J. Mountain Res.

P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011

Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

Assessment of Landslides Susceptibility in Giri Watershed, Northwest Himalaya, Himachal

Pradesh, India

Raghuveer Negi1* • Saraswati Prakash Sati2 • Deepak Kumar1 • Sanjay Singh Rana1
1
Department of Geology, DBS (PG) College Dehradun (Uttarakhand)
2
Department of Basic and Social Sciences, College of Forestry, Ranichouri, Tehri Garhwal, Garhwal U.K.
(VCSGUUHF Bharsar, Pauri Garhwal)
3
Department of geology, School of Earth Science, HNB Garhwal (Central) University, Srinagar (Garhwal)
Uttarakhand

*Corresponding author mail: [email protected]

Received: 15.02.2021; Revised: 03.05.2021; Accepted: 12.05.2021

©Society for Himalayan Action Research and Development

Abstract: The slope instability in the Himalayan terrain is a common phenomenon which is caused by a
combination of the ongoing seismicity and climate variability (extreme weather evets). In addition to this, in the last
few decades, the anthropogenic intervention in the form of various developmental activity (roads, hydropower
projects, expansion of urban sectors etc.) have posed serious threat to slope stability. In this study we have evaluated
the terrain status for landslide susceptibility in a monsoon fed Giri Watershed. An attempted has been made to
decouple various causative factors of landslides susceptibility of the region using remote sensing and GIS
techniques. Employing the Frequency ratio and the information value methods, the study observe that increasing
incidences of landslides occur along the drainage in the lower valley sides, along the linear developmental activities
and settlement areas. Further the study observed a broad correlation between rock formation, lineaments, vegetation
types, and slope steepness.

Keywords: Landslides susceptibility • Frequency ratio methods • Information value methods • Remote sensing •
Giri Watershed • Northwest Himalaya

Introduction

Himalayan eco-system is known for its inherent vulnerability, the human intervention particularly,
vulnerability that is attributed to its evolutionary changes in the land use land cover pattern over the
history. Continental-continental collision caused last couple of decades have aggravated the already
by northward drifting Indian plate gave rise to this over pressurized eco-system. One of the major
youngest and loftiest mountain chain (Dewey and threats to the Himalayan ecosystem and its
Bird 1970; Dewey and Burke 1973). Compression inhabitants are the landslides which every year
is still going on and accumulated stress is impact the various infrastructures. Although the
occasionally released in the form of earthquake whole Himalayan ranges are prone to landslides,
shocks (Yin 2006; DeMets et. al.1994; Singh et however, situation become worse in the
al. 2002).). Innumerable earthquake visits the watersheds that are located in the vicinity of major
Himalaya which made the terrain highly boundary thrusts. Landslide involves downward
vulnerable and superimposed on the natural and outward movements of slope-forming

