JOURNAL OF THE DRYLANDS 3(2): 214-219, 2010

Land Suitability Assessment for Different Irrigation Methods in Korir Watershed,

Northern Ethiopia
Kassa Teka1, 2*, Van Rompaey, A.2 and Poesen, J.2
Kassa Teka, Van Rompaey, A. and Poesen, J. 2010. Land Suitability Assessment for Different Irrigation Methods in
Korir Watershed, Northern Ethiopia. Journal of the Drylands 3(2): 214-219
In much of Korir watershed the surface irrigation system is a common practice applied for maize, vegetables and fruit
trees to meet water needs. There are very few instances of drip irrigation on small farms in the area. The aim of this
research was to evaluate and compare land suitability for surface and drip irrigation methods based on the parametric
evaluation systems. Suitability maps were generated for surface and drip irrigation methods by means of Remote
Sensing Technique and Geographic Information System (GIS). Study results showed that for surface irrigation, there
is no area classified as S1. Only 28.77% and 91.54% of the study area is with in the suitable range for surface and drip
irrigation respectively. The mean capability index for surface irrigation was 45.82 (marginally suitable) while for drip
irrigation 60.6 (moderately suitable). The results indicate that by applying drip irrigation instead of surface irrigation
methods, 62.77% can be improved from N1 to S3 and 6.19% and 22.58% from S3 and S2 respectively to S1. The
comparison of the different types of irrigation revealed that the drip irrigation was more effective and efficient than
the surface irrigation methods.
Key words: Surface, drip, suitability, watershed, irrigation, Korir
1

Department of Land Resources Management and Environmental Protection, Mekelle University,

P.O.Box
231,
Mekelle University
2
Physical and Regional Geography Research Group, K.U.Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 200E, BE-3001, Leuven, Belgium
*
Corresponding author: kassateka@yahoo.com, Tel: +251- 0914726677
Received August 10, 2010, Accepted November 25, 2010.

INTRODUCTION
The environmental situation in Africa, with
deforestation and soil degradation etc., is a very
worrying (Foty, 1993) and irrigated area per capita
is declining and irrigated lands now produce 40%
of the food supply (Hargreaves and Mekley, 1998).
Consequently, the available water resources may
not be able to meet various demands in near future
that will inevitably result in the irrigation of
additional lands in order to achieve a sustainable
global food security. To develop sustainable use;
one has to know the limitations and potentials of
the land. The best uses for land depend on soil
characteristics and their response to the use such as
texture, rooting depth, stoniness, rockiness, organic
matter content, nutrient status, structures, drainage
conditions, slope, etc.
Sys et al. (1991) suggested a parametric
evaluation system for irrigation methods which was
primarily based upon physical and chemical soil
properties. These factors influence the land
suitability in an irrigation practice including soil
properties and topography. Hired et al. (1996);
Bond (2002) and Briza et al. (2001) applied a
parametric system (Sys et al., 1991) to evaluate
land suitability for both surface1 and drip2 irrigation

in Morocco, while no highly suitable areas were

found in the studied area. The largest part of the
agricultural areas was classified as marginally
suitable. However, a large difference between
applying the two different evaluations was obtained
(Bazzani and Incerti, 2002). The area not suitable
for surface irrigation was 29.22% of total surface
and 9% with the drip irrigation while the suitable
area was 19% versus 70%.
Land suitability evaluation for surface and drip
irrigation conducted (Bienvenue et al. 2003) in
Senegal, using the parametric evaluation system
showed no area classified as highly suitable (S1)
for surface irrigation. Only 20.24% of the study
area proved suitable (S2 7.73%) or slightly suitable
(S3 12.51%). Most of the study area (57.66%) was
classified as unsuitable (N2). For drip (localized)
irrigation, a good portion (45.25%) of the area was
suitable (S2) while 25.03% was classified as highly
suitable (S1) and only a small portion was currently
not suitable (N1, 5.83%) or unsuitable (N2,
5.83%). Mbodj et al. (2004) performed a land
suitability evaluation for two types of irrigation,
(surface irrigation and drip irrigation) in Tunisia
using the suggested parametric evaluation.
According to the results, the drip irrigation
suitability gave more irrigable areas compared to

With drip or trickle irrigation the water is applied into the soil through a
small sized opening directly on the soil surface or buried in the soil. By
applying water at a very slow rate, drip irrigation is capable of delivering
water to the roots of individual plants as often as desired and at a
relatively low cost (Sijali, 2001).
Copyright Journal of the Drylands 2010
ISSN 1817-3322

The surface method of irrigation involves applying water over the soil
surface. The water is conveyed over the soil surface and infiltrates into
the soil at a rate determined by the infiltration capacity of the soil (Sijali,
2001).

