximum and average TDS

was 600, 3,600 and 1,262 mg/l during pre-monsoon and

1,000, 5,520 and 1,360 mg/l during post-monsoon 2007,

respectively. Spatial distribution maps of TDS demon-

strated that 88% area of Kaithal district had groundwater in

permissible class during pre-monsoon (Fig. 4). However,

12% of the total area in the southern parts of the district

was observed to be in non-permissible class with TDS

more than 2,000 mg/l. This may be attributed to water-

logging conditions prevailing in this region due to phys-

iographic depression (Goyal et al. 2006). Furthermore,

TDS concentration showed a uniform decrease throughout

the district after the monsoon period.

The average pre-monsoon TH was found to be

172.5 mg/l with a variation ranging from 150 to 200 mg/l.

In general, the groundwater in the study area was hard

(Fig. 5) and well within desirable range for domestic use.

Minor decrease in TH was observed after the monsoon

period, in line with pH and TDS observations. The lower

Table 1 continued


49 Songri 8.0 4.0 16 3.5 64.5 8.7 175 4,080 6,800 48.8 94.9 8.5

50 Sarhada 4.0 3.0 7.0 3.9 21.1 7.6 195 1,500 2,500 15.1 84.4 3.1

51 Songal 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 13.0 7.0 150 960 1,600 10.6 81.3 2.0

52 Taragarh 4.0 4.0 10 3.7 31.3 8.4 185 2,100 3,500 23.0 89.4 4.3

53 Kheri Raowali 4.0 3.0 9.0 3.5 24.5 7.8 175 1,680 2,800 18.5 87.5 3.5

54 Badnara 2.0 3.0 8.0 3.0 13.0 7.4 150 960 1,600 10.6 81.3 2.0

55 Bakal 2.0 3.0 6.0 3.8 6.2 7.0 190 600 1,000 4.5 62.0 1.2

56 Barsana 2.0 3.0 7.0 3.7 7.3 7.1 185 660 1,100 5.4 66.4 1.3

57 Deeg 2.0 3.0 8.0 3.3 10.7 7.2 165 840 1,400 8.3 76.4 1.7

58 Dhand 2.0 3.0 9.0 3.4 9.6 7.1 170 780 1,300 7.4 73.8 1.6

59 Duliana 2.0 3.0 8.0 3.5 8.5 7.0 175 720 1,200 6.4 70.8 1.5

60 Dosain 2.0 3.0 7.0 3.7 7.3 7.1 185 660 1,100 5.4 66.4 1.3

61 Habri 2.0 3.0 6.0 3.3 10.7 7.2 165 840 1,400 8.3 76.4 1.7

62 Jatheri 2.0 3.0 8.0 3.2 11.8 7.3 160 900 1,500 9.3 78.7 1.8

63 Kaul 2.0 3.0 9.0 3.0 13.0 7.4 150 960 1,600 13.5 81.3 2.0

64 Munarheri 2.0 3.0 6.0 3.5 8.5 7.0 175 720 1,200 6.4 70.8 1.5

65 Pai 2.0 3.0 7.0 3.2 11.8 7.4 160 900 1,500 9.3 78.7 1.8

66 Pabnawa 2.0 3.0 6.0 3.3 10.7 7.2 165 840 1,400 8.3 76.4 1.7

67 Pharal 2.0 3.0 8.0 3.2 11.8 7.4 160 900 1,500 9.3 78.7 1.8

68 Rasina 2.0 3.0 9.0 3.0 13.0 7.4 150 960 1,600 13.5 81.3 2.0

69 Sakra 2.0 4.0 11 3.8 14.2 7.5 190 1,080 1,800 13.6 78.9 2.2

70 Sangal pur 2.0 3.0 8.0 3.0 13.0 7.1 150 960 1,600 10.6 81.3 2.0

71 Bhaini Majra 4.0 3.0 7.0 3.9 21.1 7.6 195 1,500 2,500 15.1 84.4 3.1

72 Batta 4.0 4.0 11 3.7 31.3 8.0 185 2,100 3,500 23.0 89.4 4.3

73 Kurar 4.0 4.0 16 3.9 29.1 8.3 195 1,980 3,300 20.8 88.2 4.1

74 Kichhana 4.0 3.0 12 3.9 21.1 7.6 195 1,500 2,500 18.6 84.4 3.1

75 Kasaan 4.0 4.0 14 3.0 37.0 8.5 150 2,400 4,000 33.7 92.5 5.0

76 Kithana 10 4.0 19 3.8 88.2 9.5 190 5,520 9,200 69.4 95.9 10

77 Nandkaran Majra 4.0 2.0 4.0 3.8 14.2 7.0 190 1,080 1,800 13.6 78.9 2.2

78 Wazir Nagar 4.0 3.0 11 4.0 20.0 8.0 200 1,440 2,400 14.1 83.3 3.0

79 Bhagal 2.0 3.0 8.0 3.8 6.2 7.2 190 600 1,000 4.5 62.0 1.2

Min 2.00 2.0 3.0 3.00 6.2 6.9 150 600 1,000 4.5 62.0 15

Max 10.0 5.0 19 4.00 88.2 9.5 200 5,520 9,200 69.4 95.9 20

Average 2.99 3.3 8.7 3.46 19.2 7.5 172 1,360 2,267 16.0 81.1 172

SD 1.46 0.6 3.7 0.31 13.7 0.5 15.5 827 1,378 11.0 7.5 15.5

Units of ionic concentrations and RSC are in meq/l, EC is in lS/cm, TH and TDS are in mg/l and PS is in %


123

Table 2 Post-monsoon values of quality parameters (Oct 2007)