©SHARAD 45 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

materials due to gravitational force by a variety of have been initiated in the recent times (Sundriyal
motions like falling, sliding, flowing and any et.al., 2015; Kundu et al., 2017; Kumar et al.,
combination of the above (Cruden and Varnes, 2017; Sah et al., 2018; Sharma and Mahajan
1996). Enormous researches on the slope stability 2018). The preset study is in continuation of such
in precarious Himalayan terrain have been efforts to assess the slope sensitivity and the
undertaken (e.g. Sati et al., 1998; Sarkar and causes of slope instability in the Giri Watershed
Kanungo, 2004; Sati et.al., 2011; Devkota et al., (GW) which is considered to be one of the most
2013; Kanungo and Sharma, 2014; Sundriyal landslide prone watershed in the region. The
et.al., 2015; Kundu et al., 2017; Kumar et al., objective is to determine the Landslides
2017; Sah et al., 2018). The consequences of Susceptibility (LS) of the GW in order to map the
landslides became much hazardous if they occur landslide-prone areas along with suggesting some
along the roads or across the lower order streams preventive measures.
because they not only disrupt the much-required
connectivity (if roads are involved), but impound Study area
the streams causing temporary blockades.
Breaching of such blockades gives rise to high The Giri River is one of the major tributaries of
magnitude flash floods also called as the Yamuna River which originates at Kupper near
Landslide induced Lake outburst floods (LLOFs) Shimla. It has a watershed area of 2625 km²
(Rana et al., 2007). Over the last couple of covering Shimla and Sirmour districts. Along its
decades, incidences of cloudburst leading to flash course the river is joined by multiple tributaries
floods and landslides are showing an increasing such as Jalal River, Aasan River, Baseri River,
trend. Himachal Pradesh endowed with rich Choti Nadi before the Giri river meet the Yamuna
biodiversity and sustain one of the highly river near Ponta Sahib (Fig.1). The Giri River
profitable tourism industries but also highly supports irrigation for the farming in the region
evolved horticulture in the country particularly and there is a proposal for the Renuka hydropower
grown on the precariously stabilized slopes on the project. The GW lies between latitudes
lesser and Higher Himalaya. Aided to this is the 30°26'29"N to 31°15'9"N and longitudes
growing pressure of human settlements which is 77°22'35"N to 30°43'49" N (Fig.1). Elevation
impacting the natural resource base thus adversely ranges from 404m to 3620 m. The major of
augmenting the terrain sustainability. Further, aspects of the slopes ranging from south to
seismic activity although varies spatially, southwest thus receives adequate insolation
however, after 1905 Kangra earthquake, the during day and hence fairly vegetated. Due to the
terrain has not witnessed a major earthquake topographic variability the climate ranges from
which is impending implying that the region lies subtropical in the valleys and becomes temperate
in the seismic Gap (Khattri and Tyagi 1983). in the higher reaches. The Average annual rainfall
However, numerous tremors of less to moderate based on 37 years Indian Metrological Station
magnitude are observed every year in the region, data during 1980-2017 spread over the GW is
showing that the area is seismically active (Paul et 1040 mm out of which around 80% occur during
al. 2019). In view of this, it is pertinent to assess Indian Summer Monsoon (June to September).
the terrain vulnerability for the safety and security The lithology of GW (Fig 2) comprises rocks
of the local inhabitants particularly the threat belonging to Siwalik (Outer Himalaya), Lesser
posed by the growing incidences of landslides in Himalayan metasedimentary and higher
the Himalayan region for which many studies Himalayan Crystalline. These are separated by the

©SHARAD 46 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

Main Boundary Thrust (MBT) and Main Central Himalayan sequence in GW is made up of
Thrust (MCT). Besides this, the subisidiary Jutogh conglomerate, Shales, Limestoneand
Thrust (JT) and Chail Thrust (CT) traverses Dolomite(Srikantia and Sharma 1971; Auden,
through (right about the rocks). The outer 1934;Saklani 1971; Jain 1971; Thakur 1992). The
Himalayan lithology is dominated by Subathu Higher Himalayan Crystalline rocks includes
sand stone shaleand limestone (Mathur 1980) gneisses, phyllite, limestone, metavolcanics,
while Siwalik group rocks are dominated by quartzite and granite (Thakur 1992).
sandstones and clays (Thakur 1992).The lesser

Fig 1 Fig 2
Fig 1: The map showing the Giri Watersheds along with major settlements. (Inset are the location of the
Study area with respect to India and Himanchal Pradesh.

Fig 2: Broadly geological and major structural details of the Giri Watershed. Note that the watershed
encompasses rocks of Higher Himalayan Crystalline in the north and the Siwalik sedimentary succession
in the south (modified after Thakur and Rawat 1992).

Database and Methodology database is created in raster format of 15×15 m

We used satellite remote sensing data to cell size of all conditioning factors using ArcGIS
demarcate the watershed boundaries. In order to 10.3 tool. The slope, aspects (Fig 3), curvature,
asses and evaluate the susceptibility of the region, elevations (Fig 4), and drainage (Fig 7) maps are
ten major factors which influence the slope prepared using from SRTM (Shuttle Radar
instability, viz, geology, land cover, slope, aspect, Topography Mission) DEM (Digital Elevation
curvature, elevations, proximity to lineaments, Model) of 30 m resolution. The drainages was
proximity to Thrust, proximity to road, and further referenced with the survey of India (SOI)
proximity to drainage (Fig 4) were analyzed. The toposheet numbering 53E/4,7,8,11,12, and