214

the surface irrigation practice. Dengize (2006) also

compared different irrigation methods including
surface and drip irrigation in southern Ankara. He
concluded that the drip irrigation method increased
the land suitability by 38% compared to the surface
irrigation method. A research done in Iran (Albaji
et al., 2007) comparing different irrigation methods
based on the parametric evaluation approach
showed that 21.52% of the studied area was highly
suitable for surface irrigation whereas 77.47% of
the study area was highly suitable for drip
irrigation method. A study of land suitability for
irrigation schemes in Eritrea (Tesfai, 2002) showed
that in surface irrigation practice, 16% of the study
area was highly to moderately suitable (S1and S2),
24% was classified as moderately suitable (S2),
17% was marginally suitable (S3) and 40% of the
area was decided as unsuitable (N1) for surface
irrigation. Similar studies in Lali Plain, Irain
(Naseri et al., 2009) showed that by applying
sprinkler and drip irrigation methods instead of
surface irrigation methods, land suitability classes
of 10.8% for the area can be improved.
The main objective of this research was to
evaluate and compare land suitability for surface
and drip irrigation methods based on the parametric
evaluation systems for Korir watershed, Tigray
Province, Ethiopia.
METHODOLGY
The Study Area
The study area, Korir watershed, is located in
Kilte-Awulaelo woreda3, eastern zone4 of Tigray.
The total size of the area is 14.64km2 (1465
hectares) and is located where the grid coordinate
is at 564141E & 1517446N and 568959E &
1519706N. The mean annual rainfall is about 466
mm and the maximum and minimum temperature
range from 23-28C and from 9 14C,
respectively (Wukro National Meteorological
Service Agency Wukro Branch). The area is
classified as Dry Weyna-Degaagro-ecological
zone. The topographic features of the watershed
include mountain, cliff escarpments, hills and plain
(1500 2300 meters above sea level) (SFPT,
2003). The dominant tree species of the area is
Acacia etbica which, account to more than 90%
(SFPT, 2003).
The agricultural area of the watershed is
724.5375ha. Annual crops such as Chickpea,
Barley, Maize, Sorghum, and fruit trees such as
Citrus, Avocado, Guava, Papaya, Olives and
Mango are the most important crops for the
economy and subsistence of the families in the area
since most families earn their livelihoods from the
cultivation of these crops. Livestock farming
constitutes a significant financial reserve for the

majority of the farmers. The animals also take

advantage of the leftovers of crop fields after the
harvest. Part of the watershed is shown below
(Figure 1).

Figure 1. The watershed in part (own photo)

Data Collection and Analysis

Each land unit was delineated through Aerial Photo
Interpretation (API 1994) at 1:50,000 scales,
digitized on screen using ILWIS and Arc view GIS
software and improved with ground truth. The land
unit map was used as a guide in the field survey,
soil sampling and, in turn, developing a more
detailed soil map following a re-interpretation of
field observation and soil analysis. The main focus
of the study was on existing cultivated lands. The
land evaluation was determined based upon
topography and soil characteristics. The
topography characteristics included slope while soil
properties included soil texture, depth, salinity,
drainage and carbonate content. Also, soil
properties such as Cation Exchange Capacity
(CEC), organic matter (%OM) and pH were
considered in terms of soil fertility (Sys et al.,
1991). The internal properties of the soil were
described by using profile pits. A soil profile pit
was opened in each land unit, four profile pits in
total, and described using soil description guideline
(FAO, 1990). Soil classification was made based
on FAO (1998). Extent of erosion was observed
from extent of gully cut, exposed rock outcrop,
sedimentation into the river course and existing
vegetation cover. Nine composite soil samples
from demarcated horizons of the four profile pits
were taken for soil physico-chemical analysis of
the following parameters: Soil texture, soil pH,
CaCO3, organic carbon (%), salinity or EC (dSm-1),
cation exchange capacity (CEC), total nitrogen and,
and
available
phosphorous.
These
soil
characteristics were matched with the Interpretation
ratings for soil chemical characteristics (Table 1)
(Hunting 1976).