1 Agondh 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.5 8.5 7.0 175 720 1,200 6.4 70.8 1.5

2 Badsui 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.7 7.3 7.0 185 660 1,100 5.4 66.4 1.3

3 Bhusla 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.2 11.8 7.1 160 900 1,500 9.3 78.7 1.8

4 Chaba 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.9 5.1 7.0 195 540 900 3.7 56.7 1.1

5 Gulha 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.8 6.2 6.9 190 600 1,000 4.5 62.0 1.2

6 Kharkan 2.0 4.0 10 3.8 14.2 7.5 190 1,080 1,800 10.3 78.9 2.2

7 KhushalMajra 2.0 3.0 6.0 3.0 13.0 7.1 150 960 1,600 10.6 81.3 2.0

8 Papsar 2.0 4.0 9.0 3.9 13.1 7.4 195 1,020 1,700 9.4 77.1 2.1

9 Peedal 2.0 4.0 6.0 3.8 14.2 7.4 190 1,080 1,800 10.3 78.9 2.2

10 Rasulpur 2.0 4.0 11 3.9 13.1 7.2 195 1,020 1,700 9.4 77.1 2.1

11 Mehmudpur 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.8 6.2 7.1 190 600 1,000 4.5 62.0 1.2

12 SeoMajra 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.3 10.7 7.0 165 840 1,400 8.3 76.4 1.7

13 Seontha 2.0 3.0 9.0 3.0 13.0 7.0 150 960 1,600 10.6 81.3 2.0

14 Sultania 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.3 10.7 7.1 165 840 1,400 8.3 76.4 1.7

15 Barot 4.0 3.0 2.0 3.9 21.1 7.5 195 1,500 2,500 15.1 84.4 3.1

16 Chandana 2.0 4.0 4.0 3.8 14.2 7.0 190 1,080 1,800 13.6 78.9 2.2

17 Chhot 4.0 4.0 2.0 3.3 34.7 8.5 165 2,280 3,800 30.6 91.3 4.7

18 Dhons 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.3 10.7 6.9 165 840 1,400 11.3 76.4 1.7

19 Dilluwala 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.4 9.6 7.0 170 780 1,300 10.3 73.8 1.6

20 Dhundrehri 6.0 4.0 2.0 3.8 46.2 8.9 190 3,000 5,000 37.7 92.4 6.2

21 Franswala 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.3 26.7 7.5 165 1,800 3,000 24.2 89.0 3.7

22 Jaswanti 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 8.5 7.1 175 720 1,200 6.4 70.8 1.5

23 Kathwar 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.2 11.8 7.0 160 900 1,500 12.3 78.7 1.8

24 Keorak 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.4 9.6 7.1 170 780 1,300 10.3 73.8 1.6

25 Kheri Gulam Ali 2.0 3.0 6.0 3.7 7.3 7.1 185 660 1,100 8.4 66.4 1.3

26 Kultaran 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.7 7.3 7.0 185 660 1,100 5.4 66.4 1.3

27 LadanaBaba 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.8 6.2 6.9 190 600 1,000 4.5 62.0 1.2

28 Manas 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.7 23.3 7.2 185 1,620 2,700 17.1 86.3 3.3

29 Mundri 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.5 8.5 6.9 175 720 1,200 6.4 70.8 1.5

