LAND RESOURCE INVENTORY AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF FARM HOUSEHOLDS FOR WATERSHED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BUDAGUMPA-1 (4D3A9E1c) MICROWATERSHED Irakallagada Hobli, Koppal Taluk and District, Karnataka

Abstract

The land resource inventory of Budagumpa-1microwatershed was conducted using village cadastral maps and IRS satellite imagery on 1:7920 scale. The false colour composites of IRS imagery were interpreted for physiography and these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the Microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 363 ha in Koppaltaluk and district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought - prone with an average annual rainfall of 662 mm, of which about 424 mm is received during south –west monsoon, 161 mm during north-east and the remaining 77 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 83 per cent is covered by soils, 13 per cent by rock out crops, four per cent by water bodies, settlements and others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 17 soil series and 21 soil phases (management units) and 6 land use classes.  The length of crop growing period is <90 days and starts from 2nd week of August to 2nd week of November.  From the master soil map, several interpretative and thematic maps like land capability, soil depth, surface soil texture, soil gravelliness, available water capacity, soil slope and soil erosion were generated.  Soil fertility status maps for macro and micronutrients were generated based on the surface soil samples collected at every 250 m grid interval.  Land suitability for growing 28 major agricultural and horticultural crops were assessed and maps showing the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  Entire area is suitable for agriculture.  About 12 per cent of the soils are shallow (25-50 cm), 3 per centis moderately shallow (50-75 cm), 33per cent moderately deep (75- 100 cm) and 36 per cent has deep to very deep soils (100 ->150 cm).  About 14per cent of the area is having sandy at the surface, 16 per cent loamy soils and 53 per cent has clayey soils at the surface.  About 44per cent of the area has non-gravelly (<15%) soils and39per cent has gravelly soils (15-35 % gravel).  With respect to available water capacity 21 per cent of the area has very low (<50mm/m), 32per cent of the area has low (51-100 mm/m), 14 per cent medium (101-150 mm/m), 6 per cent high (151-200mm/m) and 11 per cent area is very high (>200mm/m) in available water capacity.  An area of about 11 per cent has nearly level (0-1%) lands and 73 per cent has very gently sloping (1-3%) lands.  An area of about 39 per cent is slightly eroded (e1) and 44 per cent is moderately eroded (e2) lands.  An area of about <1 per cent has soils that are slightly acid (pH 6.0 to 6.5), 23 per cent neutral soils (pH 6.5 to 7.3), 22 per cent slightly alkaline (pH 7.3 to 7.8), 30 per cent moderately alkaline (pH 7.8 to 8.4) and 7 per cent soils strongly alkaline (pH 8.4 to 9.0).  Electrical conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly < 2dsm-1indicating that soils are non saline.  Organic carbon is medium (0.5-0.75%) in 81 per cent and high (>0.75%) in 2 per cent area of the soils.  Available phosphorus is medium (23-57 kg/ha) in 29per cent and high (>57 kg/ha) in 54 per cent area of the soils.  Available potassium islow (<145 kg/ha) in <1 per cent, medium (145-337 kg/ha) in 45 per cent and high (>337 kg/ha) in 39 per cent of the soils.  Available sulphur is low (<10 ppm) in 71per cent and medium (10-20 ppm) in 12 per cent area of the soils.  Available boron is low (<0.5 ppm) in about 11 per cent and medium (0.5-1.0 ppm) in 73per cent area of the soils.  Available iron is deficient in 35 per cent and sufficient (>4.5 ppm) in 48per cent of the area.  Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in 81 of the area and sufficient in 3 per cent of the area.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in the entire area.  The land suitability for 28 major agricultural and horticultural crops grown in the microwatershed was assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (class S1) and moderately suitable (class S2) are given below. It is however to be noted that a given soil may be suitable for various crops but what specific crop to be grown may be decided by the farmer looking to his capacity to invest on various inputs, marketing infrastructure, market price, and finally the demand and supply position. Land suitability for various crops in the microwatershed Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Sorghum 63(17) 137(37) Pomegranate 62(17) 145(40) Maize 25(7) 174(48) Guava 25(7) 135(37) Bajra 107(30) 110(30) Jackfruit 62(17) 98(27) Redgram 62(17) 130(36) Jamun 13(3) 186(51) Bengal gram 38(11) 165(45) Musambi 100(28) 107(30) Groundnut 12(3) 171(47) Lime 100 (28) 107(30) Sunflower 100(28) 129 (35) Cashew 10(3) 161(44) Cotton 88(24) 112(31) Custard apple 184(51) 77(21) Chilli 107(30) 45 (12) Amla 145(40) 115(32) Tomato 107(30) 45(12) Tamarind 13(3) 90(25) Drumstick 64(18) 156(43) Marigold 25(7) 174(48) Mulberry 64(18) 187(51) Chrysanthemum 25(7) 174(48) Mango 13(3) 51(14) Jasmine 25(7) 127(35) Sapota 62(17) 98(27) Crossandra 25(7) 130(36) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 6identified LUCs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested to these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.,  Soil and water conservation treatment and drainage line treatment palnshave been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change SALIENT FINDINGS OF THE STUDY  The data indicated that 35 farmers were sampled in Budagumpa-1 micro watershed among them 8 (22.86%) were marginal farmers, 7 (20 %) were small farmers, 7 (20 %) were semi medium farmers, 6 (17.14%) were medium farmers, 2(5.71%) were large farmers and 5 (14.29%) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there were 157 population households were there in the studied micro watershed. Among them 89 (56.69%) men and 68 (43.31 %) were women. The average family size of landless was 5, marginal, small and semi medium farmers were 7 and medium and large farmers were 6. On an average the family size was 4.  