Search results

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Honnegaudanahalli 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 and use potentials of the soils in the microwartershed. The present study covers an area of 584 ha in Gundlupet taluk of Chamarajanagar district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought prone with an average annual rainfall of 734 mm, of which about 254 mm is received during south –west monsoon, 268 mm during north-east and the remaining 212 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 95 per cent is covered by soils, five per cent by others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 9 soil series and 27 soil phases (management units) and 8 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is about 150 days starting from the 3rd week of June to 1st 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 the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  About 93 per cent area is suitable for agriculture and 3 per cent is not suitable for agriculture.  About 46 per cent of the soils are moderately deep (75-100 cm) to very deep (>150 cm) and 50 per cent are shallow to moderately shallow (25-75 cm).  About 19 per cent of the area has clayey soils at the surface, 64 per cent loamy soils and 13 per cent sandy soils.  About 38 per cent of the area has non-gravelly soils, 41 per cent gravelly soils (15- 35 % gravel) and 16 per cent very gravelly (35- 60% gravel) soils.  About 76 per cent has soils that are very low (200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  About 85 per cent of the area has nearly level (0-1%) to very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands and 10 per cent is under gently sloping (3-5%) to very strongly sloping (15-25%) lands.  An area of about 73 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1), 20 per cent moderately eroded (e2) and 3 per cent soils are severely eroded (e3).  An area of about 19 per cent has soils that are extremely acid (pH 3.5-4.5) to slightly acid (pH 6.0-6.5) ; 22 per cent neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) and maximum area of about 54 per cent has soils that are slightly alkaline (pH 7.3 to 7.8) to strongly alkaline (pH 8.4 to 9.0).  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 0.75%) in organic carbon.  About 38 per cent of the soils are low (57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 3 per cent of the soils are low (337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is low (1.0 ppm) in 9 per cent area.  Available iron is deficient in about 8 per cent area and sufficient in 88 per cent area.  Available manganese is deficient (1 ppm) in 94 per cent area.  Available copper is sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in 18 per cent area and sufficient in 78 per cent area.  The land suitability for 27 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 187 (32) 80 (14) Sapota 26 (4) 153 (26) Maize 125 (21) 54 (9) Guava 125 (21) 55 (9) Redgram 125 (21) 290 (50) Banana 26 (4) 187 (32) Horsegram 125 (21) 293 (50) Jackfruit 89 (15) 152 (26) Field bean 26 (4) 241 (41) Jamun 115 (20) 98 (17) Groundnut - 234 (40) Musambi 115 (20 ) 98 (17) Sunflower - 231 (37) Lime 115 (20) 98 (17) Cotton 89 (15) 152 (26) Cashew 26 (5) 153 (26) Onion 26 (4) 241 (41) Custard apple 213 (37) 225 (39) Potato 26 (4) 152 (26) Amla 213 (37) 225 (39) Beans 26 (4) 241 (41) Tamarind 115 (20) 98 (17) Beetroot 26 (4) 152 (26) Marigold 125 (21) 198 (34) Turmeric 26 (4) 1525 (26) Chrysanthemum 26 (5) 241 (26) Mango 26 (4) 98 (17)  Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 9 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: Honnegaudanahalli micro-watershed (Basavapur sub-watershed, Gundlupet taluk, Chamarajanagar district) is located in between 11044' – 11047' North latitudes and 76035' – 76038' East longitudes, covering an area of about 584 ha, bounded by Kannagal, Puttanapur and Bhimanabid 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 Honnegaudanahalli micro-watershed (Basavapur sub-watershed, Gundlupet taluk and Chamarajanagar district) are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 52.0 to 48.0 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 54 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 72 per cent.  Social groups belong to general caste is around 70 per cent.  Liquefied petroleum gas is the source of energy for a cooking among all sample households.  About 60 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Majority of farm households (30 %) are having MGNREGA card for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 80 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 70 per cent of sample households.  Institutional participation is only 17.0 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making of agriculture production among all sample households was found. 2 Economic Indicators;  The average landholding is 0.8 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal and small farmers. The dry land account for 32.7 % and irrigated land is 67.3 % of total cultivable land among the sample households.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 20.0 per cent and agriculture is the main and agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 68.0 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs.14057 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs.10921 per household, among the all sample farmers having plough and sprayer (20 %).  The average value of livestock is around Rs.17170 per household; about 60 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 471.5 grams (1195.3 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.168282 per household. About 50 per cent on of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita average monthly expenditure is around Rs.814. 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.711 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs.396566 per year for the total area of 122.6 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 75847/ ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in garlic (Rs. 558310) followed by onion (Rs. 120939) horse gram (Rs. 11625), sunflower (Rs. 7550), maize (Rs .7447) and sorghum (Rs. 1857).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 2924/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in gram (Rs. 3203) followed by maize (Rs. 1482) and sorghum (Rs. 1671).  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. 77136) followed by sorghum (Rs. 41633), garlic (Rs. 40288), onion (Rs. 29291), sunflower (Rs. 28602), horse gram (Rs. 25170) and maize (Rs. 21128). 3 Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is by onion (26.8 %), followed by horse gram (16.2 %), sorghum (15.1 %), turmeric (14.2 %) sunflower (10.6 %), garlic (10.6 %), beetroot (3.3 %) and maize (3.3 %).  In Honnegaudanahalli micro-watershed, major soil are Hindupur (HDR) soil are having shallow soil depth cover around 10.4 % of area; crops are beet root (15.9 %), maize (31.9 %), sunflower (20.3 %), turmeric (31.9 %). Magoonahalli (MGH) soil series are having moderately shallow soil depth cover around 20 % of area; crops are onion (50 %) and turmeric (50 %). Kannigala (KNG) soil are having moderately deep soil depth cover around 9.4% of area; crops area horsegram (25.4 %) and sunflower (74.6 %), Beemanabeedu (BMB) soil are having very deep moderately soils depth cover around 15.2 % of area; crops are horse gram (22.5 %), sorghum (22.8 %), onion (22.9 %), sunflower (8.4 %) and turmeric (2.4 %) and Kallipura (KLP) soil series are very deep soil depth cover around (16.9 %) of area; crops are horse gram (50%) and sorghum (50%).  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for sunflower ranges between Rs.40164/ha in HDR soil (With BCR of 1.02) and Rs. 27618/ha in KNG soil (with BCR of 1.07).  In turmeric the cost of cultivation range between is Rs. 818442/ha in BMB soil (with of 1.16) and Rs 93334 in HDR soil (with BCR of 2.12).  In onion the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 198935/ha in BMB soil (with BCR of 2.25) and Rs. 63126/ha in MGH soil (with BCR of 3.01).  In horse gram the cost of cultivation ranges between Rs.33643/ha in KNG soil (with BCR of 1.12) and Rs.13169/ha in BMB soil (with BCR of 1.21).  In sorghum the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 26791/ha in BMB soil (with BCR of 1.15) and Rs. 25532/ha in KLP soil (with BCR of 1.16).  In garlic the cost of cultivation in BMB soil is Rs. 57290/ha (with BCR of 10.75).  In beetroot the cost of cultivation in HDR soil is Rs. 43823/ha (with BCR of 1.13) and maize the cost of cultivation in Rs. 24539/ha (with BCR of 1.36).  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 are deeper soil to maximize returns. Suggestions;  Involving farmers is watershed planning helps in strengthing institutional participation. 4  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 beetroot(91.6 %), maize(79.2 %), sunflower (28.3 to 73.4 %), turmeric (0 to 39.3 %), onion (70.6 %), horse gram (9.6 to 25.6% %), sorghum(53.6% to 52.9 %), garlic (12.4 %) and onion (48.5 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Chilkadabetta-1 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 and use potentials of the soils in the microwartershed. The present study covers an area of 476 ha in Chilkadabetta-1 microwatershed in Gundlupet taluk of Chamarajanagar district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought prone with an average annual rainfall of 734 mm. Maximum of 254 mm precipitation takes place during south–west monsoon period from June to September, the north-east monsoon contributes about 268 mm and prevails from October to early December and the remaining 212 mm takes place during the rest of the year. An area of about 97 per cent is covered by soils and 3 per cent by waterbodies, settlements, forest and others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 10 soil series and 28 soil phases (management units) and 8 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is about 150 days starting from the 3rd week of June 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 major agricultural and horticultural crops were assessed and maps showing the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  About 77 per cent area is suitable for agriculture and 23 per cent is not suitable for agriculture but well suited for forestry, pasture, agroforestry, silvi-pasture, recreation, installation of wind mills and as habitat for wildlife.  About 24 per cent of the soils are very deep (>150 cm), 12 per cent moderately deep (75 - 100 cm), 61 per cent moderately shallow to shallow (25-75 cm).  About 32 per cent of the area has clayey soils, 52 per cent loamy soils and 13 per cent sandy soils at the surface.  About 9 per cent of the area has non-gravelly (200mm/m) in available water capacity and about 73 per cent low (50-100 mm/m) and very low (337kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is low (4.5 ppm).  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils.  Available zinc is deficient in all the soils  The land suitability for 27 major crops (agricultural and horticultural) 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 Chilkadabetta-1 Microwatershed Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Sorghum 82 (17) 186 (39) Guava 78 (16) 57 (12) Maize 101 (21) 155 (33) Mango 78 (16) 23 (5) Red gram 78(16) 83 (18) Sapota 78 (16) 57 (12) Groundnut 35 (7) 221(47) Jackfruit 78 (16) 23 (5) Sunflower 70 (15) 77 (16) Jamun 78 (16) 35 (7) Cotton 82 (17) 155 (33) Musambi 78 (16) 35 (5) Onion 78 (16) 190 (40) Lime 78 (16) 35 (5) Beans 78 (16) 190 (40) Cashew 78 (16) 57 (12) Potato 78 (16) 178 (37) Custard apple 78 (16) 193 (40) Beetroot 78 (16) 178 (37) Amla 78 (16) 193(40) Turmeric 78 (16) 178 (37) Tamarind 78 (16) 35(5) Horse gram 78 (16) 180 (38) Marigold 78 (16) 190(40) Field bean 78 (16) 190 (40) Chrysanthamum 78 (16) 190(40) Banana 78 (16) 69 (50) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 8 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fibre and horticulture crops that helps in maintaining the 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 and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges that are edible, ecological and produce lot of biomass which helps in restoring the ecological balance in the micro watershed. 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: Chilakadabetta-1 Microwatershed (Shivapura sub-watershed, Gundlupet taluk, Chamarajanagar district) is located in between 11041' – 11042' North latitudes and 76040' – 76042' East longitudes, covering an area of about 476 ha, bounded by Hullipura, Belavadihundi, Mangala and Shivapura 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 Chilakadabetta-1 micro-watershed (Shivapura sub-watershed, Gundlupet taluk and Chamarajanagar district) are presented here. Social Indicators  Male and female ratio is 61.2 to 38.8 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 55.1 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 71.4 per cent.  Social groups belong to scheduled caste (SC) is around 30 per cent.  Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is the source of energy for a cooking among 90 per cent.  About 60.0 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Around 30.0 percent of farm households are having MGNREGA card for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 70 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 80 per cent.  Institutional participation is only 8.2 per cent.  Rural migration to urban centre for employment is prevalent among 10 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making are around 30 per cent of sample households. 2 Economic Indicators  The average land holding is 0.8 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal farmers. The dry land account for 72.1 % and irrigated land is 27.9 % of total cultivated land of the sample farmers.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 79.6 per cent and agriculture is the main agriculture labour is the subsidiary occupation around 10.2 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs 93314 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs 74219 per household, about 50.0 per cent of sample farmers are having sprayer.  The average value of livestock is around Rs 25750 per household; about 58.3 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 588.3 grams (1253.5 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 80.0 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs. 36529 per household. All sample farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita average monthly expenditure is around Rs.1401. 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. 900 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 505064 per year for the total area of 475.8 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 16231/ ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in tomato (Rs. 43260) followed by beans (Rs. 18914), maize (Rs. 16914), sorghum (Rs. 16401), horse gram (Rs. 7824), sunflower (Rs. 5818) and groundnut (Rs. 4485).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 449/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in groundnut (Rs. 675) followed by horse gram (Rs. 472), sunflower (Rs. 329) and sorghum (Rs. 318).  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 beans (Rs. 538092) followed by tomato (Rs. 49965), sorghum (Rs. 48561), maize (Rs. 36220), sunflower (Rs. 30947), horse gram (Rs. 20349) and groundnut (Rs. 20287). 3 Economic Land Evaluation  The major cropping pattern is horse gram (29.9 %) followed by sorghum (19.4 %) groundnut (18.1 %), sunflower (16.7 %), maize (8.7 %) and beans (3.6 %).  Chilakadabetta-1 Micro watershed, major soils are soil Hindupur (HDR) series is having shallow soil depth cover around 6.5 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing sunflower (50.0 %) and sorghum (50.0%). Hullipura (HPR) are also having moderately shallow soil depth cover around 16.6 % of area, the crops are beans (5.5 %), horse gram(44.5%), sorghum(44.5%) and tomato was 5.5 % each. Shivapura (SPR) soil series having shallow soil depth cover around 14.6 % of areas, crops are groundnut (50.0 %) and horse gram (50.0 %). Kannigala (KNG) soil series are having moderately deep soil depth cover around 11.7 % per cent of area. The major crops grown are groundnut (31.7%) and horse gram (68.3%). Annurkeri (ARK) soil series are having very deep soil depth covers around 7.4 % of area, the major crop grown is beans (13.1%), groundnut (36.9%), sorghum (36.9%) and tomato (13.1%). Kalligaudanahalli (KDH) and Beemanabeedu (BMB) soil series having very deep soil depth cover 7.3 % and 2.5 % of areas respectively; crops are maize, sunflower and horse gram.  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for groundnut ranges between Rs.18746/ha in SPR soil (with BCR of 1.0) and Rs.30525/ha in KNG soil (with BCR of 1.04).  In horse gram the cost of cultivation range between Rs 6371/ha in SPR soil (with of 2.62) and Rs. 28728/ha in BMB soil (with BCR of 1.57).  In sorghum the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 11171/ha in ARK soil (with BCR of 2.53) and Rs. 18249/ha in HDR soil (with BCR of 1.71).  In tomato the cost of cultivation range between is Rs.118609 /ha in ARK soil (with BCR of 1.25) and Rs331873 in HPR soil (with BCR of 1.28).  In sunflower the cost of cultivation range between is Rs 17602/ha in HDR soil (with BCR of 1.94) and Rs. 33353/ha in BMB soil (with BCR of 1.03).  In beans the cost of cultivation range between is Rs 112311/ha in ARK soil (with BCR of 1.23) and Rs. 126088/ha in HPR soil (with BCR of 1.02).  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 on deeper soils to maximize returns. Suggestions  Involving farmers is watershed planning helps in strengthing institutional participation. 4  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 58.7 %), horse gram (24.1 to 45.8 %), sorghum (38.2 to 53.1 %), sunflower (31.7 to 39.3 %) and tomato (44.9 to 64 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Devihal-3 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 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 435 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 97 per cent is covered by soils, three per cent by rock lands 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 7 land use classes.  