LAND RESOURCE INVENTORY AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF FARM HOUSEHOLDS FOR WATERSHED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT KALIGAUDANAHALLI (4D3E2H1b) MICRO WATERSHED Gundlupet Taluk, Chamarajanagara District, Karnataka

Abstract

The land resource inventory of Kaligaudanahalli Microwatershed 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 the 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 boundries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characterstics, classification and use potentials of the soils in the microwartershed. The present study covers an area of 612 ha in Gundlupet taluk of Chamarajanagar district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought prone with an average annual rainfall of 734 mm, of which about 254 mm is received during south –west monsoon, 268 mm during north-east and the remaining 212 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 86 per cent is covered by soils, six per cent by others and two per cent is under forest. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 12 soil series and 36 soil phases (management units) and 10 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is about 150 days starting from the 3rd week of June to 1st week of October.  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 major agricultural and horticultural crops were assessed and maps showing the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  About 86 per cent area is suitable for agriculture, 6 per cent not suitable for agriculture and two per cent area is under forest.  About 56 per cent of the soils are moderately deep (75-100 cm) to very deep (>150 cm) and 36 per cent are shallow to moderately shallow (25-75 cm).  About 34 per cent of the area has clayey soils at the surface, 40 per cent loamy soils and 22 per cent area has sandy soils.  About 7 per cent of the area has non-gravelly soils, 39 per cent gravelly soils (15-35 % gravel) and 49 per cent has very gravelly (35- 60% gravel) soils.  About 88 per cent has soils that are very low (<50mm/m) to low (51-100 mm/m) in available water capacity and a small area of 7 per cent has very high (>200 mm/m) available water capacity.  About 86 per cent of the area has nearly level (0-1%) to very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands and 10 per cent is under gently sloping (3-5%) to moderately sloping (5-10%) lands.  An area of about 64 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1), 22 per cent moderately eroded (e2) and 10 per cent soils are severely eroded (e3).  An area of about 2 per cent has soils that are slightly acidic (pH 6.0-6.5); 14 per cent neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) and maximum area of about 80 per cent has soils that are slightly alkaline (pH 7.3 to 7.8) to strongly alkaline (pH 8.4 to 9.0).  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly <2 dSm-1indicating that the soils are non-saline.  About 16 per cent of the soils are low (<0.5%), 64 per cent medium (0.5-0.75%) and 16 per cent are high (>0.75%) in organic carbon.  About 40 per cent of the soils are low (<23 kg/ha), medium (23-57 kg/ha) in 54 per cent area and one per cent of the soils are high (>57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 12 per cent of the soils are low (<145 kg/ha), medium (145-337 kg/ha) 28 per cent area and 55 per cent of the soils are high (>337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is low (<10 ppm) in about 83 per cent area and medium (10-20 ppm) in about 12 per cent area.  Available boron is low (0.5 ppm) in about 19 per cent area, medium (0.5-1.0 ppm) in 71 per cent area and high (>1.0 ppm) in 5 per cent area.  Available iron is deficient in about 51 per cent area and sufficient in 44 per cent area.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in all the soils of the microwatershed.  The land suitability for 27 major crops grown in the microwatershed were assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (S1) and moderately suitable (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, 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 8 (1) 183 (31) Sapota 36 (6) 6 (1) Maize 36 (6) 147 (25) Guava 36 (6) 6 (1) Redgram 36 (6) 16 (3) Banana 36 (6) 8 ( 1 ) Horsegram 36 (6) 163 (27) Jackfruit 36 (6) - Field bean 36 (6) 163 (27) Jamun 36 (6) 8 (1) Groundnut - 189 (32) Musambi 36 (6) 8 (1) Sunflower - 44 (7) Lime 36 (6) 8 (1) Cotton 8 (1) 147 (25) Cashew - 16 (3) Onion 36 (6) 155 (26) Custard apple - 108 (18) Potato 36 (6) 147 (25) Amla - 108 (18) Beans 36 (6) 155 (26) Tamarind 36 (6) 8 (1) Beetroot 36 (6) 147 (25) Marigold 36 (6) 161 (27) Turmeric 36 (6) 147 (25) Chrysanthemum 36 (6) 155 (26) Mango 36 (6) - Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 10 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fibre and horticulture crops.  Maintaining soil-health is vital to 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 plan has 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 and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF FARM HOUSEHOLDS Baseline socioeconomic characterisation is prerequisite to prepare action plan for program implementation and to assess the project performance before making any changes in the watershed development program. The baseline provides appropriate policy direction for enhancing productivity and sustainability in agriculture. Methodology: Kalligaudanahalli micro-watershed (Annurkeri sub-watershed, Gundlupet taluk, Chamarajanagar district) is located in between 11041’ – 11043’ North latitudes and 76037’ – 76041’ East longitudes, covering an area of about 584 ha, bounded by Karle, Siddapura, Siidainapura and Maguvinahalli villages with length of growing period (LGP) 120-150 days. We used soil resource map as basis for sampling farm households to test the hypothesis that soil quality influence crop selection, and conservation investment of farm households. The level of technology adoption and productivity gaps and livelihood patterns were analyses. The cost of soil degradation and ecosystem services were quantified. Results: The socio-economic outputs for the Kalligaudanahalli micro-watershed (Annurkeri sub-watershed, Gundlupet taluk, Chamarajanagar district) are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 60 to 40 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 55 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 70.0 per cent.  