LAND RESOURCE INVENTORY AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF FARM HOUSEHOLDS FOR WATERSHED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT RANGANAHALLI (4D3D7B3a) MICROWATERSHED Gubbi Taluk, Tumkur District, Karnataka

Abstract

The land resource inventory of Ranganahalli 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 physiographic 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 354 ha in Gubbi taluk of Tumakuru district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought-prone with an average annual rainfall of 813 mm, of which about 466 mm is received during south –west monsoon, 196 mm during north-east and the remaining 151 mm durinfg the rest of the year. An area of about 95 per cent is covered by soils and 5 per cent by others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 11 soil series and 18 soil phases (management units) and 6 land use classes (LUCs).  The length of crop growing period is about 150 days starting from 3rd week of June to third 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 95 per cent area is suitable for agriculture and 5 per cent is not suitable for agriculture  About 88 per cent of the soils are moderately deep (75-100 cm) to very deep (>150 cm) and 7 per cent of the soils are shallow to moderately shallow.  About 18 per cent of the area has clayey soils at the surface and 77 per cent loamy soils.  About 73 per cent of the soils are non gravelly, 16 per cent of the soils are gravelly (<15-35%) and 6 per cent of area has very gravelly soils (35-60%).  An area of about 11 per cent are very low (<50 mm/m), 26 per cent are low (51-100 mm/m), 43 per cent medium (101-150 mm/m) and an area of 15 per cent has very high (>200 mm/m) available water capacity.  About 93 per cent of the area has nearly level (0-1%) to very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands and about 2 per cent of the area is gently sloping (3-5%).  An area of about 43 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1) and 52 per cent moderately eroded (e2).  Maximum area of about 44 per cent has soils that are slightly acidic to strongly acid (pH 5.0-6.5), 44 per cent area has neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) and 7 per cent of the soils are slightly alkaline (pH 7.3-7.8).  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly <2 dsm-1indicating that the soils are non-saline.  About 67 per cent of the soils are low (<0.5%), 28 per cent area of the soils are medium (0.5-0.75%) and <1 per cent of the area are high in organic carbon.  About 30 per cent of the area is high (>57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus and 65 per cent area is medium (23-57 kg/ha).  About 8 per cent of the soils are low (<145 kg/ha), medium (145-337 kg/ha) in 51 per cent area and 36 per cent of the soils are high (>337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is medium (10 -20 ppm) in an area of about 95 per cent.  Available boron is low (0.5 ppm) in maximum area about 76 per cent area and medium (0.5-1.0 ppm) in 19 per cent area.  Available iron is sufficient (>4.5 ppm) in an area of about 95 per cent.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in 62 per cent and sufficient (>0.6 ppm) in 33 per cent of 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 314 (61) 30(6) Guava 250(49) 95(18) Fodder Sorghum 314 (61) 30(6) Pomegranate 296 (58) 18(3) Maize 190(37) 153(30) Banana 296 (58) 18(3) Upland paddy 314(61) 79(16) Jackfruit 296 (58) 18(3) Finger millet 314 (61) 85(16) Jamun 246 (48) 51(10) Redgram 314 (61) 30(6) Musambi 296 (58) 18(3) Horse gram 334(65) 147 (29) Lime 296 (58) 18(3) Field bean 314 (61) 30(6) Cashew 250(64) 64(12) Cowpea 314 (61) 30(6) Custard apple 314 (61) 167 (33) Groundnut 107(21) 327 (64) Amla 314 (61) 167 (33) Sunflower 296 (58) 18(3) Tamarind 246 (48) 51(10) Onion 236 (46) 108(21) Marigold 314 (61) 87(17) Chilli 314 (61) 30(6) Chrysanthemum 314 (61) 87(17) Brinjal 314 (61) 30(6) Jasmine 314 (61) 87(17) Tomato 314 (61) 30(6) Coconut 250(49) 64(12) Mango 246 (48) 51(10) Arecanut 250(49) 64(12) Sapota 296 (58) 18(3) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 6 identified LUCs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, 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, 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 an ecological balance and also contributes to 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: Ranganahalli micro-watershed (Pillahalli sub-watershed, Gubbi taluk, Tumkur district) is located in between 13028’ – 13029’ North latitudes and 76052’ – 76054’ East longitudes, covering an area of about 353.56 ha, bounded by Malamachanakunte, Kallugudi, Thalekoppa, Ranganahalli an Ankasandra 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 Ranganahalli micro-watershed (Pillahalli sub-watershed, Gubbi taluk, Thumkur district) are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 51.1 to 48.9 Per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is 64.4 around per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 73.4 per cent.  Social groups belong to other backward caste (OBC) 80 percent and general caste 20 percent.  Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is the source of energy for a cooking among all the sample households.  About 20.0 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Farm households are having MGNREGA card only 40 per cent for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 90 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities among all sample households.  Institutional participation is only 8.9 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making are around 90 per cent of households were found. 2 Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 1.01 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal and small farmers. The dry land of 73.4 per cent and irrigated land 26.5 per cent of total cultivated land area among the sample households.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 84.4 per cent and agriculture is the main and agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 8.9 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs.14771. per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs. 2472 per household. Among all sample farmers having weeder and plough (30 %).  The average value of livestock is around Rs. 26687 per household; about 66.6 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 612.2 grams (1374.7 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.67122 per household. About 50.0 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita average monthly expenditure is around Rs. 946. 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. 637 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 309674 per year for the total area of 535.5 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 53002/ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in ragi (Rs. 3371) followed by coconut (Rs. 66505) and areca nut (Rs. 142384).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 1883/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in horse gram (Rs. 2779) and ragi (Rs. 988).  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 turmeric (Rs.69577) followed by coconut (Rs. 246668), horse gram (Rs. 20907), ragi (Rs. 12073) and areca nut (Rs. 7058). 3 Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is coconut (62.5 %) followed by ragi (17.3 %) areca nut (15.6 %) and horse gram (4.5 %).  In Ragenahalli micro-watershed, major soil series are Kutegoudanahundi series are having moderately shallow soil depth cover around 15.2 % of area. On this soil farmer are presently growing horse gram (50 %) and ragi (50 %). Bidanagere series having moderately soils depth cover around 9.5 % of areas; the major crops are coconut. Balapur and Jedigere series are having deep soil depth cover around 6.0 % and 7.6 % of areas respectively, crops are coconut, areca nut and ragi grown. Hallikere, Niduvalalu and Ranatur series having very deep soil depth covers around 16.1 per cent, 11.2 per cent and 9.0 per cent of areas, respectively; the major crops are coconut, areca nut and horse gram can grow.  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for horse gram ranges between Rs.34886/ha in KGH soil (with BCR of 1.13) and Rs.19954/ha in NDL soil (with BCR of 1.12).  In ragi the cost of cultivation range between Rs 25530/ha in KGH soil (with of 1.32) and Rs. 22068/ha in HLK soil (with BCR of 1.39).  In coconut the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 136691/ha in RTR soil (with BCR of 1.69) and Rs. 54014/ha in BPR soil (with BCR of 2.0).  In areca nut the cost of cultivation range between is Rs.109416ha in RTR soil (with BCR of 3.24) and Rs.48323/ha JDG soil (with BCR of 3.79).  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 horse gram (24.1 to 36.7 %), ragi (67.6 %), coconut (57.7 to 30.7 %) and areca nut (88.2 to 83.3 %).