LAND RESOURCE INVENTORY AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF FARM HOUSEHOLDS FOR WATERSHED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SIDAGANAHALLI-4 (4D4A1R1a) MICRO WATERSHED Irakallagada Hobli, Koppal Taluk and District, Karnataka

Abstract

The land resource inventory of Sidaganhalli-4 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 these 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 531 ha in Koppal taluk and district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought - prone with an average annual rainfall of 662 mm, of which about 424 mm is received during south –west monsoon, 161 mm during north-east and the remaining 77 mm during the rest of the year. An area of 99 per cent is covered by soils and one per cent is by habitation. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 14 soil series and 28 soil phases (management units) and 7 Land management units.  The length of crop growing period is <90 days and starts from 2nd week of August to 2nd 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 320 m grid interval.  Land suitability for growing 28 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 18 per cent of the soils are shallow to moderately shallow (25-75 cm), 60 per cent of the soils are moderately deep to deep (75-150 cm) and 18 per cent soils are very deep (>150 cm).  About 31 per cent area has loamy soils and 65 per cent area has clay soils.  About 18 per cent area has non-gravelly (<15% gravel) soils and 78 per cent has gravelly to very gravelly (15-60%) soils.  About 64 per cent area is very low to low (<50-100 mm/m), 22 per cent area has medium (101-150 mm/m) and 10 per cent area is very high (>200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  About 10 per cent area has nearly level (0-1%) lands and 86 per cent area has very gently sloping (1-3%) lands.  About 28 per cent area is slight eroded (e1) and 68 per cent area is moderately eroded (e2) lands.  About 7 per cent area is slightly acid (pH 6.0-6.5), 65 per cent is neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) and 24 per cent area is slightly alkaline (pH 7.3-7.8) to moderately alkaline (pH 7.8- 8.4) in soil reaction.  Entire area is non saline (<2 dsm-1) in electrical conductivity (EC).  Organic carbon is medium (0.5-0.75%) in 34 per cent area and high (>0.75%) in 62 per cent area.  About 8 per cent area is medium (23-57 kg/ha) and 88 per cent area is high (>57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 17 per cent area is low (<145 kg/ha), medium (145-337 kg/ha) in 61 per cent area and 18 per cent area is high (>337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  About 2 per cent medium (10-20 ppm) and 94 per cent high (>20 ppm) in available sulphur.  Available boron is low (<0.5 ppm) in about 9 per cent are, medium (0.5-1.0 ppm) in 55 per cent area and high (>1.0 ppm) in 32 per cent area.  Available iron sufficient (>4.5 ppm) in the entire area.  Available zinc is sufficient (>0.6 ppm) in the entire area.  Available copper and manganese are sufficient in all the soils.  The land suitability for 28 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 7 (1) 300 (57) Pomegranate 2 321 (61) Maize 2 306 (58) Guava 2 271 (51) Bajra 131 (25) 278 (52) Jackfruit 2 271 (51) Groundnut 131 (25) 226 (43) Jamun - 309 (58) Sunflower 7 (1) 246 (46) Musambi 7 (1) 302 (57) Cotton 6 (1) 289 (54) Lime 7 (1) 302 (57) Red gram 2 239 (45) Cashew - 171 (32) Bengalgram 38 (7) 288 (54) Custard apple 137 (26) 363 (68) Chilli 2 261 (49) Amla 137 (26) 363 (68) Tomato 2 261 (49) Tamarind - 223 (42) Drumstick 2 328 (62) Marigold 2 306 (58) Mulberry 117 (22) 302 (57) Chrysanthemum 2 306 (58) Mango - 187 (35) Jasmine 2 255 (48) Sapota 2 271 (51) Crossandra 2 242 (46) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 7 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. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. FINDINGS OF THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY  The survey was conducted in Sidganhalli-4 micro-watershed is located at 15032’39.975’’ to 150 31’16.547’’North and 760 15’ 9.616’’ to 76013’41.174’’ East covering an area of about 448.03 ha coming Chilakamukki village of Koppal taluk.  Socio-economic analysis indicated that, out of the total sample of 35 respondents 5 (14.29%) were landless, 7 (20 %) were marginal, 10 (28.57%) were small farmers, 6 (17.14%) were semi medium farmers and 7 (20%) medium farmers.  The population characteristics of households indicated that, there were 94 (59.87%) men and 63 (40.13%) women among the sampled households. The average family size of landless farmers’ was 4, marginal farmers’ was 4.4, small farmers’ was 3.7, semi medium farmers’ was 5.1 and medium farmers were 5. 4.  Majority of the respondents 40 (23.12%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 67 (38.73%) were in 16-35 years of age36 (22.93%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 63 (40.13%) were in 16-35 years of age, 42 (26.75%) were in 36-60 years of age and 16 (10.19%) were above 61 years of age.  Education level of the sample households indicated that, majority there were 37.58 per cent illiterates, 28.66 per cent of them had primary school, 3.18 per cent of them had Middle school education, 10.19 per cent of them had high school, 11.46 per cent of them had PUC, 0.64 per cent of them had diploma and ITI, 3.82 per cent of them had degree and 1.27 per cent of them had masters education.  About, 31.43 per cent of household heads were practicing agriculture and 62.86 per cent of the household heads were agricultural laborers.  Agriculture was the major occupation for 28.66 per cent of the household members, 36.94 per cent were agricultural laborers, 1.91 per cent was private service, 29.3 per cent student and 2.55 per cent were children.  The household possess, 0.64 per cent of the population in the micro watershed has participated in self help group and 99.36 per cent of the population in the micro watershed has not participated in local institutions.  In the study area, 71.43 per cent of the households possess katcha house.  