30 Peoda 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.9 21.1 7.1 195 1,500 2,500 15.1 84.4 3.1

31 Sewan 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.2 11.8 7.5 160 900 1,500 12.3 78.7 1.8

32 Ujjana 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.4 9.6 7.0 170 780 1,300 10.3 73.8 1.6

33 Sajuma 4.0 4.0 9.0 3.3 34.7 7.5 165 2,280 3,800 30.6 91.3 4.7

34 Saran 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.9 21.1 8.5 195 1,500 2,500 18.6 84.4 3.1

35 Balu 6.0 4.0 2.0 3.7 47.3 8.9 185 3,060 5,100 38.9 92.7 6.3

36 Dumara 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.3 26.7 8.5 165 1,800 3,000 24.2 89.0 3.7

37 Kamalpur 4.0 5.0 5.0 3.8 38.2 8.6 190 2,520 4,200 31.7 91.0 5.2

38 Kheri SherKhan 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.9 21.1 8.4 195 1,500 2,500 18.6 84.4 3.1

39 Kheri Lamba 4.0 4.0 2.0 3.7 31.3 8.2 185 2,100 3,500 26.7 89.4 4.3

40 Kalasar 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.7 31.3 8.2 185 2,100 3,500 26.7 89.4 4.3

41 Kolekhan 4.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 29.0 8.1 150 1,920 3,200 26.9 90.6 4.0

42 Mataur 4.0 4.0 2.0 3.9 29.1 8.3 195 1,980 3,300 24.6 88.2 4.1

43 Ramgarh 4.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 45.0 9.0 150 2,880 4,800 40.4 93.8 6.0

44 Simla 4.0 3.0 10 3.2 27.8 7.9 160 1,860 3,100 25.3 89.7 3.8

45 Bhana 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.3 2.7 6.7 165 360 600 2.1 45.0 0.7

46 Jakhauli 4.0 3.0 2.0 3.9 21.1 6.9 195 1,500 2,500 15.1 84.4 3.1

47 Mandwal 4.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 21.0 7.2 150 1,440 2,400 17.2 87.5 3.0

48 Rohera 4.0 4.0 2.0 3.9 29.1 7.8 195 1,980 3,300 20.8 88.2 4.1


123

pH, TDS and TH observed during post-monsoon season

may be attributed to groundwater recharge.

Evaluation of groundwater quality for agricultural use

The suitability of groundwater in Kaithal district for agri-

cultural use was ascertained by comparing the physico-

chemical parameters like EC, SAR, PS and RSC with

USSL standards. EC of groundwater ranged from 1,000 to

9,200 and 600 to 6,000 lS/cm during the pre- and post-

monsoon seasons, respectively. Moreover, the average

value for EC decreased from 2,267 to 2,104 lS/cm during

the observation period. The water quality based on EC for

agricultural use was observed to be of moderate, doubtful

and unsuitable categories. According to the classification

adopted, 69% area in the northern and eastern parts of the

district had moderate water quality, whereas 27% in the

south and southwest had doubtful and 4% area in the south

had unsuitable levels of salinity (Fig. 6).