©SHARAD 47 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

53F/1,2,5,6,7,9,10,11 with 1:50,000 scale and on Image, a total of 710 major landslides were
Google earth. Landcover map (Fig 5) was marked with the help of centinel-2 and in Google
prepared from centinal-2 image of 10m resolution. Earth, while after field validations of landslides
The lithology and structural maps (Fig 2) are 642 landslides were finally left since during
prepared from published data (Thakur and fieldwork it was observed that many dumping
Rawat1992). Lineaments Map (Fig 8) has been zones were also marked as landslides which after
prepared from centinel-2 image and Google Earth fieldwork have been removed from final inventory
Image. The road and landslides have been map of landslides (Fig 6).
digitized from SOI toposheet and Google Earth

Fig 3: Map of causative factor (A) Curvature, (B) Elevations,

©SHARAD 48 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

Fig 4: Causative factor map (A) Aspect, (B) Slope map

Fig 5 Fig 6
Fig 5: LULC map of GW prepared using Centinal-2 satellite image
Fig 6: Landslide inventory Map prepared using Centinal- 2 satellite image and Google earth.

©SHARAD 49 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

Fig 7 Fig 8
Fig 7: drainage buffer map of GW used as causative factor for LS mapping
Fig 8: Lineament map of GW prepared from Centinal-2 imageries
was converted into a raster of 15×15 meter size
Landslide inventory which has converted the training dataset of
Landslide inventory map (Fig6) is prepared using landslides into a total of 10745 pixels. Landslides
10 m resolution Centinal-2 image aided with have covered a total area of 2.934746km². During
Google Earth, followed by field validation. Total the field visit, it was observed that maximum
642 landslides were considered and digitized landslide was found in lower GW of larger size
which have been divided into two datasets as 449 while in upper watershed some small size
landslides in the training dataset (70%) and 193 landslides on moderate to steep slope. Maximum
landslides in the validation dataset (30%) based landslides in GW have been observed proximal to
on random selection. Landslides inventory map the streams and roads.

©SHARAD 50 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

Fig 9 Fig 10
Fig 9: Road buffer map of GW, different buffer zone shown by different color scheme
Fig 10: GW Field photograph showing some of the landslides inblaini-krol units (A1) and (A2) are
the landslides are along Satuan and Renukaji road, (B) Landslides between Rajban and Satuan, (C)
and (C1) landslides near Chandani (near Renukaji).
the premises that “past and present are the best
Landslide Susceptibility Mapping key for future” (Dai and Lee 2001; Shano et.al.
There are quantitative, semi-quantitative and 2020). In the present study we used BSA which is
qualitative methods used for LS mapping. based on inductive logic that suggests that “if the
Quantitative approach includes the Statistical, situation in all observed cases than the situation
Determination, Probability and Artificial holds in all the cases” (Shano et.al. 2020). There
intelligence approaches. Statistical approach are many those have applied the probabilistic
includes the Bivariate Statistical and Multivariate model approach in a different part of the world
Statistical approach. Bivariate Statistical approach (Lee et al. 2004; Pradhan and Lee 2010; Yalcin et
(BSA) includes three methods (Frequency ratio, al. 2011; Mohammady et al. 2012; Sharma and
Information value and weight of evidence), BSA Mahajan 2018; Samanta et.al. 2018; Silalahi
rest on analytical logic, this approach is based on et.al.2019).

©SHARAD 51 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

Fig 11: landslides susceptibility map prepared by (A) FR method, and (B) IeV method for GW.

The LS maps are prepared using Frequency Ratio (1)

and Information value methods. The LS maps thus
Where Slide ratio =
generated were validated using under area curve
(AUC), in AUC the success rate curve (SRC) and (2)
prediction rate curve (PRC) for both the methods
were perform to see the consistency of the LS Class ratio = (3)
maps obtained (Fig 12). LSIFR = F1+F2+F3+…………Fn(4)
Frequency Ratio (FR) Where F1, F2.............F nare the causative factor
FR is the correlation between landslides map which were reclassified according to their
occurrence and the causative factor employed in respective FR values. FR value less than 1
the analysis (Lee and Talib 2005; Ramesh and indicates the lower correlation with that causative
Anbazhagan 2015; Balamurgan et.al. 2016). FR factor and value greater than 1 indicate the high
can be enumerate using equation (1) and correlation with that class.
calculation of LSI (Landslide Susceptibility
Index) by equation (4).

