LAND RESOURCE INVENTORY AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF FARM HOUSEHOLDS FOR WATERSHED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MARASANDRA (4D3D8G1d) MICROWATERSHED Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk, Tumkur District, Karnataka

Abstract

The land resource inventory of Marasandra 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, behaviour and use potentials of the soils in the microwartershed. The present study covers an area of 615 ha in Chikkanayakanahalli taluk of Tumkur district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought-prone with an average annual rainfall of 700 mm, of which about 378 mm is received during south –west monsoon, 179 mm during north-east and the remaining 143 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 82 per cent is covered by soils and eighteen per cent by rock outcrops and others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 10 soil series and 23 soil phases (management units) and 5 land use classes.  The length of crop growing period is about 120-150 days starting from 2nd week of July to 3rd 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 34 major agricultural and horticultural crops were assessed and maps showing the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  About 82 per cent area in the microwatershed is suitable for agriculture.  About 38 per cent of the soils are deep (100-150 cm), 33 per cent moderately deep and 12 per cent moderately shallow in soil depth.  About 30 per cent of the area has clayey soils at the surface and 55 per cent loamy soils.  About 18 per cent of the area has non-gravelly (<15% gravel) soils, 28 per cent gravelly soils (15-35 % gravel) soils and 39 per cent soils are very gravelly (35- 60%) to extreamly gravelly (60-80%).  About 76 per cent has soils that are very low (<50 mm/m) to low (51-100 mm/m) in available water capacity and >1 per cent medium (101-150 mm/m) and about 6 per cent high (>200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  About 79 per cent of the area has nearly level (0-1%) to very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands and 3 per cent gently sloping (3-5%).  An area of about 41 per cent has soils that are nil to slightly eroded (e1) and 45 per cent moderately eroded (e2).  An area of about 29 per cent has soils that are slightly acid (pH 5.0-6.5) to moderately acid, 19 per cent is strongly acid (ph 5.0-5.5), 15 per cent neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) and 20 per cent slightly to moderately alkaline in soil reaction.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly <2 dS m-1indicating that the soils are non-saline.  About 82 per cent of the soils are low (<0.5%) in organic carbon.  About 48 per cent area is medium (23-57 kg/ha) and 34 per cent high (>57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 28 per cent of the soils are low (<145 kg/ha), medium (145-337 kg/ha) in 45 per cent and 10 per cent of the soils are high (>337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is high (>10 ppm) in about 14 per cent area and medium (10- 20 ppm) in about 67 per cent and low (<10 ppm) in 1 per cent area.  Available boron is low (0.5 ppm) in about 74 per cent area and medium (0.5-1.0 ppm) in 9 per cent area.  Available iron, manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is sufficient (>0.6 ppm) in 77 per cent and deficiant (<0.6 ppm) in 5 per cent area.  The land suitability for 34 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,marked 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 88 (14) 170 (28) Guava 1 (>1) 358 (58) Fodder Sorghum 88 (14) 166 (27) Pomogranate 1 (>1) 203 (33) Maize 49 (8) 170 (28) Banana 1 (>1) 203 (33) Upland paddy 49 (8) 222 (36) Jackfruit 1 (>1) 164 (27) Finger millet 49 (8) 183 (30) Jamun 1 (>1) 39 (6) Redgram 49 (8) 209 (34) Musambi 40 (6) 164 (27) Horse gram 138 (22) 327 (53) Lime 40 (6) 164 (27) Field bean 49 (8) 209 (34) Cashew 1 (>1) 358 (58) Cowpea 88 (14) 170 (28) Custard apple 88 (14) 395 (64) Groundnut 49 (8) 377 (61) Amla 88 (14) 395 (64) Sunflower 40 (6) 164 (27) Tamarind 1 (>1) 39 (6) Onion 49 (8) 170 (28) Marigold 88 (14) 170 (28) Chilli 88 (14) 170 (28) Chrysanthemum 88 (14) 170 (28) Brinjal 88 (14) 170 (28) Jasmine 49 (8) 209 (34) Tomato 88 (14) 170 (28) Coconut 1 (>1) 164 (27) Mango 1 (>1%) - Arecanut 1 (>1) 164 (27) Sapota 1 (>1%) 164 (27) Mulberry 1 (>1) (3710) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 5 identified LUCs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder fibre and horticulture crops that helps in maintaining productivity and ecological balance in the microwatershed.  