LAND RESOURCE INVENTORY AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF FARM HOUSEHOLDS FOR WATERSHED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT TONSANHALLI-2 (4D5B8Z2a) MICROWATERSHED Chitapur Taluk, Gulbarga District, Karnataka

Abstract

The land resource inventory of Tonsanhalli-2 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 boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 676 ha in Chitapur taluk of Gulbarga district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought-prone with an average annual rainfall of 762 mm, of which about 571 mm is received during south-west monsoon, 99 mm during north-east and the remaining 92 mm during the rest of the year. Entire area of the microwatershed is covered by soils. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 2 soil series and 6 soil phases (management units) and 1 land use class.  The length of crop growing period is about 120-150 days starting from 2nd week of June to 3rd 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 was assessed and maps showing the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  Entire area of the microwatershed has suitable for agriculture  Entire area of the microwatershed has soils that are deep (100-150 cm) to very deep (>150 cm).  Entire area of the microwatershed has clayey soils at the surface  All the soils of the microwatershed are gravelly (15-35%)  Entire area of the microwatershed is very high (>200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  Entire area of the microwatershed has nearly level (0-1%) to very gently sloping (1- 3% slope) lands.  An area of about 83 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1) and 17 per cent moderately eroded (e2).  An area of about 76 per cent soils are moderately alkaline (pH 7.8-8.4) and 24 per cent strongly alkaline (pH 8.4-9.0).  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly <2 dsm-1indicating that the soils are non-saline.  About 2 per cent of the soils are low (<0.5%), 74 per cent medium (0.5-0.75%) and 24 per cent high (>0.75) in organic carbon.  About 98 per cent of the area is low (<23 kg/ha) in available phosphorus, small area of 2 per cent medium (23-57 kg/ha) and only 1 per cent area is high (>57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 1 per cent of the soils are low (<145 kg/ha) and 99 per cent medium (145- 337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is medium (10 -20 ppm) in an area of about 6 per cent and low (<10 ppm) in maximum area of about 94 per cent.  Available boron is low (0.5 ppm) in maximum area of about 72 per cent, medium (0.5-1.0 ppm) in 28 per cent.  Available iron is sufficient (>4.5 ppm) in 67 per cent area and deficient (<4.5 ppm) in 33 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in 90 per cent and sufficient (>0.6 ppm) in 10 per cent of soils in the microwatershed.  The land suitability for 19 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 - 676(100) Sapota - 676(100) Maize - - Jackfruit - - Redgram - 676(100) Jamun - 676(100) Sunflower - 676(100) Musambi 676(100) - Cotton - 676(100) Lime 676(100) - Sugarcane - - Cashew - - Soybean - 676(100) Custard apple 676(100) - Bengal gram - 676(100) Amla 676(100) - Guava - 676(100) Tamarind - 676(100) Mango - - Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the identified LUC by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fiber 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, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. This would help in not only supplementing the income but also provide fodder and fuel, generate lot of biomass which would help in maintaining an ecological balance and also help in mitigating the climate change. 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: Tonsanhalli-2 micro-watershed (Mulkod sub-watershed, Chitapur taluk, Gulbarga district) is located in between 17012’ – 17014’ North latitudes and 7705’ – 7708’ East longitudes, covering an area of about 676 ha, bounded by Mattimadu, Tengli, Mulkod, Mudbol and Invi 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 Tonsanhalli-2 micro-watershed (Mulkod subwatershed, Chitapur taluk, Gulbarga district) are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 44.0 to 56.0 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 58 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 86.0 per cent.  Social groups belong to other backward caste (OBC) is around 66.7 per cent.  Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is the source of energy for a cooking among 66.7 per cent.  About 22.2 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Majority of farm households (85.7 %) are having MGNREGA card for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system among all sample households.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 44.4 per cent of sample households.  Institutional participation is only 2.0 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making are around 88.9 per cent of households were found. 2 Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 1.2 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal and small farmers. The dry land of total cultivated land area among all the sample farmers.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 50.0 per cent and agriculture is the main and agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 43.75 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs.16737 per household. Mobile and television are mass popular communication media.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs.107062 per household, about 66.7 per cent of sample farmers having plough, bullock cart and sprayer.  The average value of livestock is around Rs.31438 per household; about 57 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 767.1 grams (1718.7 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 77.8 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs. 28573 per household. About 77.8 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita monthly average expenditure is around Rs.1560. 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. 906 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 612754 per year for the total area of 676.39 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs 154532/ ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in cotton (Rs. 41649) followed by sorghum (Rs. 19376) and redgram (Rs. 13624).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 525/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in sorghum (Rs. 525).  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 redgram (Rs. 58796) followed by cotton (Rs. 58265) and sorghum (Rs. 37643). 3 Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is cotton (16.7 %) followed by red gram (67.6 %) and sorghum (15.7 %).  In Tonsanhalli-2 micro-watershed, major soil is Dhandothi (DDT) series is having very deep soil depth cover around 12.57 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing red gram (67.6 %), cotton (16.7 %) and sorghum (15.6%).  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio in study area for red gram Rs.28033 /ha in DDT soil (with BCR of 1.68).  In cotton the cost of cultivation in DDT soil Rs. 23427/ha (with BCR of 2.78) and sorghum the cost of cultivation in DDT soil is Rs. 17674/ha (with BCR of 2.13).  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 in deeper soil to maximize returns. 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 sorghum (56.0 %), cotton (15.3 %) and redgram (11.5 %).