©SHARAD 52 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

Fig 12: AUC for FR and IeV methods showing SRC (blue line) and PRC (red line) revealing
interpretation for fitness of the LS methods, (A) for FR method, and (B) for IeV

Information Value (IeV) Where Mi/M is the ratio of landslides pixel per
The method ascertains the landslides potential class to the total landslides pixel and Ni/N is the
area (Yin and Yan1988; Van Westen 1993). The ratio of pixel of causative factor class to the total
method employs calculation of landslides pixel pixel of causative factor. The X in the equation (6)
and causative factor (Sharma and Mahajan 2018). is reclassified causative factor map according to
The negative value of IeV represent the low and their IeVvalue.
negative correlations of causative factor and
positive value represents the strong and positive Results and discussion
correlation (Van westen et. al. 1997; Shano et. al.
2020). IeV is calculated using equation (5) and Application of frequency FR
landslide susceptibility index (LSI) through The final susceptibility maps (Fig11) are prepared
equation (6). in ArcGIS 10.3 using equation (1) and (4). The
IeV=ƩLog [ ](5) map is dived into five classes of susceptibility (i)
very high, (ii) high, (iii) moderate, (iv) low and
LSIIeV = X1+X2+X3+………….Xn (6) (v) very low. Higher value of FR indicates the

©SHARAD 53 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

strong association of landslides to the causative landslides in comparison to the other classes of
factor class, the calculation of FR method is given land use (table 1). Similarly slopes proximal to
in the table 1. It has been observed that the highest major and minor structures (thrusts and
FR value is associated with Road buffer (~ 50 m lineaments) T shows high FR value with in the
from the road) (Table 1) and is inversely 200 m buffer (Table 1).Thus, based on FR
proportional to the increase in buffer beyond 50 m methods, 7.75% area lies in very high LS zone,
(Fig 9). Road in Himalayan terrain are considered 12.65% area in the high, 23% in moderate, 29% in
as one of the important causative factors in the low, and 27.5 % area in the very low class of
triggering slope instability if care is not taken for susceptibility zone (Fig 11).
the inherent fragile geology, unstable alluvium Application of information value (IeV)
and nature and type of vegetation cover (Fig 10). methods
Further, we observed that the lower valleys (400 The IeV methods have been applied for the
to 1080 m) showed a significant correlation with selected ten causative factors for analysis and
the landslides FR value (Table 1) implying that evaluation of LS map for the GW using equation
the slopes below 1080 m are more susceptible to (5) and (6). All the used causative factors and
slope destabilization. Similarly, compared to the their IeV value are listed in the table 1 and the
tributary valleys, the trunk valley (Giri river) susceptibility map is shown in the Fig 11. Around
shows high correlation with landslides frequency 47% of landslides pixels are found in the Blaini-
(Table 1). Lithology exerts first order control due Krol unit having IeV as 0.5 showing strong
to spatial variability in the lithology which in turn correlation with landslides. The Subathu, Tal, and
influence the slope stability due to different Nagthat units have 0.60, 0.7, and 0.1 IeV
strength parameter and density of discontinuity respectively showing a good association with
which leads to the different degree of landslides. Chail, Jutogh, Simla, Chor Granite,
susceptibility to landslides. The geological and Chandpur units have relatively negative
formation associated with the Tal, Subathu, correlation with the landslides, (table 1).
Blaini-Krol, and Nagthat units show higher According to the slope classes division, the
correlation to the landslide frequency (FR value as 45°−60° (0.16) and 60°−75° (0.6) class shows
4.56, 3.95, 3.28, and 1.24; Table 1). There seems high correlation in comparison to other classes of
to be a good correlation between the degree of slope. Slope aspect classes i.e South, Southwest,
slope and frequency of landslides. It has been and West indicate higher correlation showing IeV
observed that the slopes of 45°−60° has low FR 0.17, 0.23, and 0.06 respectively. While other
value (1.44) whereas as it increases to 3.77 on classes of slope directions indicate comparatively
60°−75°.Similarly, the slope aspect also seems to lower association with landslides in the GW (table
have some influence on the LS as a good 1). Concave class (52% of landslides pixel) of
correlation is observed on slopes trending South, curvature thematic layer indicate strong
Southwest and West (FR value 1.48, 1.70 and 1.5; correlation with landslides in comparison to flat
Table 1). Curvature profile shows higher (3% pixel of landslides) and convex (46% of
correlation with the negative curvature value i.e landslides pixel falls in this class) classes
concave curvature have significant correlation according to IeV (table 1). Elevation class 404 m-
with landslides (FR value 1.09). Land use 1088 m (0.7 IeV and 62% of landslides pixel falls
practices and their impact on landslides in the in this class) class indicate higher value of IeV
settlement, agriculture, fellow land, river and and good association with landslides in
scrubs class have higher correlation with the differentiation of other elevation classes. The

