Suchergebnisse

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Gasaladoddi microwatershed was conducted using village cadastral maps and IRS satellite imagery on 1:7920 scale. The false colour composites of IRS imagery were interpreted for physiography and these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the Microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 536 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 80 per cent is covered by soil, 17 per cent by rock outcrops and 3 per cent by habitation and water body. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below  The soils belong to 16 soil series and 36 soil phases (management units) and 8 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is 150cm) soils.  About 8 per cent sandy, 54 per cent loamy (sandy loam and sandy clay loam) and 18 per cent has clayey (sandy clay and clay) soils at the surface.  About 17 per cent of the area has non-gravelly (200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  An area of about 5 per cent is nearly level (0-1%), 72 per cent is very gently sloping (1-3%) and 3 per cent is gently sloping (3-5%) lands.  An area of about 22 per cent is slightly eroded (e1) and 58 per cent is moderately eroded (e2) lands.  An area of about 37 per cent is slightly acidic (pH 6.0-6.5), 37 per cent is neutral (pH 6.5-7.3), 5 per cent is slightly alkaline (pH 7.3-7.8) and 1 per cent is moderately alkaline (pH 7.8-8.4) in reaction.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 0.75%) in 80 per cent area of the soils.  Available phosphorus is medium (23-57 kg/ha) in 68 per cent and high (>57 kg/ha) in 12 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available potassium is low (337 kg/ha) in 32 per cent of the soils.  Available sulphur is low (20 ppm) in 3 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available boron is low (4.5 ppm) in 80 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (0.6 ppm) in 50 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in the entire area of the microwatershed.  The land suitability for 31 major agricultural and horticultural crops grown in the microwatershed was assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (class S1) and moderately suitable (class 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 3(1) 121(21) Sapota 5(1) 118(22) Maize - 161(30) Pomegranate 5(1) 134(25) Bajra 33(6) 252(46) Musambi 9(2) 131(24) Groundnut 39(7) 254(47) Lime 9(2) 131(24) Sunflower 3(1) 51(9) Amla 39(7) 286(53) Redgram - 54(10) Cashew 5(1) 140(26) Bengal gram 3(1) 157(29) Jackfruit 5(1) 118(22) Cotton 3(1) 120(22) Jamun - 140(26) Chilli - 107(19) Custard apple 42(8) 283(52) Tomato - 107(19) Tamarind - 21(4) Brinjal 39(7) 152(28) Mulberry 5(1) 212(40) Onion 33(6) 141(26) Marigold - 123(22) Bhendi 33(6) 157(29) Chrysanthemum - 123(22) Drumstick 5(1) 106(20) Jasmine - 107(19) Mango - 18(3) Crossandra - 110(20) Guava 5(1) 118(22)  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, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested to these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.,  Soil and water conservation and drainage line treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SALIENT FINDINGS OF THE STUDY  Results indicated that, 47 farmers were sampled in Gasaladoddi microwatershed among them 10 (21.28%) were marginal farmers, 15 (31.91 %) were small farmers, 14 (29.79 %) were semi medium farmers, 3 (6.38%) were medium farmers and 5 (10.64 %) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there were 259 population households were there in the studied micro watershed. Among them 137 (52.90%) men and 122 (47.10 %) were women. The average family size of landless was 4, marginal farmer was 6, small, semi medium and medium farmers were 5.  The data indicated that 59 (22.78%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 128 (49.42 %) were in 16-35 years of age, 52 (20.08 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 20(7.72%) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Gasaladoddi had 28.96 per cent illiterates, 35.14 per cent of them had primary school education, 11.97 per cent of them had middle school, 13.13 per cent them had high school education, 5.41 per cent of them had PUC education, 0.77 per cent of them had ITI education and masters and 1.93 per cent of them had degree education.  The results indicated that, 78.72 per cent of households practicing agriculture, 8.51 per cent of them were agricultural labour, 6.38 per cent of the household heads were general labours and 2.13 per cent were in government service.  The results indicated that agriculture was the major occupation for 66.80 per cent of the household members, 3.09 per cent were agricultural labourers, 2.70 per cent were general labours, 0.39 per cent were in government service,0.77 per cent housewives, 1.93 per cent were children and 23.17 per cent of them were students. In case of landless farmers, 23.81 per cent were agricultural labour and 33.33 per cent were general labour and student respectively. In case of marginal farmers 65.08 per cent of them were doing agriculture, 3.17 per cent of them were agriculture labour and 26.68 per cent of them were students. In small farmers 71.08 per cent of them were doing agriculture and 27.71 per cent of them were students. In case of semi medium farmers 79.49 per cent of them were agriculturist, and 14.10 per cent of them were students. In medium farmers 78.57 per cent of them were agriculturist and 14.29 per cent of them were doing other work.  The results showed that 100 per cent of households have not participated in any local institutions.  The results indicated that 40.43 per cent of the households possess thatched house, 29.79 per cent of the households possess Katcha house and 4.26 per cent of the households possess Pacca house.  The results showed that, 85.11 per cent of the households possess TV, 78.72 per cent of the households possess mixer/grinder, 29.79 per cent of the households possess 2 bicycle, 40.43 per cent of the households possess motor cycle and 95.74 per cent of the households possess mobile phones.  The results showed that the average value of television was Rs. 6,475, mixer/grinder was Rs. 1,305, bicycle was Rs. 1,285, motor cycle was Rs. 38,600 and mobile phone was Rs. 1,408.  Results showed that about 31.91 per cent of the households possess bullock cart, 40.43 per cent of them possess plough, 2.13 per cent of the households possess tractor, 23.40 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 78.72 per cent of the households possess weeder and 2.13 per cent of the households possess chaff cutter.  The results showed that the average value of bullock cart was Rs. 27,733; the average value of plough was Rs. 1,354, the average value of tractor was Rs. 700,000, the average value of sprayer was Rs. 4,272, the average value of weeder was Rs. 30 and the average value of chaff cutter was Rs. 3,000.  The results indicated that, 38.30 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 27.66 per cent of the households possess local cow and 2.13 per cent of the households possess buffalo and sheep respectively. 40 per cent of the marginal farmers possess bullock. In case of small farmers, 40 per cent of the households possess bullock and 3.33 per cent of the households possess local cow. In case of semi medium farmers, 50 per cent of households possess bullock and 42.86 per cent possess local cow. In case of medium farmers, 66.67 per cent of the households possess local cow and 33.33 per cent of the households possess bullock and buffalo respectively.  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 10.68, average own labour (women) available was 6.73, average hired labour (men) available was 10.73 and average hired labour (women) available was 9.12.  In case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was also 1.80, average hired labour (men) was 9.40 and average hired labour (women) available was 8.60. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 13.73, average own labour (women) was 8.47, average hired labour (men) was 11.40 and average hired labour (women) available was 9.20. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 2.23, average own labour (women) was 2.08, average hired labour (men) was 10 and average hired labour (women) available was 8.08. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 61, average own labour (women) was 34.67, average hired labour (men) was 15 and average hired labour (women) available was 15.  The results indicated that, 85.11 per cent of the household opined that the hired labour was adequate and 2.13 per cent of them opined that hired labour was inadequate.  The results indicated that, 1 person was migrated from micro watershed that belonged to marginal farmer category. Total migration in the micro watershed was only 0.39 per cent. 3  The results indicated that, people have migrated on an average of 10 Kms and average duration was 10 months. Semi medium farmers have migrated 10 kms and on an average for 10 months.  The results indicated that, job/work was the only reason for migration for all the migrants.  The results indicated that, households of the Gasaladoddi microwatershed possess 30.84 ha (53.50%) of dry land and 26.80ha (46.50%) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 5.14ha (80.79%) of dry land 1.22ha (19.21%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 15.28 ha (83.26%) of dry land and 3.07ha (16.74%) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 10.42 ha (40%) of dry land and 15.63ha (60%) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 6.88ha (100%) of the irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 340,354.33 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 522,198.73. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 855,748.04 for dry land and Rs. 1,390,397.36 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 242,028.60 for dry land Rs. 1,106,455.88 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 230,303.03 for dry land and Rs. 498,989.90 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 159,823.53 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 10 defunctioning and 22 functioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, there were 1 defunctioning and 1 functioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 46.81 per cent of the farmers and 2.13 per cent were using open well as a source of irrigation.  The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 42.78 meters and open well was 0.65 meters.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers there was 1.22 per cent of irrigated land, in case of small farmers there was 3.07 ha of irrigated land, in case of semi medium farmers there was 19.04 ha of irrigated land and medium farmers were having 6.07 ha of irrigated land. On an average there were 29.41 ha of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, farmers have grown maize (31.01ha), groundnut (7.90 ha), bajra (4.14 ha), cotton (1.88 ha), paddy (3.33 ha), sunflower (2.51 ha) and cotton (0.40 ha) in kharif season. Marginal farmers have grown maize and paddy. Small farmers have grown maize, groundnut, bajra, sunflower and cotton. Semi medium farmers have grown maize, groundnut, bajra and paddy. Medium farmers have grown maize, groundnut and bajra. 4  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Gasaladoddi microwatershed was found to be 76.96 per cent. In case of marginal farmers it was 100 per cent, in small farmers it was 93.37, in semi medium farmers it was 65.16 and in medium farmers it was 72.22 per cent.  The results indicated that, 70.21 per cent of the households have bank account. 80 percent of landless, 100 marginal, 66.67 per cent small and 64.29 semi medium farmers possess bank account respectively.  The results indicated that, 40 per cent of landless, 60 per cent of marginal, 6.67 per cent of the small and 28.57 per cent of semi medium farmers have borrowed credit from different sources.  The results indicated that, 5.56 per cent have availed loan from friends/relatives and money lender respectively.  The results indicated that, landless farmers availed Rs.25000. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed is 2777.78.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 32578.46. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 33910.98. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs. 1332.52. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.04.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 76846.27. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 75018.72. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. -1827.55. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.98.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for redgram was Rs. 92106.94. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 37235.25. The net income from redgram cultivation was Rs. -54871.69. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.4.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 27964.69. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 20417.92. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. -7546.77. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.73.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Sunflower was Rs. 19607.59. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 53768.81. The net income from Sunflower cultivation was Rs. 34161.23. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.74.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Cotton was Rs. 59113.07. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 88920. The net income from Cotton cultivation was Rs. 29806.93. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.5.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for paddy was Rs. 58431.09. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 91584.65. The net income from 5 paddy cultivation was Rs. 33153.56. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.57.  The results indicated that, 68.09 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 19.15 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was adequate.  The results indicated that, in landless farmers, the average income from wage was Rs. 52800. In marginal farmers the average income from business was Rs.2000, wage was Rs. 37,500 and agriculture was Rs. 29,340. In small farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 25,866.67, agriculture was Rs. 64,640 and dairy farm was Rs. 500. In semi medium farmers the average income from service/salary was Rs. 15,714.29, wage was Rs. 15,928.57, agriculture was Rs. 85,357.14 and dairy farm was Rs. 1,142.86. In medium farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 11,666.67, agriculture was Rs. 95,000 and dairy farm was Rs.1833.33.  The results indicated that, in marginal farmers the average expenditure from agriculture was Rs.12000 and goat farming was Rs.8000. In case of small farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 1,166.67, agriculture was Rs. 33,933.33 and dairy farm was Rs. 500. In case of semi medium farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs. 50,000, wage was Rs. 1,833.33, dairy farm was Rs. 1,125 and agriculture was Rs. 35,142.86. In case of medium farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 7,000, agriculture was Rs. 40,000 and dairy farming was Rs. 1250.  The results indicated that, sampled households have grown 2 cocoa, 65 coconut, 2 guava and 16 mango trees in their field and also planted 2 coconut trees in their back yard.  The results indicated that, households have planted 51 teak, 85 neem, 3 tarmind trees and 5 banyan trees in their field.  The results indicate that, households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 4276.60 for land development, Rs. 1425.53 in irrigation facility, Rs.2808.51 for improved crop production and Rs.829.79 for improved livestock management.  Marginal households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 5800 for land development, Rs.3700 for improved crop production and Rs.800 for improved livestock management. Small farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 3733.33 for land development, Rs. 1600 in irrigation facility, Rs.2800 for improved crop production and Rs.400 for improved livestock management. Semi medium farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 6214.29 for land development, Rs. 3071.43 in irrigation facility, Rs.3785.71 for improved crop production and Rs.1785.71 for improved livestock management.  The results indicated that, for land development, 40.43 per cent of the farmers were depending on government subsidy and 2.13 per cent were depending on loan from the bank. 19.15 per cent of the households were dependent on government subsidy 6 for irrigation facility. Similarly for improved crop production, 42.55 per cent of the households were dependent on government subsidy and 2.13 per cent were depending on loan from the bank and 21.28 per cent were depending on loan from the bank for improved live stock management.  The results indicated that, bajra, cotton, paddy and sunflower crops were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Groundnut and maize were sold to an extent 95.38 per cent and 99.88 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that, 6.38 percent of the households have sold their produce to agents/ traders and regulated market respectively and 100 per cent of the households have sold their produce to local/village merchant.  The results indicated that 6.38 per cent of the households have used cart as a mode of transport, 80.85 per cent of them have used tractor and 36.17 per cent have used truck as a mode of transport.  The results indicated that, 46.81 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 80 percent of marginal farmers, 40 per cent of small farmers and 57.14 per cent of semi medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 63.83 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing including 100 per cent of marginal farmers, 73.33 per cent of the small farmers and 64.29 per cent of the semi medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 100 percent used fire wood as a source of fuel and 2.13 per cent of them used LPG as a source of fuel.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the source of drinking water for 59.57 per cent and 44.68 per cent of them were using bore well for drinking water.  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 100 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, 17.02 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 40 per cent of landless, 20 per cent of marginal, 13.33 per cent of small, 7.14 per cent of the semi medium and 33.33 per cent of the medium farmers had sanitary toilet facility.  The results indicated that, 93.62 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL card, 2.13 per cent of the sampled households does not possessed BPL card and 4.26 per cent of the sampled households possessed APL card.  The results indicated that, 23.40 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 20 per cent of the landless, 30 percent of the marginal, 13.33 per cent of the small, 14.29 per cent of the semi medium and 100 percent of the medium farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits , milk, egg and meat were adequate for 97.87 per cent, 87.23 per cent, 25.53 per cent, 82.98 per cent, 2.13 per cent, 72.34 per cent, 48.94 per cent and 44.68 per cent respectively. 7  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseed; vegetables, fruits and milk were inadequate for 4.26 per cent, 10.64 per cent, 40.43 per cent, 10.64 per cent, 65.96 per cent and 21.28 per cent of the households respectively.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil problem was experienced by 29.79 per cent of the households, and wild animal menace on farm field was experienced by 61.70 per cent of the households, frequent incidence of pest and diseases was experienced by 63.83 per cent of the farmers, inadequacy of irrigation water was experienced by 25.53 per cent of the households, high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals was experienced 55.32 per cent and high rate of interest on credit was experienced by 17.02 per cent of the farmers, low price for the agricultural commodities was experienced by 42.55 per cent of the farmers, lack of marketing facilities in the area was experienced 34.04 per cent of the households, inadequate of extension services experienced by 38.30 per cent of the households, lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market was experienced by 53.19 per cent of the households, less rainfall was experienced by 36.17 per cent and of the farmers and Source of Agri-technology information(Newspaper/TV/Mobile) 4.26 per cent of the households. ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Belur-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, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the Microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 566 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. Entire area is covered by soil and 150cm) soils.  About 9 per cent loamy (sandy clay loam) and 91 per cent has clayey (sandy clay and clay) soils at the surface.  About 44 per cent of the area has non-gravelly (200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  About 8 per cent area in the microwatershed is nearly level (0-1%) and 92 per cent very gently sloping (1-3%) lands.  An area of about 28 per cent is slightly eroded (e1) and 72 per cent is moderately eroded (e2) lands.  An area of about 4 per cent is neutral (pH 6.5-7.3), 10 per cent is slightly alkaline (pH 7.3-7.8), 19 per cent is moderately alkaline (pH 7.8-8.4), 38 per cent is strongly alkaline (pH 8.4-9.0) and 29 per cent is very strongly alkaline (pH >9.0) in reaction.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 337 kg/ha) in 13 per cent area of the soils.  Available sulphur is low (20 ppm) in 4 per cent area of the soils.  Available boron is low (4.5 ppm) in 52 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in the entire area of the microwatershed.  Available manganese and copper is sufficient in the entire area of the microwatershed.  The land suitability for 31 major agricultural and horticultural crops grown in the microwatershed was assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (class S1) and moderately suitable (class 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 209(37) 244(43) Sapota - 114(20) Maize 61(11) 393(69) Pomegranate - 356(63) Bajra 126(22) 331(59) Musambi 90(16) 256(45) Groundnut 41(7) 82(15) Lime 90(16) 256(45) Sunflower 90(16) 245(43) Amla 103(18) 370(66) Redgram - 305(54) Cashew 61(11) 52(9) Bengal gram 148(26) 296(52) Jackfruit - 114(20) Cotton 148(26) 306(54) Jamun - 164(29) Chilli 62(11) 74(13) Custard apple 251(44) 222(40) Tomato 62(11) 51(9) Tamarind - 135(24) Brinjal 103(18) 360(64) Mulberry - 303(54) Onion 41(7) 72(13) Marigold 61(11) 392(69) Bhendi 41(7) 422(75) Chrysanthemum 61(11) 392(69) Drumstick - 345(61) Jasmine 61(11) 160(28) Mango - 22(4) Crossandra 61(11) 99(17) Guava - 113(20)  Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 7 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested to these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.,  Soil and water conservation and drainage line treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SALIENT FINDINGS OF THE STUDY  Results indicated that, 35 farmers were sampled in Belur-2 microwatershed among them 6 (13.95%) were marginal farmers, 12 (30.23 %) were small farmers, 11 (25.58 %) were semi medium farmers, 1 (2.33%) were medium farmers and 6 (13.95 %) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there were 188 population households were there in the studied micro watershed. Among them 100 (53.19%) men and 88 (46.81 %) were women. The average family size of landless was 4.67, marginal farmer was 3.85, small farmer was 4.6, semi medium farmers were 4.45 and medium and large farmers were 5.  The data indicated that 26 (13.83%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 85 (45.21 %) were in 16-35 years of age, 58 (30.85 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 19 (10.11%) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Belur-2 had 27.66 per cent illiterates, 32.98 per cent of them had primary school education, 6.91 per cent of them had middle school, 15.43 per cent them had high school education, 8.51 per cent of them had PUC education, 0.53 per cent of them had ITI education and 3.19 per cent of them had degree education.  The results indicated that, 83.72 per cent of households practicing agriculture, 13.95 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labour and 2.33 per cent of the household heads were others.  The results indicated that agriculture was the major occupation for 29.26 per cent of the household members, 44.15 per cent were agricultural labourers, 2.13 per cent were general labours and 1.06 per cent were in private sector, 0.53 per cent were in government service, 2.66 per cent were housewives and children's and 15.43 per cent of them were students. In case of landless farmers 57.14 per cent of them were agriculture labours, 14.29 per cent were general labours and 10.71 per cent of them were students.  In case of marginal farmers 32 per cent of them were doing agriculture, 48 per cent of them were agriculture and 16 per cent of them were students. In small farmers 32 per cent of them were doing agriculture, 30.36 per cent of them were agriculture labour, 8.93 per cent were children and 17.86 per cent of them were students. In case of semi medium farmers 28.57 per cent of them were agriculturist, 53.06 per cent of them were agriculture labour, 2.04 per cent of them were in private service. and 16.33 per cent of them were students. In medium farmers 60 per cent of them were agriculturist, 20 per cent of them were government service and 20 per cent of them were doing other work.  The results showed that 1.06 per cent of them participated in Sthree Shakthi Sangha and 98.94 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions. Landless, 2 marginal, semi medium and medium farmers were found to have no participation in any local institutions. Small farmers were found to participate in one or the other local institutions.  The results indicated that 6.98 per cent of the households possess thatched house, 83.72 per cent of the households possess Katcha house and 9.30 per cent of the households possess Pacca house.  The results showed that, 88.37 per cent of the households possess TV, 79.07 per cent of the households possess mixer/grinder, 55.81 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 44.19 per cent of the households possess motor cycle, 2.33 per cent of them possess tempo and 86.05 per cent of the households possess mobile phones.  The results showed that the average value of television was Rs. 3526, mixer/grinder was Rs. 1188, bicycle was Rs.1041, motor cycle was Rs.48684, Tempo was Rs.2000, Edge shear was Rs.3000 and mobile phone was Rs.1093.  Results showed that, about 16.28 per cent of the households possess bullock cart, 25.58 per cent of them possess plough, 2.33 per cent of the households possess tractor, 11.63 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 79.07 per cent of the households possess weeder and 9.30 per cent of the households possess chaff cutter.  The results showed that the average value of bullock cart was Rs.17428; the average value of plough was Rs. 911, the average value of tractor was Rs. 300000, the average value of sprayer was Rs. 20200, the average value of weeder was Rs. 36 and the average value of chaff cutter was Rs. 2175.  The results indicated that, 23.26 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 6.98 per cent of the households possess local cow, 2.33 per cent of the households possess crossbreed cow, 4.65 per cent of the households possess sheep and 9.30 per cent of the households possess buffalo and goat respectively. 16.67 per cent of the landless farmers possess sheep and goat respectively. In case of marginal farmers, 15.38 per cent of the households possess local cow and 7.69 per cent of the households possess local cow, crossbreed cow and goat respectively. In case of small farmers, 25 per cent of households possess bullock and 8.33 per cent possess local cow, buffalo, sheep and goat correspondingly. In case of semi medium farmers, 45.45 per cent of the households possess bullock and 9.09 per cent of the households possess local cow and buffalo respectively. 100 per cent of the medium farmers possess goat.  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 1.59, average own labour (women) available was 1.39, average hired labour (men) available was 7.70 and average hired labour (women) available was 8.11.  In case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.69, average own labour (women) was also 1.38, average hired labour (men) was 6.08 and average hired labour (women) available was 6.08. In case of small farmers, average 3 own labour men available was 1.54, average own labour (women) was 1.50, average hired labour (men) was 7.08 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.25. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 1.55, average own labour (women) was 1.27, average hired labour (men) was 10.55 and average hired labour (women) available was 11.73. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was 1.  The results indicated that, 9.30 per cent of the household opined that the hired labour was adequate and 76.74 per cent of them opined that hired labour was inadequate.  