The length of crop growing period is about 150 days starting from the 3rd week of June to 1st 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 the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  About 97 per cent area is suitable for agriculture and 3 per cent is not suitable for agriculture.  About 64 per cent of the soils are moderately shallow (50-75 cm) to very shallow (150 cm) soils.  About 73 per cent of the area has loamy soils at the surface, 4 per sandy and 20 per cent of the area has clayey soils.  About 9 per cent of the area has non-gravelly soils, 80 per cent gravelly soils (15-35 % gravel) and 9 per cent very gravelly (35- 60% gravel) soils.  About 16 per cent medium (101-150 mm/m), 81 per cent low (51-100 mm/m) to very low (0.75%) and low (20 ppm).  Available boron is low (0.5 ppm) in about 54 per cent and medium (0.5-1.0 ppm) in 43 per cent area.  Available iron is deficient in about 59 per cent area and sufficient in 38 per cent area.  Available zinc is deficient in about 84 per cent area and sufficient in 13 per cent area.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils.  The land suitability for 23 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, prevailing 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 118 (27) 125(29) Sapota 43 (10) 102 (23) Maize 118 (27) 125(29) Jackfruit 35 (8) 27 (6) Cotton 71 (16) 192(44) Jamun 35 (8) 35 (8) Sunflower 71 (16) 192(44) Musambi 35 (8) 35 (8) Onion 137 (32) 125(29) Lime 35(8) 35 (8) Groundnut 137 (32) 200(46) Cashew 35 (8) 110 (25) Chilli 145 (33) 117(27) Custard apple 71 (16) 285(66) Sugarcane 71 (16) 75(17) Amla 71(16) 285 (66) Pomegranate 71 (16) 75 (17) Tamarind 35 (8) 35 (8) Tomato 145 (33) 116(27) Marigold 145 (33) 116 (27) Guava 63 (14) 8 (2) Chrysanthemum 145(33) 116 (27) Mango 35 (8) 35 (8) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 7 identified LCUs 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 the 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 income, provide fodder and fuel and generate lot of biomass. This would help in maintaining an ecological balance and also help in 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: Devihal-3 micro-watershed (Nilogal sub-watershed, Shirahatti taluk, Gadag district) is located in between 1507' – 1509' North latitudes and 75036' – 75038' East longitudes, covering an area of about 435 ha, bounded by Chabbi village on north, Nadigatti village on the west, Majjur and Devihal villages on the east with an 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 Devihal-3 micro-watershed (Nilogal subwatershed, Shirahatti taluk and Gadag district) are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 51.8 to 48.2 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 48.2 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 69.7 per cent.  Social groups belong to other backward caste (OBC) is around 90.0 per cent.  Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is the source of energy for cooking among 60.0 per cent.  About 50.0 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Farm households (90.0 %) are having MGNREGA card for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 90.0 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 50.0 per cent of sample households.  Institutional participation is only 1.8 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making are around 50.0 per cent of households. 2 Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 1.6 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to small and medium farmers. The dry land of 83.3 % and irrigated land 16.1% of total cultivated land area among the sample farmers.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 20.4 per cent and agriculture is the main and non agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 74.3 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs. 14145 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs. 141683 per household, about 60 per cent of sample farmers having plough and bullock cart.  The average value of livestock is around Rs. 26080 per household; about 83.3 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 878.7 grams (1898.5 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 50.0 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs. 40187 per household. About 80.0 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita average monthly expenditure is around Rs.1306. 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. 1084 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 4458572 per year for the total area of 435.54 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 12856/ ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in onion (Rs. 21418) followed by sorghum (Rs. 12501), groundnut (Rs. 10847), sunflower (Rs. 9116), maize (Rs. 8305) and green gram (Rs. 4950).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs 1496/ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in maize (Rs 2379) followed by groundnut (Rs 1337) and sorghum (Rs 771).  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 sunflower (Rs.32384), followed by green gram (Rs 32286), sorghum (Rs.27823), maize (Rs.23085), groundnut (Rs.16454), and onion (Rs.15504). 3 Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is groundnut (25.5 %) followed by maize (21.0 %), onion (16.1), sunflower (10.9 %), sorghum (10.7 %) and green gram (7.9 %).  In Devihal 3 Microwatershed, major soil is soil of Devihal (DVH) series is having very shallow soil depth cover around 6.32 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing onion. Kaggalipura (KGP) soil is also having very shallow soil depth cover (3.92 %) of area; the crops are sunflower. Chikkamegheri (CKM) soil series having moderately deep soil depth cover around 17.23 per cent of areas, crops are groundnut (28 %), maize (28 %), green gram (22 %) and sorghum (22 %). Lakkipura (LKR) soil series having moderately shallow soil depth cover around 21.65 per cent of area; crops are sorghum (66 %) and sunflower (34 %), Ranatur (RTR) soil series having very deep soil depth cover 5.79 ha of area; crop are groundnut (47 %) and maize (53 %) and Thammadahalli soils are moderately shallow soil depth cover 26.81 per cent of area; crops are groundnut.  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for sunflower ranges between Rs. 35405 /ha in KGP soil (with BCR of 1.45) and Rs. 23330/ha in LKR soil (with BCR of 11.18).  In groundnut the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 23720/ha in RTR soil (with BCR of 1.35) and Rs. 22644/ha in TDH soil (with BCR of 1.74).  In sorghum the cost of cultivation range between is Rs. 13952/ha in LKR soil (with BCR of 2.54) and Rs. 10338/ha in CKM soil (with BCR of 1.19).  In maize the cost of cultivation ranges between Rs. 25385/ha in RTR soil (with BCR of 1.52) and Rs. 21308/ha in CKM soil (with BCR of 1.10).  In onion the cost of cultivation in DVH soil is Rs. 14182/ha (with BCR of 3.22) and green gram the cost cultivation in CKM soil is Rs.18425/ha (with BCR of 1.30).  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 soils to maximize returns. Suggestions;  Involving farmers is watershed planning helps in strengthing institutional participation. 4  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 (63.9 to 68.4 %), maize (79 to 82.1 %), sorghum (86.1 to 48.1 %), sunflower (51 to 30 %), onion (76.6 %) and green gram (45.3 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Shivapura-1 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 and use potentials of the soils in the microwartershed. The present study covers an area of 596 ha in Gundlupet taluk of Chamarajanagar district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought prone with an average annual rainfall of 734 mm of which about 254 mm is received during south –west monsoon, 268 mm during north-east and the remaining 212 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 96 per cent is covered by soils, four per cent by others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 8 soil series and 24 soil phases (management units) and 7 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is about 150 days starting from the 3rd week of June to 1st 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 the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  About 96 per cent area is suitable for agriculture.  About 8 per cent of the soils are moderately deep (75-100 cm) to very deep (>150 cm) and 87 per cent are shallow to moderately shallow (25-75 cm).  About 34 per cent of the area has clayey soils at the surface, 40 per cent loamy soils and 22 per cent area has sandy soils.  About 7 per cent of the area has non-gravelly soils, 39 per cent gravelly soils (15-35 % gravel) and 49 per cent has very gravelly (35- 60% gravel) soils.  About 88 per cent has soils that are very low (200 mm/m) available water capacity.  About 86 per cent of the area has nearly level (0-1%) to very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands and 10 per cent is under gently sloping (3-5%) to moderately sloping (5- 10%) lands.  An area of about 64 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1), 22 per cent moderately eroded (e2) and 10 per cent soils are severely eroded (e3).  An area of about 2 per cent has soils that are slightly acidic (pH 6.0-6.5); 14 per cent area has neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) and maximum area of about 80 per cent has soils that are slightly alkaline (pH 7.3 to 7.8) to strongly alkaline (pH 8.4 to 9.0).  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 0.75%) in organic carbon.  About 40 per cent of the soils are low (57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 12 per cent of the soils are low (337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is low (1.0 ppm) in 5 per cent area.  Available iron is deficient in about 51 per cent area and sufficient in 44 per cent area.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in all the soils of the microwatershed.  The land suitability for 27 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 8 (1) 183 (31) Sapota 36 (6) 6 (1) Maize 36 (6) 147 (25) Guava 36 (6) 6 (1) Redgram 36 (6) 16 (3) Banana 36 (6) 8 ( 1 ) Horsegram 36 (6) 163 (27) Jackfruit 36 (6) - Field bean 36 (6) 163 (27) Jamun 36 (6) 8 (1) Groundnut - 189 (32) Musambi 36 (6) 8 (1) Sunflower - 44 (7) Lime 36 (6) 8 (1) Cotton 8 (1) 147 (25) Cashew - 16 (3) Onion 36 (6) 155 (26) Custard apple - 108 (18) Potato 36 (6) 147 (25) Amla - 108 (18) Beans 36 (6) 155 (26) Tamarind 36 (6) 8 (1) Beetroot 36 (6) 147 (25) Marigold 36 (6) 161 (27) Turmeric 36 (6) 147 (25) Chrysanthemum 36 (6) 155 (26) Mango 36 (6) - 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, 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: Shivapura-1 micro-watershed (Shivapura sub-watershed, Gundlupet taluk, Chamarajanagar district) is located in between 11041' – 11043' North latitudes and 76040' – 76042' East longitudes, covering an area of about 596 ha, bounded by Hullepura, Siddapura and Hundipura villages with an 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 Shivapura-1 micro-watershed (Shivapura sub-watershed, Gundlupet taluk, Chamarajanagar district) are presented here Social Indicators  Male and female ratio is 54.8 to 45.1 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 64.5 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 80.6 per cent.  Social groups belong to scheduled caste (SC) is around 44.4 per cent.  Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is the source of energy for a cooking among 90.0 per cent.  About 66.6 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Farm households (44.4 %) are having MGNREGA card for rural employments.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 88.8 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 55.5 per cent of sample households.  Institutional participation is only 9.6 per cent of sample households.  Rural migration to unban centre for employment is prevalent among 12.9 per cent of farm households.  Women participation in decisions making are around 82.1 per cent of households. 2 Economic Indicators  The average land holding is 1.1 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal and small farmers. The dry land of 66.3 % and irrigated land 33.7% of total cultivated land area among the sample farmers.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 12.9 per cent and agriculture is the main and non agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 38.7 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs. 101589 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average farm assets value is around Rs.71651 per household, about 55.5 per cent of sample farmers owen of Irrigation pump and sprayer (44.4 %).  The average value livestock is around Rs.36667 per household; about 77.7 per cent of households are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 651.5 grams (1638.6 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 88.9 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs.65433 per household. About 55.5 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita monthly average expenditure is around Rs.1142. 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. 765 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 436466 per year for the total area of 595.6 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food production is around Rs. 30601/ ha/year. Per hectare food production services is maximum in banana (Rs. 45422) followed by sunflower (Rs. 12945), cotton (Rs. 9384), horse gram (Rs. 6715), sorghum (Rs. 5915) and maize (Rs. 5902).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 904/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in sorghum (Rs. 1091) followed by and horse gram (Rs. 717).  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 banana (Rs. 117195) followed by cotton (Rs. 58112), sorghum (Rs. 41407), sunflower (Rs. 35645), maize (Rs. 23218) and horse gram (Rs. 21933). 3 Economic Land Evaluation  The major cropping pattern is sunflower (33.1 %) followed by sorghum (25.4 %), horse gram (15 %), banana (11.9 %), cotton (4.9 %), maize (4.7 %) and safflower (4.7 %).  In Shivapura 1 micro-watershed, major soil is soil of Shivapura (SPR) series is having shallow soil deep cover around 5.65 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing maize (50.0%) and sunflower (50 %), Hindupur (HDR) soil are also having shallow soil depth cover (45.0 %) of area, the crops are horse gram (24 %), sorghum (45 %) and sunflower (31.0 %). Devarhalli (DRH) soil series having moderately shallow soil depth cover around 31.66 per cent of areas, crops are sorghum (50 %) and sunflower (50.0 %). Hullipura (HPR) soil series having moderately shallow soil depth cover around 19 % of area; crops are banana (38), cotton (16 %), sorghum (23 %) and sunflower (11.0 %).  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for sorghum range between Rs. 24166/ha in HPR soil (with BCR of 1.30) and Rs. 20250/ha in HDR soil (with BCR of 1.34).  In horse gram the cost of cultivation range between Rs 18606/ha in HPR soil (with of 1.26) and Rs.16253/ha in HDR soil (with BCR of 1.52).  In sunflower the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 40912/ha in HPR soil (with BCR of 1.03) and Rs. 16518/ha in DRH soil (with BCR of 2.22).  In maize the cost of cultivation is Rs. 24498/ha in SPR soil (with BCR of 1.24).  In banana the cost of cultivation is Rs. 62539/ha in HPR soil (with BCR of 1.69) and cotton cultivation in HPR soil is Rs.74271/ha (with BCR of 1.13).  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 on deeper soils 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 (28.5 to 24.1 %), sorghum (53.8 to 47.2%), sunflower (41.4 to 24.1 %), banana (62 %), cotton (15.6 %) and maize (77.1 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The land resource inventory of Hullur-2 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 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 448 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 96 per cent is covered by soils, four per cent by waterbodies, settlements and others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 11 soil series and 15 soil phases (management units) and 8 land use classes.  The length of crop growing period is about 150 days starting from the 3rd week of June to 1st 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 the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  About 96 per cent area is suitable for agriculture and 4% is not suitable for agriculture.  About 13 per cent of the soils are shallow (25-50 cm) to moderately shallow (50-75 cm) and about 83 per cent are moderately deep (75-100 cm) to very deep (>150 cm) soils.  About 93 per cent of the area has clayey soils at the surface and 3 per cent of the area has loamy soils.  About 32 per cent of the area has non-gravelly soils, 56 per cent gravelly soils (15-35 % gravel) and 2 per cent very gravelly (35- 60% gravel) soils.  About 22 per cent medium (101-150 mm/m), 62% is very high (>200mm/m) and 11 per cent low (51-100 mm/m) to very low (9.0).  About 95 per centhas soils are non saline ( 337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is high (>20 ppm) in about 30 per cent, medium (10-20 ppm) in about 46 per cent area and about 20 per cent area is low (1.0 ppm) in 2 per cent area.  Available iron is deficient in about 92 per cent area and sufficient in 4 per cent area.  Available zinc is deficient in about 95 per cent area and sufficient in <1 per cent area.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils.  