The durable assets owned by the households showed that, 68.57 per cent of the households possess TV, 17.14 per cent of the households possess mixer/grinder, 5.71 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 45.71 per cent of the household’s posses motor cycle, 2.86 per cent of the households possess tempo and landline phone and 91.43 per cent of the households possess mobile phones.  Farm implements owned by the households indicated that, 2.86 per cent each of the households possess bullock cart, 5.71 per cent each of the households possess plough and sprayer, 8.57 per cent of the households possess sprinkler, 28.57 per cent of the households possess weeder and 17.14 per cent of the households possess Harvester. 2  Regarding livestock possession by the households, 17.14 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 2.86 per cent of the households possess crossbreed cow and buffalo.  The average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 1.59, average own labour (women) available was 4.76, average hired labour (men) available was 9.03 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.83.  Out of the total land holding of the sample respondents 12.44 ha (24.86%) of dry land and 37.62 ha (75.14%) of irrigated land.  Marginal farmers possess 3.74 ha (80.09%) of dry land and 0.93 ha (19.91%) of irrigated land.  Small farmers possess 8.7 ha (72.15%) of dry land and 3.36 ha (27.85%) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 8.64 ha (100%) of irrigated land.  Medium farmers possess 24.69 ha (100%) of irrigated land.  There were 18 functioning and 10 functioning bore wells in the micro watershed. Bore well was the major irrigation source in the micro water shed for 54.29 per cent of the farmers.  The major crops have grown maize (27.29 ha), bajra (8.54 ha) groundnut (8.09 ha), sajje (0.81 ha), chilly, paddy, tomato and watermelon (0.4 ha). The cropping intensity in Sidganhalli-4 Micro-watershed was found to be 60.74 per cent.  The per hectare cost of cultivation for Maize, paddy groundnut, chilly, Bajra and Tomato was Rs. 34059.21, 94011.08, 40626.26, 71551.81, 30854.22 and 65441.56 with benefit cost ratio of 1:1.22, 1:1.36, 1:1.97, 1:3.18, 1:0.95 and 1:0.6 respectively.  Further, 20 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder and green fodder was adequate.  The average annual gross income was Rs. 15,800 for landless, for marginal farmers it was Rs. 55,285.71, for small farmers it was Rs. 70,700, semi medium farmers it was Rs. 170,000 and medium farmers it was Rs. 195,714.29.  The average annual expenditure is Rs. 24,350.88. For landless it was Rs. 2,040, for marginal farmers it was Rs. 6,102.04, for small farmers it was Rs. 4,470, for semi medium farmers it was Rs. 97,111.11 and for medium farmers it was Rs. 24,571.43.  Sampled households have planted 49 coconut and 3 mango trees in their field to cultivate horticultural crops.  Households have planted 13 1 teak and 57 neem trees in their field to cultivate forest species.  Households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 2,228.57 for land development, Rs. 428.57 for irrigation facility, Rs. 1,628.57 for improved crop production and Rs.1, 771.43 for improved livestock management.  Source of funds for additional investment is concerned; loan from bank was the source of additional investment for 22.86 per cent for land development, 2.86 per 3 cent for irrigation facility and 2.86 per cent for improved crop production and improved livestock management.  Own funds were the source of additional investment for 8.57 per cent for land development and 5.71 per cent for improved crop production and improved livestock management.  Regarding marketing channels, 11.43 per cent of the farmers sold their produce to agent/traders, 102.86 per cent of the farmers sold their produce to local/village merchant and 5.71 per cent of the farmers sold their produce to regulated market.  Further, 117.14 per cent of the households have used tractor and 2.86 per cent of the households used truck as a mode of transportation.  Majority of the households 54.29 per cent have incidence of soil and water erosion problems.  The household possess, (54.29 %) were interested towards soil testing.  The households possess 88.57 per cent of the households used fire wood and 11.43 per cent of the household’s LPG as a source of fuel.  Piped supply was the major source of drinking water for 68.57 per cent, 28.57 per cent of the households used bore well and 2.86 per cent of the households used lake/tank well in the micro watershed.  Electricity was the major source of light for 100 per cent of the households.  In the study area, 40 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet facility.  Regarding possession of PDS card, 97.14 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL cards and 2.86 per cent of the households possessed had no PDS cards.  Cereals were adequate for 100 per cent of the households, pulses were adequate for 74.29 per cent, oilseeds were adequate for 11.43 per cent, vegetables were adequate for 88.57 per cent, fruits were adequate for 2.86 per cent, milk and egg were adequate for 97.14 per cent and meat were adequate for 91.43 per cent of the households.  Pulses were inadequate for 25.71 per cent of the households, oilseed were inadequate for 80 per cent, vegetables were inadequate for 11.43 per cent, fruits were inadequate for 71.43 per cent, milk were inadequate for 2.86 per cent, and meat were inadequate for 5.71 per cent of the households.  Farming constraints experienced by households in the micro watersheds were lower fertility status of the soil was the constraint experienced by 62.86 per cent of the households, wild animal menace on farm field (45.71%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (40%), Inadequacy of irrigation water (25.71 %), high cost of fertilizer and plant protection chemicals (65.71%), high rate of interest on credit (31.43%), Low price for the agricultural commodities (48.57%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (54.29%), inadequate extension service (2.86%), Lack of 4 transport for safe transport of the Agril produce to the market (8.57%), less rainfall (28.57%) and Source of Agri-technology information (2.86%).