The results indicated that, households of the Belur-2 microwatershed possess 28.99 ha (62.56%) of dry land and 17.35 ha (37.44 %) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 7.55 ha (89.66%) of dry land 0.87 ha (10.34%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 15.78 ha (94.73%) of dry land and 0.88 ha (5.27%) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 5.67 ha (32.15%) of dry land and 11.95 ha (67.85%) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 3.64 ha (100%) of the irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 298,275.86 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 403,406.44. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 423,806.96 for dry land and Rs. 1,033,953.50 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 256,631.61 for dry land Rs. 569,124.40 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 247,000 for dry land and Rs. 392,992.56 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 247,000 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 14 defunctioning and 15 functioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 34.88 per cent of the farmers.  The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 23.09 meters.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers there was 0.87 per cent of irrigated land, in case of small farmers there was 1.28 ha of irrigated land, in case of semi medium farmers there was 12.10 ha of irrigated land and medium farmers were having 3.64 ha of irrigated land. On an average there were 17.90 ha of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, farmers have grown maize (19.93ha), onion (8.51 ha), groundnut (5.81 ha), sunflower (2.43 ha), cotton (1.88 ha), Red gram (1.83 ha), sorghum (1.62 ha), bajra (0.97 ha), banana (0.4 ha) and green gram (0.4 ha) in kharif season. Marginal farmers have grown maize, groundnut, sunflower, cotton, red gram and bajra. Small farmers have grown maize, onion, groundnut, sunflower 4 and green gram. Small farmers have grown maize, onion, cotton, red gram, sorghum and banana. Medium farmers have grown only maize.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Belur-2 microwatershed was found to be 82.12 per cent. In case of marginal farmers it was 95.19 per cent, in small farmers it was 89.92, in semi medium farmers it was 69.54 and in medium farmers it was 100 per cent.  The results indicated that, 69.77 per cent of the households have both bank account and savings respectively. 92.31 percent of marginal, small and large farmers possess both bank account savings respectively. In small farmers 66.67 per cent of the households have both bank account and savings respectively. In case of semi medium farmers, 90.91 per cent of possess bank account and savings respectively.  The results indicated that, 92.31 per cent of marginal, 66.67 per cent of small and 90.91 per cent of semi medium farmers have borrowed credit from different sources.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 32679.41. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 35141.18. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs. 2461.78. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.08.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 32679.41. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 35141.18. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. 2461.78. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.08.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for redgram was Rs. 92106.94. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 37235.25. The net income from redgram cultivation was Rs. -54871.69. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.4.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 49544.52. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 37461.67. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. -12082.86. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.76.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for sorghum was Rs. 6593.64. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 18278. The net income from sorghum cultivation was Rs. 11684.36. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.77.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for green gram was Rs. 43774.34. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 41990. The net income from green gram cultivation was Rs. -1784.34. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.96.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for onion was Rs. 31943.56. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 132285.50. The net income from 5 onion cultivation was Rs. 100341.94. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:4.14.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Sunflower was Rs. 26042.92. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 42306.47. The net income from Sunflower cultivation was Rs. 16263.55. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.62.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Cotton was Rs. 38511.39. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 79607.03. The net income from Cotton cultivation was Rs. 41095.63. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.07.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Banana was Rs. 89684.87. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 247000. The net income from Banana cultivation was Rs. 157315.13. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.75.  The results indicated that, 18.60 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate, 11.63 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was inadequate and 18.60 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was adequate.  The results indicated that, in landless farmers, the average income from wage was Rs. 27000. In marginal farmers the average income from service/salary was Rs.7384.62, wage was Rs. 30384.62, agriculture was Rs. 32015.38 and dairy farm was Rs. 5230.77. In small farmers the average income from business was Rs. 1000, wage was Rs. 21166.67, agriculture was Rs. 43470.83 and dairy farm was Rs. 1166.67. In semi medium farmers the average income from service/salary was Rs. 16272.73, wage was Rs. 22454.55, agriculture was Rs. 187236.36 and dairy farm was Rs.363.64. In medium farmers the average income from business was Rs. 6000 and agriculture was Rs. 375000.  The results indicated that, in landless farmers, the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 25000, farm income was Rs.500 and goat farming was Rs.5000. In marginal farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs.9090.91, agriculture was Rs.16307.69 and dairy farm was Rs.9333.33. In case of small farmers the average expenditure from business was Rs. 4000, wage was Rs. 11500, agriculture was Rs. 28727.27 and dairy farm was Rs. 2000. In case of semi medium farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs.40500, wage was Rs. 8375, dairy farm was Rs.2000 and agriculture was Rs. 60090.91. In case of medium farmers the average expenditure from business was Rs.4000, agriculture was Rs. 50000 and goat farming was Rs. 2000.  The results indicated that, sampled households have grown 34 coconut trees in their field and also planted 1 coconut tree in their back yard. 6  The results indicated that, households have planted 1 eucalyptus, 5 teak, 58 neem, 1 tarmind tree, 3 pongamia trees and 1 banyan tree in their field and also planted 2 neem tree in their back yard.  The results indicate that, households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 4744.19 for land development, Rs. 441.86 in irrigation facility and 302.33 Rs.2714.29 for improved crop production.  Marginal households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 6846.15 for land development, Rs. 769.23 for irrigation facility and Rs.384.62 for improved crop production. Small farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 3666.67 for land development, Rs. 83.33 in irrigation facility and Rs.666.67 for improved crop production. Semi medium farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 6454.55 for land development and Rs. 727.27 in irrigation facility.  The results indicated that, for land development, 31.11 per cent of the farmers were depend on government subsidy, 22.22 per cent were depend on loan from the bank. 4.44 per cent of the households were dependent on government subsidy and 8.89 per cent of the households were dependent on loan from the bank for irrigation facility. Similarly for improved crop production, 4.44 per cent of the households were dependent on government subsidy.  The results indicated that, cotton, onion and sunflower crops were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Bajra, banana, groundnut, maize and red gram were sold to an extent 13.04 per cent, 90 per cent, 68.75 per cent, 99.77 per cent and 88.89 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that, 2.33 percent of the households have sold their produce to agents/ traders, 16.28 per cent of the households have sold their produce to local/village merchant, 74.42 percent of the households sold their produce in regulated markets and 2.33 percent of the households sold their produce in cooperative marketing society.  The results indicated that 18.60 per cent of the households have used cart as a mode of transport, 72.09 per cent of them have used tractor and 2.33 per cent have used bus as a mode of transport.  The results indicated that, 34.88 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 46.15 percent of marginal farmers, 33.33 per cent of small farmers and 45.45 per cent of semi medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 65.12 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing including 92.31 per cent of marginal farmers, 58.33 per cent of the small farmers and 81.82 semi medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 100 percent used fire wood as a source of fuel.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the source of drinking water for 90.70 per cent and 11.63 per cent of them were using bore well for drinking water. 7  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 100 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, 46.51 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 100 per cent of landless, semi medium and medium farmers, 7.69 per cent of marginal and 8.33 per cent of small farmers had sanitary toilet facility.  The results indicated that, 93.02 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL card and 6.98 per cent of the sampled households does not possessed BPL card.  The results indicated that, 60.47 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 50 per cent of the landless, 69.23 percent of the marginal, 50 per cent of the small, 63.64 per cent of the semi medium and 100 percent of the medium farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits , milk, egg and meat were adequate for 100 per cent, 53.49 per cent, 51.16 per cent, 39.53 per cent, 58.14 per cent, 51.16 per cent, 48.84 per cent and 9.30 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that, pulses, oilseed; vegetables, fruits, milk, egg and meat were inadequate for 46.51 per cent, 48.84 per cent, 60.47 per cent, 27.91 per cent, 23.26 per cent, 27.91 per cent and 6.98 per cent of the households respectively.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil problem was experienced by 72.09 per cent of the households, and wild animal menace on farm field was experienced by 62.79 per cent of the households, frequent incidence of pest and diseases was experienced by 27.91 per cent of the farmers, inadequacy of irrigation water was experienced by 13.95 per cent of the households, high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals was experienced 44.19 per cent and high rate of interest on credit was experienced by 13.95 per cent of the farmers, low price for the agricultural commodities was experienced by 18.60 per cent of the farmers, lack of marketing facilities in the area was experienced 16.28 per cent of the households, inadequate of extension services experienced by 11.63 per cent of the households, lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market was experienced by 34.88 per cent of the households, less rainfall was experienced by 51.16 per cent and of the farmers and Source of Agri-technology information(Newspaper/TV/Mobile) 11.63 per cent of the households. ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Chikkabagnalu microwatershed was conducted using village cadastral maps and IRS satellite imagery on 1:7920 scale. The false colour composites of IRS imagery were interpreted for physiography and these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 680 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 82 per cent is covered by soils, 6 per cent area is covered by mining/industrial, 1 per cent area is covered by rock lands and 11 per cent is covered by habitation and settlements. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 11 soil series and 29 soil phases (management units) and 5 Land Management Units.  The length of crop growing period is 150 cm).  An area of about 73 per cent area in the microwatershed has loamy soils and 9 per cent clayey soils at the surface.  An area of about 33 per cent area has non-gravelly (0.75%) in 76 per cent area and medium (0.5-0.75%) in 6 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Entire cultivated area of the microwatershed is high (>57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  Entire cultivated area of the microwatershed is medium (145-337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is high (>20 ppm) in 1 per cent area, medium (10 -20 ppm) in 31 per cent area and low (4.5 ppm) and 13 per cent is deficient (1.0 ppm) in available manganese content.  Entire cultivated area of the microwatershed is sufficient (>0.2 ppm) in available copper content.  An area of about 16 per cent is deficient (0.6 ppm) in available zinc content.  The land suitability for 31 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 90(13) 275(40) Sapota 84(12) 317(47) Maize 75(11) 291(43) Pomegranate 84(12) 317(47) Bajra 286(42) 171(25) Guava 1(<1) 400(59) Groundnut 131(19) 419(62) Jackfruit 84(12) 317(47) Sunflower 66(10) 243(36) Jamun 37(5) 301(44) Cotton 66(10) 275(40) Musambi 84(12) 293(43) Red gram 66(10) 219(32) Lime 84(12) 293(43) Bengalgram - 318(47) Cashew 40(6) 361(53) Chilli 120(18) 246(36) Custard apple 286(42) 264(39) Tomato 120(18) 246(36) Amla 286(42) 264(39) Brinjal 243(36) 197(29) Tamarind 37(5) 82(12) Onion 154(23) 287(42) Marigold 65(10) 301(44) Bhendi 154(23) 287(42) Chrysanthemum 65(10) 301(44) Drumstick 84(12) 318(47) Jasmine 65(10) 301(44) Mulberry 84(12) 410(60) Crossandra 65(10) 277(41) Mango 37(5) 47(7)  Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 5 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested for these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.,  Soil and water conservation treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SALIENT FEATURES OF THE SURVEY  The data on households sampled for socio economic survey in Chikkabagnalu micro indicated that 30 farmers were sampled in Chikkabagnalu micro watershed among them 6 (20%) were marginal farmers, 8 (26.67%) were small farmers, 9(30%) were semi medium farmers, 6(20%) were medium farmers and 1(3.33%) landless farmer was also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there were 150 population households were there in the studied micro watershed. Among them 92 (61.33%) men and 58 (38.67 %) were women. The average family size of landless was 5, marginal farmers were 5, small farmers were 7, semi medium farmers were 4 and medium farmers were 4. On an average the family size was 5.  The data indicated that 26(17.33%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 69 (46%) were in 16-35 years of age, 45 (30 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 10 (6.67%) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Chikkabagnalu had 34 per cent illiterates, 26 per cent of them had primary school education, 9.33 per cent of them had both middle school, 13.33 per cent them had high school education, 7.33 per cent of them had PUC education, 2 per cent them had ITI education, 4.67 per cent of them had degree education and 3.33 per cent them had others.  The results indicated that, 93.33 per cent of households practicing agriculture and 3.33 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labour.  The results indicated that agriculture was the major occupation for 50.67 per cent of the household members, 17.33 per cent were agricultural labourers, 2.67 per cent were general labours, 0.67 per cent household industry, 1.33 percent were in government service, 0.67 per cent of them were in private sector, 22 per cent of them were students, 3.33 per cent of them were children and 1.33 per cent were housewives. In case of landless households 20 per cent were agricultural labourers, 60 per cent were general labourers and 20 per cent were household industry. In case of marginal farmers 42.86 per cent were agriculturist, 21.43 percent was in agricultural labour and 25 per cent of them were students. In case of small farmers 54.72 per cent of them were agriculturist, 20.75 percent was in agricultural labour and 18.87 per cent of them were students. In case of semi medium farmers 43.24 per cent of the family members were agriculturist, 21.62 per cent were agricultural labourers and 24.32 per cent of them were students. In case of medium farmers 70.37 per cent of the family members were agriculturist, 25.93 per cent of them were students and 3.70 per cent were housewives.  The results showed that 0.67 per cent of them participated in user groups and 99.33 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions. Landless, marginal, semi medium and medium farmers were found to have no participation 2 in any local institutions. Small farmers were found to participate in one or the other local institutions.  The results indicated that 43.33 per cent of the households possess Katcha house, 20 per cent of the households possess Pucca house, 33.33 per cent of the households possess Semi Pacca house and 3.33 per cent of them possess Thatched house. 100 percent of the landless farmers possess Katcha house.  The results showed that, 86.67 per cent of the households possess TV, 3.33 per cent of the households possess DVD/VCD Player, 63.33 per cent of the households possess Mixer grinder, 10 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 36.67 per cent of the households possess motor cycle, 3.33 per cent of the households possess Auto and 96.67 per cent of the households possess mobile phones.  The results showed that the average value of television was Rs.5673; DVD/VCD Player was Rs. 2000, mixer grinder was Rs.1647, bicycle was Rs.3000, motor cycle was Rs.44545, Auto was Rs. 300000 and mobile phone was Rs.2022.  The results indicated that about 23.33 per cent of the households possess bullock cart, 43.33 per cent of them possess plough, 13.33 per cent of the households possess tractor, 40 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 3.33 per cent of the households possess sprinkler, 56.67 per cent of the households possess weeder and 3.33 per cent of the households possess harvester.  The results showed that the average value of bullock cart was Rs. 14921; the average value of plough was Rs. 1573, the average value of tractor was Rs. 351250, the average value of sprayer was Rs. 3958, the average value of sprinkler was Rs. 200, the average value of weeder was Rs. 213 and the average value of harvester was Rs. 100.  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 1.83, average own labour (women) available was 1.13, average hired labour (men) available was 7.87 and average hired labour (women) available was 11.97.  In case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.67, average own labour (women) was also 1.17, average hired labour (men) was 8.83 and average hired labour (women) available was 16.83. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 2.88, average own labour (women) was 1.25, average hired labour (men) was 10.38 and average hired labour (women) available was 10.75. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 1.11, average own labour (women) was 1, average hired labour (men) was 7.78 and average hired labour (women) available was 13.56. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was 1.33, average hired labour (men) was 5 and average hired labour (women) available was 8.33. 3  The results indicated that, 73.33 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was adequate and 26.67 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was inadequate.  The results indicated that, households of the Chikkabagnalu micro watershed possess 11.59 ha (27.32 %) of dry land and 30.82 ha (72.68%) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 2.08 ha (67.41%) of dry land and 1.01 ha (32.59%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 4.65 ha (55.41 %) of dry land and 3.74 ha (44.59 %) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 2.83 ha (19.85 %) of dry land and 11.44 ha (80.15 %) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 2.02 ha (12.15 %) of dry land and 14.63 (87.85%) of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 345,092.56 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 387,934.60. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 623,495.16 for dry land and Rs. 1,289,558.23 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 322,735.19 for dry land Rs. 657,597.40 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 247,000 for dry land and Rs. 401,910.16 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 247,000 for dry land and was Rs. 245,975.65 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 30 functioning and 8 defunctioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 96.66 per cent of the farmers and 3.33 per cent of the households were using tank as a source of irrigation.  The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 68.15 meters and tank was 2.54 meters.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers there was 1.01 ha of irrigated land, in case of small farmers there was 54.25 ha of irrigated land, semi medium farmers were having 11.12 ha of irrigated land and medium farmers were having 6.88 ha of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, farmers have grown banana (0.40ha), groundnut (4.05ha), maize (19.14ha), paddy (1.62ha), bajra (0.81ha), red gram (1.31ha) in kharif season and also grown red gram (0.44 ha) in Rabi season. Marginal farmers have grown banana, groundnut and maize. Small farmers have grown groundnut, maize and red gram. Semi medium farmers have grown groundnut, maize, paddy and red gram and medium farmers grown groundnut, paddy and maize.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Chikkabagnalu micro watershed was found to be 75.56 per cent. In case of marginal farmers it was 100 per cent, in small farmers it was 83.55, in semi medium farmers it was 88.05 and in medium farmers it was 60.77 per cent. 4  The results indicated that, 93.33 per cent of the households have both bank account and savings respectively. Among marginal farmers 100 percent of them possess both bank account and savings. 87.50 per cent of small farmers possess both bank account and savings correspondingly. Semi medium farmers possess 100 per cent of both bank account and savings respectively and medium category of farmers also possess 100 per cent of bank account and also savings correspondingly.  The results indicated that, 50 per cent of marginal, 12.50 per cent of small, 22.22 per cent of the semi medium and 66.67 per cent of medium farmers have borrowed credit from different sources.  The results indicated that, 40 per cent have availed loan in commercial bank, 20 per cent have availed loan from Cooperative Bank and Grameena Bank, and 10 per cent have availed loan from Friends/Relatives and money lender respectively.  The results indicated that the average amount availed from marginal, small, semi medium and medium farmer were Rs.74250, Rs. 24750, Rs. 28400 and Rs. 71250 respectively. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed is 54,235.29.  The results indicated that, 90 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production and 10 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for land purchase.  The results indicated that, agriculture production and household consumption were the purpose for which marginal and small farmers borrowed loan from private credit. About 25 percent of loan was taken for agriculture production and 75 per cent of the farmers taken loan for household consumption.  Results indicated that 40 per cent of the households have repaid their institutional credit partially, 50 percent of the households have unpaid their loan and 10 percent of the households have fully paid their loan.  . Results indicated that 100 per cent of the households have repaid their private credit partially.  The results indicated that 30 per cent of the households were opined that they were helped to perform timely agricultural operations, 10 households were opined that easy accessibility of credit and 60 per cent of the farmers did not give any opinion on credit.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 56355.49. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 40014.00. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. -16341.49, thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.71.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 44337.39. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 40198.74. The net income from 5 maize cultivation was Rs. -4138.65. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.91.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for paddy was Rs. 58309.08. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 55266.25. The net income from paddy cultivation was Rs. -3042.83. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.95.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 60025.95. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 91159.47. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. 31133.51. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.52.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Banana was Rs. 288143.50. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 247000. The net income from Banana cultivation was Rs. -41143.50. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.86.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for red gram was Rs. 34365.65. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 58404.41. The net income from red gram cultivation was Rs. 24038.76. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.7.  The results indicated that, 33.33 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and inadequate respectively. Similarly 60 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was adequate and 6.67 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was inadequate.  The results indicated that, in case of landless farmers, the average income from wage was Rs. 120000, in marginal farmers the average income from service/salary was Rs.61666.67, wage was Rs.15500, agriculture was Rs.32100 and dairy farm was Rs. 8400. In case of small farmers average income from service/salary was Rs. 25000, Wage Rs.12500, agriculture was Rs. 62375 and goat farming was Rs.3750. In semi medium farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 13444.44, agriculture was Rs. 84888.89 and dairy farming was Rs.5222.22. In medium farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 17166.67, agriculture was Rs. 137583.33 and dairy farming was Rs. 11333.33. Over all, the average income from the salary was Rs.19000, wage was Rs.17900, agriculture was Rs.76036.67, dairy farm was Rs.5513.33 and goat farming was Rs.1000.  The results indicated that, in case of landless, the average expenditure from wage Rs. 50,000. In case of marginal farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs.140000, wage was Rs.14750, agriculture was Rs.19666.67 and dairy farm was Rs. 30000. In case of small farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs.37500, wage was Rs.11000, agriculture was Rs.38125 and goat farming was Rs.5000. In semi medium farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs.7125, agriculture was Rs.50000 and dairy farm was 6 Rs.8333.33. Similarly in medium farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 12000, agriculture was Rs.80000 and dairy farm was Rs.7875.  The results indicated that, sampled households have grown 57 coconut trees, 12 mango trees and 3 Sapota trees in their field.  The results indicated that, 3.33 per cent of the households are interested in growing horticultural crops which include 16.67 per cent medium farmers.  The results indicated that, households have planted 77 neem trees, 2 tamarind tress, 6 acacia trees and 5 banyan trees in their field.  The results indicated that, Bajra, coriander, cotton, cowpea, groundnut, sorghum, paddy, red gram and sunflower crops were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Only maize was sold to the extent of 56.32 per cent.  The results indicated that, 30 percent of the households have sold their produce to agent/traders, 50 percent of the households have sold their produce to local/village merchant, 30 percent of the households sold their produce in regulated markets and 3.33 percent of the households sold their produce to cooperative marketing society.  