©SHARAD 54 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

impact of LULC classes show strong correlation buffer zone shows strong correlations with all
with the agriculture, settlements, fallow land, river classes except the above 300m buffer zone the
and scrubs while as expected a weak correlation is IeV (Table 1). The drainage network of GW has
observed with dense forest (table 1). Similar to strong correlation with the buffer zone of the
FR, a strong association of landslides within above 150m showing IeV of 0.35. The final LS
buffer of 50 m (0.78) which decrease as the map (Fig 11) obtained through the IeV method
distance of road buffer increases (e.g., 100 m; reveals 31% area in very low zone, 31% area in
0.60, 200 m; 0.4, and 300 m; 0.30). Whereas low zone, 20% area in moderate zone, 9% area in
above 300 m it is negative (-0.06). The lineaments high zone, and 9 % area in very high zone of LS.

Table 1: Showing results obtained from FR and IeV methods

Causative factors No. of No of class Slide Class FR IeV
landslides pixel Ratio Ratio
pixel
Geology
Central 1646 4046374 0.16 0.35 0.45 -0.35
Crystalline(Undifferentiated
Jutogh)
Chail, Bhatwari 1208 2033267 0.11 0.17 0.65 -0.18
Simla/Chakarata/Damta 1170 1913370 0.11 0.16 0.67 -0.17
Biotite-Muscovite-Granite 159 457668 0.02 0.04 0.38 -0.42
Chandpur 308 742495 0.03 0.06 0.46 -0.34
Subathu 24 6685 0.00 0.00 3.95 0.60
Tal 594 143499 0.06 0.01 4.56 0.66
Blaini-Krol 4963 1663287 0.47 0.14 3.28 0.52
Nagthat 673 597794 0.06 0.05 1.24 0.09
Siwalik 0 54553 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Quaternary sediments 0 5784 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Slope
0°-15° 216 1480071 0.02 0.13 0.16 -0.79
15°-30° 1194 3021017 0.11 0.26 0.43 -0.36
30°-45° 2122 3410391 0.20 0.29 0.68 -0.16
45°-60° 3508 2672167 0.33 0.23 1.44 0.16
60°-75° 3705 1081130 0.35 0.09 3.77 0.58
Aspect
Flate 0 2259 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
North 1000 1440461 0.09 0.12 0.76 -0.12
Northeast 772 1460224 0.07 0.13 0.58 -0.24
East 770 1371187 0.07 0.12 0.62 -0.21
Southeast 1113 1363498 0.11 0.12 0.90 -0.05
South 2150 1601673 0.20 0.14 1.48 0.17
Southwest 2712 1751886 0.26 0.15 1.70 0.23
West 1501 1441428 0.14 0.12 1.15 0.06