The data indicated that 20 (12.74%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 76 (48.41 %) were in 16-35 years of age, 47 (29.94 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 14 (8.92%) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Budagumpa-1had 42.04 per cent illiterates, 1.27 per cent functional literates, 22.93 per cent of them had primary school education, 8.92 per cent of them had middle school, 12.74 per cent them had high school education, 5.10 per cent of them had PUC education and 6.37 per cent of them had degree education.  The results indicated that, 77.14 per cent of households practicing agriculture, 8.57 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labour and 14.29 per cent of the household heads were general labour.  The results indicated that agriculture was the major occupation for 40.76 per cent of the household members, 23.57 per cent were agricultural labourers, 11.46 per cent were general labours and 0.64 per cent were in private sector, were in trade and business, housewives and children’s and 21.02 per cent of them were students. In case of landless farmers 70.83 per cent of them were general labours and 29.17 per cent of them were students.  In case of marginal farmers 42.86 per cent of them were doing agriculture, 17.86 per cent of them were agriculture labour, 3.57 per cent of them were general labour and 35.71 per cent of them were students. In small farmers 61.29 per cent of them were doing agriculture, 16.13 per cent of them were agriculture labour, 3.23 per cent of them were in private service and 3.23 per cent of them were doing trade& business and housewives. In case of semi medium farmers 50 per cent of them were agriculturist, 34.62 per cent of them were agriculture labour and 11.54 per cent of them were students. In medium farmers 37.84 per cent of them were agriculturist, 35.14 per cent of them were agricultural labour and 21.62 per cent of them were students. Similarly in case of large farmers 54.55 per cent of them were agriculturist and 45.45 per cent of them were agricultural labour. 2  The results showed that 0.64 per cent of them participated in cooperative bank and 99.36 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions. Landless, marginal, semi medium, medium and large farmers were found to have no participation in any local institutions. Small farmers were found to participate in one or the other local institutions.  The results indicated that 65.71 per cent of the households possess thatched house, 25.71 per cent of the households possess Katcha house and 8.57 per cent of the households possess Pacca house.  The results showed that, 74.29 per cent of the households possess TV, 48.57 per cent of the households possess mixer/grinder, 17.14 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 31.43 per cent of the households possess motor cycle and 100 per cent of the households possess mobile phones.  The results showed that the average value of television was Rs. 8269, mixer/grinder was Rs. 1676, bicycle was Rs.2166, motor cycle was Rs.29583 and mobile phone was Rs.2303.  The result showed that about 17.14 per cent of the households possess bullock cart, 28.57 per cent of them possess plough, 8.57 per cent of the households possess power tiller, 11.43 per cent of the households possess tractor, 17.14 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 91.43 per cent of the households possess weeder, 5.71 43 per cent of the households possess harvester, 2.86 per cent of the households possess thresher and 5.71 per cent of the households possess chaff cutter.  The results showed that the average value of bullock cart was Rs.18333; the average value of plough was Rs. 1250, the average value of power tiller was Rs. 25000, the average value of tractor was Rs. 475000, the average value of sprayer was Rs. 10666, the average value of weeder was Rs. 80, the average value of harvester was Rs.35000, the average value of thresher was Rs. 37000 and the average value of chaff cutter was Rs. 3000.  The results indicated that, 31.43 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 17.14 per cent of the households possess local cow, 5.71 per cent of the households possess buffalo and 2.86 per cent of the households possess sheep.  The data indicated that in case of marginal farmers, 25 per cent of the households possess local cow and 12.50 per cent of the households possess local cow, buffalo and sheep respectively. In case of small farmers, 14.29 per cent of households possess bullock and 28.57 per cent possess local cow. In case of semi medium farmers, 28.57 per cent of the households possess bullock and 14.29 per cent of the households possess local cow and buffalo. 