District level administrative hierarchy containing many Tabias.

A structure consisting of many Woredas largely regarded as a functional
division
4

Copyright Journal of the Drylands 2010

ISSN 1817-3322

215

Table 1. Interpretation ratings for chemical soil characteristics (Hunting, 1976)

Very low
Low
Medium
EC (dS/m)
0-2
2-4
4-8
CEC (cmol(+)/kg
0-3
3-7
7 - 15
Ntot (g/100g)
0 0.1
0.1 0.2
0.2 0.3
Ctot (g/100g)
0 0.6
0.6 1.2
1.2 3.0
pH (H2O)
5-6
6-7
7-8
Moderately acid
Slightly acid
Slightly alkaline
CaCO3 (g/100g)
0 0.5
0.5 2.0
2.0 5.0
Pav (g/100g)
0 0.4
0.4 1.3
1.3 2.6

Suitability Assessment method

To evaluate the land suitability for surface and drip
irrigation, the parametric evaluation system of Sys
et al., (1991) was applied, using the soil
characteristics. For determination the average of
soil texture, salinity and CaCO3 for the upper 150
cm of soil surface, the profile was subdivided into
6 equal sections and weighting factors 2, 1.5, 1,
0.75, 0.5 and 0.25 were used for each section,
respectively (Sys et al., 1991). Six parameters were
considered which are, slope, drainage properties,
electrical conductivity of soil solution, calcium
carbonates status, soil texture and Soil depth. Rates
are assigned to the aforementioned six parameters
as per the related tables, thus, a capability index for
irrigation (Ci) was developed as shown in the
equation below:
Ci = A x

B
C
D
E
F
x
x
x
x
100 100 100 100 100

High
8 - 16
15 - 30
0.3 0.4
3 8.7
8-9
Moderately alkaline
5.0 - 15
2.6 5.3

Very high
> 16
>30
> 0.4
> 8.7
9 - 10
Strongly alkaline
> 15
> 5.3

and calcaric Vertisol (humic), (163.6ha) at the

valley bottom with 3 8% slope. However, major
soils found in the investigated arable land are:
Leptosol at the plateau (LU-4); calcaric Cambisol
(LU-2) at the foot slope; Regosol (LU-3), calcaric
Vertisol (humic) (LU-1) at the valley bottom
(Figure 2).

Fig 2. Soil distribution for Korir watershed

Where Ci = capability index for irrigation; A = soil texture

rating; B = soil depth rating; C = CaCO3 status; D = electroconductivity rating; E = drainage rating; F = slope rating.
Suitability classes are defined considering the value of the
capability index (Table 2).
Table 2 Suitability index for the irrigation
indices (CI) classes (after Sys et al., 1991)
Capability Index Class
Definition
>80
I
Highly suitable
60-80
II
Moderately suitable
45-60
III
Marginally suitable
30-45
IV
Currently not suitable
<30
V
Permanently not
suitable

capability
Symbol
S1
S2
S3
N1
N2

RESULTS
Soil type and Land Mapping Units
In much of the Korir area, the surface irrigation
system has been applied for maize, vegetables and
fruit trees to meet water needs. There are very few
instances of drip irrigation on small farms in Korir
area.
The major soil types found in the study
watershed are Leptosol (107.13ha) and Epileptic
Cambisol (humic) at the plateau ( 227.515ha) with
2 -5% slope; endoleptic Cambisol (171.2ha),
calcaric Leptosol (humic), (27.05ha) and calcaric
Leptosol (128.64ha) at the side slope with 30
50% slope; epi-Leptic Cambisol (calcaric),
(24.92ha) and calcaric Cambisol (474.82ha) at the
foot slope with 8 15% slope; Regosol (44.85ha)
Copyright Journal of the Drylands 2010
ISSN 1817-3322

