GIFTS Final Dissertation MUK DM3

MAKERERE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
SCHOOL OF FORESTRY ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL SCIENCES
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ASSESSMENT OF VEGETATION COVER CHANGE AND WATER PHYSICAL

PARAMETERS IN RIVER RWIZI CATCHMENT, MBARARA DISTRICT
BY
GIFT IMMACULATE
18/U/21252/PS
1800721252
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL

MANAGEMENT IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FOR THE AWARD OF
BACHELORS DEGREE IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE OF
MAKERERE UNIVERSITY KAMPALA UGANDA
MARCH, 2022
DECLARATION
I Gift Immaculate hereby declare that this dissertation is my original work and has never been
presented to any institution or anywhere else for any purpose except where referenced, errors
or omissions are my sole responsibility.
GIFT IMMACULATE
Signature……………………………. Date………………………………….
+256 750 461 449
+256 777 636 126
[email protected]
i
APPROVAL
This dissertation has been written and submitted under my supervision.
Signed……………………………… Date…………………………………….
Dr. DAVID MFITUMUKIZA

Academic Supervisor
[email protected]
ii
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to
My beloved family
I am splendid pleased for totally everything
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I extend my sincere gratitude to Dr. David Mfitumukiza, my academic supervisor who has
tirelessly contributed towards the success of my research. Special gratitude to my parents, sister
and her husband who supported me in my academics financially.
May the Almighty God bless you all abundantly.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ........................................................................................................................ i
APPROVAL ..............................................................................................................................ii
DEDICATION ......................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................................................ iv
LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................vii
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................... viii
ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................ ix
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................... x
1.1 Background .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Problem statement ................................................................................................................ 3
1.3 General objective ................................................................................................................. 3
1.3.1 Specific objectives ............................................................................................................ 4
1.3.2 Research questions ............................................................................................................ 4
1.4 Justification of the study ...................................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................ 5
2.1 Vegetation cover changes .................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Monitoring of vegetation cover changes.............................................................................. 5
2.3 Association of vegetation cover changes and physical water parameters ........................... 6
2.4 Perceptions on water physical parameters ........................................................................... 7
2.5 Importance of community’s perceptions in natural resource management ......................... 7
CHAPTER THREE: STUDY AREA AND METHODS .......................................................... 9
3.1 Study area............................................................................................................................. 9
3.1.1 Location of study area ....................................................................................................... 9
3.1.2 Vegetation ....................................................................................................................... 10
3.2.3 Climate ............................................................................................................................ 10
3.1.4 Major economic activities in the study area ................................................................... 11
3.2 Data collection methods ..................................................................................................... 11
3.2.1 Assessment of spatial and temporal vegetation cover changes. ..................................... 11
3.2.1.1 Accuracy assessment ................................................................................................... 11
3.2.2 Assessment of community perceptions on vegetation cover changes and associated effects
on physical water parameters ................................................................................................... 12
3.2.3 Sampling of respondents. ................................................................................................ 12
v
3.2.3.1 Sample size determination ........................................................................................... 12
3.3 Data analysis ...................................................................................................................... 14
3.3.1 Analysis for the spatial and temporal vegetation cover changes .................................... 14
3.3.2 Community perceptions on the vegetation cover changes and relationship with physical
water parameters ...................................................................................................................... 16
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS ................................................................................................ 17
4.1 Spatial and temporal LULC changes ............................................................................ 17
4.1.1 Accuracy assessment ................................................................................................. 18
4.2 Community’s perception on vegetation cover changes ..................................................... 20
4.3 Community perceptions on the association between vegetation cover changes and water
physical parameters .................................................................................................................. 21
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION ............................................................................................ 22
5.1 The spatial and temporal vegetation cover changes in river Rwizi sub catchment ........... 22
5. 2 Community perception on vegetation cover changes ....................................................... 23
5.3 Community perceptions on the association between vegetation cover changes and water
physical parameters .................................................................................................................. 24
CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION ......................................... 25
6.1 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 25
6.2 Recommendation ............................................................................................................... 25
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 27
APPENDICES ......................................................................................................................... 37
Appendix 1: Survey Questionnaire .......................................................................................... 37
Appendix 2: Sample size determination for the study population (90% confidence). ............ 40
Appendix 3: Error matrix resulting from classifying test pixels 2020..................................... 41
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1:Sample size determination ....................................................................................... 13

Table 4.2: Changes in vegetation cover classes and changes for the periods 1999- 2010, and
2010-2020 ................................................................................................................................ 18
Table 4.3: Community’s perception on the extent/severity of vegetation cover changes ....... 21
Table 4.4: Community perceptions on the association between vegetation cover changes and
water physical parameters ........................................................................................................ 21
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1: Location of the study area in Uganda ...................................................................... 9

Figure 4.2: River Rwizi sub catchment LULC changes .......................................................... 17
Figure 4.3: River Rwizi sub catchment NDVI values for 1999, 2010 and 2020 ..................... 19
Figure 4.4: River Rwizi sub catchment NDVI trend for years 1999, 2010 and 2020 ............. 20
viii
ACRONYMS
GIS Geographic Information System
ha Hectares
LUCC Land use Land Cover Changes
LULC Land Use Land Cover
NDVI Normalized Difference Vegetation Index
RGB Red Green Blue
RS Remote Sensing
SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences
n Number of respondents
ix
ABSTRACT
The Rwizi river catchment is a high value landscape covering 10 districts of western Uganda.
The catchment has faced large scale human induced land use and land cover changes, which
has led to loss of vegetation cover and its effect on water parameters. This study was aimed at
assessing vegetation cover changes, community perceptions on these changes and the
association between these changes with water physical parameters in the catchment. A
combination of satellite imagery were interpreted to construct vegetation cover dynamics in
the catchment for the years 1999, 2010 and 2020. The results from both satellite image analysis
and community perceptions showed large trends of vegetation cover changes, which have
occurred rapidly over the last 20 years. The most dominant vegetation cover change were a net
gain in built up/ bare land from 29% to 36% between 1999 and 2010, and a reduction in
grassland from 29% to 22% between 2010 and 2020. Restoration of wetlands and afforestation
efforts resulted into an increase in dense vegetation between 2010 and 2020. This is one of the
few studies in River Rwizi catchment scale that combines multi-source spatio-temporal data
on land cover to enable long-term quantification of land cover changes. The findings
demonstrate the need for restoring wetlands and afforestation and as well as research to
quantify sediment load and deposition in this river catchment. The findings might be used by
relevant authorities for informed decision making on planning for erosion and sediment control
interventions and improving the productivity of the River Rwizi.
x
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Riparian vegetation is a critical element of river catchments (Pavanelli & Cavazza, 2010).
Vegetation actively influences the hydromorphological characteristics of rivers such as flow
rate, water quality, total water yield and width of the river. River width of forested catchments
is always narrower than the river width of non-forested or grass lined river catchments (Poppe
et al., 2016; Solari et al., 2016 and Guilloy et al., 2000). Riparian vegetation significantly
reduces the rate of sediment transport and deposition and also safeguards good quality of water
by intercepting and infiltrating surface runoff from river catchment that contains nutrients and
sediments (Chua et al., 2019; Vargas Luna, 2016; Latella et al, 2020 and Machado et al., 2019).
At catchment scale, vegetation reduces runoff and sediment movement and maintains bank
stability (Ruiz-Colmenero et al., 2013 and Guo et al., 2014).
Despite of the catchment’s vegetation roles, catchment vegetation cover has been increasingly
modified due to human activity interference (Fierro et al., 2017; Riis et al., 2020). The world
is experiencing an accelerated expansion of agricultural areas in river catchments hence loss of
riparian vegetation cover (Alemu et al., 2017; Nóbrega et al., 2020 and Glenn, 2003). Other
major contributors to vegetation cover loss in river catchments are human settlement growth
and establishment of industries in river line wetland catchment areas (Turyahabwe et al., 2013;
Smith et al; 2007). Indirectly, human population growth is one of the major pressures and
drivers behind these vegetation cover losses.
Loss of vegetation cover has severe effects on river characteristics including changes in the
magnitude and pattern of surface water runoff in the catchment, total water yield, flow rate and
sediment load and transport (Geremew, 2013; Aires et al., 2020 and Abraha, 2009).
Additionally, loss of catchment vegetation cover is associated with increased surface runoff
whenever it rains, sediment transport and deposition into rivers. This eventually leads to poor
water quality and quantity through river eutrophication, water turbidity and river clogging
which shapes the changes in water color, smell, taste among others (Fabricius et al., 2014 and
Khan & Mohammad, 2014). Evidence shows that loss of vegetation cover to agricultural
activities around Lake Victoria has resulted in deterioration of water quality because of
sedimentation, leading to high water treatment costs (Twesigye, 2011).
1
To draw effective river catchment management options, it is important to understand historical
and current trends of vegetation cover, as well as how the changes affect the characteristics of
the river. It is also important that the perceptions of riparian communities on the changes and
the effects are well understood and incorporated in river catchment management strategies.
Understanding riparian community perceptions helps to establish their abilities, gaps and
opportunities for engaging them to contribute to solving prevailing problems (Thomson &
Pepperdine, 2003; Vollmer et al., 2015). That way, the communities can be supported to be
instrumental in sustainably managing their resources (Shrestha, 2011). When involved and
educated, communities can meaningfully participate in resource restoration activities including
replanting of vegetation, guarding and conservation of resources, information sharing, among
others (Amare et al., 2016; Rönnbäck et al., 2007).
Most of the studies that have focused on understanding spatial and temporal changes in river
catchments and associated river characteristics, have not sufficiently generated information to
demonstrate community perceptions on water quality and quantity management. Where
attempts have been made such perceptions have not been aligned to catchment degradation
processes (Chifamba, 2013; Keshtkar et al., 2013; Macharia et al., 2010). Lack of holistic
community involvement in natural resource management yields short-term benefits for
conservation because communities will continue using the given natural resource
unsustainably, since they are not able to be aware of the depth of the problem(Dyer et al., 2014).
To acquire information on vegetation cover trends, tools and methods that allow comparisons
of spatial and temporal changes over time are required. Remote sensing has been proven to be
reliable for monitoring vegetation cover trends as well as historical variations of river
characteristics (Shanwad et al., 2012; Bhatti et al., 2011; Tomsett & Leyland, 2019). By using
Normalized Difference Vegetation Indices (NDVIs) gotten from RS imageries, many studies
have been able to monitor trends of vegetation quality (Bento et al., 2020; Yengoh et al., 2015).
The NDVI is a commonly used vegetation index that can easily be derived using most
multispectral satellite sensors. It is based on the spectral reflectance of the red and near-infrared
wavelengths (Huang et al., 2021). This study is an attempt to assess vegetation cover changes
and associated impacts on the river water parameters for effective decision making in the
conservation of natural resources.
2
1.2 Problem statement
River catchment degradation is one of the most challenges that has been reported to cause
significant changes in river characteristics in sub Saharan (Apse & Karres, 2016). Activities
such as agriculture, brick making, industrial developments, among others continue to increase
in catchments areas (Atwongyeire et al., 2018). These activities have continued to alter riparian
areas through clearing of natural vegetation to get land for such activities.
Catchment degradation has resulted in many implications including loosening and movement
of soils into rivers Kroese et al., (2020). This Increases River water turbidity and incase the
runoff is highly enriched with nutrients, this leads to river eutrophication.
For catchments, such as River Rwizi, there is limited information on the trends, perceptions
and impacts of vegetation cover changes on water parameters. Knowledge of how people
perceive vegetation changes and the association with the water physical parameters in the river
is not understood, leaving the scale of such a gap uncertain.
Previously, there have been many projects around River Rwizi catchment focusing on
restoration activities like eviction of settlers, sand miners, and wetland demarcation among
others. However, despite these practices, there is little awareness about the vegetation cover
changes and the association of vegetation cover changes with the water physical parameters
such as color, smell, sediments and taste. This has limited the ability of environmental
management actors to manage the water resource and environment at large in an integrated or
coordinated manner. If this unawareness is not solved, poor decision making and ineffective
policy formulation by various actors will prevail. This in turn is likely to result into increased
catchment degradation with unforeseen effects on the river and its water. Therefore, this study
aims at contributing information on vegetation cover changes and how people perceive these
changes and its association with the water physical parameters.
1.3 General objective
This study aims to contribute to the understanding of how vegetation cover changes affect river
characteristics as a basis for informing improved management of water catchment areas.
3
1.3.1 Specific objectives
i. To assess the spatial and temporal and perceived vegetation cover changes in River
Rwizi catchment between 2000 and 2020.
ii. To assess community perceptions on the association between vegetation cover
changes and the physical parameters of water in River Rwizi.
1.3.2 Research questions