The results indicated that 3.33 per cent of the households have used head load as a mode of transport, 6.67 per cent of them have used cart, 90 per cent have used tractor and 10 per cent of them have used truck.  The results indicated that, 66.67 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 66.67 percent of marginal farmers, 75 per cent of small farmers, 55.56 per cent semi medium farmers and 83.33 percent medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 60 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing i.e. 66.67 per cent of marginal, 62.50 per cent of small, 44.44 per cent of semi medium and 83.33 per cent of medium farmers have shown interest towards soil testing.  The results indicated that, 83.33 percent used fire wood as a source of fuel and 23.33 percent of the households used LPG as a source of fuel.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the source of drinking water for 6.67 per cent, 76.67 per cent of them were using bore well and 16.67 per cents of the households were using lake/tank for drinking water.  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 93.33 per cent of the households and 3.33 per cent of the households were using kerosene lamp.  The results indicated that, 20 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 100 per cent of landless, 16.67 per cent of marginal, 12.50 per cent of small, 22.22 per cent of semi medium and 16.67 per cent of medium had sanitary toilet facility. 7  The results indicated that, 90 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL card and 6.67 per cent of the sampled households have not possessed BPL card.  The results indicated that, 46.67 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 100 per cent of the landless, 16.67 percent of the marginal, 100 per cent of the small, 33.33 per cent of the semi medium and 16.67 percent of the medium farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, milk, egg and meat were adequate for 96.67 per cent, 46.67 per cent, 53.33 per cent, 43.33 per cent, 73.33 per cent, 36.67 per cent, and 23.33 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables and milk were inadequate for 3.33 per cent, 53.33 per cent, 26.67 per cent, 40 per cent and 13.33 of the households. Fruits, egg and meat were inadequate for 23.33 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil was the constraint experienced by 3.33 per cent of the households, wild animal menace on farm field (40%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (13.33%), inadequacy of irrigation water (6.67%), high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals (6.67%), high rate of interest on credit (60%), low price for the agricultural commodities (6.67%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (60%), lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market (26.67%), less rainfall (93.33%) and Source of Agri-technology information(Newspaper /TV/Mobile) (63.33 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Belur-4 microwatershed was conducted using village cadastral maps and IRS satellite imagery on 1:7920 scale. The false colour composites of IRS imagery were interpreted for physiography and these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the Microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 586 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 89 per cent is covered by soil and 11 per cent by habitation and water body. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below  The soils belong to 11 soil series and 17 soil phases (management units) and 5 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is 150 cm) soils.  About 12 per cent loamy (sandy clay loam) and 77per cent has clayey (sandy clay and clay) soils at the surface.  About 71per cent of the area has non-gravelly (200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  An area of about 5 per cent is nearly level (0-1%) and 84 per cent is very gently sloping (1-3%) lands.  An area of about 5 per cent is slightly eroded (e1) and 84 per cent is moderately eroded (e2) lands.  An area of about 1% is moderately acid (pH 5.5-6.0), 3% is slightly acid (pH 6.0-6.5), 6% is neutral (pH 6.5-7.3), 4% is slightly alkaline (pH 7.3-7.8), 7% is moderately alkaline (pH 7.8-8.4), 20% is strongly alkaline (pH 8.4-9.0) and 49% is very strongly alkaline (pH >9.0) in reaction.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 0.75%) in 9 per cent area of the soils.  Available phosphorus is low (57 kg/ha) in 36 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available potassium is medium (145-337 kg/ha) in 39 per cent and high (>337 kg/ha) in 51 per cent area of the soils.  Available sulphur is low (4.5 ppm) in 15 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (0.6 ppm) in 7 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available manganese and copper is sufficient in the entire area of the microwatershed.  The land suitability for 31 major agricultural and horticultural crops grown in the microwatershed was assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (class S1) and moderately suitable (class 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 181(31) 236(40) Sapota 4(1) 23(4) Maize 4(1) 402(68) Pomegranate 4(1) 436(74) Bajra 4(1) 391(66) Musambi 70(12) 370(63) Groundnut - 75(13) Lime 70(12) 370(63) Sunflower 70(12) 347(59) Amla 4(1) 484(82) Redgram 4(1) 254(43) Cashew - 27(5) Bengal gram 177(30) 240(41) Jackfruit 4(1) 23(4) Cotton 181(31) 236(40) Jamun 4(1) 166(29) Chilli 4(1) 28(5) Custard apple 181(31) 307(52) Tomato 4(1) - Tamarind 4(1) 190(32) Brinjal - 464(79) Mulberry 4(1) 380(65) Onion - 52(9) Marigold 4(1) 413(70) Bhendi - 465(79) Chrysanthemum 4(1) 413(70) Drumstick 4(1) 461(78) Jasmine 4(1) - Mango 4(1) 10(2) Crossandra 4(1) 206(35) Guava - 27(5)  Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 5 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested to these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.,  Soil and water conservation and drainage line treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SALIENT FINDINGS OF THE SURVEY  Results indicated that 35 farmers were sampled in Belur-4 micro watershed among them 14 (40%) were marginal farmers, 11 (31.43%) were small farmers, 3 (8.57%) were semi medium farmers, 2 (5.71%) were medium farmers and 5 (14.29%) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there was a population of 158 in the studied micro watershed. Among them 91 (57.59%) were men and 67 (42.41%) were women. The average family size of landless farmers was 4.4, marginal and medium farmers were 4.5, small farmer was 4.54, semi medium farmer was 4.3 and medium farmer was 5.  The data indicated that 26 (16.46%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 68 (43.04%) were in 16-35 years of age, 49 (31.01%) were in 36-60 years of age and 15 (9.49%) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Belur-4 had 27.85 per cent illiterates, 27.85 per cent of them had primary school education, 4.43 per cent of them had middle school, 22.15 per cent of them had high school education, 9.49 per cent of them had PUC education, 0.63 per cent them had Diploma education and 5.70 per cent of them had degree education.  The results indicated that, 65.71 per cent of household heads were practicing agriculture, 20 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labour and 14.29 per cent of the household heads were general labour.  The results indicated that agriculture was the major occupation for 45.57 per cent of the household members, 17.09 per cent were agricultural labourers, 10.13 per cent were general labours, 1.27 percent were in private sector and 25.95 per cent of them were students. In case of landless households 4.55 per cent were agriculturists, 72.73 per cent were general labourers and 22.73 per cent were students. In case of marginal farmers 42.86 per cent were agriculturist, 28.57 per cent were agricultural labourers, 1.59 percent was in private service and 26.98 per cent were students. In case of small farmers 70 per cent of them were agriculturist, 4 per cent were agricultural labourers and 26 per cent of them were students. In case of semi medium farmers 61.54 per cent of the family members were agriculturists and 38.46 per cent were students. In case of medium farmers 10 per cent of the family members were agriculturists, 70 per cent were agriculture labour, 10 per cent were in private service and 10 per cent of them were students.  The results showed that 0.63 per cent of them participated in cooperative bank and 99.37 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions.  The results indicated that 20 per cent of the households possess thatched house, 57.14 per cent of the households possess katcha house and 25.71 per cent of the households possess Pucca house. 2  The results showed that, 91.43 per cent of the households possess TV, 71.43 per cent possess mixer grinder, 65.71 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 45.71 per cent of the households possess motor cycle, 2.86 per cent possess auto and 97.14 per cent of the households possess mobile phones.  The results showed that the average value of television was Rs.9000, mixer grinder was Rs.1824, bicycle was Rs.3173, motor cycle was Rs.30250, auto was Rs.35000 and mobile phone was Rs.2124.  Results showed that, 14.29 per cent of the households possess bullock cart, 25.71 per cent of the households possess plough, 2.86 per cent of the households possess both power tiller, 17.14 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 94.29 per cent of the households possess weeder and 8.57 per cent possess tractor, harvester and chaff cutter.  The results showed that the average value of bullock cart was Rs.19600; the average value of plough was Rs. 1229, the average value of power tiller was Rs. 25000, the average value of tractor was Rs. 366666, the average value of sprayer was Rs. 3166, the average value of weeder was Rs. 136, the average value of harvester was Rs. 16400 and the average value of chaff cutter was Rs.2666.  The results indicated that, 11.43 per cent of the households possess bullocks and 8.57 per cent of the households possess local cow. Around 14.29 per cent of the marginal farmers and 33.33 per cent of the semi medium farmers possess bullock, 27.27 per cent of small farmers and 33.33 per cent of semi medium farmers possess local cow. Medium farmers and landless farmers did not possess any livestock.  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 1.60, average own labour (women) available was 1.27, average hired labour (men) available was 12.90 and average hired labour (women) available was 9.37.  In case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.57, average own labour (women) was also 1.29, average hired labour (men) was 10.36 and average hired labour (women) available was 6.71. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 1.64, average own labour (women) was 1.27, average hired labour (men) was 15.45 and average hired labour (women) available was 11.82. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 1.33, average own labour (women) was 1, average hired labour (men) was 18.33 and average hired labour (women) available was 15. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was 1.5, average hired labour (men) was 8.50 and average hired labour (women) available was 6.  The results indicated that, 85.71 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was adequate.  The results indicated that, households of the Belur-4 micro watershed possess 23.16 ha (66.76%) of dry land and 11.53 ha (33.24%) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 9.87 ha (100%) of dry land. Small farmers possess 13.28 ha (88.77%) of dry 3 land and 1.68 ha (11.23%) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 3.78 ha (100%) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 6.07 ha (100%) of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 353,967.14 and average value of irrigated land was Rs. 407,476.31. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 536,516.39 for dry land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 218,251.07 for dry land and Rs. 714,216.85 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 423,126.34 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 312,866.67 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 7 functioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 20 per cent of the farmers.  The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 19.59 meters.  The results indicated that, in case of small farmers there was 1.68 ha of irrigated land, semi medium farmers were having 3.64 ha of irrigated land and medium farmers were having 6.07 ha of irrigated land. On an average there was 11.40 ha irrigated land.  The results indicated that, farmers have grown maize (12.66 ha), onion (3.77 ha), cotton (3.77 ha), sunflower (3.64 ha), groundnut (1.21 ha), red gram (0.89 ha), bajra (0.81 ha) and navane (0.40 ha) in kharif season. Marginal farmers have grown maize, onion, sorghum, cotton, sunflower, groundnut, red gram, bajra and navane. Small farmers have grown maize, onion, sorghum and sunflower. Semi medium farmers have grown onion and cotton. Medium farmers have grown maize and cotton.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Belur-4 micro watershed was found to be 95.02 per cent. In case of marginal farmers it was 100 per cent, in small farmers it was 99.32, in semi medium farmers it was 100 and in medium farmers it was 73.33 per cent.  The results indicated that, 82.86 per cent of the households have bank account and 57.14 per cent possess savings. Among marginal farmers 100 percent of them possess bank account and 71.43 per cent possess savings. 90.91 per cent of small farmers possess bank account and 72.73 per cent of them possess savings. In case of semi medium farmers 100 percent of them possess bank account and 66.67 per cent possess savings. Medium category of farmers possesses 100 per cent of bank account.  The results indicated that, 78.57 per cent of marginal, 90.91 per cent of small, 66.67 per cent of the semi medium and 50 per cent of medium farmers have borrowed credit from different sources. 4  The results indicated that, 41.67 per cent have availed loan from Grameena bank and commercial bank respectively. 4.51 per cent have availed loan from money lender and 12.50 per cent availed loan from SHGs/CBOs.  The results indicated that, marginal, small, semi medium and medium have availed Rs. 95,272.73, Rs. 90,500, Rs. 115,000 and Rs. 45,000 respectively. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed is 92,833.33.  The results indicated that, 95 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production and 5 per cent for animal husbandry.  The results indicated that, 75 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production.  Results indicated that 10 percent of the households have paid their institutional credit partially, 85 per cent of the household unpaid their loan and 5 per cent of the households fully paid their loan.  Results indicated that 75 percent of the households have paid their private credit partially and 25 per cent of the household unpaid their loan.  The results indicated that 45 per cent of the households were opined that they were helped to perform timely agricultural operations, 50 per cent of them opined that higher rate of interest and 5 per cent of the households opined that loan amount was adequate to fulfill the requirement.  The results indicated that 5 per cent of the households opined that loan amount was adequate to fulfill the requirement and 50 per cent of them opined that higher rate of interest.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for redgram was Rs. 25715.70. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 55575.00. The net income from redgram cultivation was Rs. 29859.30, thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.16.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 22941.28. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 23763.09. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs. 821.81. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.04.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for sorghum was Rs. 19778.23. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 31619.74. The net income from sorghum cultivation was Rs. 11841.51. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.6.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 50306.19. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 55219.94. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. 4913.75. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.1.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for navane was Rs. 54111.61. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 30875.00. The net income from 5 navane cultivation was Rs. -23236.61. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.57.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for cotton was Rs. 37865.94. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 80897.65. The net income from cotton cultivation was Rs. 43031.71. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.14.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for onion was Rs. 39372.89. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 105261.80. The net income from onion cultivation was Rs. 65888.91. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.67.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for sunflower was Rs. 29680.71. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 47277.63. The net income from sunflower cultivation was Rs. 17596.92. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.59.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Bajra and Red gram was Rs. 26449.29. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 57427.50 The net income from Bajra and Red gram cultivation was Rs. 30978.21. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.17.  The results indicated that, 17.14 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and green fodder was adequate respectively.  The results indicated that, in land less farmers, the average income from wage was Rs.270800. In case of marginal farmers the average income from wage was Rs.33071.43, agriculture was Rs. 38,221.43 and dairy farm was Rs. 214.29. In case of small farmers the average income from service/salary was Rs. 18,727.27, wage was Rs. 36,181.82 and agriculture was Rs. 56,122.73. In semi medium farmers the average income from wage was Rs.10000, agriculture was Rs. 135,733.33 and dairy farm was Rs. 6,750. In medium farmers the average annual income from wage was Rs. 25,000 and agriculture was Rs. 560,000.  The results indicated that, in case of land less the average annual expenditure from wage was Rs.65000, In marginal farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs.24107.14, agriculture was Rs.23714.29 and dairy farm was Rs.500. In small farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs.80000, wage was Rs.28900 and agriculture was Rs.33727.27. In semi medium farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs.24000, agriculture was Rs.69666.67 and dairy farm was Rs.10000. In case of medium farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs.10000 and agriculture was Rs.85000.  The results indicated that, households have planted 4 teak trees, 71 neem trees, 10 tarmind trees, 1 acacia tree and 1 Banyan trees in their field and also planted 404 neem trees in their back yard. 6  The results indicate that, households have an average additional investment capacity of Rs. 1485.71 for land development, Rs.400 for irrigation facility, Rs.1000 for improved crop production and Rs.200 for improved livestock management. Marginal farmers have an average additional investment capacity of Rs. 2285.71 for land development, Rs.571.43 for irrigation facility, Rs. 1500 in improved crop production and Rs.285.71 for improved live stock management. Small farmers have an average additional investment capacity of Rs.727.27 for land development, Rs.545.45 for improved crop production and Rs.272.73 for livestock management. Medium farmers have an average additional investment capacity of Rs.6000 for land development, Rs.3000 for irrigation facility and Rs.4000 for improved crop production.  The results indicated that for 17.14 per cent of the households were dependent on loan from the bank for land development respectively. For irrigation facility 5.71 per cent of household were dependent on loan from the bank. 17.14 per cent of the household were depending on loan from bank for improved crop production. 8.57 per cent of the household were dependent on loan from bank for improved livestock management.  The results indicated that, bajra, cotton, groundnut, maize, navane, onion, red gram, sorghum and sunflower crops were sold to the extent of 100 per cent.  The results indicated that, 80 percent of the households have sold their produce to regulated market and 8.57 per cent of the household sold their produce to cooperative marketing society.  The results indicated that, 5.71 per cent of households used cart as mode of transport, 71.43 per cent of households used tractor as mode of transport and 11.43 per cent used truck for transportation of their produce.  The results indicated that, 85.71 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing.  The results indicated that, 11.43 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 21.43 percent of marginal and 50 percent of medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 97.14 percent of the household used fire wood as a source of fuel and 2.86 per cent of the household used LPG as source of fuel.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the major source of drinking water for 100 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 100 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, 40 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 40 per cent of the landless, 35.71per cent of marginal, 27.27 per cent of small, 66.67 per cent of semi medium and 100 per cent of medium farmers had sanitary toilet facility. 7  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the sampled household's possessed BPL card.  The results indicated that, 37.14 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 100 per cent of the landless, 7.14per cent of the marginal farmers, 27.27 per cent of the small farmers, 100 per cent of the semi medium farmers and 50 percent of the medium farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals and milk were adequate for 100 per cent of the household respectively. Pulses and egg were adequate for 97.14 per cent of the household respectively. Oilseed and vegetables were adequate for 2.86 per cent of the household respectively. Fruits and meat were adequate for 8.57 per cent and 62.86 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, pulses, oilseed, vegetables, fruits, egg and meat were inadequate for 2.86 per cent, 97.14 per cent, 94.29 per cent, 91.43 per cent, 2.86 per cent and 37.14 per cent of the household respectively.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil was the constraint experienced by 80 per cent of the households, wild animal menace on farm field (74.29%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (68.57%), inadequacy of irrigation water (68.57%), high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals (65.71%), high rate of interest on credit (65.71%), low price for the agricultural commodities (71.43%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (62.86%), inadequate extension services (82.86 %), lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market (85.71%). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Este libro contiene la selección de los mejores trabajos de investigación y desarrollo tecnológico postulados y presentados al CIINATIC2014. El Congreso Internacional en Innovación y Apropiación de las Tecnologías de la Información y las Comunicaciones - CIINATIC es una iniciativa de la Red de Decanos y Directores de Ingeniería de Sistemas y Afines del Nororiente Colombiano, red compuesta por las siguientes universidades: Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana Seccional Bucaramanga, Universidad Francisco de Paula Santander, Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga y Unisangil. En la versión de este año se contó con el patrocinio de Colciencias, la Gobernación de Santander y su Secretaria de tecnologías de la información y las comunicaciones. El libro ofrece una mirada a la Innovación y la Apropiación de las TIC en Colombia, desde la diversidad de los diferentes aportes incluidos. Todas las comunicaciones fueron evaluadas por pares académicos con reconocimiento y visibilidad internacional. Esperamos que este libro se constituya en un referente sobre el estado del arte de las TIC en el Oriente Colombiano. ; Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana (UPB) ; OTRI Estratégica Oriente ; Universidad del Magdalena ; Universidad de los Andes (ULA) ; Universidad Francisco de Paula Santander (UFPSC) ; Unisangil ; Universidad Industrial de Santander (UIS) ; SENA ; La identificación por radiofrecuencia en la gestión de la cadena de suministro: una mirada desde el laboratorio de logística UIS…. Capítulo 1 Análisis técnico basado en estándares internacionales para la implementación del Data Center de apoyo a la gestión tecnológica y de formación por competencias en el CEET del SENA Distrito Capital…… Capítulo 2 Voto electrónico con SSL/TLS e IPSEC…… Capítulo 3 Red abierta, libre y neutral para la ciudad de Cúcuta……. Capítulo 4 Implementación de una experiencia de usuario a través de una aplicación móvil para la personalización de productos usando realidad aumentada……. Capítulo 5 Aplicación del Webcast como estrategia de instrucción para el aprendizaje significativo en la enseñanza de Fisiología Médica…… Capítulo 6 Pruebas de seguridad en aplicaciones web como imperativo en la calidad de desarrollo del software……. Capítulo 7 Sistema de comunicación OFDM Óptico-Criptográfico…… Capítulo 8 Análisis de las principales amenazas de la base de datos utilizando MS SQL Server…… Capítulo 9 Entorno de aprendizaje para la toma de decisiones en sistemas dinámicos complejos……. Capítulo 10 Sistema de información web para la gestión investigativa de sistemas automatizados (SIGSA)…… Capítulo 11 Formación de formadores en Blended Learning…… Capítulo 12 Pensamiento ausubeliano en el paradigma constructivista articulado en las tecnologías de la información y la comunicación…… Capítulo 13 TIC y formación académica: una mirada desde los docentes de la UPB-Bucaramanga…… Capítulo 14 Estrategia digital para reducir el consumo de papel en la corporación autónoma regional del Chocó – CODECHOCO…… Capítulo 15 Algoritmos y sistemas instrumentados de seguridad y control distribuido para la automatización de los procesos en la planta piloto de la UNAB…. Capítulo 16 Detección de ataques de denegación de servicio basada en la estimación del ancho de banda disponible…… Capítulo 17 Plataforma NetFPGA para la clasificación de tráfico de red…. Capítulo 18 Educación en creatividad para la innovación y desarrollo tecnológico en ingeniería……. Capítulo 19 Lineamientos para definir estrategia para la gestión dinámico sistémica de la cooperación en proyectos de software libre…. Capítulo 20 Análisis de la teoría de la mente humana basada en el reconocimiento de patrones…… Capítulo 21 Una nueva forma de concebir la memoria: entre la filosofía de la mente y el aprendizaje automático. Capítulo 22 Aplicación de la educación formativa a las tecnologías de la información y la comunicación (TIC) y seguridad de la información digital…. Capítulo 23 Orientación de la fase preliminar de TOGAF para su aplicación en proyectos de arquitectura empresarial en universidades: revisión de literatura…. Capítulo 24 "IN" Seguridad de la información y delitos informáticos en Colombia……. Capítulo 25 Propuesta de redes para la implementación del observatorio A TIC…… Capítulo 26 Sistema de gestión de proyectos integradores para la facultad de ingeniería de sistemas e informática - Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana seccional Bucaramanga…. Capítulo 27 Modelo empírico que permite evaluar el rendimiento de la red LAN basada en el estándar Homeplug AV para la transmisión de voz sobre el protocolo IP…. Capítulo 28 Optimización de una red HAN sobre PLC mediante el uso de la teoría de juegos cooperativos en un escenario realista…. Capítulo 29 Adaptación del modelo LTI de canal PLC a las condiciones de la red eléctrica colombiana…. Capítulo 30 ; This book contains the selection of the best research and technological development papers postulated and selected for CIINATIC2014. The International Congress on Innovation and Appropriation of Information and Communication Technologies - CIINATIC is an initiative of the Network of Deans and Directors of Systems Engineering and Afin of the Colombian Northeast, a network made up of the following universities: Universidad Ponti fi cia Bolivariana Seccional Bucaramanga, Francisco de Paula Santander University, Autonomous University of Bucaramanga and Unisangil. This year's version was sponsored by Colciencias, the Government of Santander and its Secretariat for information and communication technologies. The book offers a look at the Innovation and Appropriation of ICT in Colombia, from the diversity of the different contributions included. All communications were evaluated by academic peers with international recognition and visibility. We hope that this book becomes a reference on the state of the art of ICT in the Colombian East.