Fig 3. Land use map of korir area

The soil in LU-1 has a very low EC and Ntotal; low

available phosphorous (Pav); medium total organic
carbon content; high CaCO3; very high CEC with
moderately alkaline pH. Soils in LU-2 has a very
low EC; low Ntotal; medium total organic carbon
content; high Pav and CEC; medium alkaline pH.
Soils in LU-3 has a very low EC and Ntotal; low
CEC and total organic carbon content; high CaCO3
and Pav; slightly acidic pH. However, major soils
in LU-4 has a very low EC, CEC, and Ntotal; low
organic carbon content; high CaCO3 and Pav;
medium pH.
The major land uses of the watershed are
cultivated (49.46%), grassland land (4.83%), bush
land (31.26%), Deg.bushland (10.63%) and Builtup area (3.82%) (Figure 3).
The area is highly degraded. Sheet and rill are
very common in the cultivated land, grazing and
216

bush land while gullies are widely spread on the

sloppy hill side parts of the catchment. Due to
heavy deforestation, expansion of agricultural land,
population pressure, over grazing and lack of
proper land use measures, the vegetation cover is
very low.
Land Suitability Evaluation for Surface
Irrigation
The processing of the parametric evaluation system
for gravity/surface irrigation gave the results that
are represented in Table 3.

is classified as permanently not suitable (N2).

Further, there is no area classified as moderately
suitable (S2) for drip irrigation. In this case, the
handicap is given by the soil calcium carbonate and
bad texture due to a large amount of coarse gravel.
The marginally suitable area can be observed in the
largest part of cultivated area due to light soil
texture, shallow soil depth and moderate slope.
Moreover, the relative clogging potential of water
used in drip irrigation systems for land units 1 and
2 is sever (pH>8.0) and for land units 3 and 4 is
moderate (pH 7.0 8.0) as noted in Sijali (2001).

Table 3: Land Suitability for surface irrigation

Land units
Ci
Suitability class
1
61.75
S2
2
44.5
N1
3
58.21
S3
4
18.8
N2

As shown in Table 3 and Figure 4, for the surface

irrigation, there is no area classified as highly
suitable (S1). Only 22.58% (163.604ha) of the
study area is moderately suitable (S2), 6.19%
(44.85ha) marginally suitable (S3), 62.77%
(454.82ha) currently not suitable (N1) whereas
8.46% (61.27ha) of the study area is classified as
permanently not suitable (N2). The limiting factor
to this kind of use is mainly the limited soil depth
and texture that is mostly sandy, while surface
irrigation requires heavier soils.

Fig 4. Land suitability map for surface irrigation

Land Suitability Evaluation for Drip Irrigation

The processing of the parametric evaluation system
for drip irrigation gave the results that are
represented in Table 4.
Table 4: Land Suitability for drip irrigation
Land units
Ci
Suitability class
1
80.75
S1
2
57.6
S3
3
80.75
S1
4
23.3
N2

For drip irrigation (shown in Table 2 and Figure 5),

62.77% (454.82ha) of the area is marginally
suitable (S3) and 28.77 % (208.45ha) is classified
as highly suitable (S1). 8.46% (61.27ha) of the area
Copyright Journal of the Drylands 2010
ISSN 1817-3322

Figure 5. Land suitability map for drip irrigation

DISCUSSION
The mean capability index (Ci) for surface
irrigation was 45.815 (marginally suitable) while
for drip irrigation 60.6 (moderately suitable). The
comparison of the capability indexes for surface
and drip irrigation (Tables 3 & 4) indicated that in
land unit coded 4, applying surface and drip
irrigation systems was the same. In the other land
units coded 1, 2 and 3 applying drip irrigation
system was most suitable compared with surface
irrigation systems. Figure 4 and 5 show the
suitability map for surface and drip irrigation
systems in the Korir area by notation to capability
index (Ci) for different irrigation systems. As seen
from this map, the largest part of this area was
suitable for drip irrigation systems.
The results (Table 3 & 4) indicate that by
applying drip irrigation instead of surface irrigation
methods, suitability classes of land unit coded 2
(62.77%) can be improved from currently notsuitable (N1) to marginally suitable (S3) and
suitability classes of land unit coded 3
(6.1901887%) and 1 (22.58%) improved from
marginally suitable (S3) and moderately suitable
(S2) respectively to highly suitable (S1). The
comparison of the different types of irrigation
revealed that the drip irrigation is more effective
and efficient than the surface irrigation methods.
Provided it is managed properly, drip irrigation is
suitable for a large range of crops. Study results
(Sijali, 2001) showed that compared to
furrow/surface irrigation; drip irrigation can
217