i. How has vegetation cover changed in the River Rwizi catchment from 199 to 2020?
ii. How does the community perceive the vegetation cover changes in river Rwizi
catchment?
How does the community perceive the association of vegetation cover changes and water
physical parameters?
1.4 Justification of the study

Identification and provision of information on areas facing major vegetation degradation,
evaluation of perceptions on the vegetation cover changes and effects of vegetation degradation
on physical parameters of water will be important while planning for developments in the River
Rwizi sub catchment for conservation and restoration strategies by conservation actors. These
include River Rwizi catchment management committees, ministry of water and environment
and physical planning committees. It will also contribute to the knowledge of vegetation and
LULC changes in a fast-developing catchment with rapid water quality deterioration which is
typical in many developing countries. This knowledge is needed for policy makers and land
use planners in the catchment to plan sustainably.
More so, analysis of vegetation cover can be helpful in predicting the unfortunate natural
disasters to provide charitable aid, loss assessment and furthermore to scheme new protection
strategies. This predication can be done by assessing the LULC changes and their consequences
on the environment.
The study will contribute to NDP III through providing information that will be useful on
reducing water pollution and siltation of rivers and through raising awareness to lessen
encroachment on river and its catchment. It will also contribute to SDG 6 which is about clean
water and sanitation by encouraging participation of local communities to observe how their
activities contribute to changes in vegetation cover and the water physical parameters which
eventually leads to poor water quality and quantity.
4
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Vegetation cover changes
The conversion of various land use and cover types, including vegetation cover, to other land
use classifications, such as agricultural, built up, and road development, is referred to as land
use and land cover changes (Rishikesh et al., 2020). According to Bunyangha et al., (2021),
conversion of vegetation is occurring in catchment areas due to demand for space for
construction and industrialization-, large- and small-scale agriculture among others. As a result,
both agriculture and built-up areas have been identified as the primary land use changes in the
next 20 years (Bunyangha et al., 2021; Nicholas Kiggundu et al., 2018).
Recent research has shown that human activities such as logging, farming, grazing and
construction have severely influenced riparian vegetation cover with obvious decline in extent,
distribution and quality. Notably deforestation, agriculture and urbanization are the main
drivers of riparian vegetation decline in Africa (Borisade et al., 2021). For example, 1% annual
loss of vegetation cover in East Africa between 1990- 2015, was largely attributed to human
activities (Guzha et al., 2018). Additionally, in Uganda, the area under agriculture and
urbanization has expanded steadily to meet food and development needs of the growing
population. For example, during the period of 1995-2003, vegetation cover in Murchison
catchment experienced the highest change in which both the built up and agriculture lands
increased by 513 ha and 176 ha respectively due to rapid population growth and infrastructure
development (Kiggundu et al., 2018).
Natural causes such as climate change also have led to loss of natural vegetation for example
a study by Zhang et al., (2011) revealed that climate change contributed to the loss in spatial
patterns of major vegetation ecosystem from 1956 to 2006 in Inner Mongola of China. Natural
vegetation cover changes have also been witnessed in several areas around the world as climate
change continues to cause existential threats to biodiversity species.
2.2 Monitoring of vegetation cover changes
World over, there are many tools and techniques used in monitoring and assessing vegetation
cover including Geographical Information Systems and Remote Sensing, biodiversity surveys
among others. In the past, it was difficult to assess trends of vegetation changes since
researchers relied majorly on manual sampling techniques. Although the results were quite
5
accurate, it was difficult to obtain information over a broad spatial and temporal extent (Burgan,
1993). Recent advancements such as use of satellite data for remote sensing offer spatial and
temporal vegetation change detection in a practical, efficient and economical way (E. Adam et
al., 2010). Remote sensing for vegetation cover change detection bases on the reflectance
characteristics of vegetation to detect its quality and pattern of change. Additionally, several
indices have been developed to highlight vegetation-bearing areas on a remote sensing scene.
Of the indices, NDVI is the most widely used vegetation index in environmental and climate
change research and is a good indicator for identifying long-term changes in vegetated areas
and their condition (Fu & Burgher, 2015; Gandhi et al., 2015). NDVI is calculated as a ratio
difference between measured canopy reflectance in the red and near infrared bands
respectively. It has been utilized widely in several applications especially in local, regional and
continental scale vegetation cover monitoring (Amiri & Tabatabaie, 2010).
2.3 Association of vegetation cover changes and physical water parameters
Generally, water physical parameters including water color, taste, odor/smell, temperature and
sediments have largely been studied (Oschwald, 1972; Harter, 2003; Etuk & Solomon, n.d.;
Khan et al., 2018; Zhou et al., 2017). Recent literature indicates that these parameters have
undergone continuous deterioration across the globe (Namugize et al., 2018; Tahiru et al.,
2020). For example a study by Wang et al, (2005) showed a continuous trend of accumulation
of sediments in the lower Wei river in China.
According to Scatena (2000); Mustapha & Getso (2014), human-induced vegetation changes
in river catchments continue to affect the physical water parameters of water catchment areas.
The studies reveal that several industrial activities have been documented in river catchments
including buffer zones. Additionally, their waste water effluents are largely discharged into the
rivers, most of these industrial effluents are toxic, and affect the water taste, smell and color
(Tebebal, 2021). Agricultural activities have been documented to increase the risk of sediment
transport and soil erosion while grazing along river banks removes and damages riparian
vegetation, increases compaction of soil and damages the banks of the water ways (Chaney,
1993; Tebebal, 2021; Zhou et al., 2017). This makes the catchment area to become unstable,
prone and vulnerable to erosion especially during rainy seasons (Chaney, 1993; Kauffman &
Krueger, 1984). Construction activities such as dams, roads, brickmaking in the catchments
lead to sediment deposition in water bodies through runoff.
6
2.4 Perceptions on water physical parameters
A study by Thoradeniya & Bulathsinhala, (2015) revealed that public perception on water
largely depends on its physical and chemical nature such as its turbidity, color and taste among
others. However, insights of local communities about changes in water physical parameters are
not clearly known since fewer studies have documented people’s perceptions around this
subject. However, many studies have concentrated on perceptions of drinking water quality
and its safety (Khalid et al., 2018; Kulinkina et al., 2017 and Rojas et al., 2013). This study
therefore notes there is need for an integrated assessment to determine people’s insights on
water physical characteristics given its importance in contributing to watershed-wide
improvement through restoration and awareness activities (Ejigu, 2021; Mustapha & Getso,
2014).
2.5 Importance of community’s perceptions in natural resource management
Sustainable management of natural resources depends on knowledge, perceptions and values

