LAND RESOURCE INVENTORY AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF FARM HOUSEHOLDS FOR WATERSHED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT HOSAHALLI-2 (4D5B1K1b) MICROWATERSHED Yadgir Taluk and District, Karnataka

Abstract

The land resource inventory of Hosahalli-2Microwatershed 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 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 632 ha in Yadgir taluk & district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought-prone with an average annual rainfall of 866 mm, of which about 652 mm is received during south-west monsoon, 138 mm during north-east and the remaining 76 mm during the rest of the year. An area of 539 ha in the microwatershed is covered by soils, 4 ha area is covered by railway line, 50 ha area is under rock outcrops and 39 ha area is covered by others (habitation and water body). The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 6 soil series and 7 soil phases (management units) and 4 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is about 120-150 days starting from 1st week of June to 4th 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 320 m grid interval.  Land suitability for growing 29 major agricultural and horticultural crops was assessed and maps showing the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  About 539 ha area in the microwatershed is suitable for agriculture.  About <1 per cent of area is moderately shallow (50-75 cm), 2 per cent of area is moderately deep (75-100 cm), 20 per cent of area is deep (100 - 150 cm) and 63 per cent of area is very deep (>150 cm).  About 20 per cent area in the microwatershed has loamy soils and 66 per cent 11clayey soils at the surface.  Entire area in the microwatershed is non gravelly (<15%).  About 83 per cent of area is very high (>200 mm/m) in available water capacity, 2 per cent area is medium (101-150 mm/m) and <1 per cent of area is very low (<50 mm/m).  Maximum area of about 69 per cent in the microwatershed has very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands and 17 per cent of area is nearly level (0-1%) lands.  Maximum area of about 69 per cent is moderately (e2) eroded and 17 per cent of area is slightly (e1) eroded.  Entire area of the microwatershed is neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) in soil reaction.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) is dominantly <2 dsm-1indicating that the soils are non-saline in the entire area of the microwatershed.  An area of 21 per cent is high (>0.75%), 14 per cent area is medium (0.5-0.75%) and 50 per cent area is low (<0.50%) in organic carbon content.  An area of about 39 per cent is medium (23-57 kg/ha), 24 per cent of area is high (>57 kg/ha) and 23 per cent of area is low (<23 kg/ha) in available phosphorus content in the microwatershed.  An area of about 44 per cent is medium (145-337 kg/ha) and 41 per cent of area is high (>337 kg/ha) in available potassium content.  Available sulphur is low (<10 ppm) an area of 53 per cent, medium (10-20 ppm) in an area of 12 per cent and high (>20 ppm) in an area of 19 per cent of the microwatershed.  Available boron is low (<0.5 ppm) in an area of 26 per cent, medium (0.5-0.1 ppm) in an area of 57 per cent and high (>1 ppm) in an area of 2 per cent of the microwatershed.  Available iron is sufficient (>4.5 ppm) in an area of 16 per cent and deficient (<4.5 ppm) in an area of 69 per cent of the microwatershed.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in an area of 57 per cent and sufficient in an area of 28 per cent of the microwatershed.  The land suitability for 29 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, 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 11 (2) 501 (79) Guava - 11 (2) Maize 11 (2) 501 (79) Sapota - 11 (2) Bajra 11 (2) 501 (79) Pomegranate - 11 (2) Groundnut 11 (2) - Musambi - 11 (2) Sunflower - 11 (2) Lime - 11 (2) Redgram - 512 (81) Amla 11 (2) - Bengal gram - 386 (61) Cashew - - Cotton - 11 (2) Jackfruit - 11 (2) Chilli 11 (2) - Jamun - - Tomato 11 (2) - Custard apple - 11 (2) Brinjal 11 (2) - Tamarind - - Onion 11 (2) - Mulberry - 11 (2) Bhendi 11 (2) - Marigold 11 (2) - Drumstick - 11 (2) Chrysanthemum 11 (2) - Mango - -  Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the identified LMUs 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 for 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, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. This would help in not only supplementing the farm income but also provide fodder and fuel and generate lot of biomass which would help in maintaining an ecological balance and also contribute to mitigating the climate change. FINDINGS OF THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY  The survey was conducted in Hosahalli-2 is located at North latitude 160 44’ 48.193” and 160 42’ 48.205” and East longitude 770 10’ 30.469'' and 770 7’ 58.761” covering an area of about 628.64 ha coming under Kuyyalura, Majara hosalli and Yadhagiri. B Villages of Yadagiri taluk.  Socio-economic analysis indicated that, out of the total sample of 36 respondents, - 19 (52.78%) were marginal, 9(25.00%) were small and 3 (8.33%) were semi medium farmers.  