66.67 medium farmers possess bullock and 16.67 farmers possess local cow and 100 per cent of the large farmers possess bullock and 50 per cent of them possess local cow. 3  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 2, average own labour (women) available was 1.61, average hired labour (men) available was 8.80 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.38.  The data showed that in case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.25, average own labour (women) was also 1.11, average hired labour (men) was 7.67 and average hired labour (women) available was 7. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 1.71, average own labour (women) was 1.71, average hired labour (men) was 12.14 and average hired labour (women) available was 9.71. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was 1.43, average hired labour (men) was 10 and average hired labour (women) available was 8.33. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 3.17, average own labour (women) was 2.17, average hired labour (men) was 6.67 and average hired labour (women) available was 5. In case of large farmers average own labour men available was 2.50, average own labour (women) was 2.50, average hired labour (men) was 5 and average hired labour (women) available was 5.  The results indicated that, 88.57 per cent of the household opined equally that the hired labour was adequate.  The results indicated that, households of the Budagumpa-1 micro watershed possess 25.14 ha (43.40%) of dry land and 32.78 ha (56.60 %) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 5.43 ha (91.85%) of dry land 0.48 ha (8.15%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 7.89 ha (89.65 %) of dry land and 0.89 ha (10.14 %) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 4.05 ha (35.39 %) of dry land and 7.39 ha (64.61%) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 7.77 ha (41.56%) of dry land and 10.93 ha (58.44%) irrigated land. Large farmers possess 13.10 ha (100%) of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 345927.24 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 353,684.73. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 552,160.94 for dry land and Rs. 1,660,504.12 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 316,666.67 for dry land Rs. 898,181.80 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 247,000 for dry land and Rs. 541,073.38 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 283,020.83 for dry land and Rs. 384,222.22 for irrigated land. In case of large farmers the average land value was Rs. 137,391.84 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 14 functioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, there were 1functioning and 1 defunctioning open wells in the micro watershed. 4  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 40 per cent of the farmers and open well was source of irrigation for 2.86 per cent.  The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 35.71 meters.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers there was 0.96 per cent of irrigated land, in case of small farmers there was 0.89 ha of irrigated land, in case of semi medium farmers there was 9.31 ha of irrigated land, medium farmers were having 11.34 ha of irrigated land and large farmers were having 1.62 ha of irrigated land. On an average there were 24.12 ha of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, farmers have grown groundnut (11.58ha), ladies figure (1.29 ha), maize (26.93 ha), mango (2.43 ha), onion (0.40 ha), paddy (0.85 ha), sorghum (1.21 ha), tomato (0.81 ha) in kharif season. Also grown groundnut (2.43 ha) and maize (0.48 ha) in Rabi season. Marginal farmers have grown groundnut, ladies figure, maize and paddy. Small farmers have grown groundnut, maize, paddy and sorghum. Semi medium farmers have grown groundnut, maize and tomato. Medium farmers have grown groundnut, maize, mango, onion and tomato. Large farmers have grown groundnut, ladies figure and maize.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Budagumpa-1 micro watershed was found to be 72.72 per cent. In case of marginal farmers it was 98.73 per cent, in small farmers it was 90.79, in semi medium farmers it was 90.48, in medium farmers it was 89.13 per cent and in large farmers it was 32.56 per cent.  The results indicated that, 85.71 per cent of the households have bank account and 77.14 per cent of the households have savings. 100 percent of marginal, small and large farmers possess both bank account savings respectively. In case of semi medium farmers, 100 per cent of possess bank account and 85.71 per cent farmer’s savings. In Medium farmers, 100 per cent of farmers possess bank account and 66.67 per cent have savings respectively.  The results indicated that, 75 per cent of marginal, 71.43 per cent of small, 28.57 per cent of semi medium, 16.67 per cent of medium farmers and 50 per cent of large farmers have borrowed credit from different sources.  The results indicated that, 6.67 per cent have availed loan in cooperative Bank, 26.67 per cent have availed loan from friends/relatives, 53.33 per cent have availed loan in Grameena bank and 13.33 per cent have availed loan from money lender.  The results indicated that, marginal, small, semi medium and medium have availed Rs.50833.33, Rs. 109000, Rs. 316000 and Rs, 310000 respectively. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed is 119,466.67.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production.  