of local communities (Kitolelei & Sato, 2016). Research by Boonzaaier, (2010) revealed that
people’s perceptions on natural resources conservation are grounded on values and their local
knowledge on which they base to develop sustainable resource management strategies.
Additionally, values and perceptions inform people’s behavior, ideas about resources and their
conservation priorities as they pursue their daily natural resource-based livelihood activities
(Twyman, 2000). It is therefore critical to note that natural resource management decisions
should include local communities.
Community based approaches to decision making are increasingly being implemented in the
management of natural resources. A study by Bajracharya et al., (2005) revealed that
community based management has been successful in delivering conservation benefits. This is
largely attributed to increasing patterns of sustainable resource use and behavior change among
local people as a result of community empowerment programmes through awareness creation
for behavioral and perception change.
Community involvement projects and approaches have now been initiated in many
communities, most notably in Africa and have contributed to activities such as reduction in
poaching, improved community protection of wetlands and other natural resources(Newmark
& Hough, 2000). These schemes have succeeded in protecting biodiversity and natural
resources by their ability to distribute social economic benefits as well Newmark & Hough,
7
(2000) as increased enforcement (Peter & Newton, 2005). Using knowledge and perspectives
from the community levels can help build a more complete information base than the one got
from scientific studies alone (Berkes, 2004). As a result, Gemechu; (2017) revealed that
understanding community’s knowledge and its perceptions on natural resource management
practices are of paramount importance for promoting sustainable natural resources in a given
study area.
8
CHAPTER THREE: STUDY AREA AND METHODS
3.1 Study area

3.1.1 Location of study area
River Rwizi catchment is located in south-western Uganda. The river source is from Buhweju
hills with many tributaries of Kafunjo, Nyamabare, Rucence, Kinota, among others (UBOS,
2002). It stretches across many districts in southwestern Uganda including Bushenyi, Sheema,
Mbarara, Ntungamo, Kiruhura and Rakai. Covering approximately 8000 km2 (Atwebembeire
et al., 2018). It pours its water in Lake Victoria via drainage systems of Lake Mburo at
coordinates 0° 39' 52.3296'' N and 30° 55' 58.7316'' E and longitude 30.9329810, Lake Kachera
at coordinates 0° 33' 22.1616'' S and31° 5' 30.6852'' E, and Lake Kijanebalola at coordinates
0° 42' 31.3776'' N and 31° 18' 51.0552'' E. Five divisions of Mbarara district were considered;
Nyamitanga, Kakoba, Kakiika, Kamukuzi and Nyakayojo divisions (Figure 3-1).
Figure 3.1: Location of the study area in Uganda
9
3.1.2 Vegetation
The vegetation is generally comprised of savannah grassland and woodland with patches of
forests, mainly noticeable in Lake Mburo National Park and wetlands along river Rwizi. But
currently there is a continued modification of the native vegetation cover to man-made land
uses and covers including settlements, agriculture, and other socio-economic developments.
The district has a variety of land use types, however, farmlands cover the biggest area
characterized by banana and coffee plantation as well as livestock farms. Animal grazing farms
are predominantly located in savanna grasslands that provide palatable pasture for the
livestock. The district is endowed with three main central forest reserves including Rwoho
Central Forest reserves (South of the district bordering with Ntungamo), Kyahi Central Forest
reserves south east of the district bordering with Isingiro district) and Bugamba Central Forest
reserve in Bugamba subcounty. The district also has small Forest Reserves that are being
depleted including Bwizibwera and Kooga Forest reserves. Vegetation cover in the Forest
reserves is dominated by tree plantation such as pine and eucalyptus. Main wetlands exist along
River Rwizi and its tributaries in the sub-counties of Ndeija, Rugando, as well as Nyakayojo,
Nyamitanga and Kakoba Divisions. Other main wetlands exist along tributaries of River Rwizi
in Bubaare and Bukiro sub-counties, although most of the wetland vegetation has been
converted for cattle grazing and degraded due to sand mining and brick-laying. Built-up areas
are mainly in 6 Divisions in Mbarara Municipality including Biharwe, Kakiika, Kakoba,
Kamukuzi, Nyakayojo and Nyamitanga (NECOC, 2017).
3.2.3 Climate
Like the rest of south-western Uganda, the rainfall distribution for the study area is bimodal
separated by two dry seasons (Nsubuga et al., 2014). The average annual rainfall the catchment
receives ranges from 690 to 1,300 mm. November and April are the wettest months, while July
is the driest month, receiving 35 mm of rainfall on average (Songa et al., 2015).
Total annual rainfall received by Mbarara District ranges between 990 mm- 1207 mm per
annum. Lowest rainfall amounts are experienced in Mbarara Municipality i.e. in Biharwe,
Kakiika, Kakoba, Kamukuzi, Nyakayojo and Nyamitanga Divisions with rainfall between
about 990 mm -1000 mm per annum (Nuwasasira, 2019).
10
The temperatures range from 17ºC and 30ºC. March is the hottest month with an average of
19.8oC and June as the coldest month of the year. The average annual temperature is 25oC.
3.1.4 Major economic activities in the study area
Rwizi River is often called the life-line river, supports over five million people in Western
Uganda (Atwebembeire et al., 2019). The river provides freshwater for domestic, irrigation and
industrial use. The main activities around River Rwizi are subsistence and commercial
agriculture which employ 87.4% of the population (Mugonola et al., 2013). Other activities
include, tourism, mainly based on Lake Mburo Conservation area, local industry especially
brick making, sand mining, motor vehicle washing, vehicle repair garages, and wide spread
growing of eucalyptus trees(Songa et al., 2015).
3.2 Data collection methods

3.2.1 Assessment of spatial and temporal vegetation cover changes.
Satellite data (imagery) and the Digital Elevation Model archived by Earth Explorer
(www.earthexplorer.usgs.gov) were used to classify the land uses and to determine the
elevation of the study area. The Landsat images for years 1999, 2010 and 2020 were
downloaded and preprocessed in ArcGIS version 10.4. Preprocessing involved extracting the
downloaded images to get the RGB composite with the corresponding bands. Delineation of
the catchment was done using Digital Elevation Model. Choice of 1999as a base year was
founded on Mbarara’s population which started experiencing a significant increase for instance
in 1999 mbarara’s total population was 267457, in 2002 was 361477 and in 2014 the population
had increased to 472629 people (UBOS 2014).
3.2.1.1 Accuracy assessment

It is important for verifying the quality of image output (Butt et al., 2015). A combination of
reference earth-observation data and ground truth data was used for accuracy
assessment(García et al., 2016). A stratified random sample of about 100 Google earth
reference data pixels proportionally distributed among the five LULC classes was used for
accuracy assessment. An error matrix was used to show number of pixels for all the possible
correlations between the ground truth and the classified image.
The NDVI is one of several remote sensing vegetation indices used to represent vegetation
characteristics for example leaf area index, plant cover and health in an area (pixel) (Mazzarino
11
& Finn, 2016). The study relied on satellite images to derive NDVI data sets as a proxy for
vegetation greenness and health. Three land sat images of different years; 1999, 2010 and 2020
were downloaded and used to get NDVI data.
3.2.2 Assessment of community perceptions on vegetation cover changes and associated

effects on physical water parameters
The questionnaire (appendix 1) was used to collect data for the part of the first objective
(community perceptions on vegetation cover changes) and for the relationship between
vegetation cover changes and water physical parameters. Data on vegetation cover perceptions
included whether the respondents had noticed any changes in vegetation cover and if yes, in
which vegetation cover had they observed whether a decline or an increase? The table was
designed to present how people perceived the influence of different vegetation cover changes
on different water physical parameters (table 4.3.1).
3.2.3 Sampling of respondents.
This study employed a purposive selection of respondents from the people living around or
residents of identified hotspots of vegetation cover changes. In addition to people living within
river catchment such as farmers, brick makers and industrial workers were part of the study
population.
3.2.3.1 Sample size determination
The study employed a table designed by Adam (2020) at a confidence interval of 90%.(Table
3.2). Total households were 815, total sample size got was 203, but it was too big to be
achieved. The number of respondents was based on dividing the total sample size by 2: (203/2)
=101.5, hence n (number of respondents) was 102. For every selected village, 20 households
were purposively selected and a person was chosen for questionnaire administration per
household (Table 3.2.1).
Purposive selection was used in the field where by respondents were given questionnaires to
answer. Mbarara has six divisions, only five were considered in this study. Biharwe division
was not considered because it is far from the river. Five villages from five divisions were
purposively selected. This selection of villages was done by choosing the villages that were
adjacent to the river. Only people who had stayed in the area for more than ten years were
12
administered with the questionnaire. This was aimed at targeting individuals familiar with
adequate knowledge of the area. The people to include in the study were selected basing on
their ability to provide the necessary data. The rationale for choosing this approach was that
consent was needed from the respondents. The sum of the households for each village was
obtained from UBOS (2014). Households refer to the total number of houses in a given area
at a given time. Households were used to determine the number of people needed to be given
questionnaires in the field.
Table 3.1:Sample size determination

