LAND RESOURCE INVENTORY AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF FARM HOUSEHOLDS FOR WATERSHED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BELHATTI-4 (4D4A3I1d) MICROWATERSHED Shirhatti Taluk, Gadag District, Karnataka

Abstract

The land resource inventory of Belhatti-4 microwatershedwas 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 boundries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characterstics, classification and use potentials of the soils in the microwartershed. The present study covers an area of 400 ha in Shirahatti taluk of Gadag district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought prone with an average annual rainfall of 633 mm of which about 363 mm is received during south –west monsoon, 165 mm during north-east and the remaining 105 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 98 per cent is covered by soils, two per cent by rock lands, waterbodies, settlements and others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 11 soil series and 20 soil phases (management units) and 6 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is about 150 days starting from the 3rd week of June to 1rd 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 were assessed and maps showing degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  About 98 per cent area is suitable for agriculture and two per cent is not suitable for agriculture but well suited for forestry, pasture, agroforestry, silvi-pasture, installation of wind mills and as habitat for wildlife.  About 35 per cent of the soils are very deep (>150 cm) to deep (100 - 150 cm), 27 per cent are moderately shallow to shallow (25-75 cm) and about 36 per cent are moderately deep (75-100 cm) soils.  About 86 per cent of the area has clayey soils at the surface and 13 per cent loamy soils.  About 15 per cent of the area has non-gravelly soils, 60 per cent gravelly soils (15-35 % gravel) and 24 per cent very gravelly (35- 60% gravel) soils.  About 35 per cent of the area has soils that are very high (>200mm/m) in available water capacity, 47 per cent medium (100-150 mm/m) and about 16 per cent low (50-100 mm/m) and very low (<50mm/m).  About 98 per cent of the area has nearly level (0-1%) to very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands.  An area of about 48 per cent has soils that are slight erosion (e1), 35 per cent moderately eroded (e2) and 15 per cent soils are severe eroded (e3).  An area of about 12 per cent has soils that are moderately alkaline (pH 7.8 to 8.4) and 86 per cent strongly to very strongly alkaline (pH 8.4 to >9.0).  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly <2 dsm- 1indicating that most of the soils are non-saline.  About 97 per cent medium (0.5-0.75%) in organic carbon.  Major area of 95 per cent has soils that are low (<23 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 86 per cent medium (145-337 kg/ha) and 11 per cent high (>337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is low (<10 ppm) in about 21 per cent area, medium (10- 20 ppm) in about 74 per cent area and about 3 per cent area is high (>20 ppm).  Available boron is low (0.5 ppm) in about 58 per cent area, 27 per cent medium (0.5-1.0 ppm) and 13 per cent high (>1.0 ppm).  Available iron, manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils.  About 70 per cent area has soils that are deficient (<0.6 ppm) in available zinc and 29 per cent is sufficient (>0.6 ppm).  The land suitability for 21 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 114 (28) 232 (58) Jackfruit - 15 (4) Maize 5 (1) - Jamun - 213 (55) Bengalgram 185 (46) 161 (40) Musambi - 179 (46) Groundnut - 5 (1) Lime 15 (4) 189 (48) Sunflower 88 (22) 180 (45) Cashew - 36 (9) Cotton 90 (22) 268 (65) Custard Apple 17 (4) 225 (58) Banana - 5 (1) Amla 17 (4) 217(56) Pomegranate 5 (1) 312 (78) Tamarind 15 (4) 198 (51) Mango 13 (3) - Marigold 5 (1) 346 (87) Sapota - 144 (36) Chrysanthemum 5 (1) 346 (87) Guava - 113 (28) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 6 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, 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 and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF FARM HOUSEHOLDS 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: Belhatti-4 micro-watershed (Belhatti 4 sub-watershed, Shirahatti taluk, Gadag district) is located in between 1502’ – 1504’ North latitudes and 75037’ – 75039’ East longitudes, covering an area of about 390 ha, bounded by Belhatti, Konchigeri, Chikasavanur and Narayanpur villages with length of growing period (LGP) 150-180 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 Belhatti-4 micro-watershed (Belhatti subwatershed, Shirahatti taluk, Gadag district) are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 60.8 to 39.2 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 74.5 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 80.4 per cent.  Social groups belong to other backward caste (OBC) is around 80 per cent.  Fire wood is the source of energy for a cooking among 70.0 per cent.  About 40 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Majority of farm households (50 %) are having MGNREGA card for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 60 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 80 per cent of sample households.  Rural migration to urban centre for employment is prevalent among 10.0 per cent of farm households. Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 2.0 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to small and medium farmers. The dry land of 20.1 per cent and irrigated land of 6 per cent of total cultivated land area among the sample farmers. 2  Agriculture is the main occupation among 19.9 per cent and agriculture is the main and non agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 60.9 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs.12575 per household. Mobile and television are mass popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs.75292 per household, about 40 per cent of sample farmers bullock cart and plough (30 %).  The average value of livestock is around Rs. 3600 per household; about 61.5 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 828.0 grams (1796.0 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 50 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs.13601 per household. Among all sample farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita monthly average expenditure is around Rs.1219. 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. 866 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 329879 per year for the total area of 389.9 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 5059/ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in cotton (Rs. 10175) followed by maize (Rs. 8882), horse gram (Rs. 3533), groundnut (Rs 2122) and sorghum (Rs. 582).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 954/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in horse gram (Rs. 1317) followed by sorghum (Rs. 988), maize (Rs. 970), cotton (Rs. 823) and groundnut (Rs. 542).  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 cotton (Rs. 39806) followed by sorghum (Rs. 27604), horse gram (Rs. 25342), maize (Rs. 25036), and groundnut (Rs. 21960). Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is maize (58.9 %) followed by Groundnut (22.8 %), cotton (6.1 %), horse gram (6.1 %) and sorghum (6.1%). 3  In Belhatti 4 micro-watershed, major soil of alluvial landscape of KLK series is having very shallow soil deep on this soil farmers are presently growing maize and sorghum. BMD soil series are also having shallow soil depth the crops are groundnut (56.2 %) and maize (43.8 %). KPR soil series are having deep soil depth, crops are cotton (50.0 %) and sorghum (50.0 %). BGP and NGT soil series very deep soil depth, crops are maize and groundnut.  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for maize ranges between Rs. 23883/ha in KLP soil (with BCR of 1.33) and Rs.13204/ha in NBP soil (with BCR of 1.50).  In groundnut range between Rs. 34464/ha in NGT soil (with BCR of 1.15) and Rs.21051/ha in BLD soil (with BCR of 1.26).  In sunflower the cost of cultivation ranges between Rs. 39247/ha in DRL soil (with BCR of 1.1) and Rs. 17619/ha in NSP soil (with BCR of 2.36).  In hors gram the cost of cultivation Rs. 26605/ha in NBP soil (with BCR of 1.50).  In cotton the cost of cultivation is Rs.30226/ha in KPR soil (with BCR of 1.08).  In bengal gram the cost of cultivation rage between is Rs. 26508/ha in DRL soil (with BCR of 1.68) and Rs.18518/ha in NSP soil (with BCR of 1.68).  In sorghum the cost of cultivation Rs. 17531/ha in KPR soil (with BCR of 1.08).  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 Groundnut (56.6 to 72.8 %), maize (80.9 to 61 %), (8.6 to 11.3 %), cotton (56.6 %), horse gram (42.2 %) and sorghum (15.7 %).