©SHARAD 55 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

Northwest 727 1232160 0.07 0.11 0.65 -0.19

Curvature
Concave 5549 5597439 0.52 0.48 1.09 0.04
Flat 283 461516 0.03 0.04 0.67 -0.17
Convex 4913 5605821 0.46 0.48 0.96 -0.02
Elevation
404-1088 6597 1470043 0.62 0.13 4.94 0.69
1088-1523 2174 3362018 0.21 0.29 0.71 -0.15
1523-1943 1725 3231439 0.16 0.28 0.59 -0.23
1943-2421 191 2390231 0.02 0.20 0.09 -1.06
2421-3623 58 1211045 0.01 0.10 0.05 -1.28
LULC
Agriculture 5739 5301747 0.54 0.45 1.19 0.08
Settlements 691 213697 0.07 0.02 3.56 0.55
Dence Forest 978 2793872 0.09 0.24 0.39 -0.41
Fallow Land 1380 1283491 0.13 0.11 1.18 0.07
Open Forest 1024 1737371 0.10 0.15 0.65 -0.19
River 633 159895 0.06 0.01 4.36 0.64
Scrubs 300 173607 0.03 0.01 1.90 0.28
Lakes 0 1096 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Distance to Road
50 717 130527 0.07 0.01 6.05 0.78
100 439 121658 0.04 0.01 3.97 0.60
200 567 242070 0.05 0.02 2.58 0.41
300 425 234018 0.04 0.02 2.00 0.30
above 300 8597 10936503 0.81 0.94 0.87 -0.06
Distance to Thrust
100 163 217391 0.02 0.02 0.83 -0.08
200 210 218060 0.02 0.02 1.06 0.03
350 126 326456 0.01 0.03 0.42 -0.37
500 130 326024 0.01 0.03 0.44 -0.36
above 500 10116 10576845 0.95 0.91 1.05 0.02
Distance to Lineament
100 811 746988 0.08 0.06 1.19 0.08
200 763 797989 0.07 0.07 1.05 0.02
300 945 819942 0.09 0.07 1.27 0.10
above 300 8226 9299857 0.78 0.80 0.97 -0.01
Distance to Drainage
50 2005 4470176 0.19 0.38 0.49 -0.31
100 2388 2729385 0.23 0.23 0.96 -0.02
150 2189 2433651 0.21 0.21 0.99 0.00
above 150 4163 2031564 0.39 0.17 2.26 0.35

©SHARAD 56 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

Validation being continuously modified due to mining

For validation we have used the PRC and SRC. activity which is impacting the slope instability by
The SRC is the reckoning of accomplishments of activating the angle of repose.
a method that reveals the how well methods 3) The study demonstrates that FR along
matches with the events (Silalahi et.al. 2019). To with Ive can be used in association with the
get the SRC the cumulative percentage of satellite remote sensing data in ArcGIS platform
landslides (training data set) and LSI are plotted can help in identifying the potential area of
(Fig 12). PRC is reckoning of prediction instability. This will help in managing and
assessment that reveals how well methods have mitigating the terrain instability in the
predict the future potential area for landslides geologically fragile watersheds.
(Mezughi et.al. 2011; Silalahi et.al. 2019).Figure
Acknowledgements
7 show the PRC obtained by plotting cumulative
percentage of landslides (validation data set) and The authors wish to acknowledge Gambhir Singh
Chauhan and Ashish Rawat, Department of
cumulative percentage of LSI.From the validation
Geology, School of Earth Sciences, HNB Garhwal
AUC value obtained for FR Methods the PRC and University Srinagar Garhwal for their help in
SRC are 84% and 86% respectively, while for IeV preparing this manuscript. Authors are also
methods AUC value for PRC is 87% and for SRC thankful to blind reviewers for their suggestions
is 87%. Obtained AUC value for both the methods and comments to improve the articles.
are good and reasonable revealing a good results
of LS mapping (Fig 12). References

Conclusion Auden, J.B., 1934. The geology of the Krol

belt. Rec. Geol. Surv. India, 67(4),:.357-454.
The selection of causative factors for LS mapping Balamurugan, G., Ramesh, V. and Touthang, M.,
in Himalayan region is a challenge due to its 2016. Landslide susceptibility zonation
complexity, rugged topography and extremely mapping using frequency ratio and fuzzy
variable environmental setting. In light of these gamma operator models in part of NH-39,
complexity, the satellite remote sensing data Manipur, India. Nat. Haza., 84(1), :465-488.
supported by the empirical relationship allowed us Burke, K. and Dewey, J.F., 1973. Plume-
to ascertain the terrain susceptibility towards the generated triple junctions: key indicators in
slope instability (landslides). Based on the ten applying plate tectonics to old rocks. The J.
important factors (discussed above) following Geol, 81(4), :406-433.
major inferences can be made. Cruden, D.M. and Varnes, D.J., 1996. Landslides:
1) The LS has been found to be maximum in investigation and mitigation.
the proximity of the road buffer zone of 50 m and Dai, F.C., Lee, C.F., Li, J.X.Z.W. and Xu, Z.W.,
100 m and proximity of the slopes to the river 2001. Assessment of landslide susceptibility
bed. on the natural terrain of Lantau Island, Hong
2) Lower elevation, rocks of Tal, Blani and Kong. Env. Geol, 40(3), :381-391.
Subathu found to be susceptible to landslide due DeMets, C., Gordon, R.G., Argus, D.F. and Stein,
to the dominance of fine grains (clay and silt). In S., 1994. Effect of recent revisions to the
addition to this, the valley floor along the GW is geomagnetic reversal time scale on estimates
of current plate motions. Geophy. Res
Lettere, 21(20), :2191-2194.