DIVISIONS Villages Households Sample size
Nyamitanga Rwizi 128
Kakoba Kakobaquarters 189
Kakiika Nyarubanga 152
Kamukuzi Rwizi(Ruharo) 266
Nyakayojo Nyakasambya 80
TOTAL 815 203/2=101.5
13
3.3 Data analysis
3.3.1 Analysis for the spatial and temporal vegetation cover changes
Table 3.3.1 Vegetation cover classes.
The description of these vegetation cover classes is in line with the table designed by Bashiru
& Pechanec;(2017).
LULC Categories Description
Built Residential, industrial, bare surface, shopping malls, ware
up/bare land recreational and educational houses, settlements, trade fair centers
Dense thick vegetation(thick shrubs, vegetation found in water logged or river
vegetation thick forest and riparian side areas
vegetation
Grassland light grass, infrequent trees large open areas of light grass
Open water rivers, ponds area covered by open water and water
logged areas
Agriculture crop fields cultivated land and crops
The 345 color composite for the 1999 and 2010 images and 743 for 2020 image were created.
The study area boundary was used to clip the image extent of the River Rwizi sub catchment
(area of interest). The images covering the area of interest were classified using maximum
likelihood algorithm to come up with vegetation cover classes (agriculture, open water, dense
vegetation, grassland and built up/bare land) for the different years. Open water analysis was
done to find out whether vegetation cover changes had an impact on it. A study by Banadda
et al; (2018) also used the same classes to detect vegetation cover changes in Murchison Bay
catchment. A change detection in different vegetation cover classes was done by comparing
the areal change in those classes from different years. Land use and land cover change includes
change in vegetation cover, so LULC maps from Landsat images were analyzed for the changes
and trends therein. Analysis of Landsat images for classification was done by selecting training
samples of each class for example agriculture, saved the training samples and signature file.gsg.
A signature file.gsg is a file required when using the geo processing tool in maximum
likelihood classification to classify an image.
14
3.3.1.1 Accuracy assessment
Ground truthing data plays an important role to determine land use classes and assess
accuracies of the results (Stehman & Foody, 2009). To these LULC maps, ground truthing data
was used for validating their interpretation from satellite images and for image classification
and characteristics of each LULC class. The software Google earth and Arc GIS version 10.4
were employed for this assessment. This assessment was done by creating random points from
the ground truth data (Google earth) and comparing to the classified data with the use of the
error matrix. Random points were created by opening a study area (shape file) in ArcGIS,
picking a polygon and marking sample points randomly. After that attribute table for that
particular shape file is opened and user, producer and identity values are added therein. An
error matrix was obtained by using classified map and reference source. The diagonal cells of
the error matrix were used to present the correctly classified pixels (appendices 3, 4 and 5).
A Kappa test was carried out to measure the extent of classification accuracy; Kappa
coefficient, K, being a coefficient of agreement. It reflects the difference between actual
agreement of classification with reference data and the agreement expected by chance. In this
study, Kappa coefficient was calculated using equation,
𝑁(∑𝑟𝑖=1 𝑥ii ) − (∑𝑟𝑖=1(𝑥i+ . 𝑥+i )
K= 𝑁 2 − (∑𝑟𝑖=1(𝑥i+ . 𝑥+i )
Where, K = Kappa Coefficient, r = number of rows/columns in the error matrix, N = total

number of samples, xii = sum of correctly classified samples, xi+ =row i total, while x + i =
column i total.
NDVI imagery were geo rectified before calculation of the NDVI values. Geo rectification was
done by linking the Landsat images into WGS 84 / UTM zone 36N coordinate system so that
they can be accurately located onto the map. Raster calculator in map algebra was done in
ArcGIS version 10.4 to calculate NDVI for Landsat 8; NDVI = (Band 5 - Band 4) / (Band 5 +
Band 4) and for Landsat 4 and 7, NDVI = (Band 4 - Band 3) / (Band 4 + Band 3). The X-axis
represented monitoring points starting from 1, using the scale of 20 (1, 21, 41,61and 81) while
Y-axis represented NDVI values.
NDVI is related to the Landsat images by yielding linked results on vegetation cover for
example if NDVI has high and positive values, it implies more health and dense vegetation
which is the same case in classified Landsat images.
15
3.3.2 Community perceptions on the vegetation cover changes and relationship with
physical water parameters
The quantitative data including perceptions on vegetation cover changes and their association
with physical water parameters obtained by questionnaires were cleaned, coded by assigning
values including 0, 1, and 3 to each variable name for example No, Yes, decrease, increase and
entered in SPSS. Analysis was done using correlations for example linking water physical
parameters (y axis) against different LULC classes (x axis) and summaries from a collection
of people’s responses using statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26.
Inferential statistics was done to test for the association between vegetation cover change and
water physical water parameters including water taste, water smell and water color for the
second objective (table 4.3.1).
16
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
This chapter represents results on vegetation cover changes and the associated perceived
relationships with water physical parameters in River Rwizi catchment, Mbarara district.
Section 4.1 presents the spatial and temporal LULC changes. Section 4.2 presents results on
perceived changes in vegetation cover. The chapter ends with presentation of perceived
association between vegetation cover changes and water physical parameters (4.3).
4.1 Spatial and temporal LULC changes
Five major land use land cover classes were identified from the Landsat images. These include;
agriculture, open water, dense vegetation, grassland and built-up/bare land.
Figure 4.2: River Rwizi sub catchment LULC changes

Grassland class increased from 847 hectares (ha) (11%) to 2293 ha (29%) from 1999 to 2010
and later reduced to 1733 ha (22%) in 2020. The study also revealed that there was a growth in
built up/bare land from 2257ha (29%) to 2837 ha (36%) from 1999 to 2010 and later reduced
to1840ha (24%) in 2020 (Table 4.1.1 and Figure 4.1.0).
17
Table 4.2: Changes in vegetation cover classes and changes for the periods 1999- 2010, and 2010-
2020
Land cover classes Year 1999 Year 2010 Year 2020
Area(ha) % Area(ha) % Area(ha) %
Agriculture 3665 47 1442 18 2424 31
Open water 189 2 425 5 297 4
Dense vegetation 857 11 817 10 1521 19
Grassland 847 11 2293 29 1733 22
Built-up/Bare land 2257 29 2837 36 1840 24
4.1.1 Accuracy assessment
The overall producer’s map accuracy assessment for 1999 was 77.36%, 85% for vegetation
cover changes in 2010 and 84.61% in 2020. The overall Kappa co-efficient K^ of 1999, 2010
and 2020 being 71.48%, 81% and 81.6% respectively (appendices 3, 4 and5). It means there
was a better agreement between ground truthing and actual LULC (Figure 4.1.1).
NDVI
The results from NDVI analysis revealed 1999 had the highest NDVI value of 0.481 and -0.147
as the lowest NDVI value. This was followed by 2010, with 0.431 as the highest and -0.044
NDVI value as the lowest. In 2020, 0.474 was the highest NDVI value with -0.067 as the lowest
(Figure 4.1.2).
18
Figure 4.3: River Rwizi sub catchment NDVI values for 1999, 2010 and 2020
19
The NDVI values were highest in 2020, followed by 2010 and 1999. The NDVI of both 1999
and 2020 had an increasing trend 0.0004 and 0.0001 respectively as indicated by the positive
slope values (Figure 4.4). However, the NDVI of 2010 was found to be decreasing as indicated
by its negative slope (0.0003).
0.4
y = 0.0001x + 0.2586
0.35
0.3
0.25
NDVI values
0.2
y = -0.0003x + 0.2567
0.15
0.1
0.05
0 y = 0.0004x + 0.0521
-0.05 1 21 41 61 81
-0.1
Monitoring points
NDVI1999 NDVI2010 NDVI2020

Linear (NDVI1999) Linear (NDVI2010) Linear (NDVI2020)
Figure 4.4: River Rwizi sub catchment NDVI trend for years 1999, 2010 and 2020
4.2 Community’s perception on vegetation cover changes
All the respondents revealed that they had witnessed vegetation cover change, though they had
different perceptions on the extent of change on different vegetation cover. Majority of the
respondents revealed that the natural resources in the catchment area had been severely
degraded. For example, 86% and 73% of respondents revealed that wetlands and forests,
respectively, had been severely degraded, while 68% of the respondents revealed that
degradation of bushes were extremely severe. A few respondents reported less or no severe
change in different land use cover classes (Table 4.2.1).
20
Table 4.3: Community’s perception on the extent/severity of vegetation cover changes
Not severe Less severe Severe Moderate severe Extremely severe
F % F % F % F % F %
Wetland 2 2 2 2 3 3 7 7 89 86
Forest 0 0 2 2 9 9 15 15 76 74
Grassland 2 2 6 6 15 15 29 28 51 50
Agriculture 4 4 6 6 9 9 47 46 36 36
Built up 1 1 4 4 9 9 49 48 38 37
Bushes 27 2 5 5 7 7 16 16 70 68
4.3 Community perceptions on the association between vegetation cover changes and
water physical parameters
The study revealed that people perceived vegetation changes in the river catchment. Vegetation
was strongly associated with deposition into the river (r = 0.76, p = 0.048), change in water
color (r = 0.053, p = 0.638), water smell (r = 0.019, p = -0.607) and mud and silt (r = 0.508, p
= 0.035). Additionally, respondents associated an increase in agriculture with changes in river
water color (p = 0.514, r = 0.025) and water taste (p = 0.622, r = 0.028) (Table 4.3.1).
Table 4.4: Community perceptions on the association between vegetation cover changes and
Correlations
Deposition Water color Water Smell Mud and
taste water silt
Forest P.Cor -0.05 -0.03 -0.02 -0.03 0.73
P value 0.63 0.78 0.86 0.80 0.04
n 101 102 98 98 102

Grassland P.Cor -0.04 -0.04 -0.03 -0.05 0.21
P value 0.71 0.66 0.75 0.65 0.04
n 101 102 98 98 102