The land suitability for 23 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 200 (45) 193 (43) Sapota - 50 (11) Maize 13 (3) 37 (8) Jackfruit - 4 (1) Cotton 181 (40) 213(47) Jamun - 4(1) Sunflower 181 (40) 192(44) Musambi 37 (8) 195 (44) Onion 46 (10) 4(1) Lime 37(8) 195 (44) Groundnut 13 (3) 37(8) Cashew - 17(4) Chilli 13 (3) 401(89) Custard apple 320 (71) 73(16) Sugarcane - 50 (11) Amla 320(71) 73 (16) Pomegranate - 394 (88) Tamarind - 4 (1) Tomato 46 (10) 368(82) Marigold 50 (11) 344 (77) Guava - 150 (33) Chrysanthemum 50(11) 344 (77) Mango - 4(1) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 8 identified LCUs 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, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges that would help in supplementing the income, provide fodder and fuel and generate lot of biomass. This also helps in maintaining an ecological balance and 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: Hullur 2 Microwatershed (Hullur sub-watershed, Shirahatti taluk, Gadag district) is located in between 1503' – 1505' North latitudes and 75034' – 75036' East longitudes, covering an area of about 448 ha, bounded by Fatagoan Badani village on north, Amarapur village on the west, Jirmahadapur on the south, Nilogal village on the east with an 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 Hullur 2 micro-watershed (Hullur subwatershed, Shirahatti taluk, Gadag district) are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 65 to 35 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 60 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 79 per cent.  Social groups belong to scheduled caste (SC) is around 9 per cent.  Fire wood is the source of energy for a cooking among 55 per cent.  About 18 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Majority of farm households (80 %) are having MGNREGA card for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 73 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 55 per cent of sample households.  Institutional participation is only 9 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making for agriculture production among all households was found. 2 Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 2.32 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to medium and semi-medium farmers. The dry land of 69.7 % and irrigated land 30.3 % of total cultivated land area among the sample farmers.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 30 per cent and agriculture is the main and agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 51 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs. 11127 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs. 111040 per household, about 82 per cent of sample farmers owen plough and sprayer.  The average value of livestock is around Rs. 24750 per household; about 90 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 731.4 grams (1589 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 64 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs. 16407 per household. Among all sample farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita average monthly expenditure is around Rs. 1125. 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. 1033 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 441031 per year for the total area of 571.40 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 4718/ha/year. Per hectare food production services is maximum in onion (Rs. 17422) followed by maize (Rs. 5715), horse gram (Rs. 5424), cotton (Rs. 2723) sorghum (Rs. 653), groundnut (Rs. 429) and sunflower (Rs. 653).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 2239/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in groundnut (Rs. 4803) followed by sorghum (Rs. 1647), horse gram (Rs. 1214) and maize (Rs. 1290).  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. 49758) followed by sorghum (Rs. 37643), groundnut (Rs. 25959), maize (Rs. 23066), horse gram (Rs. 22416), sunflower (Rs. 12227) and onion (Rs. 10628). 3 Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is maize (68.7 %) followed by sunflower (6.2 %), onion (6.2 %), horse gram (6.2 %), sorghum (4.7 %), groundnut (4.9 %) and cotton (3.0 %).  In Hullur 2 Microwatershed, major soil series is soil of Yelisirunj (YSJ) series is having shallow soil depth cover around 4.4 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing maize (50 %) and horse gram (50 %). Attikatti (ATT) are having moderately shallow soil depth cover 4.7 % of area, the crops are groundnut (42.9 %) and maize (57.1 %). Jelligeri (JLG) soil series having moderately shallow soil depth cover around 1.4 % of areas, crops are onion. Mahalingapur Tanda (MPT) soil series having deep soil depth cover around 37.1 % of area, crops are maize. Hullur (HLR) soil series are having very deep soil depth cover around 8.2 % of area; the major crops grown are maize. Narasapura (KPR) soil series are having deep soil depth covers around 0.81 % of area, the major crop grown is cotton (6.6 %), maize (59.8 %), groundnut (3.3 %), onion (6.6 %), sorghum (10 %) and sunflower (13.6 %).  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for maize the range between Rs. 24782/ha in ATT soil (with BCR of 1.18) and Rs.18845/ha in KPR soil (with BCR of 1.07).  In horse gram the cost of cultivation Rs. 20065/ha in YSJ soil (with BCR of 1.33).  In groundnut the cost of cultivation ranges between Rs. 51669/ha in KPR soil (with BCR of 1.20) and Rs. 36120/ha in ATT soil (with BCR of 1.03).  In onion cost of cultivation range between is Rs.39707/ha in JLG soil (with BCR of 1.79) and Rs 30948 in KPR soil (with BCR of 1.20).  In cotton the cost of cultivation is Rs 40502/ha in KPR soil (with BCR of 1.07).  In sorghum the cost of cultivation is Rs.24042/ha in KPR soil (with BCR of 1.10) and sunflower the cost of cultivation is Rs.17509/ha in KPR soil (with BCR of 1.04).  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. 4  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 horse gram (25.4 %), maize (82.1 to 70.7 %), groundnut (48.6 to 42.2 %), onion (87.3 to 80.6 %), cotton (27.7 %), sorghum (56.0 %) and sunflower (77.7 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Kaligaudanahalli 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 and use potentials of the soils in the microwartershed. The present study covers an area of 612 ha in Gundlupet taluk of Chamarajanagar district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought prone with an average annual rainfall of 734 mm, of which about 254 mm is received during south –west monsoon, 268 mm during north-east and the remaining 212 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 86 per cent is covered by soils, six per cent by others and two per cent is under forest. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 12 soil series and 36 soil phases (management units) and 10 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is about 150 days starting from the 3rd week of June to 1st 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 the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  About 86 per cent area is suitable for agriculture, 6 per cent not suitable for agriculture and two per cent area is under forest.  About 56 per cent of the soils are moderately deep (75-100 cm) to very deep (>150 cm) and 36 per cent are shallow to moderately shallow (25-75 cm).  About 34 per cent of the area has clayey soils at the surface, 40 per cent loamy soils and 22 per cent area has sandy soils.  About 7 per cent of the area has non-gravelly soils, 39 per cent gravelly soils (15-35 % gravel) and 49 per cent has very gravelly (35- 60% gravel) soils.  About 88 per cent has soils that are very low (200 mm/m) available water capacity.  About 86 per cent of the area has nearly level (0-1%) to very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands and 10 per cent is under gently sloping (3-5%) to moderately sloping (5-10%) lands.  An area of about 64 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1), 22 per cent moderately eroded (e2) and 10 per cent soils are severely eroded (e3).  An area of about 2 per cent has soils that are slightly acidic (pH 6.0-6.5); 14 per cent neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) and maximum area of about 80 per cent has soils that are slightly alkaline (pH 7.3 to 7.8) to strongly alkaline (pH 8.4 to 9.0).  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 0.75%) in organic carbon.  About 40 per cent of the soils are low (57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 12 per cent of the soils are low (337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is low (1.0 ppm) in 5 per cent area.  Available iron is deficient in about 51 per cent area and sufficient in 44 per cent area.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in all the soils of the microwatershed.  The land suitability for 27 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 8 (1) 183 (31) Sapota 36 (6) 6 (1) Maize 36 (6) 147 (25) Guava 36 (6) 6 (1) Redgram 36 (6) 16 (3) Banana 36 (6) 8 ( 1 ) Horsegram 36 (6) 163 (27) Jackfruit 36 (6) - Field bean 36 (6) 163 (27) Jamun 36 (6) 8 (1) Groundnut - 189 (32) Musambi 36 (6) 8 (1) Sunflower - 44 (7) Lime 36 (6) 8 (1) Cotton 8 (1) 147 (25) Cashew - 16 (3) Onion 36 (6) 155 (26) Custard apple - 108 (18) Potato 36 (6) 147 (25) Amla - 108 (18) Beans 36 (6) 155 (26) Tamarind 36 (6) 8 (1) Beetroot 36 (6) 147 (25) Marigold 36 (6) 161 (27) Turmeric 36 (6) 147 (25) Chrysanthemum 36 (6) 155 (26) Mango 36 (6) - Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 10 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: Kalligaudanahalli micro-watershed (Annurkeri sub-watershed, Gundlupet taluk, Chamarajanagar district) is located in between 11041' – 11043' North latitudes and 76037' – 76041' East longitudes, covering an area of about 584 ha, bounded by Karle, Siddapura, Siidainapura and Maguvinahalli 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 Kalligaudanahalli micro-watershed (Annurkeri sub-watershed, Gundlupet taluk, Chamarajanagar district) are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 60 to 40 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 55 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 70.0 per cent.  Social groups belong to other backward castes (OBC) among all sample households.  Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is the source of energy for a cooking among all sample households.  About 20.0 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  About of farm households (10.0 %) are having MGNREGA card for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 80.0 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 70.0 per cent of sample households.  Institutional participation is only 25.7 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making for agriculture production among all households was found. 2 Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 0.77 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal and small farmers. The dry land of 70 per cent and irrigated land 30 per cent of total cultivated land area among the sample farmers.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 2.3 per cent and agriculture is a main and agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 48.8 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs. 9875 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs. 2520 per household, about 90.0 per cent of sample farmers owned plough.  The average value of livestock is around Rs. 19749 per household; about 66.6 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 612.6 grams (1466.7 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 90.0 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs.79659 per household. Among all sample farm households are above poverty line.  The per capita monthly average expenditure is around Rs.1543. 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.1119.8 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs.628247 per year for the total area of 612.4 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 30962/ ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in potato (Rs. 125268) followed by onion (Rs. 78483), horse gram (Rs. 11372), maize (Rs. 9165), sorghum (Rs. 8385), groundnut (Rs. 4775) and sunflower (Rs. 4541).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 1108/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in maize (Rs. 2315) followed by groundnut (Rs. 820), sorghum (Rs. 761) and horse gram (Rs. 536).  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. 59890) followed by sorghum (Rs. 46324), sunflower (Rs. 36827), horse gram (Rs. 27546), maize (Rs. 24574), groundnut (Rs. 20546), onion (Rs. 18140) and potato (Rs. 16304). 3 Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is sorghum (24.5 %) followed by maize (16.4%) sunflower (13.8 %), groundnut (11.3 %), onion (11.3 %), cotton (10.6 %), potato (7.6%) and horse gram (5.2 %).  In Kaligaudanahalli micro-watershed, major soil is soil of Hundipura (HDR) series soils is having shallow soil depth covers around 10.9 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing cotton (39.4%), horse gram (20.4%) and sunflower (40.1%), Kannigala (KNG) soils are having moderately deep and well drained soil depth covers around 16.4 % of area, the crops are onion (33.4%) and potato (66.6%). Honnegaudanahalli (HGH) soils are having very deep and well drained soil depth covers around 13.5 % of areas; crops are maize (37.5%) and sorghum (62.5%). Kalligaudanahalli (KDH) soils are having very deep soil depth covers around 31.6 % of area, crops are maize (50.0 %), sorghum (50.0 %) and Annurkeri (ARK) soil are having very deep and well drained soil depth covers around 6.3 % of area, the major crop grown is groundnut and onion.  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for onion ranges between Rs.138356/ha in ARK soil (with BCR of 1.45) and Rs.88775/ha in KNG soil (with BCR of 2.0).  In sorghum the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 35530/ha in KDH soil (with of 1.70) and Rs.8688/ha in HGH soil (with BCR1.81).  In sunflower the cost of cultivation is Rs. 39223/ha in HDR soil (with BCR of 1.13).  In maize the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 30105/ha in KDH soil (with BCR of 1.37) and Rs.20028/ha HGH soil (with BCR of 1.46).  In cotton cost of cultivation in HDR soil is Rs. 94916/ha (with BCR of 1.09).  In potato cost of cultivation in KNG soil is Rs. 50843/ha (with BCR of 3.46).  In groundnut the cost of cultivation in ARK soil is Rs. 26982/ha (with BCR of 1.21).  In sunflower cultivation in HDR soil is Rs 48657/ha (with BCR of 1.95) and horse gram the cost cultivation in HDR soil is Rs.19056/ha (with BCR of 1.94).  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 are deeper soil to maximize returns. 4 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 cotton (13.0 %), horse gram (8.3 %), sunflower (33.2 %), onion (69.6 to 75.7 %), potato (74.1 %), maize (73.1 to 78.4 %), sorghum (33.8 to 50.5 %) and groundnut (56.8 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Rampura-1 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 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 537 ha in Yadgir taluk & district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought-prone with an average annual rainfall of 866 mm, of which about 652 mm is received during south-west monsoon, 138 mm during north-east and the remaining 76 mm during the rest of the year. An area of 530 ha in the microwatershed is covered by soils, 1 ha by rock outcrops and about 7 ha by others (water bodies). The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 12 soil series and 24 soil phases (management units) and 5 land use class.  The length of crop growing period is about 120-150 days starting from 1st week of June to 4th 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 26 major agricultural and horticultural crops was assessed and maps showing the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  Entire area in the microwatershed is suitable for agriculture.  About 42 per cent area of the microwatershed has soils that are moderately deep to very deep (75 - >150 cm) and 56 per cent soils are shallow to moderately shallow (25-75 cm).  About 43 per cent area in the microwatershed has loamy soils, 17 per cent sandy and 39 per cent clayey soils at the surface.  About 69 per cent area in the microwatershed is non gravelly (200 mm/m) in available water capacity, 15 per cent is medium (101-150 mm/m), 46 per cent area is low (51-100 mm/m) and 1 per cent area is very low (9.0)  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils in the entire area of the microwatershed is dominantly 0.75).  About 70 per cent area is low in available phosphorus, 24 per area is medium (23-57 kg/ha) and 4 per cent is high (>57 kg/ha).  About 88 per cent is medium (145-337 kg/ha) in available potassium and 10 per cent is high (>337 kg/ha).  Available sulphur is low (1.0 ppm) in 5 per cent area.  Available iron is sufficient (>4.5 ppm) in 97 per cent area and deficient in 2 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in the entire area of the microwatershed.  The land suitability for 26 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 - 525(98) Sapota 8(1) 17(3) Maize 8 (1) 266(49) Pomegranate 8(1) 218(41) Bajra 8(1) 467(87) Musambi 8(1) 217(41) Groundnut 8(1) 191(35) Lime 8(1) 218(41) Sunflower 8(1) 218(41) Amla 8(1) 516(96) Redgram - 226(42) Cashew 8(1) - Bengal gram - 517(96) Jackfruit 8(1) 17(3) Cotton - 516(96) Jamun 8(1) 213(40) Chilli 8(1) 467(87) Custard apple 8(1) 517(96) Tomato 8(1) 266(49) Tamarind 8(1) 213(40) Drumstick 8(1) 218(41) Mulberry 8(1) 17(3) Mango 8(1) 17(3) Marigold 8(1) 517(96) Guava 8(1) 17(3) Chrysanthemum 8(1) 517(96)  Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the identified LMUs 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 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 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. This would help in not only supplementing the farm income but also provide fodder and fuel and generate lot of biomass which would help in maintaining an ecological balance and also contribute 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: Ramapura-1 micro-watershed (Yadgir taluk and district) is located in between 16033' – 16035' North latitudes and 77016' – 77018' East longitudes, covering an area of about 537.39 ha, bounded by Ramapura and Balacheda villages with a length growing period (LGP) 60-90 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 for each watershed. Results: The socio-economic outputs for the Ramapura-1 micro-watershed in Yadgir taluk and district are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 57.3 to 42.7 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 group of population is around 55.3 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 50.4 per cent.  