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 that would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel and generate lot of biomass. This helps in maintaining ecological balance and contribute to mitigating 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: Marasandra micro-watershed (Anekatte sub-watershed, Chikkanayakanahalli taluk, Tumkur district) is located in between 13024’ – 13026’ North latitudes and 76034’ – 76037’ East longitudes, covering an area of about 615.06 ha, bounded by Navule, Karehalli, Shavashettyhalli and Marasandra 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 eco system services were quantified. Results: The socio-economic outputs for the Marasandra micro-watershed (Anekatte subwatershed, Chikkanayakanahalli taluk, Tumkur district) are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 47.6 to 52.4 Per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is 52.3 around per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 76.2 per cent.  Social groups belong to scheduled caste (SC) 30 percent and general caste around 40 percent.  Fire wood is the source of energy for a cooking among10 per cent.  About 60 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Farm households are having MGNREGA card around 60 per cent for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is about 90 percent of farm households.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 80 per cent of sample households Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 0.23 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belonging to marginal and small farmers. The irrigated is around 82.5 per 2 cent and 17.5 per cent of rainfed land is the total cultivated land area among the sample farmers.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 4.76 per cent and agriculture is the main and agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 66.67 per cent of the sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs.11115 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs. 6917 per household; about 30 per cent of sample farmers having bullock cart and plough.  The average value of livestock is around Rs. 26188 per household; about 66.6 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 598 grams (1382 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Among all sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs. 24909 per household. About 10 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita average monthly expenditure is around Rs.1426. 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.574 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 291117 per year for the total area of 459 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 21430/ ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in coconut (Rs. 77386) followed by ragi (Rs. 5739), green gram (Rs. 1942) and horse gram (Rs. 652).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 3444/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in horse gram (Rs. 4305) and ragi (Rs. 2582).  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 bengal gram (Rs. 54585) followed by red gram (Rs. 54338), cotton (Rs. 51153) and sorghum (Rs. 40332). 3 Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is ragi (29.8%) followed by coconut (25.8 %), greengram (21.6 %), horse gram (13.0 %) and maize (9.9 %).  In Marasandra micro-watershed, major soil series are Kethanapura series having moderately shallow soil depth covered around 8.13. % of area. Major crops are green gram (26.4 %) and ragi (73.6 %), Hooradhahalli soils series are having moderately deep soil depth covers around 22.78% of area. on this soil farmers are presently growing horsegram (26.4 %) and ragi (79.4 %). Gatareddihal soils series are having deep soil depth covers around 6.27% of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing greengram (50 %) and horse gram (50 %). Nagalapur series are having deep soil depth covers around 6.27 % of area. Major crop is redgram. Balapur series are having deep soil depth covers around 6.27 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing coconut (15.1 %), greengram (39.4 %), horse gram (8.2 %) and ragi (37.4 %).  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for greengram ranges between Rs. 67855/ha in KTP soil (with BCR of 1.10) and Rs.15223/ha in GRH soil (with BCR of 1.14).  In horse gram the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 45946 ha in HDH soil (with BCR of 0.99) and Rs. 8616/ha in GRH soil (with BCR of 2.16).  In ragi the cost of cultivation range between Rs 18738 ha in BPR soil (with BCR of 1.59) and Rs.14250/ha in KTP soil (with BCR of 1.10).  In coconut the cost of cultivation range between Rs 77621 ha in HDH soil (with BCR of 2.13) and Rs.17267/ha in NGP soil (with BCR of 6.87).  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. 4  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 ragi (72 to 86.7%), horsegram gram (3.8 to 50 %), greengram (0 to 42.9 %) and coconut (35.4 to 46.4 %).