Agriculture P.Cor 0.13 0.51 0.62 -0.12 0.07
P value 0.18 0.03 0.03 0.25 0.50
n 101 102 98 98 102
21
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
5.1 The spatial and temporal vegetation cover changes in river Rwizi sub catchment
The study showed that the major and significant changes occurred in agriculture and built
up/bare land LULC classes. An increase in agriculture between 2010 and 2020 could be as a
result of an increase in the population. This is in line with a study by Bouma, (1999) who
showed that an increase in population pressure in Java had caused agriculture land to expand.
Population growth could have caused higher demand for food products and eventually loss of
natural land cover to agricultural land. While a decline in agriculture between 1999 and 2010
might be attributed to inadequate credit facilities to farmers and labor competition between
other sectors This is evidenced by Rezvi;(2018) who revealed that the movement of labor from
traditional agricultural activities to the manufacturing and service sectors are of great impact
on agriculture growth,
An increase in grassland areas might be attributed to the loss of dense vegetation for example
forests, this resulted into land with only short grass. Additionally, this increase might be
attributed to a decline in agriculture. The return of farmlands to grassland might have played a
positive role in improving grassland cover between 1999 and 2010(Xin et al., 2008). While a
decline in grassland might be attributed to an increase and encroachment by agriculture and
built up land uses between 2010 and 2020 (De la Barrera & Henríquez, 2017; Nemani et al.,
1996).
There was an increase in built up/bare land between 1999 and 2010, this increment might be
attributed to population increase, urban expansion and economic development (Chooi et al.,
2014). Increased population over the years and associated human activities also led to
significant landscape alterations in Mbarara municipality where forests, wetlands, grasslands,
and other wilderness areas came to be replaced with farms, pastures, factories, stores,
businesses, roads, and streets (Brian, 2016). Additionally, the severe drought of 1999 could
have contributed to the increased bare surfaces. This is in line with a study by C Kamusoko &
Aniya;(2007) who revealed that drought had led to an increase in bare land in Bindura district,
Zimbabwe. Between 2010 and 2020, built up/ bare land declined and this could have happened
because of the rains that were received in that area hence restoring bare lands. According to the
field survey, I believe that returning bare land to other land uses because of a positive trend in
rainfall was responsible for the decline in bare land(Brian et al., 2016). This is in line with a
22
study by Akpoti et al; (2016) who revealed that bare land had increased by 67.06% because of
the low amounts of rainfall in Black Volta Basin.
A slight decline in dense vegetation between 1999 and 2010 might be because of wetland
reclamation, encroaching on river buffer zones, deforestation and growing population. An
increase in dense vegetation between 2010 and 2020 might be attributed to restoration by
NEMA and natural resource officers at local government levels of previously reclaimed
wetlands, river buffer zones, reforestation and afforestation Whigham, (1999)and construction
activities.
More exploitation of the water resources by the growing population could have also caused the
decline in the open water Jackson et al., (2001); Pimentel et al., (1997)) and in addition,
indiscriminate dumping of municipal solid wastes into the water bodies could probably be
another reason for decreased water area as it was observed in the study by Bashiru & Pechanec,
(2017). While an increase in open water might be attributed to afforestation and vegetation
restoration programs because vegetation helps in rainfall formation through a process of
evapotranspiration hence an increase in open water after precipitation. This is in line with a
study that revealed that there was a significant increase in surface water in restored
vegetation(Zeng et al., 2020).
The study indicated that the health of vegetation was increasing over the study period. The
lowest NDVI results were recorded in1999 implying that the vegetation health was so poor.
This poor vegetation health was attributed to the drought in 1999 and 2010 (Muwembe &
Meteorologist, n.d.), that resulted into dry conditions hence drying of vegetation. This caused
persistently low NDVI values in 1999 in the greater Mbarara region. However, this trend
returned to normal in the following years for instance in 2020 because the region had recovered
from drought and started receiving its normal rainfall.
5. 2 Community perception on vegetation cover changes
Majority of the respondents were aware of vegetation cover changes in River Rwizi catchment.
They supported this by enlightening that there was a declining supply and availability of
vegetation products, for example, firewood and charcoal in the area because most of the forests,
bushes and shrubs had been lost to a large extent. This is in line with Mapedza et al., (2003)
who reported that respondents were more acutely aware of tree cover changes.
23
5.3 Community perceptions on the association between vegetation cover changes and
All the respondents indicated that there was vegetation cover degradation and this affected
several water physical parameters differently. Tsegaye et al., (2006) revealed that water
pollution in response to accelerated vegetation cover changes and LULC has drawn concerns
because of public health and environmental impacts.
In this study 99.0% of the respondents said that water color had continuously changed because
of wetland reclamation and an increase in agricultural activities. This is supported by the fact
that vegetation retains and holds sediments(López-Vicente et al., 2013). Vegetation cover
degradation implies that sediments will be carried within the runoff to water bodies and
eventually dissolves and changes water color (Thornton et al., 1997).
An increase in mud and silt in the river may be attributed to an increase in agricultural fields
as indicated in the results that there was an increase in agriculture during the study period. This
is in line with a study by Stenfert Kroese et al., (2020)who revealed that agriculture is the main
source of stream sediments. Vegetation cover is known to have an ability of retaining silt and
when it is no longer there, it means this capacity and ability is also lost hence leading to washing
of all bare soil into the river and increased incidents of sediments.
A negative change in the smell of water may be attributed to river wetland degradation. Human
activities in river wetlands tend to increase amount of organic matter available to produce
methane and sulfur gases (Rosentreter et al., 2021). When river wetlands are degraded, their
retention capacity reduces and more organic matter accumulates in the river hence increased
decomposition and production of methane and sulfur gases. Agricultural activities such as
animal rearing, poultry farms, use of pesticides and fertilizers could also be responsible for the
smell of water (Muallim et al., 2019). The waste and effluents from these activities might get
deposited in the river without primary treatment and this might led to increased water smell
(odor).
Water is perceived to have negatively changed its taste. This was strongly associated with
increased agricultural activities. The runoff from agricultural fields might contain herbicides,
inorganic fertilizers and pesticides that might get deposited into the river system. These tend to
have a different taste from that of river water, so after mixing up, rivers water taste deteriorates.
A study by Daud et al. (2017) revealed that the release of pollutants such as pesticides,
fertilizers was associated with bad water taste.
24
CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
6.1 Conclusion
The study sought to assess vegetation cover change and water physical parameters in River
Rwizi catchment, Mbarara district. This study was guided by the following specific objectives,
to assess the spatial and temporal and perceived vegetation cover changes between 2000 and
2020 and to assess community perceptions on the association between vegetation cover
changes and the physical parameters of water.
There were both positive and negative changes in vegetation cover classes. In the study period,
there was no vegetation cover class that decreased or increased throughout. All the respondents
revealed that there was vegetation cover changes in the study area and majority attributed this
to an increase in agricultural and built up environments. The other drivers of these changes are
corruption and increase in population.
Community perceptions revealed in the results that degradation of vegetation cover had
negative influences on water physical parameters. If the rate at which land conversions are
increasing is not closely monitored and regulated, there will be more vegetation degradation
and eventually severe negative changes in water parameters.
6.2 Recommendation
There is need to control vegetation cover conversions to build up, agriculture from forests,
wetlands and grasslands given that their degradation has several negative impacts on the
environment. This can be done by the natural resource officers at local government levels.
Government should implement, enforce and strengthen land use policy to control the natural
land use conversion.
A need for research on quantification of sediment load and deposition, this will help the land
use planners to allocate and promote sustainable land uses in specific areas in order to reduce
on the sediment load. This is because most of negative changes on water physical parameters
are initiated by sedimentation.
Catchment communities should be sensitized to adopt modern farming and building methods
and technologies especially in areas neighboring forests, rivers and wetland zones to save the
natural riparian vegetation and enhance its benefits To this effect, tree planting and restoration
25
of degraded wetlands and riparian areas programs ought to be enhanced by environmental
NGOs, government institutions responsible for environmental management to cover more
areas in the catchment as this presents an opportunity for increased vegetation in the catchment.
This however requires the active participation of all stakeholders, including the local
communities and local leaders.
Government through NEMA should put in interventions like monitoring and implementation
of natural resources related laws, for example, the National Forestry and Tree Planting Act,
2003, so as to reduce on the encroachment of vital vegetation cover by the residents. The
Government should review the existing population policies and put in place stringent measures
to control population growth if catchment ecosystems are to be sustainably managed.
Population growth control may reduce on the pressure on vegetation cover for livelihoods.
26
REFERENCES
Abraha, G. G. (2009). Land use change effects in Northern Ethiopia: runoff, soil and nutrient
losses, soil quality, and sediment as nutrient sources. In Doctor of Philosophy phd
Thesis 200917.
Adam, A. M. (2020). Sample Size Determination in Survey Research Sample Size