Social groups belong to scheduled caste / scheduled tribes are around 36.6 per cent  Fire wood is the main source of energy for a cooking among all sample households.  About 20.0 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Sample farm households (16.6 %) are having MGNREGA card for rural employments.  Dependence on ration cards through public distribution system is around 93.4 per cent  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 46.6 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making are around 93.4 per cent of households were found. Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 1.7 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal and small farmers. The accounted for dry land of 95.3 per 2 cent and irrigated land of 4.7 per cent among the total cultivated land of sample households.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 28.4 per cent and agriculture is the main and non agriculture labour is predominant subsidiary occupation for 44.0 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs. 76127 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs. 6681 per household, about 50.0 per cent of sample farmers are owing plough.  The average value of livestock is around Rs. 25722 per household; about 85.7 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 988.8 grams (2563.1 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition recommendation at 827 gram. Around 10.0 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs. 30942 per household. About 83.4 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita monthly average expenditure is around Rs. 3331. 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 1427.4 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs.756541 per year for the total area of 537.4 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 4780/ ha/year. Per hectare food production services is maximum in green gram (Rs.7997) followed by maize (Rs.5141), cotton (Rs. 3892), red gram (Rs.3465) and groundnut (Rs.3401).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 1421/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in maize (Rs. 2500) followed by groundnut (Rs. 941) and paddy (Rs. 823).  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 greengram (Rs. 59702) followed by red gram (Rs. 47583), cotton (Rs. 43124), maize (Rs. 22638) and groundnut (Rs. 19906). 3 Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is red gram (46.7 %) followed by cotton (27.5 %), groundnut (15.4 %), bengal gram (4.9 %), paddy (2.4 %), green gram (1.6 %) and maize (1.63 %).  In Ramapura-1 micro watershed, major soils are soil of alluvial landscape of Yalleri (YLR) series are having moderately shallow soil deep cover around 7.7 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently grow in cotton (60.0 %) and redgram (40.0 %). Soil of granite and granite gneiss landscape of Anur (ANR) are also having deep soil cover around 9.0 % of area, the crops are cotton (33.3 %), redgram (66.7 %). Bomraldoddi (BMD) soil series have very deep soil depth cover around 1.49 % of areas; crops are cotton (100%). Hegganakera (HGN) soil series are having very deep depth cover around 18.86 per cent of area, respectively. The major crops grown are cotton (15.1 %), groundnut (17.6 %) and redgram (67.3 %). Halagera (HLG) soil series are having moderately shallow soil depth covers around 24.6 % of area, the major crop grown is cotton (12.5 %), groundnut (25 %), and redgram (62.5 %). Jinkera (JNK) soil series having moderately shallow depth covers around 13.9 % of area, the major crop grown is cotton (69.2 %) and redgram (30.8 %). Mylapura (MYP) soil series having very deep and soil depth covers around 6.24 % of area; crops are cotton (12.5 %), greengram (12.5 %), maize (12.5 %) and redgram (62.5 %). Rachanalli (RHN) soil series having moderately deep and soil depth covers around 1.0 % of areas; crop are groundnut (46.2%), paddy (23.1%) and redgram (30.8%). Rampur (RMP) soil series havingg moderately shallow and soil depth covers around 9.3 % of areas crops are cotton and Sowrashtrahalli (SWR) soil series having deep and soil depth covers around 2.31 % of area crops are cotton.  The total cost of cultivation and benefit ratio (BCR) in study area for cotton ranges between Rs. 62452/ha in ANR soil (with BCR of 1.05) and Rs.22024/ha in HLG soil (with BCR of 1.5).  In redgram the cost of cultivation ranges between Rs.52871/ha in YLR soil (with BCR of 1.12) and Rs.21599/ha in HLG soil (with BCR of 1.07).  In groundnut the cost of cultivation ranges between Rs.33168/ha in HLG soil (with BCR of 1.02) and Rs. 13831/ha in RHN soil (with BCR of 1.63).  In greengram the cost of cultivation in MYP soil is Rs.33499/ha (with BCR of 1.24).  In maize the cost of cultivation is Rs.35613/ha in MYP soil (with BCR of 1.14) and paddy the cost of cultivation in RHN soil is Rs.20967/ha (with BCR of 1.06).  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 4 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 soils 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 cotton (19 to 55 %), redgram (9.1 to 58.4 %), groundnut (7.4 to 30.6 %), paddy (70%), maize (67.4 %) and greengram negative return. ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Kanekal-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, behaviour and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 494 ha in Kanekal-4 microwatershed in Yadgir taluk and district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as droughtprone with an average annual rainfall of 866 mm, of which about 652 mm is received during south–west monsoon, 138 mm during north-east and the remaining 76 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 99 per cent is covered by soils, 1 per cent by rock outcrops and others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 13 soil series and 17 soil phases (management units) and 7 land use classes.  The length of crop growing period is about 120-150 days starting from the 1st week of June to 4th 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 26 major agricultural and horticultural crops were assessed and maps showing the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  Entire land area of the microwatershed is suitable for agriculture.  Small area of less than 1 per cent are shallow (25-50 cm), 24 per cent soils are moderately shallow (50-75 cm), 18 per cent of the soils are moderately deep (75-100cm) and about 57 per cent soils are deep (100-150cm) to very deep (>150 cm) soils.  About 58 per cent of the area has clayey soils, 39 per cent loamy soils and 2 per cent sandy soils at the surface.  An area of about 77 per cent has non-gravelly and 22 per cent are gravelly.  About 56 per cent of the area has soils that are very high (>200mm/m) in available water capacity, 6 per cent is medium (101-150 mm/m), 16 per cent low (51-100mm/m) and about 20 per cent very low (0.75%) in organic carbon.  An area of 13 per cent has soils that are low (57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 97 per cent medium (145-337 kg/ha) and 2 per cent high (>337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is low (1.0 ppm) in about 3 per cent area of the microwatershed.  About 15 per cent area has soils that are deficient (4.5 ppm).  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed.  Entire area of the microwatershed is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in available zinc.  The land suitability for 26 major crops grown in the microwatershed was 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 Kanekal-4 microwatershed Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Sorghum - 385 (78) Sapota - 50 (10) Maize - 12 (2) Guava - 50 (10) Red gram - 370 (75) Pomegranate - 370 (75) Bajra - 381 (77) Jackfruit - 47 (9) Ground nut - 62 (12) Jamun - 301(61) Sunflower - 62 (12) Musambi - 370 (75) Cotton 219 (44) 120 (24) Lime - 369 (75) Bengalgram 238 (48) 100 (20) Cashew - - Chilli - 216 (44) Custard apple - 385 (78) Tomato - 62 (12) Amla - 386 (78) Drumstick - 370 (75) Tamarind - 301 (61) Mulberry - 47 (9) Marigold - 389 (79) Mango - 53(11) Chrysanthemum - 389 (79) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 7 identified LUCs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops that helps in maintaining the 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 are edible and produce lot of biomass that helps to restore the ecological balance in the microwatershed. 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: Kanikal-4 micro-watershed (Yadgir taluk and district) is located in between 16035' – 16036' North latitudes and 770 15' – 76016' East longitudes, covering an area of about 494.19 ha, bounded by Kanikal, Rampura, Sydhapura, Neelahalli and Kudlura 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 Kanikal-4 micro-watershed in Yadgir taluk and district are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 61.2 to 38.8 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age group 18 to 50 of population is around 51.8 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 61.2 per cent.  Social groups belong to scheduled caste / scheduled tribes are around 47.1 per cent  Wood is the source of energy for a cooking among 88.2 per cent.  About 29.4 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  About 11.8 per cent farm households having MGNREGA card for rural employments.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 94.1 per cent  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 31.2 per cent of sample households.  Rural migration to unban centre for employment is prevalent among 23.5 per cent of farm households.  Women participation in decisions making are around 47.1 per cent of households were found. Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 2.4 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal and small farmers. The account for 80.3 per cent of dry land 2 and 19.7 per cent of irrigated land of total cultivated land among the sample households.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 17.6 per cent and agriculture is the main and non agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 51.8 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs.184954 per household. Mobile and television are mass popular mass communication media.  The average farm assets a value is around Rs.115647 per household, about 28 per cent of sample farmers are owing plough.  The average livestock value is around Rs.32666 per household; about 64 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 1081.2 grams (2483.9 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition recommendation at 827 gram. Around 23.5 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs. 37155 per household. About 29.4 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita monthly expenditure is around Rs. 2816. 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 2236.2 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs 1093504 per year for the total area of 494.2 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 8645/ ha/year. Per hector food production services is maximum in bajra (Rs. 25693) followed by maize (Rs. 5267), redgram (Rs. 5048), greengram (Rs. 5032), groundnut (Rs. 4863) and cotton (Rs. 3792).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs.1555/ ha/year. Per hector fodder production services is maximum in bajra (Rs 2717) followed by paddy (Rs 2083), groundnut (Rs.1049) and maize (Rs 370).  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 bajra (Rs. 110557) followed by greengram (Rs. 51173), red gram (Rs. 33808), cotton (Rs. 31928), maize (Rs. 20751) and groundnut (Rs.18037). Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is redgram (47.2 %) followed by cotton (17.6 %), groundnut (16.0 %), greengram (4.8 %), maize (4.8 %), paddy (8.0 %), and bajra (1.6 %) 3  In Kanikal-4 micro watershed, major soils are soil of alluvial landscape of Sambara (SBR) series are having moderately shallow soil deep cover around 25.57 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing cotton (56.2 %), maize (25.0 %) paddy (6.2 %), and redgram (12.5 %). Soil of granite and granite gneiss landscape of Nagalapur (NGP) are also having deep soil deep cover around 0.97 % of area, the crops are paddy (11.1 %), and redgram (88.9 %). Madhwara (MDR) soil series having very deep soil depth cover around 23.42 % of areas, crops are redgram (100 %). Hosalli (HSL) soil series are having moderately deep soil depth cover around 15.53 per cent of area, respectively. The major crops grown are paddy (16.7 %) and redgram (83.3 %). Kadechoor (KDH) soil series are having moderately deep soil depth covers around 3.31 % of area, the major crop grown is bajra (8.3 %), cotton (12.5 %), greengram (16.7 %), groundnut (45.8 %) and redgram (16.7 %). Mylapura (MYP) and Rachanalli (RHN) soil series having very deep and moderately deep soil depth cover 1.54 % and 0.41 % of areas respectively; crops are cotton, greengram, maize, redgram, groundnut and paddy.  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for cotton ranges between Rs.35018/ha in MYP soil (with BCR of 1.18) and Rs.25702/ha in SBR soil (with BCR of 1.07).  In maize the cost of cultivation range between Rs 35615/ha in MYP soil (with BCR of 1.14) and Rs.16683/ha in SBR soil (with BCR of 1.48).  In paddy the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 74662/ha in SBR soil (with BCR of 1.51) and Rs. 20967/ha in RHN soil (with BCR of 1.06).  In redgram cost of cultivation range between is Rs. 29997/ha in SBR soil (with BCR of 1.48) and Rs 8160 in NGP soil (with BCR of 1.02).  In groundnut the cost of cultivation range between is Rs 23485/ha in KDH soil (with BCR of 1.22) and Rs.13831/ha in RHN soil (with BCR of 1.63).  In greengram the cost of cultivation in MYP soil is Rs.33499/ha (with BCR of 1.24).  In bajra the cost of cultivation in KDH soil is Rs.66931/ha (with BCR of 1.43).  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 soils to maximize returns. 4 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 cotton (46 to 64.6 %), maize (67.4 % to 72 %), paddy (34% to 78 %), red gram (27.3 % to 86.4 %), groundnut (26.6 % to 30.6 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Kanivaihundi 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 and use potentials of the soils in the microwartershed. The present study covers an area of 501 ha in Gundlupet taluk of Chamarajanagar district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought- prone with an average annual rainfall of 734 mm, of which about 254 mm is received during south –west monsoon, 268 mm during north-east and the remaining 212 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 96 per cent is covered by soils, three per cent by others and less than one per cent is under forest. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 12 soil series, 28 soil phases (management units) and 9 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is about 150 days starting from the 3rd week of June to 1st 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 the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  About 96 per cent area is suitable for agriculture, 150 cm) and 41 per cent are shallow to moderately shallow (25-75 cm).  About 56 per cent of the area has clayey soils at the surface, 40 per cent loamy soils and 200 mm/m) available water capacity.  About 96 per cent of the area has nearly level (0-1%) to very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands.  An area of about 65 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1) and 31 per cent moderately eroded (e2).  An area of about 5 per cent has soils that are moderately acidic to slightly acidic (pH 5.5- 6.5); 7 per cent neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) and maximum area of about 84 per cent has soils that are slightly alkaline (pH 7.3 to 7.8) to strongly alkaline (pH 8.4 to 9.0).  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 0.75%) in organic carbon.  About two per cent of the soils are low (57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 5 per cent of the soils are low (337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is low (20ppm) in about one per cent area.  Available boron is low (0.5 ppm) in about 16 per cent area, medium (0.5-1.0 ppm) in 69 per cent and high (>1.0 ppm) in 11 per cent area.  Available iron is deficient in about 77 per cent area and sufficient in 19 per cent area.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (0.6 ppm) in about 25 per cent area of the microwatershed.  The land suitability for 27 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 83 (17) 244 (49) Sapota 191 (38) 59 (12) Maize 230 (46) 85 (17) Guava 203 (41) 50 (10) Redgram 230 (46) 148 (29) Banana 173 (35) 81 (16) Horsegram 230 (46) 183 (37) Jackfruit 173(35) 30 (6) Field bean 173 (35) 170 (34) Jamun 177 (36) 30 (6) Groundnut 46 (9) 277 (55) Musambi 177 (36) 30 (6) Sunflower 21 (4) 221 (44) Lime 177 (36) 30 (6) Cotton 26 (5) 149 (30) Cashew 193 (39) 106 (21) Onion 173 (35) 154 (30) Custard apple 208 (41) 205 (41) Potato 173 (35) 149 (30) Amla 208 (41) 205 (45) Beans 173 (35) 154 (30) Tamarind 177 (35) 75 (15) Beetroot 173 (35) 149 (30) Marigold 230 (46) 97 (19) Turmeric 173 (35) 149 (30) Chrysanthemum 173 (35) 170 (34) Mango 173 (35) 75 (15) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 9 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 the 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: Kanivaihundi Microwatershed (Hangala sub-watershed, Gundlupet taluk, Chamarajanagar district) is located in between 11042' – 11044' North latitudes and 76038' – 76040' East longitudes, covering an area of about 501 ha, bounded by Hangala, Hangalapura, Karle, Pasainapura and Kaligaudanahalli 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 Kanivaihundi Microwatershed (Hangala sub-watershed, Gundlupet taluk, Chamarajanagar district) are presented here. Social Indicators  Male and female ratio is 45.4 to 54.6 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 48.5 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 66.5 per cent.  