The sodium or alkaline hazard for irrigation water is

classified in terms of SAR and it is important for agricul-

ture and human pathology. However, it varies considerably

Table 2 continued


49 Songri 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.2 27.8 7.6 160 1,860 3,100 22.0 89.7 3.8

50 Sarhada 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.4 33.6 7.9 170 2,220 3,700 25.8 90.8 4.6

51 Songal 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 8.5 6.9 175 720 1,200 6.4 70.8 1.5

52 Taragarh 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 13.0 6.9 150 960 1,600 10.6 81.3 2.0

53 Kheri Raowali 2.0 4.0 2.0 3.5 16.5 7.1 175 1,200 2,000 12.5 82.5 2.5

54 Badnara 2.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 6.8 150 480 800 4.1 62.5 1.0

55 Bakal 2.0 4.0 7.0 3.0 21.0 8.0 150 1,440 2,400 17.2 87.5 3.0

56 Barsana 2.0 3.0 6.0 3.2 11.8 7.2 160 900 1,500 9.3 78.7 1.8

57 Deeg 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.4 9.6 7.3 170 780 1,300 7.4 73.8 1.6

58 Dhand 2.0 2.0 4.0 3.3 2.7 6.6 165 360 600 2.1 45.0 0.7

59 Duliana 2.0 2.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 6.8 150 480 800 4.1 62.5 1.0

60 Dosain 2.0 2.0 4.0 3.2 3.8 6.7 160 420 700 3.0 54.3 0.8

61 Habri 2.0 4.0 4.0 3.4 17.6 7.1 170 1,260 2,100 13.5 83.8 2.6

62 Jatheri 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.9 5.1 6.9 195 540 900 3.7 56.7 1.1

63 Kaul 2.0 2.0 6.0 3.0 5.0 6.8 150 480 800 4.1 62.5 1.0

64 Munarheri 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.8 6.2 7.0 190 600 1,000 4.5 62.0 1.2

65 Pai 2.0 3.0 6.0 3.0 13.0 7.2 150 960 1,600 10.6 81.3 2.0

66 Pabnawa 2.0 2.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 6.8 150 480 800 4.1 62.5 1.0

67 Pharal 2.0 3.0 6.0 3.9 5.1 6.9 195 540 900 3.7 56.7 1.1

68 Rasina 2.0 2.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 6.8 150 480 800 4.1 62.5 1.0

69 Sakra 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.3 56.7 6.6 165 3,600 6,000 44.1 94.5 0.7

70 Sangal pur 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.9 21.1 7.1 195 1,500 2,500 15.1 84.4 3.1

71 Bhaini Majra 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.7 23.3 7.6 185 1,620 2,700 17.1 86.3 3.3

72 Batta 4.0 4.0 5.0 3.3 34.7 8.8 165 2,280 3,800 27.0 91.3 4.7

73 Kurar 4.0 4.0 2.0 3.3 26.7 8.4 165 1,800 3,000 20.8 89.0 4.7

74 Kichhana 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.5 16.5 6.9 175 1,200 2,000 15.7 82.5 2.5

75 Kasaan 4.0 4.0 2.0 3.4 33.6 7.5 170 2,220 3,700 29.4 90.8 4.6

76 Kithana 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 24.5 7.1 175 1,680 2,800 21.9 87.5 3.5

77 Nandkaran Majra 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.4 9.6 6.9 170 780 1,300 10.3 73.8 1.6

78 Wazir Nagar 4.0 2.0 5.0 3.0 21.0 8.0 150 1,440 2,400 17.2 87.5 3.0

79 Bhagal 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 8.5 7.5 175 720 1,200 6.4 70.8 1.5

Min 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.7 6.6 150 360 600 2.1 45.0 0.7

Max 6.0 5.0 11 3.9 56.7 9.0 195 3,600 6,000 44.1 94.5 6.3

Average 2.8 3.2 4.3 3.5 17.6 7.4 173 1,262 2,104 14.5 77.8 2.5

SD 1.1 0.7 1.9 0.3 12.0 0.6 16 718 1,197 10.0 12.0 1.4

Units of ionic concentrations and RSC are in meq/l, EC is in lS/cm, TH and TDS are in mg/l and PS is in %


123

due to physiography, geology, hydrology and anthropo-

genic activities. From the analysis of SAR, it was observed

that groundwater in northeastern, central and northern parts

of the district had low-to-medium alkaline hazard, whereas

about 26% area in the southwestern and southern parts

suffered from high to very high alkaline hazard during the

pre- and post-monsoon seasons for the year 2007 (Fig. 7).