Determination in Survey Research. June.
Https://doi.org/10.9734/JSRR/2020/v26i530263
Adam, E., Mutanga, O., & Rugege, D. (2010). Multispectral and hyperspectral remote
sensing for identification and mapping of wetland vegetation: a review. Wetlands
Ecology and Management, 18(3), 281–296.
Aires, U. R. V., da Silva, D. D., Moreira, M. C., Ribeiro, C. A. A. S., & Ribeiro, C. B. De M.
(2020). The Use of the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index to Analyze the
Influence of Vegetation Cover Changes on the Streamflow in the Manhuaçu River
Basin, Brazil. Water Resources Management. Https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-020-
02536-1
Akpoti, K., Antwi, E. O., & Kabo-bah, A. T. (2016). Impacts of rainfall variability, land use
and land cover change on stream flow of the black Volta Basin, West Africa.
Hydrology, 3(3), 26.
Alemu, T., Bahrndorff, S., Hundera, K., Alemayehu, E., & Ambelu, A. (2017). Effect of
riparian land use on environmental conditions and riparian vegetation in the east African
highland streams. Limnologica. Https://doi.org/10.1016/j.limno.2017.07.001
Amare, D., Mekuria, W., T/wold, T., Belay, B., Teshome, A., Yitaferu, B., Tessema, T., &
Tegegn, B. (2016). Perception of local community and the willingness to pay to restore
church forests: the case of Dera district, northwestern Ethiopia. Forests, Trees and
Livelihoods, 25(3), 173–186.
Amiri, F., & Tabatabaie, T. (2010). Using remote sensing data for vegetation cover
assessment in semi-arid rangeland of center province of Iran. World Applied Sciences
Journal, 11(12), 1537–1546.
Apse, C., & Karres, N. (2016). Sub-Saharan Africa’s Urban Water Blueprint. August, 22 pp.
Https://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/regions/africa/africa-urban-water-blueprint.pdf
27
Atwebembeire, J., Bazira, J., Kagoro, G., Yatuha, J., Andama, M., & Lejju, J. B. (2018). The
physico-chemical quality of streams and channels draining into river Rwizi, South
Western Uganda.
Atwongyeire, D., Ssekandi, J., Tumwesigye, W., Ndihiziwe, D., & Nagawa, G. (2018). Land
use practices in the rural and urban sub catchments of River Rwizi, Western-Uganda;
their effect on its ecological characteristics.
Banadda, N., Wanyama, J., & Kabenge, I. (2018). Assessing land use and land cover changes
in the Murchison Bay catchment of Lake Victoria basin in Uganda. Journal of
Sustainable Development, 11(1), 44–55.
Bashiru, K. A., & Pechanec, V. (2017). Is Nigeria losing its natural vegetation and
landscape? Assessing the landuse-landcover change trajectories and effects in Onitsha
using remote sensing and GIS. Open Geosciences, 9(1), 707–718.
Https://doi.org/10.1515/geo-2017-0053
Bento, V. A., Gouveia, C. M., dacamara, C. C., Libonati, R., & Trigo, I. F. (2020). The roles
of NDVI and Land Surface Temperature when using the Vegetation Health Index over
dry regions. Global and Planetary Change, 190, 103198.
Bhatti, A. M., Nasu, S., & Takagi, M. (2011). Monitoring System for Suspended Sediment in
Surface Water Using Remotely Sensed Data-ALOS/AVNIR-2.
Borisade, T. V., Odiwe, A. I., Akinwumiju, A. S., Uwalaka, N. O., & Orimoogunje, O. I.
(2021). Assessing the impacts of land use on riparian vegetation dynamics in Osun
State, Nigeria. Trees, Forests and People, 5(November 2020), 100099.
Https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2021.100099
Bouma, J. (1999). Land use change under conditions of high population pressure: the case of
Java. Global Environmental Change, 9(4), 303–312.
Brian, B. (2016). Temporal and spatial patterns of urban sprawl and their implications on
environmental planning in Mbarara Municipality. Applied Geomatics, 8(3), 201–216.
Brian, Mpairwe, D., Ericksen, P., & Peden, D. (2016). Trends in variability and extremes of
rainfall and temperature in the cattle corridor of Uganda. Uganda Journal of Agricultural
Sciences, 17(2), 231. Https://doi.org/10.4314/ujas.v17i2.8
Burgan, R. E. (1993). Monitoring vegetation greenness with satellite data (Vol. 297). US
28
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station.
Butt, A., Shabbir, R., Ahmad, S. S., & Aziz, N. (2015). Land use change mapping and
analysis using Remote Sensing and GIS: A case study of Simly watershed, Islamabad,
Pakistan. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science, 18(2), 251–259.
Chooi, T. K., San, L. H., & Jafri, M. Z. M. (2014). Land Cover Changes and Their
Relationship with Land Surface Temperature Using Remote Sensing Technique
(Penerbit USM). Penerbit Usm.
Chua, E. M., Wilson, S. P., Vink, S., & Flint, N. (2019). The influence of riparian vegetation
on water quality in a mixed land use river basin. River Research and Applications.
Https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.3410
Daud, M. K., Nafees, M., Ali, S., Rizwan, M., Bajwa, R. A., Shakoor, M. B., Arshad, M. U.,
Chatha, S. A. S., Deeba, F., & Murad, W. (2017). Drinking water quality status and
contamination in Pakistan. Biomed Research International, 2017.
De la Barrera, F., & Henríquez, C. (2017). Vegetation cover change in growing urban
agglomerations in Chile. Ecological Indicators, 81, 265–273.
Dyer, J., Stringer, L. C., Dougill, A. J., Leventon, J., Nshimbi, M., Chama, F., Kafwifwi, A.,
Muledi, J. I., Kaumbu, J.-M., & Falcao, M. (2014). Assessing participatory practices in
community-based natural resource management: Experiences in community engagement
from southern Africa. Journal of Environmental Management, 137, 137–145.
Ejigu, M. T. (2021). Overview of water quality modeling. Cogent Engineering, 8(1),

1891711.
Etuk, H. S., & Solomon, R. J. (n.d.). The physio-chemical parameters of souka river, in the
fct, abuja.
Fabricius, K. E., Logan, M., Weeks, S., & Brodie, J. (2014). The effects of river run-off on
water clarity across the central Great Barrier Reef. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 84(1–2),
191–200. Https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.05.012
Fierro, P., Bertrán, C., Tapia, J., Hauenstein, E., Peña-Cortés, F., Vergara, C., Cerna, C., &
Vargas-Chacoff, L. (2017). Effects of local land-use on riparian vegetation, water
quality, and the functional organization of macroinvertebrate assemblages. Science of
the Total Environment. Https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.07.197
29
Fu, B., & Burgher, I. (2015). Riparian vegetation NDVI dynamics and its relationship with
climate, surface water and groundwater. Journal of Arid Environments, 113, 59–68.
Gandhi, G. M., Parthiban, S., Thummalu, N., & Christy, A. (2015). Ndvi: Vegetation Change
Detection Using Remote Sensing and Gis – A Case Study of Vellore District. Procedia
Computer Science, 57, 1199–1210.
Https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.07.415
García, L., Rodríguez, D., Wijnen, M., & Pakulski, I. (2016). Earth observation for water
resources management: current Use and future opportunities for the water sector. World
Bank Publications.
Gemechu, Y. O. (2017). Communitys perception on soil erosion and their participation in soil
conservation practices: A case study of Alaltu watershed of Najo District, Ethiopia.
Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Management, 8(2), 17–24.
Https://doi.org/10.5897/jssem2016.0583
Geremew, A. A. (2013). Assessing the impacts of land use and land cover change on
hydrology of watershed : assessing the impacts of land use and land cover change on
hydrology of watershed : A Case study on Gilgel – Abbay Watershed , Lake Tana. 82.
Glenn, E. P. (2003). Riparian Areas, Functions and Strategies for Management.

Environmental Science & Policy. Https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2003.08.003
Guilloy, Á., Tabacchi, E., & Lambs, L. (2000). Open Archive Toulouse Archive Ouverte (
OATAO ) Impacts of riparian vegetation on hydrological processes Abstract : 14.
Https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1085(200011/12)14
Guo, E., Chen, L., Sun, R., & Wang, Z. (2014). Effects of riparian vegetation patterns on the
distribution and potential loss of soil nutrients: a case study of the Wenyu River in
Beijing. Frontiers of Environmental Science and Engineering.
Https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-014-0667-8
Harter, T. (2003). Groundwater quality and groundwater pollution.
Huang, S., Tang, L., Hupy, J. P., Wang, Y., & Shao, G. (2021). A commentary review on the
use of normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) in the era of popular remote
sensing. Journal of Forestry Research, 32(1), 1–6. Https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-020-
01155-1
30
Jackson, R. B., Carpenter, S. R., Dahm, C. N., mcknight, D. M., Naiman, R. J., Postel, S. L.,
& Running, S. W. (2001). Water in a changing world. Ecological Applications, 11(4),
1027–1045.
Kamusoko, C., & Aniya, M. (2007). Land use/cover change and landscape fragmentation
analysis in the Bindura District, Zimbabwe. Land Degradation & Development, 18(2),
221–233.
Khalid, S., Murtaza, B., Shaheen, I., Ahmad, I., Ullah, M. I., Abbas, T., Rehman, F., Ashraf,
M. R., Khalid, S., & Abbas, S. (2018). Assessment and public perception of drinking
water quality and safety in district Vehari, Punjab, Pakistan. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 181, 224–234.
Khan, K., Lu, Y., Saeed, M. A., Bilal, H., Sher, H., Khan, H., Ali, J., Wang, P.,
Uwizeyimana, H., & Baninla, Y. (2018). Prevalent fecal contamination in drinking
water resources and potential health risks in Swat, Pakistan. Journal of Environmental
Sciences, 72, 1–12.
Khan, M. N., & Mohammad, F. (2014). Eutrophication: challenges and solutions. In

Eutrophication: Causes, consequences and control (pp. 1–15). Springer.
Kroese, J. S., Batista, P. V. G., Jacobs, S. R., Breuer, L., Quinton, J. N., & Rufino, M. C.
(2020). Agricultural land is the main source of stream sediments after conversion of an
African montane forest. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 1–15.
Kulinkina, A. V, Plummer, J. D., Chui, K. K. H., Kosinski, K. C., Adomako-Adjei, T.,