achieve 90 95% efficiency. Table 5 gives

comparative irrigation requirements for meeting
crop demand with the different irrigation methods
(adapted from Sijali, 2001). Moreover, this author
suggested that losses to runoff, deep percolation
and evaporation are minimal (most of the irrigation
water is taken up by the plant) when drip irrigation
method is used.
Table 5. Comparison of typical irrigation requirements
under well- designed and managed drip and furrow
irrigation systems (mm/day)
Net crop water
demand
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0

Irrigation
requirement (drip
method)
3.3
3.9
4.4
5.0
5.6
6.1
6.7

Irrigation
requirement
(furrow method)
5.0
5.8
6.7
7.5
8.3
9.2
10.0

Because of the insufficiency of surface water, and

the aridity of the climate, only the drip irrigation is
recommended for a sustainable use of this natural
resource. According to Sijali (2001), drip irrigation
is often the favored method of irrigation, for
example on steep and undulating slopes, for porous
soils, for shallow soils, field having various soils,
where water is scarce, where water is expensive,
and where water is of poor quality. However, the
main limiting factors in using surface irrigation
methods in this area are soil texture, soil depth and
slope. This corresponds with the results of Sijali
(2001) in which, surface irrigation may not be
appropriate for porous soils (final infiltration rates
>7 cm/h) such as sandy soils, or soils with final
infiltration rates that are too low (<0.3 cm/h). The
main limiting factors in using drip irrigation
methods in this area are soil calcium carbonate
content and soil texture. Soil texture provides a
measure for permeability, and to some extent, for
water retention capacity (Wayne et al., 2007). Soils
with potentially high percolation losses and soils
with low water retention capacity and all soils with
coarse textures have been considered not suited for
surface irrigation. Irrigation of dry land crops
require well drained soils to assure aeration and to
avoid the danger of secondary salinization. Under
irrigated conditions, soil depth affects drainage,
aeration, and water retention properties. Calcium
carbonate in the soil profile affects soil structure
and
interferes
with
infiltration
and
evapotranspiration processes. It influences both the
soil moisture regime and availability of nutrients
(Albaji et al., 2007).
CONCLUSIONS
Details are given for the analysis of the field data to
compare the suitability of different irrigation
systems. The analyzed parameters included soil and
Copyright Journal of the Drylands 2010
ISSN 1817-3322

land characteristics. The results showed that drip

irrigation is more suitable than surface irrigation
methods for most of the study area. The major
limiting factor for the drip irrigation methods were
soil calcium carbonate and soil texture. However,
for surface irrigation methods soil texture, soil
depth and slope were the restricting factors. Drip
irrigations can obviously be a way to improve the
practice on light soil textures. On the other hand,
because of insufficiency of water in arid and semi
arid climate, maximizing water use efficiency is
necessary to produce more crops per drop and to
help solve the water shortage crisis in the
agricultural sector. The shift from surface irrigation
to high-tech irrigation technologies, therefore,
offers significant water-saving potentials. Finally,
since drip irrigation systems typically apply small
amount of water on a frequent basis to maintain
soil water near field capacity, it would be more
beneficial to use drip irrigation methods in this
area.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Our particular gratitude goes to the Mekelle
University NORAD II Project for their financial
and logistics support. We feel great pleasure to
express my special gratitude to Mr. Mulu Haftu,
Mr. Kalayu Berhe, Mr. Aregawi Teka, Mr. Kahsay
Tadelle, Mr. Yirgalem Gebre, and Mr. Eskindir
Gidey for their technical support during the field
work. We would also like to thank the farmers,
development workers and experts from the Office
of Agriculture and Rural Development (OoARD)
and Tabia5 administration of the study site for
providing me with valuable information and for
their guidance.
REFERENCES
Albaji, M., Boroomand Nasab, S., Kashkoli, H. and
Naseri, A.A. 2007. Comparison of different
irrigation methods based on the parametric
evaluation approach in West Shoush Plain,
Iran.
Journal of the International
Commission on Irrigation and Drainage.
Bazzani, F. and Incerti, F. 2002. Land evaluation in
the province of Larache, Morocco. 22nd
Course
Professional Master Geomatics
and Natural Resources Evaluation. 12 Nov
2001-21 June 2002. IAO, Florence, Italy.
Berry, Quirine Ketterings, Steve Antes, Steve Page,
Jonathan Russell-Anelli, Renuka Rao and
Steve DeGloria, 2007. Nutrient Management
Spear Program. Department of Crop and Soil
Sciences, College of Agriculture and Life
Sciences. Cornell University Cooperative
Extension.
Bienvenue, J.S., Ngardeta, M. and Mamadou, K.
2003. Land Evaluation in the Province of
5