The results indicated that, 81.82 per cent of the household’s barrowed private credit for agriculture production and 18.18 per cent of the household’s barrowed private credit for social functions like marriage. 5  Results indicated that 100 per cent of households were unpaid their institutional loan.  Results indicated that 54.55 per cent of the households have partially paid their loan and 45.45 per cent have unpaid their private credit.  The results indicated that 25 per cent of the households were opined that helped to perform timely agricultural operations and 75 per cent of the households were opined that higher rate of interest.  The results indicated that, 9.09 per cent of the households were opined that easy accessibility of credit, 54.55 per cent of the households were opined that loan amount was adequate to fulfill the requirement and 18.18 per cent of the households were opined that helped to perform timely agricultural operations.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 20131.66. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 22249.38. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs. 2117.73. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.11.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 52091.06. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 69130.38. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. 17039.32. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.33.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for paddy was Rs. 79623.59. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 67722.91. The net income from paddy cultivation was Rs. -11900.69. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.85.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 23029.06. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 22625.29. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. -403.77. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.98.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for tomato was Rs. 65128.50. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 49400. The net income from tomato cultivation was Rs. -15728.50. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.76.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for mango was Rs. 38242.52. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 24700. The net income from mango cultivation was Rs. -13542.52. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.65.  The results indicated that, 28.57 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 25.71 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was adequate.  The table indicated that, in landless farmers, the average income from wage was Rs. 106000. In marginal farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 28,750 and agriculture was Rs. 81,118.75. In small farmers the average income from business was Rs. 25,000, wage was Rs. 18,571.43, agriculture was Rs. 68,921.43 and dairy farm was Rs. 3,500. In semi medium farmers the average income from service/salary was Rs. 8,571.43, wage was Rs. 9,285.71 and agriculture was Rs. 72,142.86. In medium farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 10,833.33, agriculture was 6 Rs. 67,500, and dairy farm was Rs. 333.33. In case of large farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 10,000, agriculture was Rs. 110,000 and dairy farm was Rs. 1,000.  The results indicated that, in landless farmers, the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 23000, in marginal farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs.5750 and agriculture was Rs.40875. In case of small farmers the average expenditure from business was Rs. 115,000, wage was Rs. 6,600, agriculture was Rs. 24,571.43 and dairy farm was Rs. 15,000. In case of semi medium farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs.20000, wage was Rs. 1,600 and agriculture was Rs. 29,285.71. In case of medium farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 4,000, agriculture was Rs. 28,000 and dairy farm was Rs. 500. In large farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs.500, agriculture was Rs.55000 and dairy farm was Rs.500.  The results indicated that, sampled households have grown 34 coconut and 131 mango trees in their field and also planted 2 coconut trees in their back yard.  The results indicated that, households have planted 2 teak, 76 neem and 5 tarmind trees in their field and also planted 1 neem tree in their back yard.  The results indicate that, households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 5,200.14 for land development, Rs. 2,314.43 in irrigation facility, Rs.2714.29 for improved crop production and Rs.971.43 for improved livestock management.  Marginal households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 2500 for land development, Rs. 750 for irrigation facility, Rs.1375 for improved crop production and Rs.875 for improved livestock management. Small farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 2857.14 for land development, Rs. 1142.86 in irrigation facility, Rs.1714.29 for improved crop production and Rs.428.57 for improved livestock management. Semi medium farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 7515 for land development, Rs. 4715 in irrigation facility, Rs.4428.57 for improved crop production and Rs.1142.86 for improved livestock management. Medium farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 11666.67 for land development, Rs. 4666.67 for irrigation facility, Rs.5166.67 for improved crop production and Rs.1833.33 for improved livestock management. Large farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 9000 for land development, Rs. 3000 for irrigation facility, Rs.5000 for improved crop production and Rs.2500 for improved livestock management.  