The use of such waters in irrigation is harmful for soil and

thereby results in low permeability and poor cultivability in

the district (Todd and Mays 2005).

It is widely agreed that the high percentage of sodium in

irrigation water degrades the soil conditions. In the study

area, PS for groundwater in the pre- and post-monsoon

seasons varied in the range 62–96 and 45–95%, respec-

tively. It was revealed from the analysis that the ground-

water in Kaithal district was of doubtful to bad quality as

the PS ranged between 60 and 80% in 61% of the total area

and was more than 80% in the rest of the area (Fig. 8).

Irrigation water with high PS may cause sodium accumu-

lation and calcium deficiency in the soil leading to a

breakdown of its physical properties. Therefore, good

Fig. 3 Spatial distribution of pH in Kaithal district during 2007

Fig. 4 Spatial distribution of TDS in Kaithal district during 2007

Fig. 5 Spatial distribution of TH in Kaithal district during 2007

Fig. 6 Spatial distribution of EC in Kaithal district during 2007


123

drainage, high leaching and use of organic matter are

required for its management in the area.

The sodium hazard also increases if the water contains a

high concentration of bicarbonate ions. When the soil

solution has a high concentration of carbonates, the for-

mation of calcium and magnesium carbonate precipitates

increases the relative proportion of sodium in water (Eaton

1950). The RSC in the study area ranged from 1.2 to 10.2

and 0.7 to 6.3 meq/l during the pre- and post-monsoon

seasons, respectively. Moreover, an observation of RSC

revealed that in about 65% area of Kaithal district,

groundwater was marginally suitable to doubtful, whereas

in 35% area, it was non-suitable to bad for irrigation

(Fig. 9).

From the results of the spatial distribution of EC, SAR,

SP and RSC, it is summarized that in about two-third parts

of the Kaithal district (north, center and east), the use of

groundwater in agriculture appears to be within safe limits.

However, high PS values observed throughout the district

suggest that intensive agriculture during the green revolu-

tion period has presumably caused the damage to ground-

water quality. Furthermore, it was observed that the

groundwater was not suitable for agricultural use in about

one-third area of the district (south and southwest). Further,

relatively high EC, SAR, SP and RSC values in this part

may be attributed to heavy application of fertilizers and

their subsequent leaching due to poor drainage conditions.

Also, high water table conditions accompanied by capillary

action and evaporation might have caused accumulation of

salts and deterioration in the water quality (Goyal et al.

2006).

Seasonal variation in groundwater quality

All the water quality parameters analyzed in this study

showed a perceptible moderation in the post-monsoon

observations. This dilution may be attributed to replenish-

ment of the groundwater by rainfall during the monsoon

season. Moreover, the relative improvement in the ground-

water quality in Kaithal district in post-monsoon observa-

tions indicated a clean recharge without pollution from

extraneous sources.

Fig. 7 Spatial distribution of SAR in Kaithal district during 2007

Fig. 8 Spatial distribution of PS in Kaithal district during 2007

Fig. 9 Spatial distribution of RSC in Kaithal district during 2007


123

Conclusion

From the study, it is concluded that the groundwater in

Kaithal district is hard, alkaline and saline in nature.

Therefore, in the major part of the district, the groundwater

has low public acceptability for domestic use as compared

to canal-based water supply. However, no health-based

concerns were perceived in groundwater use for drinking

and other domestic purposes. For irrigation, groundwater in

67% area of the district was of permissible to good quality

and was found to be suitable in the northern, eastern and

central parts. Relatively high EC, SAR, SP and RSC values

in the remaining parts seem to be the result of heavy

application of fertilizers and their subsequent leaching

under poor drainage conditions. Strict regulations are

needed to be implemented to reduce the risk of ground-

water contamination by fertilizers and pesticides. Further, a

moderation effect was observed in the quality of the

groundwater during the monsoon season. The observed

dilution in quality is attributed to the recharge by rainfall in

the study area. Moreover, GIS was found to be an effective

and efficient tool in handling problems pertaining to vari-

ous quality parameters in their spatial extent. Finally,

spatial distribution maps generated through this investiga-

tion for various quality parameters will be helpful for

planners and policy makers in suggesting remedial mea-

sures in a holistic way for sustainable water management in

the study area.