Social groups belong to other backward caste (OBC) is around 75.0 per cent.  Liquefied petroleum gas is the source of energy for a cooking among 79.0 per cent.  About 50.0 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 70.0 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 62.5 per cent of sample households.  Institutional participation is only 3.0 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making are around 25 per cent of households were found. Economic Indicators  The average land holding is 1.85 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to small farmers. The dry land account for 34.3 per cent and irrigated land 65.7 per cent of total cultivated land area among the sample farmers. 2  Agriculture is the main occupation among 59.3 per cent and agriculture is the main and private service is subsidiary occupation for 7.4 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs. 10456 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs. 60532 per household, among all the sample farmers having owen plough.  The average livestock value is around Rs. 29000 per households; about 60 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 617.2 grams (1408 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 87.5 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs. 35720 per household. About 87.5 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita monthly average expenditure is around Rs. 1212. 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. 570 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 274907 per year for the total area of 500.69 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs 72273/ ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in lemon (Rs. 415454) followed by horse gram (Rs. 9228), sunflower (Rs. 5480), cowpea (Rs. 3575), ragi (Rs. 1356) and sorghum is negative returns.  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 1407/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in sorghum (Rs. 2646) followed by cowpea (Rs. 1203) and horse gram (Rs. 1136).  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 (Table 25 and Figure 12) in lemon (Rs. 57663) followed by sorghum (Rs. 37291), sunflower (Rs. 32068), horse gram (Rs. 23235), and cowpea (Rs. 8093). Economic Land Evaluation  The major cropping pattern is sorghum (25.4 %), horse gram (25.4 %) followed by sunflower (21.7 %), cowpea (17.7 %), ragi (8.9 %) and lemon (0.9 %).  In Kanivaihundi Microwatershed, major soil are soil of Honnegaudanahalli (HGH) series is having very deep 30.3 per cent area On this soil farmers are 3 presently growing horse gram (50.0 %), sorghum (25.0 %), sunflower (25.0 %) followed by Hindupur (HDR) series is having shallow 13.2 % per cent of area On this soil farmers are presently growing cowpea (33.3 %), ragi (33.3 %), horse gram (14.8 %) and sorghum (14.8 %). Magoonahalli (MGH) series is havingg moderately shallow 14.0 per cent of areas, on this soil farmer are presently growing horse gram (47.4 %), sorghum (47.4 %). Gopalapur (GPR) series is having Moderately deep 45.5 per cent of area On this soil farmers are presently growing Lemon (100 %), Devarahalli (DRH) series is having moderately shallow 7.8 per cent area On this soil farmers are presently growing horsegram (50.0 %), sorghum(50 %). Kannigala (KNG) series is having moderately deep 16.7 per cent of area, on this soil farmers are presently sunflower and Annurkeri (ARK) series is having shallow soil deep cover around 4.2 per cent of area on this soil farmers are presently growing sorghum and sunflower.  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for horse gram ranges between Rs. 22995/ha in DRH soil (with BCR of 1.26) and Rs. 9018 in MGH soil (with BCR of 2.40).  In sorghum the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 29444/ha in ARK soil (with of 0.05) and Rs. 16470/ha in MGH soil (with BCR of 1.12).  In sun flower the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 27513/ha in ARK soil (with BCR of 1.22) and Rs. 23566/ha in KNG soil (with BCR of 1.31).  In ragi the cost cultivation in HDR soil is Rs. 24418/ha (with BCR of 1.08).  In cowpea the cost of cultivation in HDR soil is Rs 14467/ha (with BCR of 1.33) and lemon cost of cultivation in GPR soil is Rs 33637/ha (with BCR of 13.35).  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 are 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 (71.8 %), lemon (63.2 %), sorghum (65.3 to 45.0 %), cowpea (47.2 %), sunflower (45.8 to 39.3) and horse gram (34.8 to 11.4 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Honavalu-2 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 delineated physiographic boundaries 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 446 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 about 98 per cent is covered by soils, two per cent by waterbodies, settlements and others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 13 soil series and 22 soil phases (management units) and 4 land use classes.  The length of crop growing period is 150 cm).  About 200mm/m).  An area of about 10 per cent has nearly level (0-1%) lands and 88 per cent has very gently sloping (1-3%) lands.  An area of about 63 per cent is slightly eroded (e1) and 35 per cent is moderately eroded (e2) lands.  An area of about 4 per cent has soils that are slightly alkaline (pH 7.3 to 7.8), about 20 per cent moderately alkaline (pH 7.8 to 8.4), 72 per cent strongly alkaline (pH 8.4 to 9.0) and 2 per cent soils are very strongly alkaline (pH>9.0).  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 0.75%) in 12 per cent area of the soils.  Available phosphorus is low (57 kg/ha) in 14 per cent of the soils.  Available potassium is medium (145-337 kg/ha) in 6 per cent and high (>337 kg/ha) in 92 per cent of the soils.  Available sulphur is medium (10-20 ppm) in 8 per cent and high (>20 ppm) in 90 per cent area of the soils.  Available boron is low (0.5 ppm) in about 44 per cent area, medium (0.5-1.0 ppm) in 52 per cent and high (>1.0 ppm) in 2 per cent area.  Available iron is deficient in 1 per cent of the area and sufficient (>4.5 ppm) in 97 per cent of the area.  Available zinc is deficient (0.6 ppm) in 29 per cent of the soils.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in the entire area.  The land suitability for 27 major crops grown in the microwatershed was 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 60 (13 ) 241 (54) Pomegranate 19 (4 ) 272 (61) Maize - 44 (10) Guava 34 (8) Bajra 34 (8) 10 (2) Jackfruit 19 (4 ) 15 (3) Redgram - 315 (71 ) Jamun - 207 (47) Bengalgram 62 (14) 323 (72) Musambi 70 (16 ) 221 (49 ) Groundnut 15 (3) 113 (25) Lime 70 (16 ) 221 (49 ) Sunflower 51 (12) 240 (54 ) Cashew - 72 (16 ) Cotton 62 (14) 323 (72) Custard apple 197 (44) 240 (54 ) Chilli - 44 (10) Amla 19 (4). 418 (94) Tomato - 44 (10) Tamarind - 207 (47 ) Drumstick 19 (4) 357 (80 ) Marigold - 300 (67 ) Mulbery 34 (8) 335 (75 ) Chrysanthemum - 300 (67 ) Mango 34 (8) Jasmine - 44 (10) Sapota 19 (4) 30 (7) Crossandra - 209 (47) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the four identified LUCs 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 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 which inturn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute 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: The Honavalu-2 micro-watershed (Koppal taluk and district) is located in between 15019' – 15020' North latitudes and 7603' – 7605' East longitudes, covering an area of about 446.42 ha, bounded by Vadhaganala, Katrahalli and Honavalu villages. Agro Ecological Region (AER) – 3: (Deccan plateau, hot arid ecosubregion). Karnataka Plateau (Rayalseema as inclusion), hot arid ESR with deep loamy and clayey mixed red and black soil, low to medium AWC and LGP 60-90 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 for each watershed. Results: The socio-economic outputs for the Honavalu-2 micro-watershed in Koppal taluk and district are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 52.7 to 47.3 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 58.3 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 74.0 per cent.  Wood is the source of energy for a cooking among 100 per cent.  About 71.4 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Majority of farm households (75.0 %) are having MGNREGA card for rural employments.  Dependence on ration cards through public distribution system is around 96.4 per cent  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 89.3 per cent of sample households.  Institutional participation is only 5.45 per cent of sample households.  Women participation is decisions making are around 39.3 per cent of households were found. Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 2.4 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to medium and semi medium farmers. Major area under rain fed (76.4 %) and irrigated (23.6%) of area cultivation. 2  Agriculture is the main occupation among 25.2 per cent and Agriculture is the main and non agriculture labour is predominant subsidiary occupation for 55.6 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs.44842 per household. Mobile and television are mass popular mass communication media.  The average farm assets a value is around Rs.68315 per household, about 39.3 per cent of sample farmers are owing plough.  The average livestock value is around Rs.17953 per livestock; about 82.0 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 703.0 grams (1727.1kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 78.6 per cent of sample farmers are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs.29672 per household. About 10.7 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita monthly expenditure is around Rs.462 per household. 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 900.3 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs 505064 per year for the total area of 446.4 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs 12084/ ha/year. Per hectare food production services is maximum in chillies (Rs.61493) followed by bengalgram (Rs.17952), cotton (Rs.8276), groundnut (Rs.5394), green gram (Rs 4691), sunflower (Rs.4607), redgram (Rs.3242), maize (Rs.3193) and bajra is negative returns.  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder grain production is around Rs 1562/ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in maize (Rs 4725) and bajra (Rs 3794).  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 red gram (Rs.107573) followed by bengalgram (Rs.102347), cotton (Rs 74637), bajra (Rs.65782), groundnut (Rs. 45878), sunflower (Rs.36737), greengram (Rs.32410) and maize (Rs.22412). Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is maize (43.0 %) followed by Sunflower (20.8 %), cotton (10.4 %), bajra (8.7 %), green gram (7.9 %), bengal gram (3.9 %), groundnut (3.7 %), chillies (0.8 %) and red gram (0.8 %). 3  In Honavalu-2 micro-watershed, major soil is soil of alluvial landscape of Hatti (HTI) series is having moderately shallow soil deep cover around 2.1 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing maize (50.0 %) and sunflower (50.0 %), Soil of granite and granite gneiss landscape of Bidanagere (BDG) are also having moderately deep soil deep cover around 11.8 % of area, the crops are bajra (62.5 %), cotton was 37.5 % each. Dambarahalli (DRL) soil series having moderately deep soil depth cover around 13.24 % of areas, crops are bajra (11.2 %), cotton (11.2 %), groundnut (3.8 %) maize (53.5 %), redgram (2.8 %) and sunflower (17.4 %), Balapur (BRP) soil series are having deep soil depth cover around 18.8 % of area, respectively. The major crops grown are maize (57.3 %) and sunflower (42.7 %). Gatareddihal (GRH) soil series are having deep soil depth covers around 33.1 % of area, the major crop grown is bajra (13.5 %), bengalgram (16.9 %), chillies (3.4 %), cotton (20.2 %), maize (25.0 %) and sunflower (21.0 %). Mornal (MNL) soil series having deep soil depth cover 3.47 % of area, crops are cotton, groundnut and maize .and Kadagathur (KDT) soil series having deep soil depth cover 4.58 % of areas respectively; crops are bajra (4.9 %), greengram (49.1 %), groundnut (11.6 %) and maize (34.4 %).  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for groundnut range between Rs. 63566/ha in DLR soil (with BCR of 1.04) and Rs.56316/ha in MNL soil (with BCR of 1.16).  In cotton the cost of cultivation ranges between Rs.57633/ha in BDG soil (with BCR of 1.03) and Rs.51870/ha in DRL soil (with BCR of 1.10).  In maize the cost of cultivation range between Rs 46807/ha in KDT soil (with of 2.00) and Rs.17643/ha in HTI soil (With BCR of 1.03).  In sunflower the cost of cultivation ranges between Rs.33757/ha in DRL soil (with BCR of 1.15) and Rs. 26253/ha in HTI soil (with BCR of 1.58).  In bajra cost of cultivation range between is Rs.41990/ha in KDT soil (with BCR of 1.18) and Rs.33654/ha in GRH soil (with BCR of 1.06).  In redgram the cost of cultivation in DRL soil is Rs.79040/ha (with BCR of 1.04).  In chillies the cost of cultivation in GRH soil is Rs 117386/ha (with BCR of 2.1) and green gram cost of cultivation in KDT soil is Rs 19711/ha (with BCR of 1.31).  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. Fertilizer applications are deeper soil to maximize returns. Suggestions;  Involving farmers is watershed planning helps in strengthing institutional participation. 4  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 chillies (90 %), maize (51.3 to 85.1 %), bajra (0 to 29.7 %), greengram (24.0 %), sunflower (0 to 23.8 %), cotton (0 to 10 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Harve-2 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, behaviour and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 436 ha in Harve-2 microwatershed in Chamarajnagar taluk and district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought- prone with an average annual rainfall of 769 mm, of which about 316 mm is received during south –west monsoon, 252 mm during north-east and the remaining 201 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 87 per cent area is covered by soils, 10 per cent area is covered by mining/industrial and 2 per cent is by others (Habitation and Water bodies). The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 10 soil series, 26 soil phases (mapping units) and 7 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is about 150 days starting from the last week of July to 4th 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 major agricultural and horticultural crops were assessed and maps showing degree of suitability along with constraints were generated.  Entire cultivated area of about 86 per cent is suitable for agriculture.  An area of about 6 per cent has deep (100-150 cm) soils, an area of 16 per cent has moderately deep (75-100 cm) soils. Maximum area of about 34 per cent is under moderately shallow (50-75 cm) soils and shallow (25-50 cm) soils occupy 30 per cent area in the microwatershed.  An area of about 40 per cent has loamy soils at the surface and an area of about 47 per cent has sandy at the surface.  An area of about 21 per cent has gravelly (15-35%) soils and an area of about 65 per cent has very gravelly (35-60%) soils in the microwatershed.  About 44 per cent of the area has very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands and about 43 per cent area is nearly level (0-1% slope) lands.  An area of about 51 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1), 35 per cent has soils that are moderately eroded (e2) and 1 per cent area under gullied lands.  An area of about 6 per cent soils are slightly acid to moderately acid (pH 5.5- 6.5), 21 per cent area has neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) soils and 60 per cent has slightly alkaline to moderately alkaline (pH 7.3-8.4) soils in the microwatershed.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 57 kg/ha) in 62 per cent area in available phosphorus.  An area of about 2 per cent has soils that are low (337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is low (4.5ppm) in the available iron.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in the entire cultivated area of the microwatershed.  An area of about 32 per cent has soils that are deficient (<0.6 ppm) and 55 per cent has soils are sufficient in available zinc.  The land suitability for 9 major crops (agricultural and horticultural) 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 Crops Suitability area in ha (%) Highly Suitable (S1) Moderately Suitable (S2) Sorghum 16(4) 231(53) Maize 16(4) 231(53) Finger millet 16(4) 231(53) Red gram 10(2) 87(19) Groundnut 16(4) 231(53) Cotton 10(2) 236(54) Chilli 16(4) 231(53) Mango - 14(3) Sapota - 97(22)  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 horticulture crops that helps in maintaining the 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, generate lot of biomass, which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute 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: Harve 2 Microwatershed (Chamarajanagar taluk and district) is located in between 15018' – 15020' North latitudes and 7603' – 7605' East longitudes, covering an area of about 435.66 ha, bounded by Harve, Tammadahalli, Kethahalli and Kaggalipura villages with a 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 Harve 2 Microwatershed in Chamarajanagar taluk and district are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 48.8 to 51.1 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 64 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 66.6 per cent.  