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Belur-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 these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the Microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 514 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 86 per cent is covered by soil and 14 per cent by habitation and water body. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below  The soils belong to 11 soil series and 18 soil phases (management units) and 7 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is 200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  Entire area in the microwatershed is very gently sloping (1-3%) lands.  An area of about 11 per cent is slightly eroded (e1) and 75 per cent is moderately eroded (e2) lands.  An area of about 6% is moderately alkaline (pH 7.8-8.4), 76 per cent is strongly alkaline (pH 8.4-9.0) and 4% is very strongly alkaline (pH >9.0) in reaction.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 57 kg/ha) in 7 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available potassium is medium (145-337 kg/ha) in 68 per cent and high (>337 kg/ha) in 18 per cent area of the soils.  Available sulphur is low (4.5 ppm) in 21 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (0.6 ppm) in 11 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available manganese and copper is sufficient in the entire area of the microwatershed.  The land suitability for 31 major agricultural and horticultural crops grown in the microwatershed was assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (class S1) and moderately suitable (class 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 96(19) 165(32) Sapota 15(3) 143(28) Maize 15(3) 246(48) Pomegranate 47(9) 251(49) Bajra 125(24) 247(48) Musambi 96(19) 202(39) Groundnut - 237(46) Lime 96(19) 202(39) Sunflower 96(19) 91(17) Amla 47(9) 371(72) Redgram 15(3) 170(33) Cashew 47(9) 111(22) Bengal gram 81(16) 180(34) Jackfruit 15(3) 143(28) Cotton 81(16) 180(34) Jamun - 218(43) Chilli 15(3) 143(27) Custard apple 128(25) 290(56) Tomato 15(3) 65(12) Tamarind - 208(41) Brinjal 47(9) 227(44) Mulberry 47(9) 174(34) Onion 47(9) 46(9) Marigold 15(3) 246(47) Bhendi 47(9) 227(44) Chrysanthemum 15(3) 246(47) Drumstick 47(9) 186(36) Jasmine 15(3) 106(20) Mango - 59(11) Crossandra 15(3) 67(12) Guava 15(3) 143(28)  Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 7 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested to these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.,  Soil and water conservation and drainage line treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SALIENT FINDINGS OF THE STUDY  Results indicated that, 35 farmers were sampled in Belur-1 micro watershed among them 8 (22.86%) were marginal farmers, 6 (17.14 %) were small farmers, 7 (20 %) were semi medium farmers, 8 (22.86%) were medium farmers, large farmers 1(2.86%) and 5 (10.20 %) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there were 194 population households were there in the studied micro watershed. Among them 100 (51.55%) men and 94 (48.45%) were women. The average family size of landless farmers was 4, marginal and medium farmers were 5, small and semi medium farmer was 6 and large farmer was 11. On an average the family size was 5.  The data indicated that 49 (25.26%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 76 (39.18 %) were in 16-35 years of age, 54 (27.84 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 15 (7.73%) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Belur-1 had 28.35 per cent illiterates, 30.41 per cent of them had primary school education, 14.43 per cent of them had middle school, 11.86 per cent them had high school education, 5.15 per cent of them had PUC education, 1.03 per cent them had Diploma education, 0.52 had ITI education, 3.61 per cent of them had degree education, 1.03 per cent of them had masters education and 3.61 per cent them had others.  The results indicated that, 85.71 per cent of households practicing agriculture, 11.43 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labour and 2.86 per cent of the household heads were general labour.  The results indicated that agriculture was the major occupation for 59.79 per cent of the household members, 6.70 per cent were agricultural labourers, 0.52 per cent were general labours, 1.03 percent were in private sector, 24.74 per cent of them were students, 3.61 per cent of them were children and 3.09 per cent were housewives. In case of landless households 5 per cent were agriculture, 50 per cent were agriculture labour, 5 per cent were general labour and 15 per cent were students. In case of marginal farmers 76.74 per cent were agriculturist, 2.33 percent were in private service and 16.28 per cent were students. In case of small farmers 57.14 per cent of them were agriculturist and 40 per cent of them were students. In case of semi medium farmers 62.12 per cent of the family members were agriculturist, 2.33 per cent were in private service, 20.93 per cent of them were students, 4.65 per cent were housewives and 6.98 per cent were children. In case of medium farmers 59.52 per cent of the family members were agriculturist, 4.76 per cent were agriculture labour, 2.38 per cent were children and 33.33 per cent of them were students. In case of large farmers 81.82 per cent were doing agriculture, 9.09 per cent were both agriculture labour and students respectively. 2  The results showed that 0.52 per cent of them participated in cooperative bank and 99.48 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions. Only small farmers were found to participate in one or the other local institutions.  The results indicated that 57.14 per cent of the households possess thatched house and 45.71 per cent of the households possess Pucca house. 100 per cent of the land less farmers possess thatched house and 100 per cent of the large farmers possess Pucca house.  The results showed that, 100 per cent of the households possess TV and Mixer grinder respectively. 8.57 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 34.29 per cent of the households possess motor cycle and 97.14 per cent of the households possess mobile phones.  The results showed that the average value television was Rs. 6257, mixer grinder was Rs.1485, bicycle was Rs.3000, motor cycle was Rs.34583 and mobile phone was Rs.1376.  The results indicated that about 20 per cent of the households possess both bullock cart and plough, 2.86 per cent of the households possess both power tiller and tractor respectively. 17.14 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 88.57 per cent of the households possess weeder and 2.86 per cent of the households possess thresher.  The results showed that the average value of bullock cart was Rs.18000; the average value of plough was Rs. 1500, the average value of power tiller was Rs. 25000, the average value of tractor was Rs. 500000, the average value of sprayer was Rs. 5000, the average value of weeder was Rs. 26 and the average value of thresher was Rs. 20000.  The results indicated that, 17.14 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 37.14 per cent of the households possess local cow, 8.57 per cent of the households possess buffalo and 5.71 per cent of the households possess.  In case of marginal farmers, 12.50 per cent of the households possess bullock and 25 per cent of the household possess local cow, 12.50 per cent household possess buffalo and sheep respectively. In case of small farmers, 33.33 per cent of households possess bullock, 66.67 per cent possess local cow and 16.67 per cent of the households possess sheep. In case of semi medium farmers, 14.29 per cent of the households possess bullock, 28.57 per cent of the household possess local cow and 16.67 per cent of the households possess sheep. In case of medium farmers 12.50 per cent of the household possess bullock and 50 per cent of the household possess local cow. In large farmers 100 per cent of the household possess bullock, local cow and sheep respectively.  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 2, average own labour (women) available was 1.84, average hired 3 labour (men) available was 7.30 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.20.  In case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.88, average own labour (women) was also 2.13, average hired labour (men) was 7.38 and average hired labour (women) available was 7. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 1.67, average own labour (women) was 1.50, average hired labour (men) was 7 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.17. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 2.43, average own labour (women) was 1.86, average hired labour (men) was 7.29 and average hired labour (women) available was 7. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 1.63, average own labour (women) was 1.63, average hired labour (men) was 7.50 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.50. In case of large farmers, average own labour men available was 5, average own labour (women) was 4, average hired labour (men) was 7 and average hired labour (women) available was 8.  The results indicated that, 85.71 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was adequate.  The results indicated that, households of the Belur-1 micro watershed possess 24.79 ha (42.06 %) of dry land and 34.15 ha (57.94 %) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 2.74 ha (62.59 %) of dry land and 1.63ha (37.14%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 6.05 ha (78.65 %) of dry land and 1.64 ha (21.35 %) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 3.38 ha (26.89 %) of dry land and 9.17 ha (73.11%) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 12.63 ha (45.34%) of dry land and 15.22 ha (54.66%) of irrigated land. Large farmers possess 6.48 ha (100%) of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 318325.99 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 494643.91. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 949999.98 for dry land and Rs. 2690098.94 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 396256.68 for dry land Rs. 1216748.79 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 294682.25 for dry land and Rs. 610145.56 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 150416.67 for dry land and Rs. 256060.61 for irrigated land. In case of large farmers the average land value was Rs.154375 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 15 functioning and 3 de-functioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 42.86 per cent of the farmers.  The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 36.66 meters. 4  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers there was 1.88 ha of irrigated land, in case of small farmers there was 1.62 ha of irrigated land, semi medium farmers were having 8.10 ha of irrigated land, medium farmers were having 8.10 ha of irrigated land and large farmers having 3.24 ha of irrigated land. On an average there was 22.93 ha irrigated land.  The results indicated that, farmers have grown bajra (4.57 ha), brinjal (0.40 ha), chilly (1.21 ha), cotton (4.13 ha), groundnut (1.38 ha), maize (23.32 ha), onion (1.21 ha) and sugar cane (1.21 ha) in kharif season. Marginal farmers have grown bajra, cotton, groundnut and maize. Small farmers have grown bajra, maize and onion. Semi medium farmers have grown brinjal, cotton, maize and onion. Medium farmers have grown bajra, chilly, cotton, maize, onion and sugar cane. Large farmers have grown cotton, maize and onion.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Belur-1 micro watershed was found to be 55.74 per cent. In case of marginal farmers it was 99.63 per cent, in small farmers it was 99.70, in semi medium farmers it was 62.75, in medium farmers it was 39.99 per cent and in case of large farmers the cropping intensity was 53.33 per cent.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have bank account and 2.86 per cent possess savings. Among marginal farmers 100 percent of them possess bank account. 100 per cent of small farmers possess bank account and 12.50 per cent of them possess savings. Semi medium, medium and large category of farmers possesses 100 per cent of bank account.  The results indicated that, 20 per cent of the landless, 62.50 per cent of marginal, 66.67 per cent of small, 42.86 per cent of the semi medium and 62.50 per cent of medium farmers have borrowed credit from different sources.  The results indicated that, 44.44 per cent have availed loan from Grameena bank.  The results indicated that, marginal, small, semi medium and medium have availed Rs. 25400, Rs. 42500, Rs. 16666.67 and Rs. 110000 respectively. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed is 49833.33.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production.  Results indicated that 100 percent of the households have unpaid their loan.  The results indicated that 9.09 per cent of the households were opined that they were helped to perform timely agricultural operations, higher rate of interest and forced to sell the produce at low price to repay loan in time respectively.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 26836.07. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 30613.70. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. 3777.63, thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.14. 5  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 23553.87. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 35161.80. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs. 11607.92. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.49.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Chilly was Rs. 19910.02. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 276640. The net income from Chilly cultivation was Rs. 256729.98. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:13.89.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 104680.63. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 109091.66. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. 4411.03. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.04.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for brinjal was Rs. 54847.38. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 111150. The net income from brinjal cultivation was Rs. 56302.62. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.03.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for cotton was Rs. 44525.95. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 104092.86. The net income from cotton cultivation was Rs. 59566.91. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.34.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for onion was Rs. 48293.62. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 126793.33. The net income from onion cultivation was Rs. 78499.71. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.63.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for sugar cane was Rs. 28816.35. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 98800. The net income from sugar cane cultivation was Rs. 69983.65. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:3.43.  The results indicated that, 65.71 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 2.86 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was adequate.  The results indicated that, in land less farmers, the average income from wage was Rs.29000. In case of marginal farmers the average income from wage was Rs.15250, agriculture was Rs.41625, dairy farm was Rs.2250 and goat farming was Rs.3750. In case of small farmers the average income from wage was Rs.20000, agriculture was Rs.47500 and dairy farm was Rs.2833.33. In semi medium farmers the average income from business was Rs.12857.14, wage was Rs.17142.86, agriculture was Rs.113000 and dairy farm was Rs.1000. In medium farmers the average annual income from wage was Rs.17142.86, agriculture was 6 Rs.46000 and dairy farm was Rs.9375. In large farmers the average annual income from wage was Rs.35000, agriculture was Rs.170000 and was Rs.8000.  The results indicated that, in marginal, small, semi medium and large farmers the average expenditure from agriculture was Rs.14000, Rs.14166.67, Rs.38142.86 and Rs.56000 respectively. In medium farmers the average expenditure from agriculture was rs.21714.29 and dairy farm was Rs.7000.  The results indicated that, sampled households have grown 21 coconut trees in their field.  The results indicated that, households have planted 8 teak trees, 60 neem trees and 1 Peeple trees in their field.  The results indicate that, households have an average additional investment capacity of Rs. 9371.43 for land development, Rs.2857.14 for irrigation facility, Rs.5514.29 for improved crop production, Rs.457.14 for improved livestock management and Rs.85.71 for orchard development and maintenance. Marginal farmers have an average additional investment capacity of Rs. 9500 for land development, Rs.2750 for irrigation facility, Rs. 5625 in improved crop production and Rs.750 for improved live stock management. Small farmers have an average additional investment capacity of Rs.9666.67 for land development, Rs.3333.33 for irrigation facility, Rs.5833.33 for improved crop production, Rs.833.33 for livestock management and Rs.500 for orchard development/maintenance. Semi medium farmers have additional investment capacity of Rs.11571.41 for land development, 3428.57 for irrigation facility and Rs.7285.71 for improved crop production. Medium farmers have an average additional investment capacity of Rs.11250 for land development, Rs.3000 for irrigation facility, Rs.6250 for improved crop production and Rs.625 for improved livestock management. Large farmers have an additional investment capacity of Rs.23000 for land development, Rs.10000 for irrigation facility and Rs.12000 for improved crop production.  The results indicated that for 74.29 per cent and 14.29 per cent of the households were dependent on loan from the bank and soft loan for land development respectively. For irrigation facility 28.57 per cent of household were dependent on loan from the bank and 8.57 per cent of the household were dependent on soft loan. 62.86 per cent and 14.29 of the household were depending on loan from bank and soft loan for improved crop production respectively. 8.57 per cent of the household were dependent on loan from bank for improved livestock management.2.86 per cent of the household were dependent on loan from bank for orchard development/maintenance.  The results indicated that, brinjal, chilly; cotton and onion crops were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Bajra, groundnut and maize crops were sold to the extent of 82.50per cent, 96 per cent and 96.92 per cent. 7  The results indicated that, 100 percent of the households have sold their produce to local/village merchant.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of households used tractor as a mode of transport and 25.71 per cent of the household used truck.  The results indicated that, 85.71 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing.  The results indicated that, 82.86 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 100 percent of marginal, small, semi medium farmers and large farmers and 87.50 percent of medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 100 percent of the household used fire wood as a source of fuel and 20 per cent of the household used LPG as source of fuel.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the major source of drinking water for 51.43 per cent of the households and 42.86 per cent of the household were using bore well as a source of drinking water.  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 100 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, 45.71 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 40 per cent of the landless, 100 per cent of marginal, 50 per cent of small, 66.67 per cent of semi medium, 8.33 per cent of medium and 100 per cent of large farmers had sanitary toilet facility.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the sampled household's possessed BPL card.  The results indicated that, 31.43 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 100 per cent of the landless, 25 per cent of the marginal farmers, 16.67 per cent of the small farmers, 12.50 per cent of the medium farmers and 100 percent of the large farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals and pulses were adequate for 100 per cent of the household respectively. Vegetables, milk, egg and meat were adequate for 97.14 per cent, 80 per cent, 37.14 per cent and 14.29 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, Oilseed, vegetables, fruits, milk, egg and meat were inadequate for 25.71 per cent, 2.86 per cent, 62.86 per cent, 5.71 per cent, 62.86 per cent and 80 per cent of the household respectively.  The results indicated that, oilseed and fruits were inadequate for 62.86 per cent and 14.29 per cent of the household respectively.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil was the constraint experienced by 80 per cent of the households, wild animal menace on farm field (74.29%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (68.57%), inadequacy of irrigation water (22.86%), high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals (54.29%), high rate of interest on credit (25.71%), low price for the agricultural commodities (71.43%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (68.57%), 8 inadequate extension services (48.57 %), lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market (74.29%) and less rain fall (14.29%) ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Hosahalli-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 these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 636 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 100 per cent is covered by soils and 150 cm) soils.  An area of about 2 per cent has sandy soils, 17 per cent has loamy soils and 78 per cent has clayey soils at the surface.  About 49 per cent of the area has non-gravelly (200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  About 8 per cent area has nearly level (0-1%) and 89 per cent area has very gently sloping (1-3%) lands in the microwatershed.  An area of about 27 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1) and 70 per cent moderately eroded (e2) lands.  An area of about 18 per cent are neutral (pH 6.5-7.3), 21 per cent are slightly alkaline (pH 7.3-7.8), 11 per cent are moderately alkaline (pH 7.8-8.4), 21 per cent are strongly alkaline (pH 8.4-9.0) and 25 per cent are very strongly alkaline (pH >9.0) in soil reaction.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils is 0.75%) in 7 per cent area of the soils.  Available phosphorus is low (337 kg/ha) in available potassium content.  Available sulphur is low (1.0 ppm) in 4.5 ppm) in 51 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (0.6 ppm) in about 3 per cent area.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils.  The land suitability for 31 major agricultural and horticultural 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 10 (2) 360 (57) Sapota 10 (2) 113 (18) Maize - 369 (58) Pomegranate 10 (2) 314 (49) Bajra 70 (11) 340 (54) Musambi 10 (2) 314 (49) Groundnut 70 (11) 193 (30) Lime 10 (2) 314 (49) Sunflower 10 (2) 273 (43) Amla 70 (11) 500 (79) Red gram 10 (2) 264 (41) Cashew 10 (2) 124 (20) Bengalgram - 370 (58) Jackfruit 10 (2) 113 (18) Cotton 10 (2) 360 (57) Jamun 10 (2) 304 (48) Chilli 10 (2) 77 (12) Custard apple 70 (11) 500 (79) Tomato 10 (2) 77 (12) Tamarind 10 (2) 224 (35) Brinjal 71 (11) 453 (71) Mulberry 11 (2) 472 (74) Onion 71(11) 170 (27) Marigold 10 (2) 360 (57) Bhendi 71 (11) 453 (71) Chrysanthemum 10 (2) 360 (57) Drumstick 10 (2) 420 (66) Jasmine 10 (2) 159 (25) Mango 10 (2) 204 (32) Crossandra 10 (2) 87 (14) Guava 10 (2) 113 (18)  Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 7 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops that helps in maintaining productivity and ecological balance in the microwatershed.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested for these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.  Soil and water conservation treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SALIENT FINDINGS OF THE STUDY  The results indicated that 51 farmers were sampled in Hosahalli-1micro watershed among them 20(39.22%) were marginal farmers, 9 (17.65 %) were small farmers, 14(27.45 %) were semi medium farmers, 3 (5.88 %) were medium farmers and 5 (9.80 %) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that, there were 150(56.18%) men and 117 (43.82 %) were women. The average family size of landless and marginal farmer was 5, small and medium farmer was 4 and semi medium farmers were 7. On an average the family size was 5.  The data indicated that 61 (22.85%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 116 (43.45 %) were in 16-35 years of age, 67 (25.09 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 23(8.61%) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Hosahalli-1had 26.22 per cent illiterates, 25.09 per cent of them had primary school education, 8.99 per cent of them had both middle school, 18.73 per cent them had high school education, 7.12 per cent of them had PUC education, 0.75 per cent them had Diploma education, 2.62 per cent of them had degree education, 0.37 per cent of them had masters education and 8.61 per cent them had others.  The results indicated that, 50.98 per cent of households practicing agriculture, 37.25 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labour, 9.80 per cent of the household heads were general labour and 1.96 per cent of the household heads were in private service.  The results indicated that agriculture was the major occupation for 32.58 per cent of the household members, 28.84 per cent were agricultural labourers, 5.62 per cent were general labours, 0.37 percent were in government service, 1.87 per cent of them were in private sector, 20.60 per cent of them were students, 5.24 per cent of them were children and 4.12 per cent were housewives. In case of landless households 4 per cent were general labourers, 60 per cent of the household were general labour and 16 per cent were students. In case of marginal farmers 36.17 per cent were agriculturist, 27.66 percent was in agricultural labour, 2.86 per cent of them were in government service and 25.53 per cent were students. In case of small farmers 48.57 per cent of them were agriculturist, 14.29 percent was in agricultural labour and students. In case of semi medium farmers 32 per cent of the family members were agriculturist, 41 per cent of them were general labour and 17 per cent of them were students. In case of medium farmers 30.77 per cent of the family members were agriculturist and agriculture labour respectively and 38.46 per cent of them were students.  The results showed that 100 per cent of the farmers have not participated in any local institutions. 2  The results indicated that 35.29 per cent of the households possess thatched house, 17.65 per cent of the households possess Katcha house, 19.61 per cent of the households possess Pacca house and 1.96 per cent of them possess Semi Pucca house.  The results showed that, 94.12 per cent of the households TV, 78.43 per cent of the households possess Mixer grinder, 9.80 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 41.18 per cent of the households possess motor cycle and 96.08 per cent of the households possess mobile phones.  