The results indicated that, for land development, 2.86 per cent of the farmers were depend on government subsidy, 40 per cent were depend on loan from the bank and 2.86 per cent of the households were depend on soft loan. 2.86 per cent of the households were dependent on government subsidy; own funds and soft loan for land development for irrigation facility respectively and 28.57 per cent were dependent on loan from the bank for irrigation facility. Similarly for improved crop production, 7 31.43 per cent of the households were dependent on loan from the bank, 8.57 per cent were dependent on their own funds and 2.86 per cent of the households were dependent on soft loan. For improved livestock management 17.14 per cent of the households were dependent on loan from bank, 8.57 per cent were dependent on own funds and 2.86 per cent were dependent on soft loan.  The results indicated that, Bajra, ladies finger, maize, paddy, sorghum and tomato crops were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Groundnut and mango were sold to the extent of 90.99 per cent and 66.67 per cent respectively. Average price obtained by bajra was Rs.1300/q, groundnut was Rs.3531.82/q, ladies finger was Rs.1250/q, maize was Rs.1145/q, mango was Rs.2000/q, paddy was Rs.1450/q, sorghum was Rs.2100/q and tomato was Rs.1000/q.  The results indicated that, 40 percent of the households have sold their produce to local/village merchant, 42.85 percent of the households sold their produce in regulated markets and 2.85 percent of the households sold their produce in cooperative marketing society.  The results indicated that 17.14 per cent of the households have used cart as a mode of transport, 57.14 per cent of them have used tractor and 11.43 per cent have used truck as a mode of transport.  The results indicated that, 37.14 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 25 percent of marginal farmers, 28.57 per cent of small farmers, 57.14 per cent of semi medium farmers, 66.67 percent of medium farmers and 50 per cent of the large farmers.  The results indicated that, 82.86 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing including 100 per cent of marginal farmers, small farmers, semi medium farmers and large farmers and 83.33 per cent of the medium farmers respectively.  The results indicated that, 14.29 per cent of the households have adopted field bunding which includes 25 per cent of marginal, 28.57 per cent of small farmers and 14.29 per cent of semi medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households who adopted field bunding opined that bunds required full replacement.  The results indicated that 14.29 per cent of soil conservation structure is constructed by government.  The results indicated that, 97.14 percent used fire wood as a source of fuel.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the source of drinking water for 57.14 per cent, 25.71 per cent of them were using bore well and 14.29 per cents of the households were using lake/tank for drinking water.  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 100 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, 54.29 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 100 per cent of landless, 12.50 per cent of marginal, 100 per cent of small, 14.29 8 per cent of semi medium, 16.67 per cent of medium and 100 per cent of large farmers had sanitary toilet facility.  The results indicated that, 97.14 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL card.  The results indicated that, 28.57 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 20 per cent of the landless, 25 percent of the marginal, 14.29 per cent of the small, 42.86 per cent of the semi medium, 33.33 percent of the medium farmers and 50 per cent of the large farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits , milk, egg and meat were adequate for 100 per cent, 97.14 per cent, 5.71 per cent, 17.14 per cent, 25.71 per cent, 82.86 per cent, 85.71 per cent and 77.14 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that, oilseed; vegetables, fruits, milk, egg and meat were inadequate for 91.43 per cent, 80 per cent, 68.57 per cent, 11.43 per cent, 11.43 per cent and 17.14 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that milk were market surplus for 2.86 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil and wild animal menace on farm field was experienced by 82.86 per cent of the households, frequent incidence of pest and diseases was experienced by 37.14 per cent of the farmers, inadequacy of irrigation water was experienced by 31.43 per cent of the households, high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals was experienced and high rate of interest on credit was experienced by 40 per cent of the farmers, low price for the agricultural commodities was experienced by 71.43 per cent of the farmers, lack of marketing facilities in the area was experienced 80 per cent of the households, inadequate of extension services experienced by 71.43 per cent of the households, lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market was experienced by 74.29 per cent of the households and less rainfall was experienced by 2.86 per cent of the farmers.