The population characteristics of households indicated that, there were 96 (57.83%) men and 69 (41.57%) were women.  Majority of the respondents (39.76%) were in the age group of 35-60 years.  Education level of the sample households indicated that, majority there were 62.05 per cent illiterates, 0.60 per cent were functional literates and only 0.60 per cent attained graduation.  About, 91.67 per cent of household heads practicing agriculture and 5.56 per cent of the household heads were engaged as agricultural labourers.  Agriculture was the major occupation for 56.02 per cent of the household members.  In the study area, 61.11 per cent of the households possess katcha house and 22.22 per cent possess pucca house.  The durable assets owned by the households showed that, 88.89 per cent possess TV, 22.22 per cent possess mixer grinder and 88.89 per cent possess mobile phones.  Farm implements owned by the households indicated that, 16.67 per cent of the households possess plough and only 2.78 per cent sprayer.  Regarding livestock possession by the households, 30.56 per cent possess local cow.  The average labour availability in the study area showed that, own labour men available in the micro watershed was 1.53, women available in the micro watershed was 1.36, hired labour (men) available was 7.25 and hired labour (women) available was 6.56.  Further, 5.56 per cent of the households opined that hired labour was inadequate during the agricultural season.  Out of the total land holding of the sample respondents (30.71 ha), 97.36 per cent of the area is under dry condition and the remaining 2.64 per cent area is irrigated land.  There were 4.00 bore wells among the sampled households. Bore well was the major source of irrigation for 11.11 per cent of the households.  The major crops grown by sample farmers are Red gram, Cotton, Green gram, Jowar and Paddy and cropping intensity was recorded as 100.00 per cent. 2  The sample households possessed 77.78 per cent bank account and 55.56 per cent of them have savings in the account.  About 55.56 per cent of the respondents borrowed credit from various sources.  Among the credit borrowed by households, 20.00 per cent have borrowed loan from commercial banks.  Majority of the respondents (100.00 %) have borrowed loan for agriculture purpose.  Regarding the opinion on institutional sources of credit, 100.00 per cent of the households opined that credit helped to perform timely agricultural operations.  The per hectare cost of cultivation for Red gram, Cotton, Green gram, Jowar and Paddy was Rs.144754.84 , 54527.26, 32898.82, 24745.49, and 144669.80 with benefit cost ratio of 1:0.70, 1: 2.00, 1: 1.60, 1: 1.10, and 1:0.60 , respectively.  Further, 27.78 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 13.89 per cent of the households have opined that the green fodder was adequate.  The average annual gross income of the farmers was Rs. 92732.78 in microwatershed, of which Rs. 45288.33 comes from agriculture.  The total number of horticultural trees grown (both field and backyard) by the sampled households were coconut (6), Mango (4) trees in the fields and forest species have planted 48 neem trees, 2 tamarind trees together in both field and backyard.  Households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 17527.78 for land development and Rs. 4500.00 for creation of irrigation facility.  Source of funds raised from bank as a loan for land development was 11.11 per cent.  Regarding marketing channels, 58.33 per cent of the households have sold agricultural produce to the local/village merchants, while, 30.56 per cent have sold by Agents/Traders. Further, 83.33 per cent of the households have used tractor for the transport of agriculture commodity.  Majority of the farmers (47.22 %) have experienced soil and water erosion problems in the watershed and 83.33 per cent of the households were interested towards soil testing.  Firewood connection was the major source of fuel for domestic use for 69.44 per cent of the households and 30.56 per cent households has LPG.  Piped supply was the major source for drinking water for 88.89 per cent of the households.  Electricity was the major source of light for 100.00 per cent of the households.  In the study area, 50.00 per cent of the households possess toilet facility.  Regarding possession of PDS card, 97.22 per cent of the households possessed BPL card. Cereals (75.00%), pulses (75.00%), oilseeds (66.67%) were adequate for consumption. 3  Farming constraints experienced by households in the micro watersheds were lower fertility status of the soil (77.78%) wild animal menace on farm field (61.11%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (72.22%), inadequacy of irrigation water (63.89%), high cost of fertilizers and plant protection chemicals (77.78%), high rate of interest on credit (77.78%), low price for the agricultural commodities (77.78%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (61.11%), inadequate extension services (41.67%) and lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market (75.00%).