The results showed that the average value of television was Rs. 8062, mixer grinder was Rs.1700, bicycle was Rs.2200, motor cycle was Rs.32454 and mobile phone was Rs.2014.  The data showed that, 11.76 per cent of the households possess bullock cart, 21.57 per cent of them possess plough, 1.96 per cent of the households possess irrigation pump, power tiller, tractor and harvester respectively. 17.65 per cent of the households possess sprayer and 88.24 per cent of the households possess weeder.  The results showed that the average value of bullock cart was Rs.17500; the average value of plough was Rs. 1545, the average value of irrigation pump was Rs. 2000, the average value of power tiller was Rs. 25000, the average value of tractor was Rs. 500000, the average value of sprayer was Rs. 4888, the average value of weeder was Rs. 107 and the average value of harvester was Rs. 100.  The results indicated that, 13.73 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 21.57 per cent of the households possess local cow, 17.65 per cent of the households possess buffalo and 1.96 per cent of the households possess crossbreed cow, sheep and cow respectively.  In case of marginal farmers, 5 per cent of the households possess bullock, 20 per cent of the households possess local cow, 15 per cent of the households possess buffalo and 5 per cent of the households possess goat. In small farmers 11.11 per cent of the households possess bullock and buffalo respectively. In semi medium farmers, 21.43 per cent of the households possess bullock, 50 per cent of the households possess local cow and 35.71 per cent of the households possess buffalo. In case of medium farmers 66.67 per cent of the households possess bullock and 33.33 per cent of the households possess crossbreed cow and sheep respectively.  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 1.98, average own labour (women) available was 1.48, average hired labour (men) available was 8.33 and average hired labour (women) available was 6.07.  In case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.65, average own labour (women) was also 1.30, average hired labour (men) was 7.05 3 and average hired labour (women) available was 5.15. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 1.44, average own labour (women) was 1.11, average hired labour (men) was 10.56 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.56. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 2.86, average own labour (women) was 2.07, average hired labour (men) was 9.29 and average hired labour (women) available was 6.43. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 1.67, average own labour (women) was 1, average hired labour (men) was 5.67 and average hired labour (women) available was 6.  The results indicated that, 88.24 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was adequate and 1.96 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was inadequate.  The results indicated that, households of the Hosahalli-1micro watershed possess 29.69 ha (54.32 %) of dry land and 24.97 ha (45.68 %) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 12.20 ha (93.14 %) of dry land and 0.90ha (6.86%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 6.90 ha (73 %) of dry land and 2.55 ha (27%) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 10.59 ha (45.55 %) of dry land and 12.66 ha (54.45 %) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 8.86 ha (100%) of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 520,124.03 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 576,373.36. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 717,070.33 for dry land and Rs. 1,780,180.25 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 376,436.11 for dry land Rs. 959,033.27 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 386,969.81 for dry land and Rs. 627,765.34 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 270,684.94 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 8 functioning and 11 defunctioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 52.94 per cent of the farmers.  The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 39.82 meters.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers there was 0.90 ha of irrigated land, in case of small farmers there was 2.46 ha of irrigated land, semi medium farmers were having 12.59 ha of irrigated land and medium farmers were having 4.86 ha of irrigated land. On an average there were 20.81 ha of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, farmers have grown bajra (7.73 ha), banana (2.55 ha), Bengal gram (3.20 ha), cotton (2.13 ha), drumstick (0.49 ha), groundnut (4.69 4 ha), maize (25.48 ha), red gram (4.33 ha), sorghum (2.47 ha) and sunflower (0.81 ha) in kharif season. Marginal farmers have grown bajra, groundnut, maize, red gram and sunflower. Small farmers have grown bajra, banana, cotton, groundnut, maize and sorghum. Semi medium farmers had grown bajra, banana, Bengal gram, cotton, drumstick, groundnut, maize, red gram and sorghum. Medium farmers have grown bengal gram, groundnut and maize.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Hosahalli-1micro watershed was found to be 76.18 per cent. In case of marginal farmers it was 90.63 per cent, in small farmers it was 100, in semi medium farmers it was 78.02 and in medium farmers it was 41.30 per cent.  The results indicated that, 49.02 per cent of the households have bank account and 19.61 per cent of the household possess savings. Among marginal farmers 55 percent of them possess bank account and 25 percent of the households possess savings. 55.56 per cent of small farmers possess bank account and 33.33 per cent of the households possess savings. In semi medium farmers, 57.14 per cent of them possess bank account and 7.14 savings per cent of them possess and in medium category of farmers possess 33.33 per cent of bank account and also savings correspondingly.  The results indicated that, 25 per cent of marginal, 44.44 per cent of small, 28.57 per cent of the semi medium and 33.33 per cent of medium farmers have borrowed credit from different sources.  The results indicated that, 42.86 per cent have availed loan in commercial bank, 50 per cent have availed loan from Grameena bank and 7.14 per cent have availed loan from money lender.  The results indicated that, marginal, small, semi medium and medium have availed Rs.36600, Rs. 102500 and Rs. 56250 and Rs.50000 respectively. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed was Rs. 62000.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production.  The results indicated that, 100 percent of loan was taken for health care.  Results indicated that 100 per cent of the households have unpaid their institutional credit.  Results indicated that 100 per cent of the households have repaid their private credit partially.  The results indicated that 30.77 per cent of the households were opined that they were helped to perform timely agricultural operations and 69.23 per cent of them opined that higher rate of interest.  The results indicated that 100 per cent of the households were opined that loan amount was adequate to fulfill the requirement. 5  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 32799.55. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 129330.43. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. 96530.89, thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:3.94.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 36239.86. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 44053.21. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs. 7813.34. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.22.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 56153.85. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 113354.28. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. 57200.42. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.02.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Sunflower was Rs. 42168.76. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 30875.00. The net income from Sunflower cultivation was Rs-11293.76. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.73.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for redgram was Rs. 37564.88. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 56195.79. The net income from redgram cultivation was Rs. 18630.91. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.5.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for sorghum was Rs. 26051.69. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 41911.68. The net income from sorghum cultivation was Rs. 15859.99. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.61.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Cotton was Rs. 38511.39. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 75028.14. The net income from Cotton cultivation was Rs. 46253.24. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.61.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for banana was Rs. 143187.93. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 491750.31. The net income from banana cultivation was Rs. 348562.38. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:3.43.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Bengal gram was Rs. 42028.60. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 23304.69. The net income from Bengal gram cultivation was Rs. -18723.91. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.55.  The results indicated that, 37.25 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder and green fodder were adequate.  The results indicated that, in landless farmers, the average income from wage was Rs. 29000. In marginal farmers the average income from service/salary was 6 Rs.12500, wage was Rs. 19350, agriculture was Rs. 51301 and dairy farm was Rs. 1708. In small farmers the average income from service/salary was Rs. 28444.44, wage was Rs. 6666.67, agriculture was Rs. 83044.44 and dairy farm was Rs. 2777.78. In semi medium farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 15714.29, agriculture was Rs. 68200 and dairy farm was Rs.6434.29. In medium farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 11666.67 and agriculture was Rs. 75333.33.  The results indicated that, in landless farmers, the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 15000. In marginal farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs. 63333.33, wage was Rs. 14,205.88, agriculture was Rs. 19,636.36 and dairy farm was Rs. 6,250. In case of small farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs. 92,500, wage was Rs. 13,000, agriculture was Rs. 53,888.89 and dairy farm was Rs. 12,000. In case of semi medium farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 8,785.71, dairy farm was Rs. 9,600 and agriculture was Rs. 47,142.86. In case of medium farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs.4000 and agriculture was Rs. 56,666.67.  The results indicated that, sampled households have grown 9 coconut trees in their field and also planted 1 coconut tree in their back yard.  The results indicated that, households have planted 55 neem trees, 8tamarind tress, 3 silver oak trees and 1 banyan trees in their field and also grown 1 Neem tree in the backyard.  The results indicate that, households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 3725.49 for land development, Rs. 980.39 in irrigation facility, Rs.2372.55 for improved crop production and Rs.607.84 for improved livestock management.  Marginal households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 3800 for land development, Rs. 450 for irrigation facility, Rs.2350 for improved crop production and Rs.350 for improved livestock management. Small farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 2000 for land development, Rs.1666.67 for improved crop production and Rs.555.56 for improved livestock management. Semi medium farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 6,142.86 for land development, Rs. 2,500 for irrigation facility, Rs. 3,785.71 for improved crop production and Rs. 1,142.86 for improved livestock management. Medium farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 3,333.33 for land development, Rs. 2,000 for irrigation facility, Rs. 2,000 for improved crop production and Rs. 1,000 for improved livestock management.  The results indicated that, loan from the bank was the source of funds to, 39.22 per cent of the households for land development, 17.65 per cent of the households for irrigation facility, 41.18 per cent of the households for improved crop production and 19.61 per cent of the households for improved livestock management. 7  The results indicated that, Bajra, banana, bengal gram, cotton, drumstick, groundnut, red gram, sorghum and sunflower crops were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Only maize was sold to the extent 97.75 per cent respectively. Results also obtained that, the average price of bajra was Rs.1457.14/q, Banana was Rs.657.50/q, Bengal gram was Rs.3750/q, cotton was Rs.4250/q, drumstick was Rs.3500/q, groundnut was Rs.3700/q, maize was Rs.1132.80/q, red gram was Rs.4542.86/q, Sorghum was Rs.3225/q and Sunflower was Rs.2500/q.  The results indicated that, 13.73 percent of the households have sold their produce to agent/traders, 25.49 percent of the households have sold their produce to local/village merchant, 23.53 percent of the households sold their produce in regulated markets and 47.06 percent of the households sold their produce to cooperative marketing society.  The results indicated that 13.73 per cent of the households have used cart as a mode of transport, 56.86 per cent of them have used tractor and 39.22 per cent have used truck.  The results indicated that, 35.29 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 45 percent of marginal farmers, 11.11 per cent of small farmers, 50 per cent of semi medium farmers and 33.33 percent of medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 58.82 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing.  The results indicated that, 92.16 percent used fire wood as a source of fuel and 7.84 percent of the households used LPG as a source of fuel.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the source of drinking water for 68.63 per cent and 31.37 per cent of them were using bore well for drinking water.  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 98.04per cent of the households and 1.96 per cent of the households were using kerosene lamp.  The results indicated that, 33.33 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 40 per cent of landless, 35 per cent of marginal, 22.22 per cent of small, 35.71 per cent of semi medium and 33.33 per cent of medium had sanitary toilet facility.  The results indicated that, 98.04 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL card and 1.96 per cent of the sampled households have not possessed BPL card.  The results indicated that, 27.45 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 20 per cent of the landless, 30 percent of the marginal, 33.33 per cent of the small, 14.29 per cent of the semi medium and 66.67 percent of the medium farmers. 8  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits , milk, egg and meat were adequate for 100 per cent, 84.31 per cent, 23.53 per cent, 35.29 per cent, 1.96 per cent, 96.08 per cent, 84.31 per cent and 45.10 per cent of the households respectively.  The results indicated that, pulses, oilseed, vegetables, fruits, milk and meat were inadequate for 15.69 per cent, 78.43 per cent, 68.63 per cent, 66.67 per cent, 3.92 per cent and 39.22 per cent of the households respectively.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil was the constraint experienced by 60.78 per cent of the households, wild animal menace on farm field (76.47%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (33.33%), inadequacy of irrigation water (21.57%), high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals (37.25%), high rate of interest on credit (35.29%), low price for the agricultural commodities (80.39%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (80.39%), inadequate extension services (56.86%), lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market (60.78%), less rainfall (31.37%) and Source of Agri-technology information(Newspaper/TV/Mobile) (13.73 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Nirligi-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 these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 684 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 85 per cent is covered by soils and 15 per cent by habitation and water bodies, settlements and others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 12 soil series and 25 soil phases (management units) and 5 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is 150 cm) soils.  An area of about 12 per cent has loamy soils and 73 per cent has clayey soils at the surface.  About 50 per cent of the area has non-gravelly (0.75%) in soils.  Available phosphorus is low (57 kg/ha) in 9 per cent area of the microwatershed.  About 26 per cent are medium (145-337 kg/ha) and 59 per cent soils are high (>337 kg/ha) in available potassium content.  Available sulphur is low (20 ppm) in 1.0 ppm) in soils.  Available iron is deficient (4.5 ppm) in 32 per cent area of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (0.6 ppm) in about 36 per cent area.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils.  The land suitability for 31 major agricultural and horticultural 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 193 (28) 78 (11) Sapota 54 (8) 41 (6) Maize 54 (8) 217 (32) Pomegranate 54 (8) 216 (32) Bajra 89 (13) 206 (30) Musambi 168 (25) 102 (15) Groundnut 68 (10) 248 (36) Lime 168 (25) 102 (15) Sunflower 168 (25) 101 (15) Amla 95 (14) 465 (68) Red gram 54 (8) 217 (32) Cashew - 27 (4) Bengalgram 139 (20) 200 (29) Jackfruit 54 (8) 41 (6) Cotton 160 (23) 111 (16) Jamun 21 (3) 226 (33) Chilli 54 (8) 41 (6) Custard apple 233 (34) 326 (48) Tomato 54 (8) 41 (6) Tamarind 21 (3) 263 (38) Brinjal 6 (1) 487 (71) Mulberry 89 (13) 327 (48) Onion - 317 (46) Marigold 54 (8) 216 (32) Bhendi - 492 (72) Chrysanthemum 54 (8) 216 (32) Drumstick 54 (8) 439 (64) Jasmine 54 (8) 41 (6) Mango 21 (3) 92 (13) Crossandra 54 (8) 156 (23) Guava 33 (5) 62 (9)  Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 5 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops that helps in maintaining productivity and ecological balance in the microwatershed.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested for these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.  Soil and water conservation treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SALIENT FINDINGS OF THE STUDY  Results indicated that 35 farmers were sampled in Nirligi-1 micro watershed among them 4 (11.43 %) were marginal farmers, 10 (28.57 %) were small farmers, 3 (8.57 %) were semi medium farmers, 12 (34.29%) were medium farmers, 1(2.86%) was large farmer and 5 (14.29 %) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there were 170 population households in the studied micro watershed. Among them 85 (50%) men and 85(50 %) were women. The average family size of landless, marginal, small and large farmers was 5, semi medium and medium farmer was 6.  The data indicated that 39 (22.94%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 73 (42.94 %) were in 16-35 years of age, 51 (30 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 7 (4.12%) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Nirligi-1 had 23.53 per cent illiterates, 32.35 per cent of them had primary school education, 11.18 per cent of them had middle school, 11.76 per cent of them had high school education, 12.94 per cent of them had PUC education, 1.18 per cent of them had diploma and ITI education, 4.12 per cent of them had degree education and 0.59 per cent them had masters.  The results indicated that, 71.43 per cent of households practicing agriculture, 20 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labour and 2.86 per cent of them were general labour, in government service and housewives respectively.  The results indicated that agriculture was the occupation for 51.18 per cent of the household members, 10.59 per cent were agricultural labourers, 0.59 per cent of them were general labour, in government service, housewives and children's respectively. 4.71 per cent were in private service and 30 per cent were students. In case of landless farmers, 45.45 per cent were agricultural labour and students respectively. In case of marginal farmers 55 per cent were agriculturist, 10 percent was in private service and 25 per cent were students. In case of small farmers 65.79 per cent of them were agriculturist, 2.63 per cent of them were private service and 31.58 per cent of them were students. In case of semi medium farmers 64.71 per cent of the family members were agriculturist, 11.76 per cent were in private service and 23.53 per cent of them were students. In case of medium farmers 56.52 per cent of the family members were agriculturist, 10.14 per cent of them were general labours, 1.14 per cent were in government service, 4.35 per cent were in private service and 26.09 per cent were students. In case of large farmers 25 per cent of the family members were agriculturist, agriculture labour and 50 per cent of them were students. 2  The results showed that 1.76 per cent of the household participated in self help group, 0.59 per cent of the households participated in user group and 97.65 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions.  The results indicated that 34.29 per cent of the households possess Katcha house, 42.86 per cent of the household possess thatched house and 22.86 per cent of the households possess Pucca house.  The results showed that, 94.29 per cent of the households possess TV, 91.43 per cent of the households possess Mixer grinder, 34.29 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 42.86 per cent of the household possess motor cycle and 100 per cent of the households possess mobile.  The results showed that the average value of television was Rs.4757; the average value of television was mixer grinder was Rs.1312, the average value of television was bicycle was Rs. 1333, the average value of television was motor cycle was Rs.34333 and the average value of television was mobile phone was Rs.1569.  Data showed that 25.71 per cent of the households possess bullock cart, 31.43 per cent of them possess plough, 2.86 per cent of the households possess power tiller and tractor, 17.14 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 100 per cent of the households possess weeder, 2.86 per cent of them possess thresher and 11.43 per cent of them possess chaff cutter.  The results showed that the average value of bullock cart was Rs.18222; the average value of plough was Rs. 970, the average value of power tiller was Rs. 25000, the average value of tractor was Rs. 600000, the average value of sprayer was Rs. 4666, the average value of weeder was Rs.30, the average value of thresher was Rs.15000 and the average value of chaff cutter was Rs. 3000.  The results indicated that, 34.29 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 20 per cent of the households possess local cow and 2.86 per cent of the household possess cross bread cow and buffalo respectively.  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 1.67, average own labour (women) available was 1.47, average hired labour (men) available was 10.87 and average hired labour (women) available was 10.77.  In case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.75, average own labour (women) was also 1.25, average hired labour (men) was 9.50 and average hired labour (women) available was 8.50. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 1.20, average own labour (women) was 1.40, average hired labour (men) was 15.40 and average hired labour (women) available was 14.40. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 1.67, average own labour (women) was 1.33, average hired labour (men) was 14 and average hired labour (women) available was also 14. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 2.08, average own labour 3 (women) was 1.67, average hired labour (men) was 7.08 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.92. In large farmers average own labour men available was 1, average own labour (women) was 1, average hired labour (men) was 7 and average hired labour (women) available was 8.  The data showed that, in case of landless farmers 20 per cent of the household possess bullock and local cow. In case of marginal farmers, 25 per cent of the households possess bullock. In case of small farmers, 50 per cent of households possess bullock. In case of semi medium farmers, 33.33 per cent of the households possess cross bread cow. In medium farmers, 41.67 per cent of the households possess bullock, 50 per cent of the household possess local cow and 8.33 per cent of the household possess buffalo.  The results indicated that, 88.57 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was adequate.  The results indicated that, households of the Nirligi-1 micro watershed possess 29.29 ha (43.12%) of dry land and 38.64 ha (56.88%) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 2.65 ha (84.52 %) of dry land and 0.49ha (15.48%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 12.90 ha (94.10 %) of dry land and 0.81 ha (5.90%) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 0.41 ha (11.31%) of dry land and 3.24 ha (88.69%) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 4.48 ha (12.55%) of dry land and 31.21 ha (87.45%) of irrigated land and large farmers possess 8.85 ha (75.33%) of dry land and 2.90 ha (24.67 %) of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 225,259.29 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 408,356.92. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 527,938.93 for dry land and Rs. 1,029,166.63 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 186,005.65 for dry land and Rs. 741,000 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 1,937,254.94 for dry land and was Rs. 586,625 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 178,501.79 for dry land and was Rs. 371,573.08 for irrigated land. In large farmers the average land value was Rs. 135,590.12 for dry land and Rs. 172,486.04 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 10 functioning and 3 de-functioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 28.57 per cent of the farmers, 5.71 per cent of households were using canal as a source of irrigation and 2.86 per cent of the farmers were using tank for irrigation.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers there was 0.49 ha of irrigated land and semi medium farmers were having 1.21 ha of irrigated land and medium farmers having 28.57 ha irrigated land. On an average there were 30.57 ha of irrigated land. 4  The results indicated that, farmers have grown bajra (4.20 ha), cotton (6.88 ha), groundnut (5.75 ha), maize (30.73 ha), navane (2.43 ha), onion (3.32 ha), red gram (1.34 ha) and sunflower (0.81 ha) in kharif season. Marginal and small farmers have grown groundnut, maize, onion and sunflower. Semi medium farmers have grown bajra, cotton and onion. Medium farmers have grown bajra, cotton, groundnut, maize and onion. Large farmers have grown bajra and navane.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Nirligi-1 micro watershed was found to be 72.63 per cent. In case of marginal and small farmers cropping intensity was 100 per cent, in case of semi medium farmers it was 99.56 per cent, in medium farmers it was 61.06 per cent and in case of large farmers it was 74.53 per cent.