Tabia is a sub-district of roughly five thousand residents. Regarded as

the lowest administrative unit.

218

Thies, Senegal. 23rd Course Professional

Master. Geomatics and Natural Resources
Evaluation. 8th Nov 2002-20 June 2003. IAO,
Florence, Italy.
Bond, W. J. 2002. Assessing Site Suitability for an
Effluent Plantation in Mckenzie. Soil Physical
Measurement and Interpretation for Land
Evaluation. CSIRO Publishing, pp. 351359.
Briza, Y., Dileonardo, F. and Spisni, A. 2001. Land
Evaluation in the Province of Ben Slimane,
Morocco.
21st
Course
Professional
Master.Remote Sensing and Natural Resource
Evaluation. 10 Nov2000 - 22 June 2001.
IAO, Florence, Italy.
Dengiz, O. 2006. A Comparison of Different
Irrigation Methods Based on the Parametric
Evaluation Approach. Turk J. Agric. For.
30:2129.
FAO, 1990. Guidelines for soil description. FAO
Rome, pp. 69.
FAO, 1998. World reference base for soil
resources. FAO Rome, pp. 88.
Foty k, 1993. Acacia, Quarterly-44 FF/N, Number
7. GJED-TOVE. BP110 KPALIMETOGO.
Hargreaves, H.G. and Mekley, G.P. 1998.
Irrigation fundamentals. Water Resource
Publication, LLC, 200 p.
Hired, C., Thomson, A. and Beer, I. 1996.
Selection and Monitoring of Sites Intended for
Irrigation
with Reclaimed Water in
Proceedings. Water TECH, Sydney. May

Copyright Journal of the Drylands 2010

ISSN 1817-3322

1996. Australian Water

and
Wastewater Association, Sydney, Australia.
Hunting. 1976. Tigray Rural Development Report.
Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, UK:
Hunting
Technical Service.
Mbodj, C., Mahjoub, I. and Sghaiev, N. 2004. Land
Evaluation in the Oud Rmel Catchment,
Tunisia.
24th
Course
Professional
Master. Geomatics and Natural Resources
Evaluation. 10th Nov 200323 rd Jun.
Naseri A., Rezania A.R., and Albaji M. 2009.
Investigation of Soil quality for different
irrigation systems in Lali Plain, Iran. Journal
of Food & Environment Vol.7 (3&4): 955
960. WFL Publisher. Science and Technology
SFPT, 2003. Draft Genfel Tabia Land Use Plan.
GFA-terra systems.
Sijali IV, 2001. Drip Irrigation: Options for
Smallholder Farmers in Eastern and Southern
Africa. RELMA Technical Handbook Series
24. Nairobi, Kenya: Regional Land
Management Unit
(RELMA),
Swedish
International
Development
Cooperation
Agency (Sida). Pp 60.
Sys I., Van Ranst E., and Debaveye J. (1991) Land evaluation, part II. Methods in land
evaluation. Agriculture publications n.7,
General Administration for Development
Cooperation. Brussels, Belgium pp. 70-76.
Tesfai, M. 2002. Land suitability system for spate
irrigation schemes in Eritrea. Soil Use
Management 18:77-78.

219