©SHARAD 57 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

Devkota, K.C., Regmi, A.D., Pourghasemi, H.R., Mathur, N.S., 1980. Biostratigraphical aspects of
Yoshida, K., Pradhan, B., Ryu, I.C., Dhital, the Subathu Formation, Kumaun Himalaya.
M.R. and Althuwaynee, O.F., 2013. Mezughi, T.H., Juhari, M.A., Abdul, G.R. and
Landslide susceptibility mapping using Ibrahim, A., 2011. Landslide susceptibility
certainty factor, index of entropy and logistic assessment using frequency ratio model
regression models in GIS and their applied to an area along the EW highway
comparison at Mugling–Narayanghat road (Gerik-Jeli). American J. Env. Sci., 7(1), :43-
section in Nepal Him, Nat. Hazard, 65(1), 50.
:135-165. Mohammady, M., Pourghasemi, H.R. and
Dewey, J.F. and Bird, J.M., 1970. Mountain belts Pradhan, B., 2012. Landslide susceptibility
and the new global tectonics. J Geophy. mapping at Golestan Province, Iran: a
Res., 75(14), :2625-2647. comparison between frequency ratio,
Jain, A.K., 1971. Stratigraphy and tectonics of Dempster–Shafer, and weights-of-evidence
lesser Himalayan region of Uttarkashi, models. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 61,
Garhwal Himalaya. Him. Geo. 1, :25-58. :221-236.
Kanungo, D.P. and Sharma, S., 2014. Rainfall Paul, A., Tiwari, A. and Upadhyay, R., 2019.
thresholds for prediction of shallow Central Seismic Gap and Probable zone of
landslides around Chamoli-Joshimath region, large earthquake in North West
Garhwal Himalayas, India. Landslides, 11(4), Himalaya. Him. Geo., 40(2), :199-212.
:629-638. Pradhan, B. and Lee, S., 2010. Landslide
Khattri, K.M. and Tyagi, A.K., 1983. Seismicity susceptibility assessment and factor effect
patterns in the Himalayan plate boundary and analysis: backpropagation artificial neural
identification of the areas of high seismic networks and their comparison with
potential. Tectono., 96(3-4), :281-297. frequency ratio and bivariate logistic
Kumar, D., Thakur, M., Dubey, C.S. and Shukla, regression modelling. Env. Mod.
D.P., 2017. Landslide susceptibility mapping Softw., 25(6), :747-759.
& prediction using support vector machine Ramesh, V. and Anbazhagan, S., 2015. Landslide
for Mandakini River Basin, Garhwal susceptibility mapping along Kolli hills Ghat
Himalaya, India. Geomor. 295, :115-125. road section (India) using frequency ratio,
Kundu, J., Sarkar, K., Tripathy, A. and Singh, relative effect and fuzzy logic models. Env.
T.N., 2017. Qualitative stability assessment Earth Sci., 73(12), :8009-8021.
of cut slopes along the National Highway-05 Rana, N., Sati, S.P., Sundriyal, Y.P., Doval, M.M.
around Jhakri area, Himachal Pradesh, and Juyal, N., 2007. Socio-economic and
India. J. Ear. Sys. Sci, 126(8), :1-15. environmental implications of the
Lee, S. and Talib, J.A., 2005. Probabilistic hydroelectric projects in Uttarakhand
landslide susceptibility and factor effect Himalaya, India. J Mountain Sci, 4(4), :344-
analysis. Env. Geo., 47(7), :982-990. 353.
Lee, S., Ryu, J.H., Won, J.S. and Park, H.J., 2004. Sah, N., Kumar, M., Upadhyay, R. and Dutt, S.,
Determination and application of the weights 2018. Hill slope instability of Nainital City,
for landslide susceptibility mapping using an Kumaun Lesser Himalaya, Uttarakhand,
artificial neural network. Eng. Geol, 71(3-4), India. Journal of rock mechanics and
:289-302. geotechnical engineering, 10(2), :280-289.