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have bank account and 42.86 per cent of having savings. Among land less farmers 100 per cent of the household possess bank account; marginal farmers 100 percent of them possess both bank account and 75 per cent of the household possess savings. 100 per cent of small, farmers possess per cent of bank account and 90 per cent possess savings, in semi medium farmers 100 per cent of the farmers possess bank account and 66.67 per cent savings, in case of medium farmers 100 per cent of the farmers possess bank account and 8.33 per cent of them possess savings and large category of farmers possess 100 per cent of bank account.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of marginal, small, semi medium and large farmers and 66.67 per cent of the medium farmers have borrowed credit from different sources.  The results indicated that, 23.08 per cent have availed loan in commercial bank, 3.85 per cent have availed loan from Cooperative Bank, money lender and SHGs/CBOs respectively. 38.46 per cent have availed loan from Grameena bank and 15.38 per cent of the household's availed loan from friends/relatives.  The results indicated that, marginal, small, semi medium, medium and large farmers have availed Rs. 130000, Rs. 79000, Rs. 178333.33, Rs. 66,250 and Rs.50000 respectively. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed is 94807.69.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production.  The results indicated that, 85.71per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production and 14.29 per cent of the household barrowed money for household consumption.  . Results indicated that 82.35 percent of the households have unpaid their institutional loan and 17.65 per cent of them fully paid their institutional loan. 5  Results indicated that 14.29 percent of the households have partially paid their private credit and 85.71 per cent of the households have unpaid their private credit.  The results indicated that 23.53 per cent of the households were opined that they were helped to perform timely agricultural operations and 11.76 per cent opined that higher rate of interest.  The results indicated that 14.29 per cent of the households were opined that loan amount was adequate to fulfill the requirement and 28.57 per cent opined that higher rate of interest.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 34996.06. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 26639.98. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. -8356.08. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.76.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for cotton was Rs. 27652.39. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 94691.73. The net income from cotton cultivation was Rs. 67039.34. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:3.42.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 30764.01. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 50101.70. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. 19337.69. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.63.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 161340.12. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 30924.25. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs. -130415.87. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.19.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for navane was Rs. 11505.44. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 22230. The net income from navane cultivation was Rs. 10724.56. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.93.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for red gram was Rs. 19733.93. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 38835.54. The net income from red gram cultivation was Rs. 19101.62. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.97.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for onion was Rs. 37429.69. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 104434.69. The net income from onion cultivation was Rs. 67005. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.79.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for sunflower was Rs. 26987.81. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 50388. The net 6 income from sunflower cultivation was Rs. 23400.19. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.87.  The results indicated that, 57.14 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 8.57 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was adequate.  The table indicated that the in case of landless farmers the average annual income from wage was Rs.28000 and dairy farm was Rs.600, in marginal farmers, average income from service/salary was Rs.3750, business was Rs.60000, wage was Rs.27500 and agriculture Rs. 46950. In case of small farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 81700 and agriculture was Rs.47610. In semi medium farmers the average income from service/salary was Rs.33333.33, wage was Rs.6000 and agriculture was Rs.97666.67. Medium farmer's average income from service/salary was Rs.5000, business was Rs.1666.67, wage was Rs.15666.67, agriculture was Rs.99166.67 and dairy farm was Rs.4416.67. Similarly in large farmers the average income from wage was Rs.20000 and agriculture was Rs.110000.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal, the average annual expenditure from business was Rs. 170000 and agriculture was Rs.26750. In case of small farmers the average annual expenditure from agriculture was Rs. 25300. In case of semi medium farmers the average expenditure from agriculture was Rs.55666.67 and dairy farm was Rs. 17000. In medium farmers the average annual expenditure from business was Rs.12000 and agriculture was Rs.45818.18.In large farmers the average expenditure from agriculture was Rs. 50000.  The results indicate that, households have an average additional investment capacity of Rs. 3285.71 for land development and Rs. 1600 in irrigation facility, Rs.1742.86 for improved crop production and Rs.142.86 for improved livestock management. Marginal farmers have an average additional investment capacity of Rs. 2500 for land development and Rs. 2000 in improved crop production. Medium farmers have an average additional investment capacity of Rs.7500 for land development, Rs.4000 for irrigation facility, Rs. 4416.67 for improved crop production and Rs. 416.67 for improved livestock management. Large farmers have an average additional investment of Rs.15000 for land development and have an investment capacity of Rs. 8000 for irrigation facility.  The results indicated that for 5.71 per cent and 20 per cent of the households were dependent on loan from the bank and soft loan for land development respectively. For irrigation facility 14.29 per cent of household were dependent on loan from the bank and 5.71 per cent of the household were dependent on soft loan. 11.43 per cent of the household were depending on loan from bank and soft loan for 7 improved crop production respectively. 2.86 per cent of the household were dependent on loan from bank for improved livestock management.  The results indicated that, bajra, cotton, groundnut, navane, onion, red gram and sunflower crops were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Only maize was sold to the extent of 93.79 per cent.  The results indicated that, 88.57 percent of the households have sold their produce to local/village merchant and 22.86 percent of the households have sold their produce to regulated market.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of households used tractor as a mode of transport.  The results indicated that, 85.71 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing.  The results indicated that, 42.86 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 25 percent of marginal farmers, 33.33 per cent of semi medium farmers, 100 percent of medium farmers and 100 per cent of the large farmers.  The results indicated that, 91.43 percent of the household used fire wood as a source of fuel, 2.86 per cent of the household used kerosene and 25.71 per cent of the household used LPG as source of fuel.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the major source of drinking water for 60 per cent of the households and 40 per cent of the household were using bore well as a source of drinking water.  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 100 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, 45.71 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 40 per cent of the landless, 100 per cent of marginal, 50 per cent of small, 66.67 per cent of semi medium, 8.33 per cent of medium and 100 per cent of large farmers had sanitary toilet facility.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the sampled household's possessed BPL card.  The results indicated that, 91.43 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 20 per cent of the landless and 100 percent of the marginal, small, semi medium, medium farmers and large farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals and pulses were adequate for 97.14 per cent of the household respectively. Oilseed were adequate for 2.86 per cent of the households, vegetables were adequate for 77.14 per cent of the households, milk were adequate for 88.57 per cent of the households, egg were adequate for 57.14 per cent of the households and meat were adequate for 25.71 per cent of the household. 8  The results indicated that, cereals and pulses were inadequate for 2.86 per cent of the household. Oilseed, vegetables, fruits, milk, egg and meat were inadequate for 57.14 per cent, 22.86 per cent, 74.29 per cent, 5.71 per cent, 42.86 per cent and 71.43 per cent of the household respectively.  . The results indicated that, oilseed and fruits were inadequate for 40 per cent and 25.71 per cent of the household respectively.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil was the constraint experienced by 82.86 per cent of the households, wild animal menace on farm field (68.57%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (54.29%), inadequacy of irrigation water (57.14%), high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals (48.57%), high rate of interest on credit (48.57%), low price for the agricultural commodities (77.14%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (62.86%), inadequate extension services (57.14 %), lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market (48.57%) and less rain fall (11.43%) . ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Timmapur-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, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 501 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 84 per cent is covered by soils, 14 per cent by rock outcrops and 2 per cent by water bodies, settlements and others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 12 soil series and 21 soil phases (management units) and 5 Land management units.  The length of crop growing period is 150 cm) soils.  About 43 per cent area has clayey soils at the surface and 41 per cent loamy soils at the surface.  About 13 per cent of the area has non-gravelly (0.75%) in organic carbon.  Available phosphorus is medium (23-57 kg/ha) in about 71 per cent and high (>57 kg/ha) in about 13 per cent area of the microwatershed.  About 65 per cent of the soils are low (337 kg/ha) in available potassium content.  Available sulphur is low (320 ppm) in 11 per cent soils.  Available boron is low (0.5 ppm) in about 83 per cent area and 4.5 ppm) in the entire area.  Available zinc is deficient (0.6 ppm) in about 42 per cent area.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils.  The land suitability for 31 major agricultural and horticultural 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 - 160 (32) Sapota - 19 (4) Maize - 159 (32) Pomegranate - 78 (15) Bajra - 200 (40) Musambi - 78 (15) Groundnut - 107 (21) Lime - 78 (15) Sunflower - 75 (15) Amla - 237 (47) Red gram - 66 (13) Cashew - 36 (7) Bengalgram - 176 (35) Jackfruit - 19 (4) Cotton - 160 (32) Jamun - 69 (14) Chilli - 101 (20) Custard apple - 237 (47) Tomato - 101 (20) Tamarind - 66 (13) Brinjal 16 (3) 135 (27) Mulberry - 113 (23) Onion 16 (3) 62 (12) Marigold - 159 (32) Bhendi 16 (3) 120 (24) Chrysanthemum - 159 (32) Drumstick - 93 (18) Jasmine - 101 (20) Mango - 16 (3) Crossandra - 110 (22) Guava - 19 (4) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 5identified LMUs 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 productivity and ecological balance in the microwatershed.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested for these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.  Soil and water conservation treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SALIENT FINDINGS OF THE STUDY  The results indicated that 35 farmers were sampled in Timmapur-2 microwatershed among them 4 (11.43%) were marginal farmers, 14 (40%) were small farmers, 8 (22.86 %) were semi medium farmers, 4 (11.43%) were medium farmers and 5 (14.29%) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there were 191 population households were there in the studied micro watershed. Among them 106 (55.50%) men and 85 (44.50 %) were women. The average family size of landless was 6, marginal farmer was 4, small and semi medium farmers were 5 and medium farmers were 7. On an average the family size was 5.  The data indicated that 40 (20.94%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 91 (47.64 %) were in 16-35 years of age, 47 (24.61 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 13 (6.81%) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Timmapur-2 had 37.17 per cent illiterates, 35.08 per cent of them had primary school education, 8.38 per cent of them had middle school, 11.52 per cent of them had high school education, 5.76 per cent of them had PUC education, 0.52 had diploma education and 1.05 per cent of them had degree education.  The results indicated that, 80 per cent of households practicing agriculture, 17.14 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labour and 5.71 per cent of the household heads were general labour.  The results indicated that agriculture was the major occupation for 45.55 per cent of the household members, 24.61 per cent were agricultural labourers, 4.71 per cent were general labours and 23.56 per cent of them were students. In case of landless farmers 54.84 per cent of them were agriculture labours, 29.03 per cent of them were general labour and 12.90 per cent of them were students.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers 58.82 per cent of them were doing agriculture, 17.65 per cent of them were agriculture labour and 23.53 per cent of them were students. In small farmers 51.35 per cent of them were doing agriculture, 20.27 per cent of them were agriculture labour and 28.38 per cent of them were student. In case of semi medium farmers, 76. 92 per cent of them were agriculturist, 10.26 per cent of them were agriculture labour and students. In medium farmers 30 per cent of them were agriculturist, 26.67 per cent of them were agricultural labour and 40 per cent of them were students.  The results showed that 100 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions.  The results indicated that 45.71 per cent of the households possess thatched house, 42.86 per cent of the households possess Katcha house and 11.43 per cent of the households possess Pucca house. 2  The results showed that, 100 per cent of the households possess TV, 91.43 per cent of the households possess mixer/grinder, 42.86 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 37.14 per cent of the households possess motor cycle and 97.14 per cent of the households possess mobile phones.  The results showed that the average value of television was Rs. 6800, mixer/grinder was Rs. 1656, bicycle was Rs.1750, motor cycle was Rs.29230 and mobile phone was Rs.1544.  The data showed that about 28.57 per cent of the households possess bullock cart, 45.71 per cent of them possess plough, 2.86 per cent of the households possess tractor, 25.71 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 94.29 per cent of the households possess weeder and 11.43 per cent of the households possess chaff cutter.  The results showed that the average value of bullock cart was Rs.16800; the average value of plough was Rs. 910, the average value of tractor was Rs. 500000, the average value of sprayer was Rs. 3500, the average value of weeder was Rs. 59 and the average value of chaff cutter was Rs. 2325.  The results indicated that, 45.71 per cent of the households possess bullocks and 28.57 per cent of the households possess local cow. In case of marginal farmers, 25 per cent of the households possess bullock. In case of small farmers, 50 per cent of households possess bullock and 28.57 per cent possess local cow. In case of semi medium farmers, 62.50 per cent of the households possess bullock and 50 per cent of the households possess local cow. 75 medium farmers possess bullock and 50 farmers possess local.  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 2.13, average own labour (women) available was 1.65, average hired labour (men) available was 8.35 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.16.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was also 1.25, average hired labour (men) was 6.50 and average hired labour (women) available was 5.25. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was 1.71, average hired labour (men) was 9.71 and average hired labour (women) available was 8.21. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 2.38, average own labour (women) was 1.50, average hired labour (men) was 9.13 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.50. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 2.25, average own labour (women) was 2, average hired labour (men) was 6 and average hired labour (women) available was 6.50.  The results indicated that, 88.57 per cent of the household opined that the hired labour was adequate.  The results indicated that, households of the Timmapur-2 microwatershed possess 20.72 ha (45.57%) of dry land and 24.75 ha (54.43%) of irrigated land. Marginal 3 farmers possess 2.51 ha (86.11%) of dry land and 0.40 ha (13.89%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 16.19 ha (86.21 %) of dry land and 2.59 ha (13.79 %) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 0.81 ha (6.97 %) of dry land and 10.81 ha (93.03%) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 1.21 ha (9.98%) of dry land and 10.95 ha (90.02%) irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 390,761.72 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 501,592.55. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 597,580.64 for dry land and Rs. 1,976,000 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 333,450 for dry land Rs. 810,468.74 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 741,000 for dry land and Rs. 573,558.06 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 494,000 for dry land and Rs. 303,045.09 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 19 functioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 54.29 per cent of the farmers.  The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 45.37 meters.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers there was 0.40 per cent of irrigated land, in case of small farmers there was 2.59 ha of irrigated land, in case of semi medium farmers there was 12.02 ha of irrigated land and medium farmers were having 6.11 ha of irrigated land. On an average there were 21.13 ha of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, farmers have grown bajra (4.45 ha), chilly (1.21 ha), cotton (2.91 ha), groundnut (8.22 ha), horsegram (1.21 ha), maize (14.40 ha), paddy (4.57 ha), sesamum (0.81 ha), sorghum (1.21 ha), sunflower (0.81 ha) and tomato (1.21 ha) in kharif season. Marginal farmers have grown groundnut, maize and sesamum. Small farmers have grown bajra, cotton, groundnut, horsegram, maize and sorghum. Semi medium farmers have grown chilly, cotton, groundnut, maize, paddy and tomato. Medium farmers have grown cotton, groundnut, maize, paddy and sunflower.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Timmapur-2 microwatershed was found to be 98.07 per cent. In case of marginal farmers, small farmers and medium farmers it was 100 per cent and in semi medium farmers it was 93.03 per cent.  The results indicated that, 94.29 per cent of the households have bank account and 48.57 per cent of the households have savings. 60per cent of the landless farmers have bank account. In marginal farmers 100 per cent of them have bank account and 50 per cent of them had savings. In case of small farmers 100 per cent of them had bank account and 71.43 per cent possess savings. In case of semi medium farmers, 4 100 per cent of possess bank account and 62.50 per cent farmer's savings. In Medium farmers, 100 per cent of farmers possess bank account.  The results indicated that 54.29 per cent of the farmers have borrowed credit from different sources which includes 75 per cent of marginal, 57.14 per cent of small, 75 per cent of semi medium and 50 per cent of medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 31.58 per cent have availed loan in commercial bank, 15.79 per cent have availed loan in cooperative Bank, 5.26 per cent have availed loan from friends/relatives, 89.47 per cent have availed loan in Grameena bank, 42.11per cent have availed loan from money lender and 10.53 per cent have availed loan in SHGs/CBOs.  The results indicated that, marginal, small, semi medium and medium have availed Rs. 55,000, Rs. 110,062.50, Rs. 74,166.67 and Rs, 195,000 respectively. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed was Rs. 108,447.37.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production.  The results indicated that, 27.27 per cent of the household's barrowed private credit for agriculture production which includes 40 per cent of the small and 50 per cent of the semi medium farmers.  Results indicated that 19.23 per cent of households were partially paid their loan, 61.54 per cent of households were unpaid their loan and 19.23 per cent of households were fully paid their loan.  Results indicated that 63.64 per cent of the households have partially paid their loan, 27.27 per cent have unpaid their private credit and 9.09 per cent of the households have fully paid their loan.  The results indicated that 30.77 per cent of the households were opined that helped to perform timely agricultural operations, 46.15 per cent of the households were opined that higher rate of interest, 7.69 per cent of the households were opined that they were forced to sell the produce at low price to repay loan in time .  The results indicated that, 9.09 per cent of the households were opined that helped to perform timely agricultural operations and higher rate of interest and 36.36 per cent of the households were not given any opinion.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 27597.79. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 29830.49. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs. 2232.71. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.08.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 61186.58. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 75699.47. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. 14512.89. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.24. 5  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for paddy was Rs. 62877.74. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 73035.07. The net income from paddy cultivation was Rs. 10157.34. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.16.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 17933.64. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 25454.72. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. 7521.08. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.42.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for tomato was Rs. 28537.03. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 103740. The net income from tomato cultivation was Rs. 75202.97. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:3.64.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for horsegram was Rs. 11451.45. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 26840.67. The net income from horsegram cultivation was Rs. 15389.22. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.34.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for cotton was Rs. 28542.16. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 71784.37. The net income from cotton cultivation was Rs. 43242.21. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.52.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for sunflower was Rs. 34933.39. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 63232. The net income from sunflower cultivation was Rs. 28298.61. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.81.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for chilly was Rs. 23059.20. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 181133.33. The net income from chilly cultivation was Rs. 158074.14. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:7.86.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for sorghum was Rs. 13146.50. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 34382.40. The net income from sorghum cultivation was Rs. 21235.90. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.62.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for sesamum was Rs. 15380.78. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 21612.50. The net income from sesamum cultivation was Rs. 6231.72. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.41.  The results indicated that, 62.86 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 34.29 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was adequate.  The table indicated that, in landless farmers, the average income from wage was Rs. 26000. In marginal farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 26071.43 and agriculture was Rs. 37600. In small farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 6 26071.43, agriculture was Rs. 49050 and dairy farm was Rs. 2112.14. In semi medium farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 14,375, agriculture was Rs. 117,562.50 and dairy farm was Rs.625. In medium farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 15000, agriculture was Rs. 71500 and dairy farm was Rs. 750.  The results indicated that, in landless farmers, the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 13000, in marginal farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs.5666.67 and agriculture was Rs.14750. In case of small farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 11111.11, agriculture was Rs. 23285.71 and dairy farm was Rs. 10,000. In case of semi medium farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 5750, agriculture was Rs. 47875 and dairy farm was Rs.1000. In case of medium farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 3,000 and agriculture was Rs. 35,000.  The results indicated that, sampled households have grown 20 coconut and 49 mango trees in their field.  The results indicated that, households have planted 50 neem, 6 tarmind, 1 banyan and 1 peeple trees in their field.  The results indicate that, households have an average investment capacity of Rs.2257.14 for land development, Rs. 1171.43 in irrigation facility, Rs.1314.29 for improved crop production, Rs.600 for improved livestock management and Rs.142.86 for subsidiary enterprises.  