Social groups belong to other backward castes (OBC) among all sample households.  Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is the source of energy for a cooking among all sample households.  About 20.0 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  About of farm households (10.0 %) are having MGNREGA card for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 80.0 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 70.0 per cent of sample households.  Institutional participation is only 25.7 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making for agriculture production among all households was found. 2 Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 0.77 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal and small farmers. The dry land of 70 per cent and irrigated land 30 per cent of total cultivated land area among the sample farmers.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 2.3 per cent and agriculture is a main and agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 48.8 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs. 9875 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs. 2520 per household, about 90.0 per cent of sample farmers owned plough.  The average value of livestock is around Rs. 19749 per household; about 66.6 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 612.6 grams (1466.7 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 90.0 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs.79659 per household. Among all sample farm households are above poverty line.  The per capita monthly average expenditure is around Rs.1543. Environmental Indicators-Ecosystem Services;  The value of ecosystem service helps to support investment to decision on soil and water conservation and in promoting sustainable land use.  The onsite cost of different soil nutrients lost due to soil erosion is around Rs.1119.8 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs.628247 per year for the total area of 612.4 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 30962/ ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in potato (Rs. 125268) followed by onion (Rs. 78483), horse gram (Rs. 11372), maize (Rs. 9165), sorghum (Rs. 8385), groundnut (Rs. 4775) and sunflower (Rs. 4541).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 1108/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in maize (Rs. 2315) followed by groundnut (Rs. 820), sorghum (Rs. 761) and horse gram (Rs. 536).  The data on water requirement for producing one quintal of grain is considered for estimating the total value of water required for crop production. The per hectare value of water used and value of water was maximum in cotton (Rs. 59890) followed by sorghum (Rs. 46324), sunflower (Rs. 36827), horse gram (Rs. 27546), maize (Rs. 24574), groundnut (Rs. 20546), onion (Rs. 18140) and potato (Rs. 16304). 3 Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is sorghum (24.5 %) followed by maize (16.4%) sunflower (13.8 %), groundnut (11.3 %), onion (11.3 %), cotton (10.6 %), potato (7.6%) and horse gram (5.2 %).  In Kaligaudanahalli micro-watershed, major soil is soil of Hundipura (HDR) series soils is having shallow soil depth covers around 10.9 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing cotton (39.4%), horse gram (20.4%) and sunflower (40.1%), Kannigala (KNG) soils are having moderately deep and well drained soil depth covers around 16.4 % of area, the crops are onion (33.4%) and potato (66.6%). Honnegaudanahalli (HGH) soils are having very deep and well drained soil depth covers around 13.5 % of areas; crops are maize (37.5%) and sorghum (62.5%). Kalligaudanahalli (KDH) soils are having very deep soil depth covers around 31.6 % of area, crops are maize (50.0 %), sorghum (50.0 %) and Annurkeri (ARK) soil are having very deep and well drained soil depth covers around 6.3 % of area, the major crop grown is groundnut and onion.  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for onion ranges between Rs.138356/ha in ARK soil (with BCR of 1.45) and Rs.88775/ha in KNG soil (with BCR of 2.0).  In sorghum the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 35530/ha in KDH soil (with of 1.70) and Rs.8688/ha in HGH soil (with BCR1.81).  In sunflower the cost of cultivation is Rs. 39223/ha in HDR soil (with BCR of 1.13).  In maize the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 30105/ha in KDH soil (with BCR of 1.37) and Rs.20028/ha HGH soil (with BCR of 1.46).  In cotton cost of cultivation in HDR soil is Rs. 94916/ha (with BCR of 1.09).  In potato cost of cultivation in KNG soil is Rs. 50843/ha (with BCR of 3.46).  In groundnut the cost of cultivation in ARK soil is Rs. 26982/ha (with BCR of 1.21).  In sunflower cultivation in HDR soil is Rs 48657/ha (with BCR of 1.95) and horse gram the cost cultivation in HDR soil is Rs.19056/ha (with BCR of 1.94).  The land management practices reported by the farmers are crop rotation, tillage practices, fertilizer application and use of farm yard manure (FYM). Due to higher wages farmer are following labour saving strategies is not prating soil and water conservation measures. Less ownership of livestock limiting application of FYM.  It was observed soil quality influences on the type and intensity of land use. More fertilizer applications are deeper soil to maximize returns. 4 Suggestions;  Involving farmers is watershed planning helps in strengthing institutional participation.  The per capita food consumption and monthly income is very low. Diversifying income generation activities from crop and livestock production in order to reduce risk related to drought and market prices.  Majority of farmers reported that they are not getting timely support/extension services from the concerned development departments.  By strengthing agricultural extension for providing timely advice improved technology there is scope to increase in net income of farm households.  By adopting recommended package of practices by following the soil test fertiliser recommendation, there is scope to increase yield in cotton (13.0 %), horse gram (8.3 %), sunflower (33.2 %), onion (69.6 to 75.7 %), potato (74.1 %), maize (73.1 to 78.4 %), sorghum (33.8 to 50.5 %) and groundnut (56.8 %).