Acknowledgments The authors are thankful to The Groundwater

Cell, Government of Haryana for providing necessary data on

groundwater quality. The training in GIS applications imparted by the

Indian Institute of Remote Sensing, Dehradun, India, is also gratefully

acknowledged. The first author also thanks the University Grants

Commission, New Delhi, India for the grant of teacher fellowship to

undertake the study.

References

Alcamo J, Florke M, Marker M (2007) Future long-term changes in

global water resources driven by socio-economic and climatic

changes. Hydrol Sci J 52(2):247–275

Appelo CAJ, Postma D (1996) Geochemistry, groundwater and

pollution. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, 1212 p

Ayers RS, Westcot DW (1994) Water quality for agriculture. FAO

Irrigation and Drainage Paper 29, Rev. 1, pp 1–130

BIS (1998) Characteristics for Drinking Water, IS, 10500, New Delhi

Chaudhary BS, Kumar M, Roy AK, Ruhal DS (1996) Applications of

RS and GIS in groundwater investigations in Sohna block,

Gurgaon district, Haryana, India. International Archives of

Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 31, B-6, Vienna, Austria.

pp 18–23

Datta SP, Biswas DR, Saharan N, Ghosh SK, Rattan RK (2000) Effect

of long-term application of sewage effluents on organic carbon,

bio-available phosphorus, potassium and heavy metals status of

soils and uptake of heavy metals by crops. J Indian Soc Soil Sci

48:836–839

Eaton FM (1950) Significance of carbonates in irrigation water. Soil

Sci 69:123–133

Goyal SK, Sethi GK, Chaudhary BS (2006) Integrated groundwater

studies in Kaithal district of Haryana, using remote sensing and

GIS. Proceedings of National Conference on Environmental

Conservation. Sept 1–3, Pilani, India, pp 745-751

Heath RC (1998) Basic ground-water hydrology, USGS water-supply

paper 2220, Denver, CO, 1998

Jain CK, Sharma MK (2000) Regression analysis of groundwater

quality of Sagar district, Madhya Pradesh. Indian J Environ

Health 42(4):159–168

Kovar K, Krasney J (eds) (1995) Groundwater quality: remediation

and protection. IAHS Publ. 225, pp 257-261

Lloyd JW, Heathcote JA (1985) Natural inorganic hydrochemistry in

relation to groundwater—an introduction. Clarendon Press,

Oxford, p 296

Marechal JC, Dewandel B, Ahmed S, Galeazzi L, Zaidi FK (2006)

Combined estimation of specific yield and natural recharge in a

semi-arid groundwater basin with irrigated agriculture. J Hydrol

329:281–293

Nash H, McCall GJH (eds) (1995) Groundwater quality. In: 17th

Special Report. Chapman and Hall, London

Palaniswami C, Ramulu US (1994) Effects of continuous irrigation

with paper factory effluent on soil properties. J Indian Soc Soil

Sci 42:139–140

Patel KP, Pandya RR, Maliwal GL, Patel KC, Ramani VP, George V

(2004) Heavy metal content of different effluents and their

relative availability in soils irrigated with effluent waters around

major industrial cities of Gujarat. J Indian Soc Soil Sci 52:89–94

Richards LA (ed) (1954). Diagnosis and improvement of saline and

alkali soils, USDA Handbook no. 60, Washington, 160 pp

Statistical abstract (2009). State statistical abstract, Haryana (2007–

08), Govt. of Haryana Publication no. 910, Chandigarh, India

Todd DK, Mays LW (2005) Groundwater Hydrology, 3rd edn. Wiley,

New York, pp 329–358

Wilcox LV (1955) Classification and use of irrigation waters, USDA

Circular No. 969, pp 19


123

GIS based spatial distribution mapping and suitability evaluation of groundwater quality for...

Documents

Transcript of GIS based spatial distribution mapping and suitability evaluation of groundwater quality for...