The data showed that Marginal households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 2500 for land development, Rs. 1500 for irrigation facility and Rs.1250 for improved crop production. Small farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 2357.14 for land development, Rs. 785.71 in irrigation facility, Rs.1642.86 for improved crop production and Rs.357.14 for improved livestock management. Semi medium farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 2000 for land development, Rs. 1750 in irrigation facility, Rs.1250 for improved crop production and Rs.750 for improved livestock management. Medium farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 5000 for land development, Rs. 2500 for irrigation facility, Rs.2000 for improved crop production, Rs.2500 for improved livestock management and Rs.1250 for subsidiary enterprises.  The results indicated that, for land development, 20 per cent were depending on loan from the bank and 2.86 per cent of the households were depending on soft loan. For irrigation facility 5.71 per cent of the households were dependent on loan from bank and 11.43 per cent were depending on soft loan. Similarly for improved crop production, 5.71 per cent of the households were dependent on loan from the bank, 2.86 per cent were dependent on their own funds and 14.29 per cent of the households were depending on soft loan. For improved livestock management 2.86 per cent were dependent on own funds and 11.43 per cent were dependent on soft loan. For subsidiary enterprises 2.86 per cent of the households were dependent on soft loan. 7  The results indicated that, chilli, cotton, horsegram, sesamum, sorghum, sunflower and tomato crops were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Bajra, groundnut, maize and paddy were sold to the extent of 85.71 per cent, 96.27 per cent, 97.23 per cent and 94.33 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that, 62.86 percent of the households have sold their produce to local/village merchant, 31.43 percent of the households sold their produce in regulated markets and 14.29 percent of the households sold their produce in cooperative marketing society.  The results indicated that 11.43 per cent of the households have used cart as a mode of transport, 57.14 per cent of them have used tractor and 40 per cent have used truck as a mode of transport.  The results indicated that, 42.86 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 50 percent of marginal farmers, 42.86 per cent of small farmers, 37.50 per cent of semi medium farmers and 100 percent of medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 82.86 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing including 100 per cent of marginal farmers, small farmers and medium farmers and 87.50 per cent of the semi medium farmers respectively.  The results indicated that, 100 percent used fire wood as a source of fuel and 2.86 per cent of the households used LPG.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the source of drinking water for 82.86 per cent of the households and 17.14 per cents of the households were using bore well for drinking water.  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 100 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, 31.43 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 20 per cent of landless, 100 per cent of marginal, 21.43 per cent of small, 25 per cent of semi medium and 25 per cent of medium farmers had sanitary toilet facility.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL card.  The results indicated that, 42.86 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 60 per cent of the landless, 100 percent of the marginal, 21.43 per cent of the small, 12.50 per cent of the semi medium and 100 percent of the medium farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, milk, egg and meat were adequate for 94.29 per cent, 60 per cent, 5.71 per cent, 85.71 per cent, 80 per cent, and 65.71 per cent respectively. Vegetables and fruits were adequate for 48.57 per cent of the households. 8  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseed, vegetables, fruits, milk, egg and meat were inadequate for 5.71 per cent, 40 per cent, 80 per cent, 42.86 per cent, 40 per cent, 5.71 per cent, 17.14 per cent and 31.43 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil was experienced by 85.71 per cent of the households, wild animal menace on farm field was experienced by 74.29 per cent of the households, frequent incidence of pest and diseases was experienced by 65.71 per cent of the farmers, inadequacy of irrigation water was experienced by 42.86 per cent of the households, high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals was experienced by 65.71 per cent of the households, high rate of interest on credit was experienced by 60 per cent of the farmers, low price for the agricultural commodities was experienced by 60 per cent of the farmers, lack of marketing facilities in the area was experienced 65.71 per cent of the households, inadequate of extension services experienced by 65.71 per cent of the households, lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market was experienced by 74.29 per cent of the households and less rainfall was experienced by 25.71 per cent of the farmers. ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Kalakeri microwatershed was conducted using village cadastral maps and IRS satellite imagery on 1:7920 scale. The false colour composites of IRS imagery were interpreted for physiography and these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 497 ha in Koppal taluk and district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought - prone with an average annual rainfall of 662 mm, of which about 424 mm is received during south–west monsoon, 161 mm during north-east and the remaining 77 mm during the rest of the year. An area of 99 per cent is covered by soils, 150 cm).  About 2 per cent area in the microwatershed has sandy soils, 65 per cent area in the microwatershed has loamy soils and 31 per cent clayey soils at the surface.  About 80 per cent area has non-gravelly (200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  About 4 per cent area of the microwatershed has nearly level (0-1% slope) lands and 95 per cent area of the microwatershed has very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands.  An area of about 53 per cent area is moderately (e2) eroded and about 46 per cent area is slightly (e1) eroded.  An area of about 10 per cent soils are moderately acid to slightly acid (pH 5.5-6.5), 12 per cent soils are neutral (pH 6.5-7.3), 68 per cent soil are slightly alkaline to strongly alkaline (pH 7.3-9.0) and 8 per cent soils are very strongly alkaline (pH >9.0) in soil reaction.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils in the entire cultivated area of the microwatershed is dominantly 0.75%) in 59 per cent area.  An area of about 52 per cent is medium (23-57 kg/ha) and 47 per cent is high (>57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus.  An area of about 34 per cent is low (337 kg/ha) in available potassium.  Available sulphur is low (20 ppm) in 24 per cent area of the microwatershed.  An area of 66 per cent is low (4.5 ppm) and 58 per cent is deficient (1.0 ppm) in available manganese content.  Entire cultivated area of the microwatershed is sufficient (>0.2 ppm) in available copper content.  An area of about 24 per cent is deficient (0.6 ppm) in available zinc content.  The land suitability for 31 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 58(12) 81(16) Sapota 56(11) 112(23) Maize 56(11) 99(20) Pomegranate 56(11) 170(34) Bajra 56(11) 186(37) Guava - 168(34) Groundnut - 380(77) Jackfruit 56(11) 112(23) Sunflower 58(12) 81(16) Jamun 56(11) 154(31) Cotton 58(12) 82(16) Musambi 58(12) 168(34) Red gram 56(11) 77(16) Lime 58(12) 168(34) Bengalgram 2(<1) 137(38) Cashew - 195(39) Chilli 56(11) 25(5) Custard apple 58(12) 417(84) Tomato 56(11) 25(5) Amla 56(11) 419(84) Brinjal 15(3) 389(78) Tamarind 56(11) 76(15) Onion 15(3) 330(66) Marigold 56(11) 84(17) Bhendi 15(3) 389(78) Chrysanthemum 56(11) 84(17) Drumstick 56(11) 294(59) Jasmine 56(11) 25(5) Mulberry 56(11) 419(84) Crossandra 56(11) 56(6) Mango 56(11) 75(13)  Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 3 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserves soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested for these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.,  Soil and water conservation treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SALIENT FINDINGS OF THE SURVEY  Results indicated that, 49 farmers were sampled in Kalakeri micro watershed among them 17 (34.69%) were marginal farmers, 19 (38.78 %) were small farmers, 6(12.24 %) were semi medium farmers, 2 (4.08 %) were medium farmers and 5 (10.20 %) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there were 228 population households were there in the studied micro watershed. Among them 135 (59.21%) men and 93 (40.79 %) were women. The average family size of landless was 3, marginal farmers and medium farmers were 4, small farmer was 5 and semi medium farmer was 7. On an average the family size was 5.  The data indicated that 35 (15.35%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 110 (48.25 %) were in 16-35 years of age, 58 (25.44 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 25 (10.96 %) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Kalakeri had 35.53 per cent illiterates, 27.19 per cent of them had primary school education, 2.63 per cent of them had both middle school, 14.91 per cent them had high school education, 8.77 per cent of them had PUC education, 0.44 per cent them had Diploma education, 2.63 per cent of them had degree education, 1.75 per cent of them had masters education and 6.14 per cent them had others.  The results indicated that, 89.79 per cent of households practicing agriculture, 2.04 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labour and 8.16 per cent of the household heads were general labour.  The results indicated that agriculture was the major occupation for 52.63 per cent of the household members, 12.72 per cent were agricultural labourers, 5.70 per cent were general labours, 0.44 percent were in government service, 4.39 per cent of them were in private sector, 1.32 per cent of them were trade and business, 17.54 per cent of them were students, 4.82 per cent of them were children and 0.44 per cent were housewives. In case of landless households 76.47 per cent were general labourers and 11.76 per cent were students. In case of marginal farmers 59.70 per cent were agriculturist, 8.96 percent was in agricultural labour, 2.99 per cent of both were in private and trade and business and 20.90 per cent were students. In case of small farmers 58.06 per cent of them were agriculturist and 15.05 per cent of them were students. In case of semi medium farmers 48.84 per cent of the family members were agriculturist and 23.26 per cent of them were students. In case of medium farmers 62.50 per cent of the family members were agriculturist and 25 per cent of them were in private service.  The results showed that 0.88 per cent of them participated in self help groups and 99.12 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions. Small, semi medium and medium farmers were found to have no participation in any local 2 institutions. Land less and marginal farmers were found to participate in one or the other local institutions.  The results indicated that 65.31 per cent of the households possess Katcha house, 2.04 per cent of the households possess Pucca house, 30.61 per cent of the households possess Semi Pacca house and 2.04 per cent of them possess Thatched house. 100 percent of the landless and medium farmers possess Katcha house.  The results showed that, 2.04 per cent of the households possess radio, 83.67 per cent of the households possess TV, 53.06 per cent of the households possess Mixer grinder, 2.04 per cent of the households possess refrigerator, 32.65 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 30.61 per cent of the households possess motor cycle, 2.04 per cent of the households possess Auto, 89.80 per cent of the households possess mobile phones and 4.08 per cent of the households possess computer/laptop.  The results showed that the average value of radio was Rs.800, television was Rs. 5024, mixer grinder was Rs.1892, refrigerator was Rs.15000, bicycle was Rs.7437, motor cycle was Rs.42866, Auto was Rs. 100000, mobile phone was Rs.1723 and computer/laptop was Rs. 2000.  Results showed that 12.24 per cent of the households possess bullock cart, 20.41 per cent of them possess plough, 6.12 per cent of the households possess seed/fertilizer drill, 10.20 per cent of the households possess irrigation pump, 4.08 per cent of the households possess tractor, 16.33 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 2.04 per cent of the households possess sprinkler, 67.35 per cent of the households possess weeder, 12.24 per cent of the households possess harvester, 4.08 per cent of the households possess chaff cutter and 2.04 per cent of the households possess JCB/Hitachi.  The results showed that the average value of bullock cart was Rs.20833; the average value of plough was Rs. 1040, the average value of seed/fertilizer drill was Rs. 1925, the average value of irrigation pump was Rs. 20750, the average value of tractor was Rs. 301500, the average value of sprayer was Rs. 4825, the average value of sprinkler was Rs. 500, the average value of weeder was Rs. 73, the average value of harvester was Rs. 80, the average value of chaff cutter was Rs. 3000 and the average value of JCB/Hitachi was Rs. 300000.  The results indicated that, 28.57 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 20.41 per cent of the households possess local cow, 6.12 per cent of the households possess buffalo, 2.04 per cent of the households possess sheep and 4.08 per cent of the households possess poultry birds respectively.  In case of marginal farmers, 17.65 per cent of the households possess bullock and local cow respectively and 5.88 per cent of the households possess poultry birds. In case of small farmers, 42.11 per cent of households possess bullock, 21.05 per cent possess local cow, 10.53 per cent of the households possess buffalo and 5.26 per cent possess sheep and poultry birds respectively. In case of semi medium farmers, 50 per 3 cent of the households possess both bullock and local cow correspondingly, 16.67 per cent of the households possess buffalo.  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 1.56, average own labour (women) available was 1.33, average hired labour (men) available was 22.16 and average hired labour (women) available was 21.63.  In case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.18, average own labour (women) was also 1.18, average hired labour (men) was 11.65 and average hired labour (women) available was 11.18. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 1.72, average own labour (women) was 1.28, average hired labour (men) was 30.28 and average hired labour (women) available was 30.28. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was 2, average hired labour (men) was 25 and average hired labour (women) available was 21.67. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was 1, average hired labour (men) was 30 and average hired labour (women) available was 32.50.  The results indicated that, 85.71 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was adequate which includes 94.12 per cent of the marginal farmers, 94.74 per cent of small, 100 per cent of semi medium and medium farmers and 2.04 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was inadequate.  The results indicated that, households of the Kalakeri micro watershed possess 28.05 ha (62.87 %) of dry land and 16.57 ha (37.13 %) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 10.26 ha (98.07 %) of dry land and 0.20 ha (1.93%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 15.25 ha (70.99 %) of dry land and 6.23 ha (29.01 %) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 2.54 ha (29.46 %) of dry land and 6.09 ha (70.54 %) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 4.05 ha (100%) of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 495354.20 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 633488.03. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 682051.27 for dry land and Rs. 1482000 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 419532.91 for dry land Rs. 737792.21 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 196656.04 for dry land and Rs. 706183.51 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 321100 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 7 functioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 39.13 per cent of the farmers.  The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 39.76 meters.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers there was 0. 20 ha of irrigated land, in case of small farmers there was 9.06 ha of irrigated land, semi medium farmers were having 8.05 ha of irrigated land and medium farmers were having 8.10 ha of irrigated land. On an average there were 25.41 ha of irrigated land. 4  The results indicated that, farmers have grown bajra (12.09 ha), maize (83.02 ha), paddy (1.82 ha) and sesamum (0.81ha) in kharif season. Also grown chilly (1.21 ha), cow pea (2.24 ha), groundnut (3.63 ha), paddy (0.40 ha), sunflower (3.04ha) and tomato (0.08 ha) in Rabi season. Marginal farmers have grown Maize, Bajra, sesamum, cowpea and groundnut. Small farmers have grown bajra, maize, paddy, cowpea, groundnut and tomato. Semi medium farmers have grown Maize, bajra, chilly, cowpea, groundnut and sunflower. Medium farmers have grown bajra, maize and sunflower.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Kalakeri micro watershed was found to be 177.17 per cent. In case of marginal farmers it was 527.38 per cent, in small farmers it was 92.17, in semi medium farmers it was 79.59 and in medium farmers it was 100 per cent.  The results indicated that, 41.30 per cent of the households have bank account and savings respectively. Among marginal farmers 58.82 percent of them possess both bank account and savings. 36.84 per cent of small farmers possess both bank account and savings correspondingly. Semi medium farmers possess 16.67 per cent of both bank account and savings respectively and medium category of farmers possess 50 per cent of bank account and also savings correspondingly.  The results indicated that, 58.82 per cent of marginal, 31.58 per cent of small and 50 per cent of medium farmers have borrowed credit from different sources.  The results indicated that, 11.76 per cent have availed loan in commercial bank and friends/ relatives correspondingly, 52.94 per cent have availed loan from Grameena bank, 23.52 per cent have availed loan from money lender and 29.41 per cent have availed loan from SHGs/CBOs.  The results indicated that, marginal, small and medium have availed Rs.37500, Rs. 90166.67 and Rs. 200000 respectively. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed is 62000.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production.  The results indicated that, agriculture production, purchase–agricultural implements/ farm machinery, purchase-vehicle, household consumption and social functions like marriage reasons were the purpose for which marginal and small farmers borrowed loan from private credit. About 54.55 percent of loan was taken for agriculture production, 9.09 per cent of the loan was taken for purchase–agricultural implements/ farm machinery, purchase-vehicle, household consumption respectively and 18.18 per cent of the farmers taken loan for social functions like marriage.  Results indicated that 9.09 per cent of the households have repaid their institutional credit partially and 90.91 percent of the households have unpaid their loan. 5  Results indicated that 27.27 per cent of the households have repaid their private credit partially, 54.55 percent of the households have unpaid their loan and 18.18 per cent of them fully paid their loan.  The results indicated that 9.09 per cent of the households were opined that they were helped to perform timely agricultural operations, higher rate of interest and forced to sell the produce at low price to repay loan in time respectively.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 32955.96. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 29877.63. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. -3078.33, thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.91.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 48488.33. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 94802.50. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs. 46314.17. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.96.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for paddy was Rs. 42321.23. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 60771.15. The net income from paddy cultivation was Rs. 18449.91. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.44.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Sesamum was Rs. 11003.14. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 20748.00. The net income from Sesamum cultivation was Rs. 9744.86. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.89.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Chilly was Rs. 18128.02. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 75746.67. The net income from Chilly cultivation was Rs. 57618.64. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:4.18.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Cowpea was Rs. 32618.68. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 16444.98. The net income from Cowpea cultivation was Rs. -16173.70. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.5.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 75670.65. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 82435.19. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. 6764.53. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.09.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Sunflower was Rs. 21608.43. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 19142.50. The net income from Sunflower cultivation was Rs. -2465.93. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.89.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Tomato was Rs. 148312.50. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 493999.99. The net income from Tomato cultivation was Rs. 345687.50. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:3.33.  The results indicated that, 32.65 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 2.04 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was inadequate. 6 Similarly 28.57 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was adequate and 2.04 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was inadequate.  The results indicated that the average income from service/salary was Rs. 3,918.37, business Rs. 1,530.61, wage Rs. 38,653.06, agriculture Rs. 61,736.73, dairy farm Rs. 612.24 and goat framing Rs. 1,020.41.  The results indicated that the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs. 816.33, business Rs. 979.59, wage Rs. 8,326.53, agriculture Rs. 33,040.82, dairy farm Rs. 204.08 and goat farming Rs. 510.20.  The results indicated that, sampled households have grown 105 coconut trees and 21 mango tree in their field.  The results indicated that, households have planted 1 Eucalyptus tree, 4 teak trees, 97 neem trees, 16 tamarind tress and 4 banyan trees in their field and also grown 2 Neem tree in the backyard.  The results indicated that for 2.04 per cent of the households were dependent on government subsidy for land development, irrigation facility and improved crop production respectively.  The results indicated that, Bajra, Chilly, Cowpea, Paddy, Sesamum and Tomato crops were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Groundnut, maize and sunflower were sold to the extent of 56.32 per cent, 75.89 per cent and 75 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that, 75.51 percent of the households have sold their produce to agent/traders, 18.37 percent of the households have sold their produce to local/village merchant and 26.53 percent of the households sold their produce in regulated markets.  The results indicated that 24.49 per cent of the households have used head load as a mode of transport, 32.65 per cent of them have used cart and 63.27 per cent have used tractor.  The results indicated that, 36.73 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing.  The results indicated that, 14.29 per cent of the households have adopted field bunding which includes 23.53 per cent of marginal, 10.53 per cent of small farmers and 16.67 per cent of semi medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households who adopted field bunding opined that full replacement is required for the bunds.  The results indicated that 10.20 per cent of soil conservation structure is constructed by the government and 4.08 per cent is constructed by others.  The results indicated that, 71.43 percent used fire wood as a source of fuel, 24.49 percent of the households used LPG and 4.08 per cent of the households used dung cake as a source of fuel.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the source of drinking water for 51.02 per cent, 36.73 per cent of them were using bore well and 10.20 per cents of the households were using lake/tank for drinking water. 7  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 100 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, 48.98 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 20 per cent of landless, 47.06 per cent of marginal, 42.11 per cent of small, 100 per cent of semi medium and 50 per cent of medium had sanitary toilet facility.  The results indicated that, 95.92 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL card and 4.08 per cent of the sampled households have not possessed BPL card.  The results indicated that, 32.65 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 60 per cent of the landless, 17.65 percent of the marginal, 15.79 per cent of the small, 100 per cent of the semi medium and 50 percent of the medium farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits , milk, egg and meat were adequate for 100 per cent, 83.67 per cent, 57.14 per cent, 69.39 per cent, 20.41 per cent, 91.84 per cent, 81.63 per cent and 63.27 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that, vegetables, fruits and meat were inadequate for 26.53 per cent of the households. Pulses, oilseed, milk and egg were inadequate for 16.33 per cent, 42.86 per cent, 6.12 per cent and 10.20 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil was the constraint experienced by 38.78 per cent of the households, wild animal menace on farm field (67.35%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (57.14%), inadequacy of irrigation water (30.61%), high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals (44.90%), high rate of interest on credit (53.06%), low price for the agricultural commodities (34.69%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (46.94%), inadequate extension services (26.53%), lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market (38.78%), less rain fall (48.98%) and Source of Agri-technology information(Newspaper/TV/Mobile) (18.37 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Gabrielle Hecht on Nuclear Ontologies, De-provincializing the Cold War, and Postcolonial Technopolitics