©SHARAD 58 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org
J. Mountain Res. P-ISSN: 0974-3030, E-ISSN: 2582-5011
Vol. 16(1), (2021), 45-59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v16i1.5

Saklani, P.S., 1971. Structure and tectonics of the Simla Himalaya. Geol. Soc. India, 12(3),
Pratapnagar area, Garhwal Himalaya. Him. :234-240.
Geol, 1, :75-91. Sundriyal, Y.P., Shukla, A.D., Rana, N.,
Samanta, R.K., Bhunia, G.S., Shit, P.K. and Jayangondaperumal, R., Srivastava, P.,
Pourghasemi, H.R., 2018. Flood Chamyal, L.S., Sati, S.P. and Juyal, N., 2015.
susceptibility mapping using geospatial Terrain response to the extreme rainfall event
frequency ratio technique: a case study of of June 2013: Evidence from the Alaknanda
Subarnarekha River Basin, India. Mod. and Mandakini River Valleys, Garhwal
Earth Syst. Env., 4(1), :395-408. Himalaya, India. Episodes, 38(3), :179-188.
Sarkar, S. and Kanungo, D.P., 2004. An integrated Thakur, V.C. and Rawat, B.S., 1992. Geological
approach for landslide susceptibility mapping map of the Western Himalaya. Published
using remote sensing and GIS. Photo. Eng. under the authority of the Surveyor General
Rem. Sens. 70(5), :617-625. of India. Printing Group of Survey of
Sati, S.P., Naithani, A. and Rawat, G.S., 1998. India, 101
Landslides in the Garhwal Lesser Himalaya, Thakur, V.C., 1992. Geology of western
UP, India. Envi., 18(3), :149-155. Himalaya. Phy. Chem. Earth, 19, :1-355.
Sati, S.P., Sundriyal, Y.P., Rana, N. and Dangwal, Van Westen, C.J., (1993). Application of
S., 2011. Recent landslides in Uttarakhand: geographic information systems to landslide
nature's fury or human folly. Curr. Sci. hazard zonation. Ph.D. Thesis (90-6164-078-
(Bangalore), 100(11), :1617-1620. 4).http://www.itc.nl/library/Papers_1993/
Shano, L., Raghuvanshi, T.K. and Meten, M., phd/vanwesten.pdf
2020. Landslide susceptibility evaluation and Van Westen, C.J., Rengers, N., Terlien, M.T.J.
hazard zonation techniques–a and Soeters, R., 1997. Prediction of the
review. Geoenvi. Disas. 7:1-19. occurrence of slope instability phenomenal
Sharma, S. and Mahajan, A.K., 2018. through GIS-based hazard zonation. Geol.
Comparative evaluation of GIS-based Rundschau, 86(2):404-414.
landslide susceptibility mapping using Yalcin, A., Reis, S., Aydinoglu, A.C. and
statistical and heuristic approach for Yomralioglu, T., 2011. A GIS-based
Dharamshala region of Kangra Valley, comparative study of frequency ratio,
India. Geoenvironmental Disasters, 5(1), p.4. analytical hierarchy process, bivariate
Silalahi, F.E.S., Arifianti, Y. and Hidayat, F., statistics and logistics regression methods for
2019. Landslide susceptibility assessment landslide susceptibility mapping in Trabzon,
using frequency ratio model in Bogor, West NE Turkey. Catena, 85(3), :274-287.
Java, Indonesia. Geosci. Letters, 6(1), :1-17. Yin, A., 2006. Cenozoic tectonic evolution of the
Singh, S.K., Mohanty, W.K., Bansal, B.K. and Himalayan orogen as constrained by along-
Roonwal, G.S., 2002. Ground motion in strike variation of structural geometry,
Delhi from future large/great earthquakes in exhumation history, and foreland
the central seismic gap of the Himalayan sedimentation. Earth-Sci.Revi, 76(1-2):1-31.
arc. Bull. Seis. Scoi Amer., 92(2), :555-569. Yin, K.L. and Yan, T.Z., 1988. Statistical
Srikantia, S.V. and Sharma, R.P., 1971. Simla prediction models for instability of
Group-A Reclassification of the'Chail metamorphosed rocks. In International
Series''Jaunsar Series' and'Simla Slates' in the symposium on landslides. 5 : 1269-1272.
******

©SHARAD 59 http://jmr.sharadpauri.org