Social groups belong to around other backward caste (OBC) is 50.0 per cent.  Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is the source of energy for a cooking among all sample households.  About 66.6 per cent of households have a yashaswini health card.  Majority of farm households (50.0 %) are having MGNREGA card for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 80.0 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 90.0 per cent of sample households.  Institutional participation is only 20.6 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making are around 80.0 per cent of households. 2 Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 0.7 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal and small farmers. The dry irrigated land of 56.4 % and rain fed land 43.6 % of total cultivated land area among the sample farmers.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 15.4 per cent and agriculture is the main and agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 51.3 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs. 15487 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs. 4280 per household, about 90 per cent of sample farmers weeder and drip/sprinkler (20.0 %).  The average value of livestock is around Rs. 34444 per household; about 54.5 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 552.3 grams (1502.4 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 90.0 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs.145229. per household. About 70 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita average monthly expenditure is around Rs.1198. 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. 617 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 232650 per year for the total area of 435.7 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs 91737/ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in banana (Rs. 200516) followed by turmeric (Rs. 94392), beans (Rs. 33933), groundnut (Rs. 9452), sorghum (Rs. 4237), horse gram (Rs. 3181) sorghum and mulberry (Rs. 1561).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs 1046/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in groundnut (Rs. 1425) followed by sorghum (Rs. 1022) and horse gram (Rs. 690).  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 beans (Rs. 294826) followed by coconut (Rs. 239888), mulberry (Rs. 211913), banana (Rs. 3 146348), turmeric (Rs. 48512), sorghum (Rs. 38916), horse gram (Rs. 21416) and groundnut (Rs. 19822). Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is horse gram (50.4%) followed by sorghum (15.4 %), coconut (13.4 %), turmeric (9.8 %), banana (6.5 %), groundnut (3.4 %) and mulberry (1.3 %).  In Harve 2 Microwatershed, major soils are soil of Harve (HRV) series is having shallow soil depth cover around 11.0 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing coconut. Kaggalipura (KGP) are also having shallow soil depth cover 17.7 % of area, the crops are banana (50 %) and turmeric (50 %). Mukahalli (MUK) soil series having shallow soil depth cover around 1.3 % of areas, crops are horsegram (50.0 %) and sorghum (50.0 %). Lakkipur (LKR) soil series having moderately shallow soil depth cover around 63.8 % of area, crops are groundnut (83.9 %) and sorghum (16.1 %). Mukhadahalli (MKH) soil series are having moderately deep soil depth cover around 2.9 % of area; the major crops grown are horse gram (28.2 %) and sunflower (71.8 %). Kumachahalli (KMH) soil series are having deep soil depth covers around 2.9 % of area, the major crop grown is beans (33.6 %), turmeric (33.6 %) and horse gram (32.6 %). Balapur (BPR) soil series having deep soil depth cover 2.5 % of areas; crops are mulberry.  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for horse gram ranges between Rs.27090 ha in KMH soil (with BCR of 1.54) and Rs. 13481/ha in MKH soil (with BCR of 1.69).  In sorghum the cost of cultivation ranges between 23827/ha in MUK soil (with BCR of 1.59) and Rs.220271 /ha in LKR soil (with BCR of 0.91).  In turmeric the cost of cultivation range between Rs 87150 /ha in KMH soil (with BCR of 1.54) and Rs.105782/ha in KGP soil (with BCR of 1.79).  In banana the cost of cultivation in KGP soil is Rs.86621/ha (with BCR of 3.31).  In mulberry the cost of cultivation in BPR soil is Rs.68106/ha (with BCR of 1.02).  In groundnut the cost of cultivation in LKR soil is Rs.36861/ha (with BCR of 1.30) and beans the cost of cultivation in KMH soil is Rs.23579/ha (with BCR of 2.44).  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. 4  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 horse gram (20.9 to 41.2%), sorghum (45.0 to 73.6 %), groundnut (58.3 %), banana (52.6 %), coconut (51.0 %), mulberry (24.6 %) and turmeric (8.9%). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Anekatte 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 and behavior, use potentials of the soils in the microwartershed. The present study covers an area of 544 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 97 per cent is covered by soils and 3 per cent by others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 10 soil series and 19 soil phases (management units) and six 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.  An area of about 97 per cent in the microwatershed is suitable for agriculture and three per cent not suitable for agriculture.  About 60 per cent of the soils are deep (100-150 cm) to very deep (>150 cm), 32 per cent moderately deep (75-100cm) and 5 per cent moderately shallow (50-75%) soils.  About 25 per cent of the area has clayey soils at the surface, 65 per cent loamy soils and 7 per cent sandy soils.  About 38 per cent of the area has non-gravelly soils, 12 per cent gravelly (15-35%) and 48 per cent very gravelly to extremely gravelly (35-80%) soils.  About 59 per cent has soils that are very low (200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  About 92 per cent of the area has nearly level (0-1%) to very gently sloping (1-3% slope) and 5 per cent gently sloping (3-5%) lands.  An area of about 52 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1) and 45 per cent moderately eroded (e2).  An area of about 21 per cent has soils that are slightly acid (pH 5.0-6.5) to moderately acid, 36 per cent neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) and 40 per cent slightly to moderately alkaline (pH 7.3-8.4).  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 9 per cent of the soils are low (337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is high (>10 ppm) in about 28 per cent area, low (4.5 ppm) in about 93 per cent area and deficient (0.6 ppm) in about 60 per cent area and deficient (<0.6 ppm) in 37 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, 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 71 (13) 158 (29) Guava 46 (9) 221 (41) Fodder Sorghum 71 (13) 158 (29) Pomegranate 71 (13) 172 (32) Maize - 133 (24) Banana 71 (13) 172 (32) Upland paddy 71 (13) 195 (36) Jackfruit 71 (13) 84 (15) Finger millet 71 (13) 138 (25) Jamun 71 (13) 135 (25) Redgram 71 (13) 197 (36) Musambi 71 (13) 172 (32) Horse gram 96 (18) 331 (61) Lime 71 (13) 172 (32) Field bean 71 (13) 197 (36) Cashew 46 (9) 100 (18) Cowpea 71 (13) 197 (36) Custard apple 71 (13) 356 (65) Groundnut - 305 (56) Amla 71 (13) 356 (65) Sunflower 71 (13) 133 (24) Tamarind 71 (13) 135 (25) Onion 24 (4) 147 (27) Marigold 71 (13) 197 (36) Chilli 71 (13) 197 (36) Chrysanthemum 71 (13) 197 (36) Brinjal 71 (13) 197 (36) Jasmine 71 (13) 197 (36) Tomato 71 (13) 197 (36) Coconut 46 (9) 100 (18) Mango 71 (13) 135 (25) Arecanut 46 (9) 100 (18) Sapota 71 (13) 76 (14) Mulberry - (2200) 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 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 and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges that would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder fuel and generate lot of biomass. This helps in maintaining ecological balance and 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: Anekatte micro-watershed (Anekatte sub watershed, Chikkanayakanahalli taluk, Tumkur district) is located in between 13024' – 13026' North latitudes and 76031' – 76035' East longitudes, covering an area of about 544.32 ha, bounded by Aralikere, Kallenahalli, Navule, Gowdanahalli, Kurubarahalli and Bevinahalli 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 Anekatte Microwatershed (Anekatte sub watershed, Chikkanayakanahalli taluk, Tumkur district) are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 52 to 48 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 48 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 89 per cent.  Social groups belong to scheduled caste (SC) and other backward caste (OBC) is around 10 and 40 per cent, respectively.  Fire wood is the source of energy for a cooking among 60 per cent.  About 60 per cent of households have Yashaswini health card.  Majority of farm households (70 %) are having MGNREGA card for rural employment.  Dependence on ration cards for food grains through public distribution system is around 80 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities around 70 per cent of sample households.  Women participation in decisions making are around 10 per cent of households. 2 Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 0.92 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal and small farmers. The dry land of 45.8 % and irrigated land 54.2 % of total cultivated land area among the sample farmers.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 9 per cent and agriculture is the main and non agriculture labour is subsidiary occupation for 85.0 per cent of sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs. 85481 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs. 10623 per household, about 50 per cent of sample farmers having plough and weeder (74 %).  The average value of livestock is around Rs. 28125 per household; about 82.3 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 681.5 grams (1600.9 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 80 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs.25693 per household. About 20 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita average monthly expenditure is around Rs.1272 per household. 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. 584 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 309005 per year for the total area of 544.32 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs 11804/ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in red gram (Rs. 40596) followed by horse gram (Rs. 15989), sorghum (Rs. 11528), ragi (Rs. 5593), green gram (Rs. 4778), maize (Rs. 2562) and sesamum (Rs. 1579).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 2413/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in maize (Rs. 5273) followed by ragi (Rs. 2489), horse gram (Rs. 1466), and sorghum (Rs. 423).  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 red gram (Rs. 3 67233) followed by sorghum (Rs 53775), green gram (Rs. 35719), maize (Rs. 33063), horse gram (Rs. 23761) and ragi (Rs. 11418). Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is horse gram (24.7 %) followed by maize (14.4 %), green gram (11.8 %), ragi (31.0 %), red gram (3.3 %), sesamum (3.3%) and sorghum (11.5 %).  In Anekatte micro-watershed, major soil is alluvial landscape of Bidanagere (BDG) series is having moderately deep soil depth cover around 14.11 of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing ragi (50 %) red gram (50 %).Hooradhahalli (HDH) are also having moderately deep soil depth cover around 16.9 % of area, the crops are green gram (14.2 %), ragi (65.3 %) and sesamum (20.4 %). Mukhadahalli (BPR) soil series having deep soil depth cover around 22.25 % of areas, crops are green gram (11.1 %), horse gram (38.8 %), ragi (11.1 %) and sorghum (38.8 %). Ravanaki (LGD) soil series having deep soil depth cover around 17.62 % of area, crops are green gram (12 %), horse gram (38 %), and ragi (5.0 %). Kadagathur (KDT) soil series are having very deep soil depth cover around 8.5 % of area; the major crops are horse gram (33.3 %), maize (33.3%) and ragi (33.3 %). Ranatur (RTR) soil series are having very deep soil depth covers around 4.4 % of area, the major crop grown is green gram (50 %) and maize (50 %).  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for green gram ranges between Rs.107918/ha in LGD soil (with BCR of 1.53) and Rs.22068/ha in BPR soil (with BCR of 1.34).  In ragi the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 98303/ha in LGD soil (with of 1.05) and Rs.10268/ha in KDT soil (with BCR of 1.73).  In horse gram the cost of cultivation range between Rs. 22616/ha in BPR soil (with BCR of 1.53) and Rs. 16591/ha in KDT soil (with BCR of 2.38).  In maize the cost of cultivation range between is Rs 51788/ha in KDT soil (with BCR of 1.28) and Rs. 49867/ha in RTR soil (with BCR of 1.17).  In sesamum the cost of cultivation in HDH soil is Rs.39168 /ha (with BCR of 1.51)  In red gram the cost of cultivation in BDG soil is Rs. 47969/ha (with BCR of 1.80) and sorghum the cost of cultivation in BPR soil is Rs.20230/ha (with BCR of 2.27).  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. 4  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 ragi (83.3 to 59.5 %), green gram (58.7 to 42.2 %), maize (60.8 to 70.4 %), horse gram (13.2 %), sorghum (28.4 %) and sesamum (11.4 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Karahalli 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 434 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 97 per cent is covered by soils and 3 per cent by others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 12 soil series and 24 soil phases (management units), and six 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.  An area of about 95 per cent in the microwatershed is suitable for agriculture and two per cent not suitable for agriculture.  About 45 per cent of the soils are deep (100-150 cm) to very deep (>150 cm), 43 per cent moderately deep (75-100cm) and 7 per cent shallow to moderately shallow (25- 75%) soils.  About 5 per cent of the area has clayey soils at the surface and 89 per cent loamy soils.  About 3 per cent of the area has non-gravelly soils, 22 per cent gravelly (15-35%) and 70 per cent very gravelly to extremely gravelly (35-80%) soils.  About 61 per cent has soils that are very low (200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  About 70 per cent of the area has nearly level (0-1%) to very gently sloping (1-3% slope) and 25 per cent gently sloping (3-5%) lands.  An area of about 28 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1) and 67 per cent moderately eroded (e2).  An area of about 79 per cent has soils that are slightly acid (pH 5.0-6.5) to moderately acid and 16 per cent neutral (pH 6.5-7.3) in reaction.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  About 18 per cent of the soils are low (0.6 ppm) in about 7 per cent area and deficient (<0.6 ppm) in 87 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, 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 - 211 (48) Guava - 167 (38) Fodder Sorghum - 211 (48) Pomegranate - 220 (50) Maize - 114 (26) Banana - 220 (50) Upland paddy - 307 (71) Jackfruit - 139 (32) Finger millet - 255 (59) Jamun - 151 (35) Redgram - 228 (52) Musambi - 228 (52) Horse gram - 368 (85) Lime - 228 (52) Field bean - 228 (52) Cashew - 167 (38) Cowpea - 228 (52) Custard apple 31 (7) 337 (77) Groundnut - 271 (62) Amla - 368 (84) Sunflower - 211 (48) Tamarind - 151 (35) Onion - 193 (44) Marigold - 235 (54) Chilli - 228 (52) Chrysanthemum - 235 (54) Brinjal - 228 (52) Jasmine - 235 (54) Tomato - 228 (52) Coconut - 131 (30) Mango - 81 (19) Arecanut - 131 (30) Sapota - 131 (30) Mulberry 39 (9) (2282) 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 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 and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges that would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder, fuel and generate lot of biomass. This helps in maintaining ecological balance and contribute 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: Karahalli micro-watershed (Anekatte sub-watershed, Chikkanayakanahalli taluk and Tumkur district) is located in between 13023' – 13025' North latitudes and 76033' – 76035' East longitudes, covering an area of about 434.02 ha, bounded by Navule, Anekatte Varedahalli, Siddaramanagara 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 ecosystem services were quantified. Results: The socio-economic outputs for the Karahalli Microwatershed (Anekatte subwatershed, Chikkanayakanahalli taluk and Tumkur district) are presented here. Social Indicators;  Male and female ratio is 52.6 to 47.3 per cent to the total sample population.  Younger age 18 to 50 years group of population is around 52.6 per cent to the total population.  Literacy population is around 89.5 per cent.  Social groups belong to other backward caste (OBC) is around 90.0 per cent.  Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is the source of energy for a cooking among all the sample households.  About 70.0 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 60.0 per cent.  Swach bharath program providing closed toilet facilities of all the sample households.  Institutional participation is only 2.6 per cent.  Women participation in local organisation is around 30 % of the sample households. 2 Economic Indicators;  The average land holding is 0.5 ha indicates that majority of farm households are belong to marginal and small farmers. The dry land account for 34.4 % and irrigated land is 65.6 % of total cultivated land of the sample farmers.  Agriculture is the main occupation among 81.6 per cent and agriculture labour is predominant subsidiary occupation for 13.2 per cent of the sample households.  The average value of domestic assets is around Rs 13478 per household. Mobile and television are popular media mass communication.  The average value of farm assets is around Rs 6110 per household, about 80 per cent of sample farmers are owing plough.  