Egorov, A. I., & Naumova, E. N. (2017). Physicochemical parameters affecting the
perception of borehole water quality in Ghana. International Journal of Hygiene and
Environmental Health, 220(6), 990–997.
Latella, M., Bertagni, M. B., Vezza, P., & Camporeale, C. (2020). An Integrated
Methodology to Study Riparian Vegetation Dynamics: From Field Data to Impact
Modeling. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems.
Https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002094
López-Vicente, M., Poesen, J., Navas, A., & Gaspar, L. (2013). Predicting runoff and
sediment connectivity and soil erosion by water for different land use scenarios in the
Spanish Pre-Pyrenees. Catena, 102, 62–73.
31
Machado, R. A. S., Oliveira, A. G., & Lois-González, R. C. (2019). Urban ecological
infrastructure: The importance of vegetation cover in the control of floods and landslides
in Salvador/Bahia, Brazil. Land Use Policy, 89, 104180.
Mapedza, E., Wright, J., & Fawcett, R. (2003). An investigation of land cover change in
Mafungautsi Forest, Zimbabwe, using GIS and participatory mapping. Applied
Geography, 23(1), 1–21.
Mazzarino, M., & Finn, J. T. (2016). An NDVI analysis of vegetation trends in an Andean
watershed. Wetlands Ecology and Management, 24(6), 623–640.
Muallim, M. A., Urban, B. O. F., Planning, R., Planning, R., & Earth, F. O. F. (2019). An
analysis of land use associated smell in kano metropolis bachelor of urban and regional
planning thesis submitted to the department of urban and regional planning , faculty of
earth and environmental sciences , bayero university kano , in partial fulfi.
Mugonola, B., Deckers, J., Poesen, J., Isabirye, M., & Mathijs, E. (2013). Adoption of soil
and water conservation technologies in the Rwizi catchment of south western Uganda.
International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 11(3), 264–281.
Mustapha, A., & Getso, B. U. (2014). Journal of Environments. Journal of Environments,

1(2), 54–59.
Muwembe, K. Y., & Meteorologist, S. (n.d.). Using of Remote Sensing data for Monitoring
of Drought related Surface Water Stress in Pastoral Areas of Uganda BY.
NECOC. (2017). Risk and Vulnerability Profile for Mbarara District. Https://www.necoc-
opm.go.ug/hzwestern2/Mbarara District HRV Profile.pdf
Nemani, R. R., Running, S. W., Pielke, R. A., & Chase, T. N. (1996). Global vegetation
cover changes from coarse resolution satellite data. Journal of Geophysical Research:
Atmospheres, 101(D3), 7157–7162.
Newmark, W. D., & Hough, J. L. (2000). Conserving Wildlife in Africa: Integrated

Conservation and Development Projects and Beyond: Because multiple factors hinder
integrated conservation and development projects in Africa from achieving their
objectives, alternative and complementary approache. Bioscience, 50(7), 585–592.
Nicholas Kiggundu, I. I., Anaba, L. A., Banadda, N., Wanyama, J., & Kabenge, I. (2018).
Assessing land use and land cover changes in the Murchison Bay catchment of Lake
32
Victoria basin in Uganda. Journal of Sustainable Development, 11(1), 44–55.
Nóbrega, R. L. B., Ziembowicz, T., Torres, G. N., Guzha, A. C., Amorim, R. S. S., Cardoso,
D., Johnson, M. S., Santos, T. G., Couto, E., & Gerold, G. (2020). Ecosystem services of
a functionally diverse riparian zone in the Amazon–Cerrado agricultural frontier. Global
Ecology and Conservation. Https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00819
Nuwasasira, S. (2019). Assessment of practices, challenges and benefits of urban agriculture

in Kamukuzi Division, Mbarara Municipality. Makerere University.
Oschwald, W. R. (1972). Sediment‐water interactions. Journal of Environmental Quality,

1(4), 360–366.
Pavanelli, D., & Cavazza, C. (2010). River suspended sediment control through riparian
vegetation: a method to detect the functionality of riparian vegetation. CLEAN–Soil,
Air, Water, 38(11), 1039–1046.
Peter, & Newton, A. C. (2005). Effectiveness of community involvement in delivering

conservation benefits to the Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. Environmental
Conservation, 32(3), 239–247.
Pimentel, D., Houser, J., Preiss, E., White, O., Fang, H., Mesnick, L., Barsky, T., Tariche, S.,
Schreck, J., & Alpert, S. (1997). Water resources: agriculture, the environment, and
society. Bioscience, 47(2), 97–106.
Poppe, M., Kail, J., Aroviita, J., Stelmaszczyk, M., Giełczewski, M., & Muhar, S. (2016).
Assessing restoration effects on hydromorphology in European mid-sized rivers by key
hydromorphological parameters. Hydrobiologia, 769(1), 21–40.
Rezvi, M. R. (2018). The Factors of Declining Agricultural Growth in Bangladesh and Its
Impact on Food Security. South Asian Journal of Social Studies and Economics, 1(1), 1–
9.
Riis, T., Kelly-Quinn, M., Aguiar, F. C., Manolaki, P., Bruno, D., Bejarano, M. D., Clerici,
N., Fernandes, M. R., Franco, J. C., Pettit, N., Portela, A. P., Tammeorg, O., Tammeorg,
P., Rodríguez-González, P. M., & Dufour, S. (2020). Global overview of ecosystem
services provided by riparian vegetation. Bioscience.
Https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biaa041
Rojas, L. F. R., Megerle, A., & Araral, E. (2013). Perception of water quality and health risks
33
in the rural area of Medellín. American Journal of Rural Development, 1(5), 106–115.
Rönnbäck, P., Crona, B., & Ingwall, L. (2007). The return of ecosystem goods and services in
replanted mangrove forests: perspectives from local communities in Kenya.
Environmental Conservation, 313–324.
Rosentreter, J., Borges, A., Poulter, B., & Eyre, B. (2021). Half of global methane emissions
come from aquatic ecosystems-much of this is human-made. The Conversation.
Ruiz-Colmenero, M., Bienes, R., Eldridge, D. J., & Marques, M. J. (2013). Vegetation cover
reduces erosion and enhances soil organic carbon in a vineyard in the central Spain.
Catena, 104, 153–160.
Scatena, F. N. (2000). Drinking water quality. Drinking Water from Forests, 7.
Shanwad, U. K., Gowda, H. H., Prabhuraj, D. K., Reddy, K. A., & Lxmikanth, B. P. (2012).
Impact assessment of watershed programme through remote sensing and geographical
information system. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 40(4), 619–628.
Smith, J., Lee-Thorp, J., & Hall, S. (2007). Climate change and agropastoralist settlement in
the Shashe-Limpopo River Basin, Southern Africa: AD 880 to 1700. South African
Archaeological Bulletin.
Solari, L., Van Oorschot, M., Belletti, B., Hendriks, D., Rinaldi, M., & Vargas‐Luna, A.
(2016). Advances on modelling riparian vegetation—hydromorphology interactions.
River Research and Applications, 32(2), 164–178.
Songa, P., Rumohr, J., & Musota, R. (2015). A shared water risk assessment for a vulnerable
river basin: River Rwizi in Uganda. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment,
197, 213–224.
Stehman, S. V, & Foody, G. M. (2009). Accuracy assessment. In The SAGE handbook of

remote sensing (pp. 297–309). Sage London.
Stenfert Kroese, J., Batista, P. V. G., Jacobs, S. R., Breuer, L., Quinton, J. N., & Rufino, M.
C. (2020). Agricultural land is the main source of stream sediments after conversion of
an African montane forest. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 1–15.
Thomson, D., & Pepperdine, S. (2003). Assessing community capacity for riparian
restoration. Citeseer.
34
Thoradeniya, B., & Bulathsinhala, A. (2015). Community perceptions on drinking and
domestic water: A pilot study. October 2015.
Thornton, C. I., Abt, S. R., & Clary, W. P. (1997). VEGETATION INFLUENCE ON

SMALL STREAM SILTATION 1. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources
Association, 33(6), 1279–1288.
Tomsett, C., & Leyland, J. (2019). Remote sensing of river corridors: A review of current
trends and future directions. River Research and Applications, 35(7), 779–803.
Tsegaye, T., Sheppard, D., Islam, K. R., Johnson, A., Tadesse, W., Atalay, A., & Marzen, L.
(2006). Development of chemical index as a measure of in-stream water quality in
response to land-use and land cover changes. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 174(1–4),
161–179. Https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-006-9090-5
Turyahabwe, N., Tumusiime, D. M., Kakuru, W., & Barasa, B. (2013). Wetland Use/Cover
Changes and Local Perceptions in Uganda. Sustainable Agriculture Research, 2(4), 95.
Https://doi.org/10.5539/sar.v2n4p95
Twyman, C. (2000). Participatory conservation? Community‐based natural resource

management in Botswana. Geographical Journal, 166(4), 323–335.
Vargas Luna, A. (2016). Role of vegetation on river bank accretion. In tu delft university.
Vollmer, D., Prescott, M. F., Padawangi, R., Girot, C., & Grêt-Regamey, A. (2015).
Understanding the value of urban riparian corridors: considerations in planning for
cultural services along an Indonesian river. Landscape and Urban Planning, 138, 144–
154.
Wang, G., Wu, B., & Wang, Z. (2005). Sedimentation problems and management strategies
of sanmenxia reservoir, yellow river, china. Water Resources Research, 41(9).
Whigham, D. F. (1999). Ecological issues related to wetland preservation, restoration,

