LAND RESOURCE INVENTORY AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF FARM HOUSEHOLDS FOR WATERSHED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT NAGENAHALLI (4D3D4L2a) MICROWATERSHED Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk, Tumkur District, Karnataka

Abstract

The land resource inventory of Nagenahalli 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 868 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 90 per cent is covered by soils, 10 per cent by others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 6 soil series and 17 soil phases (management units) and 4l and use classes.  The length of crop growing period is about 150 days starting from 2ndweek 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.  Entire area is suitable for agriculture.  About 90 per cent of the soils are deep (100-150 cm) to very deep (>150 cm).  About 34 per cent of the area has clayey soils at the surface, 50 per cent loamy and 5% sandy soils.  Entire area has non-gravelly (<15%) soils.  About 73 per cent has soils that are medium (101-150 mm/m) and about 16 per cent high (>200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  About 90 per cent of the area has nearly level (0-1%) to very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands.  An area of about 84 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1) and 6 per cent moderately eroded (e2).  An area of about 23 per cent has soils that are slightly acid (pH 5.0-6.5) to moderately acid, 62 per cent area has neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) and 5 per cent area slightly alkaline.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly <2 dS m-1indicating that the soils are non-saline.  About 90 per cent of the soils are medium (0.5-0.75%) in organic carbon.  About 72 per cent area is medium (23-57 kg/ha) and 3 per cent area is high (>57 kg/ha) and 15 per cent area is low (<23 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 2 per cent of the soils are low (<145 kg/ha), medium (145-337 kg/ha) in 61 per cent area and 27 per cent of the soils are high (>337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is high (>10 ppm) in about 13 per cent, medium (10-20 ppm) in about 52 per cent and low (<10 ppm) in 24 per cent area.  Available boron is low (0.5 ppm) in about 81 per cent area and medium (0.5-1.0 ppm) in 9 per cent area.  Available iron is sufficient (>4.5 ppm) in the entire area.  Available manganese, copper and zinc are sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed.  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, 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 672 (77) 59 (7) Guava 366 (42) 365 (42) Fodder Sorghum 672 (77) 106 (12) Pomogranate 672 (77) 106 (12) Maize 283 (33) 448 (52) Banana 672 (77) 106 (12) Upland paddy 672 (77) 106 (12) Jackfruit 672 (77) 59 (7) Finger millet 672 (77) 59 (7) Jamun 672 (77) 106 (12) Redgram 672 (77) 106 (12) Musambi 672 (77) 106 (12) Horse gram 672 (77) 106 (12) Lime 672 (77) 106 (12) Field bean 672 (77) 106 (12) Cashew 366 (42) 306 (35) Cowpea 672 (77) 106 (12) Custard apple 672 (77) 106 (12) Groundnut 42 (5) 324 (37) Amla 672 (77) 106 (12) Sunflower 672 (77) 106 (12) Tamarind 672 (77) 106 (12) Onion 589 (68) 189 (22) Marigold 672 (77) 106 (12) Chilli 672 (77) 106 (12) Chrysanthemum 672 (77) 106 (12) Brinjal 672 (77) 106 (12) Jasmine 672 (77) 106 (12) Tomato 672 (77) 106 (12) Coconut 366 (42) 365 (42) Mango 672 (77) 59 (7) Arecanut 366 (42) 365 (42) Sapota 672 (77) 59 (7) Mulberry 42 (5) (5473) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 4 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 would help 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: Nagenahalli micro-watershed (Kibbanahalli sub-watershed, Chikkanayaka- halli Taluk, Tumkur district) is located in between 13020’ – 13021’ North latitudes and 76036’ – 76039’ East longitudes, covering an area of about 867.82 ha, bounded by Bedarahalli, Baraganahalli, Aralikere, Godekere, Pankajanahalli and Halugona 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 Nagenahalli Microwatershed (Kibbanahalli sub-watershed, Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk, Tumkur district) are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 50 to 50 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 57 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 99 per cent.  Social groups belong to general caste among all the sample households.  Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is the source of energy for a cooking among the all sample households.  About 40 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Around 20 per cent of farm households are having MGNREGA card for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 60 per cent.  Swatch bharath program providing closed toilet facilities for among all sample households.  Institutional participation is only 15.0 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making for agriculture production among all the sample farms households. 2 Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 0.90 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal and small farmers. The dry land of 68.7 % and irrigated land 18.6 % of total cultivated land area among the sample farmers.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 78.3 per cent and agriculture is the main and agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 3.3 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs. 9532 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs. 119861 per household, about 40 per cent of sample farmers having tractor and sprayer.  The average value of livestock is around Rs. 19833 per household; about 41.6 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 566.9 grams (1336.8 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Among the all sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs.48989 per household. About 50 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita average monthly expenditure is around Rs.924. 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. 423 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 328783 per year for the total area of 867.8 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 43095/ ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in areca nut (Rs. 80030) followed by coconut (Rs. 44830) and ragi (Rs. 4427).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 3397/ ha/year is ragi.  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 coconut (Rs. 331961) followed by ragi (Rs. 16258) and areca nut (Rs. 11031). 3 Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is coconut (65.5 %) followed by ragi (29.6 %) and areca nut (4.8 %).  In Nagenahalli micro-watershed, major soil series are Hallikere (HLK) soil series are having very deep soil depth cover around 27.7 % area. On this soil farmers are presently growing ragi. Jedigere (JDG) soil series are having deep soil depth cover around 4.86 % area; the crops are coconut (90.4 %) ragi (9.5 %). Ranatur (RTR) soils are having very deep soil depth covered around 35.2 % areas; crops are areca nut (7.4 %), coconut (69.8 %) and ragi (22.7 %). Thondigere (TDG) soils are also having very deep soil depth covered around 5.36 % of area, crops are coconut.  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for coconut ranges between Rs.246381/ha in TDG soil (with BCR of 1.15) and Rs. 106004/ha in RTR soil (with BCR of 1.29).  In ragi the cost of cultivation ranges between 73391/ha in JDG soil (with BCR of 1.04) and Rs.33907/ha in HLK soil (with BCR of 1.14).  In areca nut the cost of cultivation Rs.147210/ha in RTR soil (with BCR of 1.54).  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 strengthens 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 strengthens 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 coconut (32.5 to 49.8 %), ragi (37.7 to 68.2 %) and areca nut (77.8 %).