The average value of livestock is around Rs 20476 per household; about 27.7 per cent of household are having livestock.  The average per capita food consumption is around 726.1 grams (1576.6 kilo calories) against national institute of nutrition (NIN) recommendation at 827 gram. Around 70 per cent of sample households are consuming less than the NIN recommendation.  The annual average income is around Rs. 35342 per household. About 80.0 per cent of farm households are below poverty line.  The per capita average monthly expenditure is around Rs 1069. 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. 800 per ha/year. The total cost of annual soil nutrients is around Rs. 328649 per year for the total area of 434.02 ha.  The average value of ecosystem service for food grain production is around Rs. 30921/ ha/year. Per hectare food grain production services is maximum in coconut (Rs. 80945) followed by beans (Rs. 55109), green gram (Rs. 7575), sorghum (Rs. 7046) and ragi (Rs. 3929).  The average value of ecosystem service for fodder production is around Rs. 3597/ ha/year. Per hectare fodder production services is maximum in sorghum (Rs. 5191) followed by ragi (Rs. 4975) and greengram (Rs. 625).  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. 390405) followed by beans (Rs. 224539), sorghum (Rs. 38850), green gram (Rs. 32747) and ragi (Rs. 13592). 3 Economic Land Evaluation;  The major cropping pattern is green gram (33.6 %) followed by ragi (25.0 %) sorghum (22.6 %), horse gram (14.0 %) and coconut (4.8 %).  In Karahalli Microwatershed, major soils are Hooradhahalli (HDH) series are having moderately deep soil depth cover around 14.1 % of area. On this soil farmers are presently growing greengram (40.3 %), ragi (40.3 %) and sorghum (19.4 %). Huliyapura (HLP) is also having moderately deep soil depth cover around 6.1 % of area; the crops are coconut (23.6 %) and sorghum (76.4 %). Bidanagere (BDG) soil series having moderately deep soil depth cover around 22.2 % of areas, crops are beans (50 %) and greengram (50 %). Nagalapur (NGP) soil series are having deep soil depth cover around 7.7 % of area; the major crops grown are greengram (55.4 %) and ragi (44.6 %). Chikka Tanda (CKT) soil series are having very deep soil depth covers around 3.8 % of area, the major crop grown is ragi (50 %) and sorghum (50 %). Thondigere (TDG) soil series having very deep soil depth cover 14.4 %; crops are greengram (70.2 %) and ragi (29.8 %).  The total cost of cultivation and benefit cost ratio (BCR) in study area for greengram ranges between Rs.19147/ha in NGP soil (with BCR of 1.15) and Rs. 15135/ha in HDH soil (with BCR of 1.76).  In ragi the cost of cultivation range between Rs.36323/ha in TDG soil (with BCR of 1.23) and Rs 12152/ha in HDH soil (with BCR of 1.55).  In sorghum the cost of cultivation a range between Rs.26682/ha in CKT soil (with BCR of 1.32) and Rs. 17739/ha in HLP soil (with BCR of 2.19).  In beans the cost of cultivation in BDG soil is Rs.14051/ha (with BCR of 4.92) and coconut the cost of cultivation in HLP soil is Rs 93408/ha (with BCR of 1.87).  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 soils 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. 4  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 greengram (42.4 to 53.4 %), ragi (54.7 to 76.6 %), sorghum (46.4 to 70.7 %) and coconut (20.3 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

ÖZET:Hayvancılık, Çad'ın gelişmekte olan bir ülke olarak önemli bir ekonomik bileşenidir. Petrol sektöründen sonra genel olarak ülkenin GSYİH'sini paylaşmaktadır. Önemine rağmen, bu sektör bir takım kısıtlamalarla karşı karşıya. Bu kısıtlamaları araştırmak için, bu çalışma hayvancılık politikasını etkileyen faktörler araştırıldı. Çad'daki hayvancılık sektöründeki iyileşmenin, Hükümet tarafından halihazırda ele alınan politika kısıtlamalarından etkilendiği varsayılmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın belirli bir araştırma amacı Çad'da hayvancılık politikasının uygulamadaki zayıf yönlerini ve güçlü yönlerini analiz etmektir; hayvancılık politikası uygulamasını incelemenin yanı sıra. Bu araştırmada kullanılan yöntem hem niteliksel hem de nicelikseldir ve birincil ve ikincil olmak üzere iki veri kaynağına dayanır. Hayvancılık politikasının uygulanmasına ilişkin temel veriler, hayvancılık politikasının uygulanmasını etkileyen parametreleri belirlemek için hayvancılık ve paydaşlık bakanlığında çalışan kamu görevlilerine yönelik anketler kullanılarak bir anket kullanılarak toplanmıştır.Anket sonuçları, hem nicel hem de nitel analiz yöntemleri kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Çalışma, nicel betimsel analizin sonucuna dayandı. İstatistikler, Sosyal Bilimler için İstatistik Paketi (SPSS) programı ile yürütülen analiz sonrası demografik özelliklerin ve çalışma faktörlerinin bir özetini ve açıklamasını verir. Açık uçlu soruların sonucu nitel analizde tartışılmış ve cevaplayıcılardan her birinin en önemli üçünü seçmelerini istemek için ek sorular eklenmiştir. nitel analiz. Analizlerin sonuçları, araştırmanın nitel kısmından gelen yanıtlar, ilgili çalışmaların sonuçları ve araştırma bulgularına genel bir bakış açısı sağlamak için Çad Hayvancılık Dairesi'nden gelen hayvancılık istatistik verileriyle daha da doğrulanmıştır. Ortalama ve frekans dağılımı gibi tanımlayıcı istatistikler de kullanılmıştır.Bu araştırmanın ana bulguları, hayvancılık geliştirme politikasının dört faktörden etkilendiğini göstermiştir: hayvancılık verimlilik sistemleri; ekonomik çevre; kamu yönetimi ve yönetişim; ve insan kaynakları geliştirme politikasının yönetimi. Çalışmanın sonuçları, hayvancılık üretim sistemindeki faktörler arasında, hayvancılık politikasına etkileri bakımından, geniş üreme sistemleri bulunduğunu; hayvan sağlığı sorunları; ve veteriner eczanesi. Ekonomik ortamda, faktörler mezbaha modernizasyonunun eksikliğidir; hayvan pazarı sistemlerinin modernizasyonunun eksikliği; hayvan ticareti pazarlama sistemlerinin eksikliği; ve önceliklendirme hayvancılık bütçesi eksikliği. Kamu yönetiminde ve yönetişimde tanımlanan faktörler, önceliklendirme yapan hayvancılık politikasının eksikliğidir; uygunsuz proje yönetimi; stratejik yönetim kapasitesi eksikliği; ve kapasite geliştirme yönetiminin eksikliği. İnsan kaynaklarının geliştirilmesi ve politikasının yönetiminde, etkileyici faktörler, esas sistem ilkelerinin uygulanmasının eksikliğidir; yöneticilerin değerlendirilmemesi; ve eğitim ve uzatma eksikliği.Öneriler, proje yönetimini geliştirmek için politika oluşturma ve uygulamada yer alan kurumlar arasındaki işbirliğini güçlendirmek amacıyla dört faktör etrafında sunulmuştur; Hayvancılık politikasını, ekonomik perspektifi içeren kapsamlı bir yaklaşım gerektiren karmaşık bir sorun olarak ele almak; Gelişen bir sistem olarak hayvancılık politikası vizyonunu modernize etmek. Bu tavsiyeler, hayvancılık politikasının daha fazla uygulanmasını ilgilendirmekte ve merkezi hükümetin ülke genelinde izlenmesi mümkün olan hayvancılık politikasındaki stratejisine atıfta bulunmaktadır. Ancak, bu önerilerin hepsi çok önemlidir, ancak bazıları kısa, orta ve uzun vadede yapılmalıdır.İÇİNDEKİLERSayfa numarası.TABLO LİSTESİXŞEKİL LİSTESİXIKISALTMA LİSTESİXII1. ÇALIŞMA ARKA PLANI11.1 Giriş 11.2 Araştırma Sorunu Beyanı 41.3 Çalışmanın Amacı 61.4 Araştırma Amaçı 71.5 Araştırma Soruları 71.6 Araştırma Hipotezi 81.7 Araştırma Tasarımı ve Metodolojisi 81.8 Çalışmanın Önemi 9 1.9 Tez Bölümlerinin Anahatları 92. LITERATÜR TARAMASI, POLİTİKA UYGULAMASI VE KAVRAMSAL ÇERÇEVE 112.1 Giriş 112.2 Politika Tanımları 122.3 POLİTİKA UYGULAMASI 142.3.1 Açıklayıcı Modeller 162.3.2 Açıklayıcı Modellerin Uygulanması 162.3.3 Reçeteli Modeller 172.3.3.1 Reçete Modellerinin Uygulanması 182.3.4 Rasyonel Yaklaşım 222.3.5 Politik yaklaşım 242.3.6 Uygulama teorisi: Sistem Modeli 252.3.7 AŞAĞIDAN YUKARIYA VE YUKARIDAN AŞAĞIYA YAKLAŞIMLAR 272.3.7.1 Yukarıdan Aşağıya Yaklaşım 282.3.7.2 Aşağıdan Yukarıya Yaklaşım 282.3.7.3 Aşağıdan Yukarıya ve Yukarıdan Aşağıya Yaklaşımların Sentezi 292.3.8 BAŞARILI VE BAŞARISIZ UYGULAMA NEDİR?342.4 KAVRAMSAL ÇERÇEVE: HAYVANCILIK UYGULAMASININ POLİTİKASI 362.4.1 POLİTİKA UYGULAMASINDAN ETKİLEYEN FAKTÖRLER 362.5 HAYVANCILIK POLİTİKASININ UYGULAMASINI ETKİLEYEN FAKTÖRLER 422.5.1 Hayvancılık Verimlilik Sistemleri 422.5.1.1 Geniş Kapsamlı Islah Sistemi 422.5.1.2 Hayvan Sağlığı Sorunları 432.5.1.3 Veteriner Eczacılığı 432.5.2 Ekonomik Çevre 442.5.2.1 Hayvancılık Pazarlama Sistemleri 442.5.2.2 Hayvancılık Pazar Sistemleri 442.5.2.3 Olumlu Tedbir Eksikliği 452.5.3 Kamu Yönetimi ve Yönetişim 452.5.3.1 Politika Yönetimi 452.5.3.2 Kamu Yönetimi 472.5.4 İnsan Kaynakları Geliştirme Yönetimi 482.5.4.1 Eğitim ve yazışmalı492.5.4.2 Araştırma Hizmetleri 492.5.5 Hayvancılık Gelişme Planlarının Uygulanması 502.5.6 Stratejik Planlama için Devlet Koordinasyonu 522.5.7 Uygulayıcıların Politikaya Yönelik Tutumları 542.5.8 Hayvancılık Planlama ve Bilgi Hizmetleri Livestock 562.5.8.1 Hayvancılık Teknolojisinin Sağlanması 572.6 KAVRAMSAL ÇERÇEVE 572.6.1 KAVRAMSAL ÇERÇEVE ELEMANLARI 582.6.1.1 Politika İçeriği 582.6.1.2 Uygulama İçeriği 592.6.1.3 Uygulayıcıların Politikaya Taahhüdü 602.6.1.4 Politika Uygulama Kapasitesi 612.6.1.5 Uygulama İçin Müşterilere ve Koalisyonlara Destek 622.6.2 Kavramsal Çerçeve 652.7 ÖZET VE SONUÇ 663. ÇAD'IN SOSYO EKONOMİK ORTAMINA GENEL BAKIŞ VE LIVESTOCK POLİTİKA SİSTEMİ 683.1 Giriş 683.2 Ülke Profili 683.2.1 Kolonizasyon ve Bağımsız 693.2.2 Yönetim Seviyesi 703.2.3 Devlet ve Ssiyasi Durum 713.2.4 Doğal Kısıtlamalar 713.3.1 Sosyo-demografik ve Ekonomik Özellikle 723.3.2 Sosyoekonomik Kısıtlamalara Genel Bakış 733.3.3 Siyasi Kısıtlamalar 773.3.4 Çad'da Hayvancılık Sektörü Arka Planı 793.5 PASTORAL KALKINMA BAKANLIĞI ORGANİZASYONU ÇAD VE HAYVAN ÜRETİMİ 813.5.1 Hayvancılıkta Kurumsal Politika Çerçevesi 823.5.2. Hayvancılık Kurumsal Bağlantıları ve Ortaklığı 833.5.3 Hayvancılık Kuruluş Kuruluşları 833.5.4 Özel Sektör Kuruluşları 843.5.5 Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları 853.6 ENDÜSTRİYELLEŞME VE ÜRÜNÜN SINIRLARI İŞLEME 853.6.1 Mezbahaneler ve Kesim Alanları 863.6.2 İşlenmiş Ürün Faaliyetleri 863.6.3 Süt İşleme Üniteleri 883.6.4 Dönüşüm Birimleri 883.6.5 İşlenmiş Ürün Çeşitleri 883.7 ÖZET VE SONUÇ 894. METODOLOJİ METHODOLOGY 904.1 Giriş 904.2 Çalışmanın amacı 904.3 ARAŞTIRMA TASARIMI VE ANALİTİK MODELİ 914.3.1 Araştırma Tasarımı ve Metodoloji 914.4 Nüfus 944.5 Örnek 944.6 Anket Aracı 954.7 Veri Toplama 964.7.1 Pilot Testi 964.7.2 Gerçek Anket/Veri Toplama 974.8 Analiz 974.9 ÖZET VE SONUÇ 985. ÇALIŞMA VERİLERİNİN TOPLANMASI ANALİZİ 995.1 Giriş 995.2 Numunenin Demografik Profili 995.3 Çalışma Faktörleri 1005.3.1 Hayvancılık Verimlilik Sistemi Faktörleri 1015.3.2 Ekonomik Çevre Faktörleri 1025.3.3 Kamu Yönetimi ve Yönetişim 1035.3.4 İnsan Kaynakları Geliştirme ve Politika Yönetimi 1045.3.5 En Önemli Güçlü Noktalar ve Zayıf Noktalar 1065.3.5.1 Hayvancılık Gelişme Planlarının Uygulanmasının Güçlü ve Zayıf Noktaları 1065.3.5.2 Hayvancılık Stratejik Planlaması için Devlet Koordinasyonunda Güçlü Noktalar ve Zayıf Noktalar 1075.3.5.3 Uygulayıcıların Hayvancılık Politikasına Karşı Tutumlarında Güçlü Noktalar ve Zayıf Noktalar 1085.4 ÖZET VE SONUÇ 1096. BULGULARIN TARTIŞMASI, ÇALIŞMA ÖZETİ, SONUÇ VE ÖNERİLER 1106.1 Giriş 1106.2 Bulguların Özeti 1106.2.1 Hayvancılık Verimlilik Sistemi Faktörü 1106.2.2 Ekonomik Çevre Faktörü 1116.2.3 Kamu Yönetimi ve Yönetişim Faktörü 1116.2.4 İnsan Kaynakları Geliştirme ve Politika Faktörü Yönetimi 1116.2.5 En Önemli Güçlü Noktalar ve Zayıf Noktalar 1126.3 Bulguların Tartışılması 1146.3.1 Hayvancılık verimlilik sistemi faktörleri ile ilişkileri ve geliştirilmiş uygulama hizmetlerinin üç bileşeni 1146.3.2 Ekonomik çevre faktörleri ile geliştirilmiş uygulama hizmetlerinin üç bileşeni arasındaki ilişki 1156.3.3 Kamu yönetimi ve yönetişim ve gelişmiş uygulama hizmetlerinin üç bileşeni arasındaki ilişki 1186.3.4 İnsan kaynakları geliştirme politikasının yönetimi ile iyileştirilmiş uygulama hizmetlerinin üç bileşeni arasındaki ilişki 1206.3.5 Araştırma Sorusuna Cevap 1226.4 Öğütleme1436.5 Sonuç 161 Kaynakça 162 Ekler 173 Anket 190 --- ABSTRACT:Livestock is an important economic component of Chad as a developing country. It shares in overall country's GDP after the oil sector. In spite of its importance, this sector is facing a number of constraints. In order to explore those constraints, this study was investigated the factors that impact the livestock policy. It is hypothesized that the improvement of the livestock sector in Chad is affected by the policy constraints, already being addressed by the Government. A specified research objective of this study is to analyse the weaknesses and the strengths of livestock policy implementation in Chad; as well as to examine livestock policy implementation. The method used in this research both qualitative and quantitative and is based on two sources of data, primary and secondary. The primary data on the implementation of livestock policy were collected by using a survey through the questionnaires addressed to the public officers working at the Ministry of livestock and stakeholders to identify the parameters influencing the implementation of livestock policy. The survey results were analysed by using both quantitative and qualitative methods of analyses. The study relied on the result of the quantitative descriptive analysis. The statistics give a summary and description of the demographic aspects and the study factors after analysis run with the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) programme. The result of open-ended questions was discussed in qualitative analysis and additional questions were added to ask the respondents to select the most significant top three in each part of the three statement-questions each has five strong points and five weak points also were discussed in qualitative analysis. The results of the analyses were further substantiated by the responses from the qualitative part of the survey, by the results of related studies, and by livestock statistical data from the Department of the livestock of Chad to provide a general perspective on the research findings. Descriptive statistics such as mean and frequency distribution were also utilized.The main findings of this research showed that livestock development policy is influenced by four factors: livestock productivity systems; economic environment; public administration and Governance; and management of human resources development policy. The results of the study revealed that among the livestock production system factors in terms of their impact on livestock policy, there are extensive breeding systems; animal health issues; and veterinary pharmacy. In the economic environment, factors are lack of modernization of slaughterhouse; lack of modernization of livestock market systems; lack of livestock trade marketing systems; and lack of livestock budget prioritizing. In public administration and governance identified factors are lack of livestock policy prioritizing; inappropriate project management; lack of strategic management capacity; and lack of administration of the capacity building. And in management of human resources development and policy, the influencing factors are lack of application of the merit system principles; lack of evaluation of administrators; and lack of training and extension. The recommendations are presented around four factors, to improve project management strengthen the collaboration among the agencies involved in policy making and implementation; to address livestock policy as a complex problem which needs a comprehensive approach embracing economic perspective; to modernize vision of livestock policy as an evolving system. These recommendations concern the further implementation of livestock policy and refer to the strategy of the central government in livestock policy that could be pursued across the country. However, all of these recommendations are so important but some of them to be done in short, medium and long term.TABLE OF CONTENTSPage No.LIST OF TABLESXLIST OF FIGURESXILIST OF ABBREVIATIONXII1.STUDY BACKGROUND11.1 Introduction11.2 Statement of Research Problem41.3 Purpose of the Study61.4 Research Objective71.5 Research Questions71.6 Research Hypothesis81.7 Research Design and Methodology81.8 Significance of the Study 9 1.9 Outline of Thesis Chapters 92. LITERATURE REVIEW, POLICY IMPLEMENTATION AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 112.1 Introduction112.2 Policy Definitions122.3 POLICY IMPLEMENTATION142.3.1 Descriptive Models162.3.2 Implication of Descriptive Models162.3.3 Prescriptive Models172.3.3.1 Implication of Prescriptive Models 182.3.4 Rational Approach222.3.5 Political approach242.3.6 Implementation theory: System Model252.3.7 TOP-DOWN AND BOTTOM-UP APPROACHES272.3.7.1 Top Down Approach282.3.7.2 Bottom Up Approach282.3.7.3 Synthesis of Bottom-up and Top-down Approaches292.3.8 WHAT IS SUCCESSFUL AND FAILED IMPLEMENTATION?342.4 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK: POLICY IMPLEMENTATION OF LIVESTOCK POLICY362.4.1 FACTORS THAT AFFECT POLICY IMPLEMENTATION362.5 FACTORS THAT AFFECT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF LIVESTOCK POLICY422.5.1 Livestock Productivity Systems422.5.1.1 Extensive Breedıng System422.5.1.2 Animal Health Issues432.5.1.3 Veterinary Pharmacy432.5.2 Economic Environment442.5.2.1 Livestock Marketing Systems442.5.2.2 Livestock Market Systems 442.5.2.3 Lack of Positive Measures452.5.3 Public Administration and Governance452.5.3.1 Policy Administration452.5.3.2 Public Governance472.5.4 Management of Human Resources Development482.5.4.1 Training and Extension492.5.4.2 Research Services492.5.5 Implementation of Livestock Development Plans502.5.6 Government Coordination for Strategic Planning522.5.7 Attitudes of Implementers Towards the Policy542.5.8 Livestock Planning and Information Services562.5.8.1 Provision of Livestock Technology572.6 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK572.6.1 ELEMENTS OF CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK582.6.1.1 Policy Content582.6.1.2 Context of Implementation592.6.1.3 Commitment of Implementers to the Policy602.6.1.4 Capacity to Implement Policy612.6.1.5 Support of Clients and Coalitions for Implementation622.6.2 Conceptual Framework652.7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION663. OVERVIEW OF SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT OF CHAD AND LIVESTOCK POLICY SYSTEM 683.1 Introduction683.2 Country Profile683.2.1 Colonization and Independent693.2.2 Administration level703.2.3 Government and political situation713.2.4 Natural Constraints713.3.1 Socio-demographic and Economic Characteristics723.3.2 Overview of Socioeconomic Constraints 733.3.3 Political Constraints773.3.4 Livestock Sector Background in Chad793.5 ORGANISATION OF MINISTRY OF PASTORAL DEVELOPMENT AND ANIMAL PRODUCTION OF CHAD 813.5.1 Institutional Policy Framework of Livestock823.5.2. Livestock Institutional Linkages and Partnership833.5.3 Livestock Associative Institutions833.5.4 Private Sector Institutions843.5.5 Non-Governmental Organisations853.6 CONSTRAINTS OF INDUSTRIALISATION AND PRODUCT PROCESSING853.6.1 Slaughterhouses and Slaughter Areas863.6.2 Processed Product Activities863.6.3 Milk Processing Units883.6.4 Transformation Units883.6.5 Processed Product Varieties883.7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION894. METHODOLOGY 904.1 Introduction904.2 Purpose of the study904.3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND ANALYTICAL MODEL914.3.1 Research Design and Methodology914.4 Population944.5 Sample944.6 Survey Instrument954.7 Data Collection964.7.1 Pilot Test964.7.2 Actual Survey/Data Collection974.8 Analysis974.9 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION985. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA COLLECTION OF THE STUDY 995.1 Introduction995.2 The Demographic Profile of Sample995.3 Study Factors1005.3.1 Livestock Productivity System Factors1015.3.2 Economic Environment Factors1025.3.3 Public Administration and Governance1035.3.4 Management of Human Resources Development and Policy1045.3.5 The Most Significant Strong Points and Weak Points1065.3.5.1 Strong and weak points of Implementation of Livestock Development Plans1065.3.5.2 Strong Points and Weak point in Government Coordination for Livestock Strategic Planning1075.3.5.3 Strong Points and Weak point in Attitudes of implementers toward the Livestock policy1085.4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION1096. DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS, SUMMARY OF THE STUDY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1106.1 Introduction1106.2 Summary of Findings1106.2.1 Livestock Productivity System Factor1106.2.2 Economic Environment Factor1116.2.3 Public Administration and Governance Factor1116.2.4 Management of Human Resources Development and Policy Factor1116.2.5 The Most Significant Strong Points and Weak Points1126.3 Discussion of Findings1146.3.1 Relationship between livestock productivity system factors and the three components of improved implementation services1146.3.2 Relationship between economic environment factors and the three components of improved implementation services1156.3.3 Relationship between public administration and governance and the three components of improved implementation services1186.3.4 Relationship between management of human resources development policy and the three components of improved implementation services1206.3.5 Answer to Research Question1226.4 Recommendation 1436.5 Conclusion 161 Bibliography162 Appendices173 Questionnaires190

Addressing issues such as the one that is intended to be developed in these Unes and that is proposed in the title, are interesting insofar as they become challenges not only theoretical but practical.The term Orange Economy in addition to pretending to offer a chromatic distinctive seems to want to locate us in a particu­lar context with equally singular impacts Déribéré (1964). The study carried out on the subject and contained in the manual: «The orange economy.An infinite opportu­nity" by Felipe Buitrago Restrepo and lván Duque Márquez, expresses the importance of the creative and cultural industries in the development of countries like ours, where the economy is not very diverse compared to Mexico, the United States and Spain,among others.But what is the Orange economy? And what makes it up? The Orange economy has been defined by the IDB (lnter-American Devel­opment Bank) as the set of activities that in a chain-linked way allow ideas to be transformed into cultural goods and ser­vices, whose value is determined by their intellectual property content. The orange universe is composed of cultural economy and creative industries, in whose intersection are the conventional cultural industries and support areas far creativity (www.iadb. org, 26 Sep. 2018).Culture and knowledge are undoubtedly the economic components that generate wealth, it seems to be the slogan proclaimed by the Orange Economy. These elements are not new to Colombia as they have always been present in the national scenario. lt has been said and recognized that Colombian talent is indisputable not only locally, regionally, nationally, but also globally as well as its ancestral wealth in knowledge and tradi­tions that are organized in consolidated knowledge to conserve cultural diversity which in turn is the source of creativity and innovation.Only until now do they seem to have value in an economy that had previously down­played their importance and prominence, even reflected in sorne artistic and cultural activities that barely survive despite the talent, innovation and knowledge they pos­sess. However, it must also be recognized that sorne artistic activities have had better luck than others, referring to the little ar much support they have received. Within these could be mentioned the cinema, sorne visual and scenic arts, music and fashion. lt is evident then that the contribution that ideas and cultural activities can offer to a national economy has begun to be recog­nized within this orange framework,as long as there is support, incentives and guar­antees that facilitate their insertion in the economic cycle and not leave it to the fate ar influence of a few.Reconciling the relationship between econo­my and culture is not an easy task, given that far creative minds the monetary character with which they want to value and measure is odious and uncomfortable, perhaps be­cause it does not really represent the cre­ative and innovative value they possess. In addition, the lack of recognition of their work as legitimate, which deserves to have all the conditions and opportunities that are lacking, often leads them to swell the informality of their activities, denying them the opportunity to participate in a chain of value that benefits everyone.On the other hand, Buitrago and Duque in their manual, (p. 47) consider the econo­my and the expensive culture of the same coin: one is the abstract representation of its symbolic value and the other is its quan­titatively precise validation, then comes to being the coin itself, the creation of both (p. 48) given the factors that are found in it: productive capacity, seriousness, solidity, entrepreneurial spirit or the values of the society that receive it. l n these, societies use their most important cultural symbols and their most recognized historical icons to adorn and support their value (p. 49).In this arder of ideas, to achieve in the real­ity and Colombian context that culture and economy complement each other and are seen as faces of the same coin, will be the biggest challenge that this Orange Economy proposal has to face, which shows to have political will, thanks to the current positions of its proponents.lt will be necessary, then, innovative and creative business models that allow trans­forming ideas into cultural goods and ser­vices whose value is determined by their intellectual property content and will un­doubtedly be present, making use of the new and modern technologies of information and communication, in arder to contribute and promote connectivity to the insertion of these creative and cultural industries, thus contributing to the creative value cha in, accompanied by education and preservation of heritage, in this so-called Orange Economy. ; bordar temas como el que se pretende de­sarrollar en estas líneas y que se encuentra planteado en su título, resultan interesantes en la medida que se convierten en retos no solamente teóricos sino prácticos. El término Economía Naranja además de pretender brindar un distintivo cromático pareciera querer ubicarnos en un contexto particular con unos impactos igualmente singulares Déribéré (1964). El estudio reali­zado sobre el tema y contenido en el manual: «La economía naranja. Una oportunidad in­finita» de Felipe Buitrago Restrepo e lván Duque Márquez, expresa la importancia de las industrias creativas y culturales en el desarrollo de países como el nuestro, don­de la economía es poco diversa comparada con las deMéxico, Estados Unidos y España, entre otras. Pero ¿Qué es en sí la economía Naranja? ¿Y qué la compone?, La economía Naranja ha sido definida por el BID (Banco Intera­mericano de Desarrollo) como el conjunto de actividades que de manera encadenada permiten que las ideas se transformen en bienes y servicios culturales, cuyo valor está determinado por su contenido de propie­dad intelectual. El universo naranja está compuesto por la economía cultural y las industrias creativas, en cuya intersección se encuentran las industrias culturales con­vencionales y las áreas de soporte para la creatividad (www.iadb.org, 26 sep. 2018). Cultura y conocimiento sin duda son los componentes económicos que generan ri­queza, parece ser la consigna que proclama la Economía Naranja. Estos elementos no son nuevos para Colombia en la medida que siempre han estado presentes en el escena­rio nacional. Se ha dicho y reconocido que el talento colombiano es indiscutible no solo a nivel local, regional, nacional, sino también mundial al igual que su riqueza ancestral en saberes y tradiciones que se organizan en conocimiento consolidado para conservar la diversidad cultural que a su vez es origen de creatividad e innovación.Solo hasta ahora parecen tener valor dentro de una economía que antes les había res­tado importancia y protagonismo, viéndose reflejado incluso en algunas actividades artísticas y culturales que escasamente lo­gran sobrevivir pese al talento, innovación y conocimiento que poseen; sin embargo, se debe reconocer también que algunas actividades artísticas sí han contado con mayor suerte que otras, refiriéndose al poco o mucho apoyo que han recibido. Dentro de estas se podrían mencionar el cine, al­gunas artes visuales y escénicas, la música y la moda. Se manifiesta entonces, que se ha empezado a reconocer dentro de este marco naranja el aporte que las ideas yac­tividades culturales pueden brindar a una economía nacional, siempre y cuando se cuente con apoyo, incentivos y garantías que faciliten su inserción en el ciclo económico y no dejárselo a la suerte o a la influencia de unos pocos. Conciliar la relación entre economía y cul­tura, no es tarea fácil dado que para las mentes creativas el carácter monetario con el que se le quiere valorar y medir le resulta odioso e incómodo, quizá porque no representa realmente el valor creativo e innovador que ellos poseen. Además, la falta de reconocimiento a su trabajo como legítimo, que merece contar con todas las condiciones y oportunidades de las cuales se carece, los lleva muchas veces a engrosar la informalidad de sus actividades, negán­doles así, la oportunidad de participar en una cadena de valor que beneficie a todos.Por otra parte, Buitrago y Duque en su ma­nual, (pág. 47), consideran a la economía y la cultura cara de una misma moneda: una es la representación abstracta de su valor simbólico y la otra es su validación cuanti­tativamente precisa, viene entonces a ser la moneda en sí misma la creación de ambas (pág. 48), dada los factores que en ella se encuentran: capacidad productiva, seriedad, solidez, espíritu emprendedor o los valores de la sociedad que la acogen. En estas, las sociedades se valen de sus símbolos cul­turales más importantes y de sus íconos históricos más reconocidos para adornar y respaldar el valor de las mismas (Pág. 49). En este orden de ideas, lograr en la realidad y contexto colombiano que la cultura y la economía se complementen y se vean cara de una misma moneda, será el reto mayor que tiene que enfrentar esta propuesta de Economía Naranja que muestra contar con voluntad política, gracias a las posiciones actuales de sus proponentes. Se necesitarán, entonces modelos de ne­gocios innovadores y creativos, que permi­tan transformar ideas en bienes y servicios culturales cuyo valor esté determinado por su contenido de propiedad intelectual y sin duda estarán presentes, haciendo uso de las nuevas y modernas tecnologías de la infor­mación y comunicación, con el fin de aportar e impulsar la conectividad a la inserción de estas industrias creativas y culturales, con­tribuyendo así, a la cadena de valor creativa, acompañada por la educación y preservación del patrimonio, en esta llamada Economía Naranja. ; Aborder des questions telles que celles qui sont censées etre développées dans ces lignes et qui sont soulevées dans son titre est intéressant dans la mesure ou elles de­viennent des défis non seulement théoriques mais pratiques. Le terme Économie Orange, en plus de pré­tendre offrir une distinction chromatique, semble vouloir nous situer dans un contexte particulier aux impacts tout aussi singuliers, Déribéré (1964). L.:étude réalisée sur le sujet et le contenu dans le manuel: «t.:économie orange. Une opportunité infinie» de Felipe Buitrago Restrepo et lván Duque Márquez, souligne l'importance des industries créa­tives et culturelles dans le développement de pays comme le nótre, ou l'économie n'est pas tres diversifiée par rapport a celles du Mexique, des États-Unis et de l'Espagne.Mais qu'est-ce que l'économie orange? Et qu'est-ce qui la compase? La BID (Banque interaméricaine de développement) a défini t.:économie Orange comme un ensemble d'activités permettant de transformer les idées en idées de biens et services culturels, dont la valeur est déterminée par le contenu de leur propriété intellectuelle. t.:univers orange est constitué de l'économie culturelle et des industries créatives, a l'intersection de laquelle se trouvent les industries cultu­relles conventionnelles et les espaces de soutien a la créativité (www.iadb.org, 26 sept. 2018). La culture et le savoir sont sans aucun doute les composants économiques génératrices de richesse, et semblent etre le slogan pro­clamé par l'économie orange. Ces éléments ne sont pas nouveaux en Colombie car ils ont toujours été présents dans le scénario national. ll a été dit et reconnu que le talent colombien est indiscutable non seulement au niveau local, régional, national, mais aussi mondial,ainsi que sa richesse ancestrale en savoirs et traditions organisés en savoirs consolidés pour préserver la diversité cultu­re lle, qui a son tour origine de la créativité et de l'innovation.Jusqu'a présent, ils semblent avoir de la valeur dans une économie qui auparavant avait minimisé leur importance et leur no­toriété, reflétant meme certaines activités artistiques et culturelles qui survivent a peine malgré le talent, l'innovation et les connaissances qu'ils possedent. Cependant, il faut aussi reconnaitre que certaines acti­vités artistiques ont eu plus de chance que d'autres, en référence au peu ou beaucoup de soutien qu'elles ont re¡;u. Parmi ceux-ci, on peut citer le cinéma, certains arts visuels et scéniques, la musique et la mode. l l est ainsi manifesté que, dans ce cadre orange, la contribution que les idées et les activités culturelles peuvent apporter a une économie nationale ont commencé a etre reconnues, a condition qu'il existe un soutien, des in­citations et des garanties qui facilitent leur insertion dans le cycle économique, sans laisser au sort ou a l'influence de quelques­uns.Réconcilier la relation entre l'économie et la culture n'est pas une tache facile étant donné que, pour les esprits créatifs, le caractere monétaire avec lequel ils veulent valoriser et mesurer est odieux et inconfortable; pour la raison que cela ne représente pas vraiment la valeur créative et innovante qu'ils possedent. En outre, le manque de reconnaissance de leur travail comme légitime, mérite de béné­ficier de toutes les conditions et opportunités qui leur manquent pour souvent les conduire a grossir l'informalité de leurs activités, les privant ainsi de la possibilité de participer a une chaine de valeur qui profite a tout le monde.D'autre part, Buitrago et Duque, dans leur manuel (page 47), considerent l'économie et la culture coOteuse d'une meme piece: l'une est la représentation abstraite de sa valeur symbolique et l'autre est sa validation quantitative précise, puis étant la monnaie elle-meme la création des deux (page 48), compte tenu des facteurs qui s'y trouvent: capacité de production, sérieux, solidité, es­prit d'entreprise ou valeurs de la société qui la rec;:oit. Dans ces, les sociétés utilisent leurs symboles culturels les plus importants et leurs icónes historiques les plus reconnues pour orner et soutenir leur valeur (p. 49).Dans cet ordre d'idées, est réalisé que dans la réalité et le contexte colombien, la culture et l'économie se completent et soient confron­tés au meme probleme, qui constituera le plus grand défi auquel cette proposition de l'économie orange doit faire face, ce qui montre la volonté politique , grace aux po­sitions actuelles de ses partisans. lls seront alors nécessaires que des mo­deles commerciaux innovants et créatifs permettant de transformer des idées en biens et services culturels dont la valeur est déterminée par leur contenu de propriété intellectuelle et, sans aucun doute, ils se­ront présents, en utilisant les technologies nouvelles et modernes de l'information et de la communication, afin de contribuer et de promouvoir la connectivité a l'insertion de ces industries créatives et culturelles, contribuant ainsi a la chaine de valeur de la création, accompagnée par l'éducation et la préservation du patrimoine, dans cette soi-disant économie orange.