creation and assessment. Science of the Total Environment, 240(1–3), 31–40.
Xin, Z., Xu, J., & Zheng, W. (2008). Spatiotemporal variations of vegetation cover on the
Chinese Loess Plateau (1981–2006): Impacts of climate changes and human activities.
Science in China Series D: Earth Sciences, 51(1), 67–78.
Yengoh, G. T., Dent, D., Olsson, L., Tengberg, A. E., & Tucker, C. J. (2015). Applications of
35
NDVI for land degradation assessment. In Use of the normalized difference vegetation
index (NDVI) to assess land degradation at multiple scales (pp. 17–25). Springer.
Zeng, Y., Yang, X., Fang, N., & Shi, Z. (2020). Large-scale afforestation significantly
increases permanent surface water in China’s vegetation restoration regions.
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 290, 108001.
Zhou, X., Zhang, K., Zhang, T., Li, C., & Mao, X. (2017). An ignored and potential source of
taste and odor (T&O) issues-biofilms in drinking water distribution system (DWDS).
Applied Microbiology & Biotechnology, 101(9).
36
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Survey Questionnaire
Dear Sir/Madam
My name is GIFT IMMACULATE, a student of Makerere University, Kampala. I am pursuing

a Bachelor’s Degree in Environmental Science. I am currently conducting research on the
topic: Assessment of vegetation cover change and sediment load in River Rwizi catchment,
Mbarara district.
This study is purely for academic purposes and the data obtained will be treated with highest
honesty and maximum confidentiality. You have been identified as a resourceful person in this
research, kindly provide accurate information as much as you can. No individual identities will
be used in any reports or publications resulting from this study.
Please tick the correct option or write where blank spaces are provided.
Section A. Personal Information
(a) Gender of respondent 0. Male 1. Female
(b). Age of respondent………………………………………
(c). Level of education
0. Religious Education Only 1. No formal education 2. Lower primary

(P1-P4) 3. Upper primary (P5-P7) 4. O-Level (senior 1-4) 5. A-Level
(senior 5-6) 6. College-Certificate 7. College-Diploma 8. University
(d). marital status: 0. Single 1. Married 2. Divorced 3. Widow 4. Widower
(e). Type(s) of occupation: 0. Trading 1. Crop farming 2. Livestock rearing 3. Brick

making 4. Fishing 5. Civil servant 6. Other
(specify)…………………………………………………….
Section B. Perceived levels of vegetation cover changes
1(a) For how long have you been in this area? ………………… years
(b) For the time you have been here, have you noticed any changes in the vegetation cover of
this area? 0. No. 1. Yes.
37
(c) If yes in (1) above, what land use/cover (vegetation cover) changes have you observed?
Gain (+) Loss (-)

Wetland
Dense vegetation
Grassland
Agriculture
Built-up areas)
other
Other
Other
Other
2. According to you, what could be the extent of the vegetation cover change?
Not severe Less severe severe Moderately Extremely

severe severe
Wetland
Dense
vegetation
Grasslands
Agriculture
Built-up areas.
Other
Other
Other
Section C. Association of vegetation cover changes with physical water parameters in

River Rwizi.
(a) Have you ever witnessed/seen soil erosion in this area?
0. No. 1. Yes.
(b). If yes, in which land use/cover (s) have you witnessed erosion the most?
38
0. Agriculture 1. Roads. 2. Burnt grasslands. 3. Built-up areas.
4. Open grounds 5. Degraded forests 6. Other……………………………
(c). Where do you think the eroded soils end up or get deposited to?
0. In the river 1. Forests 2. Grasslands. 3. Agriculture lands
4. Air 5. I don’t know 6. Others (specify)……………………….
(d) What do you consider to be the effects of loss of vegetation cover on water characteristics
in R. Rwizi?
Increased Reduced
Change in water color
Change in water taste
Change in smell of water
Mud and silt in water
Other
Other
39
Appendix 2: Sample size determination for the study population (90% confidence).
40
Appendix 3: Error matrix resulting from classifying test pixels 2020
Agriculture Open Dense Grassland Built User

water vegetation up/bare land value
Agriculture 16 0 0 1 0 17
Open water 13 7 20
Dense 0 0 14 3 0 17
vegetation
Grassland 0 0 1 26 0 27
Built up/bare 1 0 2 1 19 23
land
Producer value 17 13 14 21 19 104
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑙𝑦 𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑙𝑠/𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙

Overall accuracy = x100
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑝𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑙𝑠/𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑠
=88/104*100
=84.61%
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑙𝑦 𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑙𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑒𝑎𝑐ℎ 𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑠

User’s accuracy = x100
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑙𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑠/𝑅𝑜𝑤 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙
=Agriculture; 16/17*100= 94%
=Built up; 19/23*100 = 83%
=Grassland; 26/27*100 = 96%
=Dense veg; 14/17*100 = 82%
=Open water; 13/20*100 = 65%
𝑁(∑𝑟𝑖=1 𝑥ii ) − (∑𝑟𝑖=1(𝑥i+ . 𝑥+i )

Kappa co-efficient 𝑲^ = 𝑁 2 − (∑𝑟𝑖=1(𝑥i+ . 𝑥+i )
=104 (88)-(1791)/1042-1791
=9152-1791/10816-1791
=7361/9025*100
=81.6%
41
Agriculture Open Dense Grassland Built up/bare User

water vegetation land value
Open water 0 17 3 1 0 21
Grassland 0 0 2 16 0 18
Built up/bare land 0 0 0 2 24 26
Producer value 16 19 18 22 24 99

=16+17+11+16+24/99*100
= 84/99*100
= 85%

=Agriculture; 16/18*100= 89%
=Built up; 24/26*100 = 92%
=Grassland; 16/18*100 = 89%
=Dense veg; 11/16*100 = 69%
=Open water; 17/21*100 = 81%
𝑁(∑𝑟𝑖=1 𝑥ii ) − (∑𝑟𝑖=1(𝑥i+ . 𝑥+i )

=99(84)-1995/992-(1995)
=8316-1995/9801-1995
=6321/7806*100
=81%
42
Agriculture Open Dense Grassland Built User

water vegetation up/bare land value
Open water 0 11 3 3 0 17
Grassland 0 0 4 10 0 14
Built up/bare land 0 0 1 0 20 21
Producer value 19 18 30 22 17 106

=19+11+22+10+20/106*100
=82/106*100
=77.36%

=Agriculture; 19/25*100= 76%
=Built up; 17/21*100 = 81%
=Grassland; 10/14*100 = 71%
=Dense veg; 22/29*100 = 76%
=Open water; 11/17*100 = 65%
𝑁(∑𝑟𝑖=1 𝑥ii ) − (∑𝑟𝑖=1(𝑥i+ . 𝑥+i )

=106(82)-2316/1062-2316
=8692-2316/11236-2316
=6376/8920*100
=71.48%
43

GIFTS Final Dissertation MUK DM3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GIFTS Final Dissertation MUK DM3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GIFTS Final Dissertation MUK DM3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MAKERERE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

SCHOOL OF FORESTRY ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

ASSESSMENT OF VEGETATION COVER CHANGE AND WATER PHYSICAL

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL

This dissertation has been written and submitted under my supervision.

Dr. DAVID MFITUMUKIZA

This work is dedicated to

I am splendid pleased for totally everything

May the Almighty God bless you all abundantly.

Table 3.1:Sample size determination ....................................................................................... 13

Figure 3.1: Location of the study area in Uganda ...................................................................... 9

GIS Geographic Information System

LUCC Land use Land Cover Changes

LULC Land Use Land Cover

NDVI Normalized Difference Vegetation Index

RGB Red Green Blue

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences

1.3 General objective

1.3.2 Research questions

1.4 Justification of the study

2.1 Vegetation cover changes

2.2 Monitoring of vegetation cover changes

2.3 Association of vegetation cover changes and physical water parameters

2.5 Importance of community’s perceptions in natural resource management

Sustainable management of natural resources depends on knowledge, perceptions and values

3.1 Study area

Figure 3.1: Location of the study area in Uganda

3.1.4 Major economic activities in the study area

3.2 Data collection methods

3.2.1.1 Accuracy assessment

3.2.2 Assessment of community perceptions on vegetation cover changes and associated

3.2.3 Sampling of respondents.

3.2.3.1 Sample size determination

Table 3.1:Sample size determination

Table 3.3.1 Vegetation cover classes.

Where, K = Kappa Coefficient, r = number of rows/columns in the error matrix, N = total

4.1 Spatial and temporal LULC changes

Figure 4.2: River Rwizi sub catchment LULC changes

4.1.1 Accuracy assessment

NDVI1999 NDVI2010 NDVI2020

4.2 Community’s perception on vegetation cover changes

P value 0.63 0.78 0.86 0.80 0.04

n 101 102 98 98 102

n 101 102 98 98 102

5. 2 Community perception on vegetation cover changes

Adam, A. M. (2020). Sample Size Determination in Survey Research Sample Size

Ejigu, M. T. (2021). Overview of water quality modeling. Cogent Engineering, 8(1),

Glenn, E. P. (2003). Riparian Areas, Functions and Strategies for Management.

Harter, T. (2003). Groundwater quality and groundwater pollution.

Khan, M. N., & Mohammad, F. (2014). Eutrophication: challenges and solutions. In

Kulinkina, A. V, Plummer, J. D., Chui, K. K. H., Kosinski, K. C., Adomako-Adjei, T.,

Mustapha, A., & Getso, B. U. (2014). Journal of Environments. Journal of Environments,

Newmark, W. D., & Hough, J. L. (2000). Conserving Wildlife in Africa: Integrated

Nuwasasira, S. (2019). Assessment of practices, challenges and benefits of urban agriculture

Oschwald, W. R. (1972). Sediment‐water interactions. Journal of Environmental Quality,

Peter, & Newton, A. C. (2005). Effectiveness of community involvement in delivering