This is the fourth in a series of Talks dedicated to the technopolitics of International Relations, linked to the forthcoming double volume 'The Global Politics of Science and Technology' edited by Maximilian Mayer, Mariana Carpes, and Ruth Knoblich 




Nuclear power has formed a centerpiece of Cold-War IR
theorizing. Yet besides the ways in which its destructive capacity invalidates
or alters the way we should understand questions of war and peace, there are
different powers at play in the roles the nuclear assumes in global politics.
Through careful investigations of alternative sites and spaces of nuclear
politics, Gabrielle Hecht has uncovered some of the unexpected ways in which
what one can call the 'nuclear condition' affects politics across the globe. In
this Talk, Hecht, amongst others,
explores what it means to 'be nuclear'; explains how we need to deprovincialize
the Cold War to fully grasp its significance in global politics; and challenges
us to explore technopolitics outside of the comfortable context of
OECD-countries.





Print version of this Talk (pdf)



What is according to your view the most important challenge
facing global politics and what is/should be the central debate in the
discipline of International Relations (IR)?



I think one of the most important
challenges in global politics is the question of planetary boundaries. In the
1970s the Club of Rome published the report 'the Limits to Growth' (read PDF here), which addressed
the finite quality of the planet's resources. It exposed the problems that
the ideology (and practice) of endless economic
growth posed for these limits. The question of climate change today really is
all about planetary boundaries. We have already exceeded the CO2 level
that is safe for the planet to sustain human life: We have just passed 400
parts per million; the desirable level is rated at 350 parts per million; the
pre-industrial level of CO2 was 270 parts per million. So we have
already produced more CO2 than is sustainable. And that is just one
indicator. There are all kinds of other planetary boundaries at play—energy
supply being the most salient one in terms of climate change. How can we even
produce enough energy to maintain the lifestyles of the industrialized north? What
about the requirements of the so-called 'rest'?



Obviously this is a huge issue and
there are many parts to it. One part of this—the piece that I have studied the
most—is nuclear power. Many people are enthusiastic about nuclear power as a
solution to climate change. Some prominent environmentalists have been
converted, because they believe nuclear power offers a way to produce a large
amount of energy with a very small amount of matter, and because they see it as
carbon free. (That's pretty clearly not the case, by the way, though nuclear
power certainly produces less carbon than fossil fuels.) But are the human health
and environmental costs worth the savings in carbon? Do the resources poured
into nuclear power—some are predicting a thousand new reactors in the next
few decades—take away resources from other forms of energy production, forms
that could potentially address the emissions problems more rapidly and with lower
costs for the environment and for human health? Moreover, nuclear power in any
one location ends up becoming a global issue. So in that sense nuclear power in
China, in India or in Japan is inherently a global problem. And the industry everywhere
certainly needs global regulation—at the moment, there is none. The
International Atomic Energy Agency is not a regulator. These are serious questions
for international relations, and should be fodder for analysis.



One can obviously put this into
perspective by comparing the death toll from nuclear power with that related to
coal—would one then actually have to be against the use of coal? The numbers of
coal-related deaths are astonishing. But the first, most obvious point to make
is that being against coal doesn't require being in favor of nuclear power! It's
also extremely important to realize that death and morbidity figures for
nuclear power are highly contested. Take the figures concerning Chernobyl. The
IAEA and WHO put Chernobyl deaths at 4,000. A study published by National
Cancer Institute in the United States puts the deaths at something like 43,000.
A meta-analysis of 5,000 Slavic language scientific studies estimates the total
number of Chernobyl deaths (some of which are yet to come) at 900,000. These
discrepancies have a lot to do with controversies over the biological effects
of low-level radiation, and also with the technopolitics of measurement and counting.
Comparing the two energy technologies is much more complicated than merely
counting coal deaths vs. nuclear power deaths.





How did arrive where
you currently are in your thinking about these issues?



Actually, the real
question is how I came to study politics. I got my bachelor's degree in physics
from MIT in the 1980s. The two biggest political issues on campus at that time
were Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative and Apartheid in South Africa
(specifically, a move to divest American corporate interests in South Africa,
the very corporations that were funding MIT research and for which MIT students
would work when they graduated). I got interested in both, and along the way I
came to realize that I was much more interested in the politics of science and
technology than I was in actually doing physics. So I took some courses in the
field of science and technology studies (STS), and decided to attend graduate
school in the history and sociology of science and technology.



I had also always had a
morbid fascination with nuclear weapons. I'd read a lot of post-apocalyptic
science fiction when I was a teenager. All of these things came together for me
in graduate school. I first hoped to study the history of Soviet nuclear
weapons but quickly realized that would be impossible for all kinds of reasons.
I ended up studying French nuclear power after I realized that nobody had researched
it in the ways that interested me. I had lived in France in the 1970s, when the
nuclear power program was undergoing rapid expansion. So it was a good fit. After
I was done with that project, I became interested in rethinking the so-called
nuclear age from a colonial and post-colonial perspective.





What would a student need to become a specialist in global studies or
understand the world in a global way?



Travel, learn languages. Remain attentive to—and critical of—the
political work done by claims to 'global' purview. Learn history—you won't understand international relations in any depth at
all if you remain rooted in the present.



Then, for those want to
start exploring the global politics of science and technology, two books come
immediately to mind. Timothy Mitchell's (Theory Talk #59) Carbon Democracy, on the global technopolitics of fossil fuels. And Paul Edwards's A Vast Machine, on the relationship
between data and models in the production of knowledge about climate change. Both
are must-reads.







The world is permeated with technological
artifacts and systems—in what ways is this relevant for approaches to global
politics? Where is the conceptual place for technologies within IR?



First, I should make
clear that I am not an IR specialist.



That said, I think it
does not make sense to think about international relations (lower case) without
thinking about the technologies, systems, and infrastructures that make any
kind of global movement possible. The flows of people, of products, of culture,
political exchanges—these are all mediated through and practiced in the technological systems
that permeate our globe. So are the interruptions and absences in such 'flows'.
I draw attention to the specific political practices that are enacted through
technological systems with the notion of technopolitics. I initially used this
concept in my work on nuclear power in France to capture the ways in which
hybrid forms of power are enacted in technological artifacts, systems and
practices. There I used the term in a rather narrow sense to talk about the strategic practices of designing
technologies to enact political goals. My paramount example was that of the
French atomic weapons program. In the early 1950s, France's political leaders insisted
that France would never build atomic weapons. But engineers and other leaders in
the nascent nuclear program were designing reactors in a way that optimized the
production of weapons-grade plutonium rather than electricity. When politicians
finally signed on, the technology was ready to go. This example problematizes
the very notion of a 'political decision'. Instead of a single, discursive
decision, we see a complex process whereby political choices are inscribed into
technologies, which subsequently favor certain political outcomes over others.



In this example, both
engineers and politicians consciously
engaged in technopolitics. By contrast, Timothy Mitchell has used the
hyphenated term 'techno-politics' to emphasize the unpredictable and unintended
effects of technological assemblages. Over the last fifteen years, I have also
developed a broader notion of the term, particularly in its adjectival form, 'technopolitical'.
I find this to be a useful shorthand for describing both how politics can be
strategically enacted through technological systems, and also how technological
systems can be re-appropriated for political ends in ways that were unintended
by their designers.  The point, really,
is to highlight the myriad politics of materiality.





Do the particular characteristics of nuclear
technologies and related research programs make it impossible to apply the
lenses of 'high politics'?



I think a
high-politics approach to understanding nuclear weapons decision-making is
extremely impoverished. It's not that there aren't high politics, of course
there are. But they cannot offer a sufficient or straightforward explanation
for how or why any one particular country develops a nuclear program.  A focus on high politics implies a focus
decision makers and moments. But that's really misleading. In pretty much every
case, the apparent 'moment' of decision is in fact a long process involving a tremendous
amount of technopolitical, cultural, and institutional work, rife with
conflicts and contingencies of all kinds. I think a more productive approach is
to try to understand nuclear capacity-building.



Itty Abraham has done
some fantastic work on India's nuclear program, which helps us think about
other cases as well. For example, he analyzes the symbolic importance of the
nuclear test, noting that IR uses 'the test' as kind of 'aha!' moment, the moment in which one knows that a country
has nuclear weapons. Instead, Abraham sees the test as a process for the cultural
production of meaning: a process in which certain meanings get fixed, but by no
means the most important moment for understanding the actual technology and
politics behind the production of nuclear weapons.





Your book Entangled
Geographies (2011) explores a plethora of places, people, and technical networks that
sustained the US and Soviet empires. Here, as in Being Nuclear (2012), you insist on investigating the Cold War as
transnational history. What difference does this move make?



In Entangled Geographies, my colleagues and I build on the work of Odd
Arne Westad, whose book The Global Cold
War was an argument for understanding the non-superpower, non-European
dimensions of the Cold War. We give that a technopolitical spin, which offers a
de-provincializing of the Cold War that's complementary to Westad's. By
focusing on places like Saudi Arabia, or Zimbabwe, or Brazil, or South Africa,
we show how even the central struggles of the Cold War were intimately bound up
in 'northern' relationships to colonial and post-colonial worlds, and in the
imaginaries that characterized those relationships.



In Being Nuclear I focus on uranium from Africa—more specifically South Africa, Namibia,
Gabon, Madagascar, and Niger. Uranium from Africa has long been a major source
of fuel for nuclear power and atomic weapons, including the bomb dropped on
Hiroshima, but it has been almost completely absent from accounts of the
nuclear age, whether scholarly or popular. This changed in 2002, when the US
and British governments claimed that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein 'sought
significant quantities of uranium from Africa' (later specified as the infamous
'yellowcake from Niger'). Africa suddenly became notorious as a source of
uranium. But that did not admit Niger, or any of Africa's other
uranium-producing countries, to the select society of nuclear states. Nor did
it mean that uranium itself counted as a nuclear thing. My book explores what
it means for something—a state, an
object, an industry, a workplace—to be 'nuclear'. I show that such questions lie at the heart of
today's global order and the relationships between 'developing nations' and 'nuclear
powers'.



Being Nuclear argues that 'nuclearity'
is not a straightforward scientific classification but a
contested technopolitical one. In the first part of the book, I
follow uranium's path out of Africa and analyze the invention of the global
uranium market. In the second part, I enter African nuclear worlds, focusing
on miners and the occupational hazard of radiation
exposure. In both parts, I show that nuclearity requires instruments and
data, technological systems and infrastructures, national agencies and
international organizations, experts and conferences, and journals and media
exposure. When (and where) nuclearity is densely distributed among these
elements, it can offer a means of claiming expertise, compensation, or
citizenship. It can serve as a framework for making sense of history,
experience, and memory. When (and where) network elements are absent, weak, or
poorly connected, nuclearity falters, fades, or disappears altogether, failing
to provide a resource for people claiming remediation or treatment. Nuclearity
in one register doesn't easily transpose to another: geopolitical nuclearity
doesn't automatically translate into occupational nuclearity. Yet these domains
remain connected. African uranium miners depend on the transnational movement
of nuclear things, but that movement also depends on African miners.
Ultimately, I conclude, nuclear security must be considered in tandem with
other forms of human security—food and health and environmental and political security. By placing
Africa in the nuclear world, and the nuclear world in Africa, the book seeks to
remake our understanding of the nuclear age.



I should note that it's
not only uranium production that connects the colonial and postcolonial spaces
with nuclear things. (Also: African countries weren't the only such places
where uranium was produced. Much of the rest of the world's uranium came from the
Navajo nation in the United States, Aboriginal territories in Australia, First
Nation territories in Canada, colonized spaces in the Soviet Empire, etc.)  French nuclear weapons were tested in the Algerian
desert and French Polynesia; the United States tested its weapons on the Bikini
Islands; Britain tested its weapons in Maralinga, in Aboriginal Australia; the
Soviet Union tested its weapons on the planes of Kazakhstan. And so on.



So, understanding the
history of the Cold War—even its most
iconic technology, nuclear weapons—as a form of transnational history really calls attention to spaces that
have previously been considered marginal, even perhaps not fully nuclear. Ultimately,
it should provoke us to problematize 'the Cold War' as a frame for global or
transnational history (and social science).



Looking at those
colonized and semi-colonized spaces of mining, testing and monitoring infrastructures
gives us not necessarily an answer to the question of why the Cold War ended,
but it does enable you to ask different and possibly more interesting
questions. It can lead you, for example, to place the Cold War within the
framework of imperialism (rather than the other way around). A longer
historical view questions whether the Cold War really represents historical
rupture. What political work is done by such claims to rupture? How does that
work differ in different places?  What
are its material consequences?





Why are science and technology hardly ever studied in
the postcolonial world from a STS perspective?



I think there are a number
of reasons why STS has paid relatively little attention to the postcolonial
world. One is that in STS—like many
disciplines—the prestige of the subject
matter maps onto the prestige of the researcher. So STS researchers who study cutting-edge
science or large-scale technological systems seem somehow to be getting at 'harder'
topics, ones that that focus on active creation. Engineering and other acts of
creation appear more prestigious than acts of maintenance, or acts of
dismantling. Even studying small-scale creation seems to confer more prestige
than studying mundane practices. This brings us back to the theme of rupture
vs. continuity: studying or proclaiming rupture seems somehow sexier—and certainly more radical—than studying continuity.



Another, more trivial
answer is just that most STS researchers so far have come from Europe and North
America, and they tend not to be trained in area studies.





Does the constant ontological insecurity of nuclear
things mean that the 'nuclear' is purely a matter of social and political
construction?



No, definitely not. But
I think to explain what I mean by all this we should take a few steps back and
start with what I like to call nuclear
exceptionalism. This is a technopolitical claim—emerging immediately after the end of World
War II—that there was
something radically unique about nuclear things. From 1945 onward, both cold warriors
and their activist opponents cultivated this nuclear exceptionalism. Atomic
weapons were portrayed as fundamentally different from any other human
creation. The bomb was the ultimate geopolitical trump card, and it was imagined
as replacing empire in one fell swoop. You see nuclear scientists and engineers
gaining prestige, power, and funding far beyond their colleagues in
conventional research. In the meantime, anti-nuclear groups make their own claims
to exceptionalism by talking about the unprecedented dangers posed by nuclear
things. Everywhere you see nuclearity and morality intertwined. Nuclear things
either represent salvation or moral depravity… or the apocalyptic end of
mankind. But regardless of where you stood politically, this notion of nuclear
exceptionalism rested on the sense that the difference between nuclear and non-nuclear
things was transparent---ultimately a clear-cut, physical matter of
radioactivity.



The nuclear thus
emerges not just as a category, but also as a universal and universalizing
ontology, one that seems to apply in the same way all over the globe. And
frankly, historians, political scientists, anthropologists, and sociologists
have reproduced that nuclear exceptionalism. (I did it myself in my first book,
The Radiance of France.)



All of which has made
it hard to see that what I call nuclearity—the process by which something comes
to count as a "nuclear" thing – has a history, a politics, and a geography. Things
that count as nuclear in one time and place might not count as nuclear at
another. Rendering something as nuclear and exceptional is a form of technopolitical
claims-making. It follows that insisting that certain things are not especially
nuclear, or that they are banal, is also a form of technopolitical claims-making.




You can see this in the
response of the nuclear industry to activist opponents. In the late 1960s and
over the course of the 1970s, the nuclear industry began to represent nuclear
power not as a life-saving technology for the human race, but as simply another
way to boil water. Radiation was just another industrial risk. Such
representations seek to banalize nuclear things.



Nuclearity could thus get
made, unmade and remade. My favorite example comes from a 1995 US government report
on nuclear proliferation. The appendix has a table that summarizes the nuclear
activities of 172 nations. Neither Gabon, nor Niger, nor Namibia are listed as
having any nuclear activities, despite the fact that those nations together, during
that very year, produced something like 25% of the world's uranium. So when does
uranium count as a nuclear thing? When does it lose its nuclearity? And what
does Africa have to do with it?



The argument is not that
radioactivity doesn't have to do anything with nuclearity, or that nuclearity
has nothing to do with the technologies and physical processes we typically
associate with the word. Rather, I argue that nuclearity is one thing, and radioactivity
and fission are another; sometimes they are co-terminus, but not always and not
necessarily. Understanding where (and why) they don't map onto each other is politically revealing.





Which kind of interdisciplinary
exchanges do we need between your discipline and IR to deepen our understanding
of global technopolitics?





Science
and technology studies (STS) is really good at exploring practice, and
especially at calling attention to the differences between principles and
practice—for example, between regulation on the one hand, and the actual
practices that regulations are meant to control (without ever entirely succeeding).
STS can bring to IR an understanding of how the intimate details of practice
matter politically—of how everyday technopolitical and techno-scientific exchanges can be
more important loci for politics than treaties, diplomacy, and other forms of
what you called high politics. 


I
can also answer this question wearing my historian's hat. The IR scholarship on
nuclear weapons that I'm familiar with (and again, I'm not an expert!) seems to
be quite focused on producing models—on using history to produce predictive models that
will in turn serve to shape international policy on nuclear weapons regulation.
But if history tells us one thing, it is that models are basically useless for
understanding how countries develop nuclear weapons. Instead, history and STS
both teach us about which questions to ask (in this instance, about nuclear
development). Identifying the important questions—rather than prescribing the applicable model—leaves open the list
of possible answers. It also leaves open solutions and policies, letting us be more
attentive to the specificities and uniqueness of individual cases.





Final question. Let's take the
example of Iran's nuclear program. What alternative question about the issue
would lenses of nuclear exceptionalism bring us?



Nuclear
technology has played an important role in shaping modern Iranian national
identity. This began in the 1970s under
the Shah, who – with the support of the US – developed a grandiose plan to
build a fleet of nuclear reactors. It took a different turn after the 1979
Iranian revolution. For a while, the new regime sidelined the nuclear program
as an unwelcome manifestation of western corruption. But after a few years
leaders reappropriated nuclear development and sought to invest it with
Iranian-ness. The dynamics of nuclear exceptionalism have operated in Iran much
the same way they did in France and in South Africa. Nuclear exceptionalism has
served to give material form to national identity. And materialized national
identity is most emphatically not
something that you can negotiate away in the P5+1 talks.

                                  

                                  



Gabrielle Hecht is Professor
of History at the University of Michigan, where she also directs the Program in
Science, Technology, and Society and serves as associate director of the
African Studies Center. She recently published Being Nuclear: Africans and
the Global Uranium Trade (MIT Press and Wits University Press, 2012), which
has received awards from the American Historical Association and the American
Sociological Association, as well as the 2013 Susanne M. Glasscock Humanities
Book Prize and Honorable Mention for the African Studies Association's 2013
Herskovits Award. She is also the author of The Radiance of France: Nuclear
Power and National Identity after World War II (MIT Press 1998 & 2009)
and editor of Entangled Geographies: Empire and Technopolitics in the Global
Cold War, editor (MIT Press, 2011). Hecht is embarking on a new book
project on technology and power in Africa, as well as new research on
transnational toxic trash. She has held visiting positions at universities in
Australia, France, Norway, South Africa, and Sweden.





Related links





Hecht's faculty profile at the University of Michigan 
Read Hecht's Introduction to Entangled Geographies (MIT Press 2011) here (pdf)  
Read
Hecht's The Power of Nuclear Things (Technology
& Culture 2010) here (pdf) 
Read
Hecht's Nuclear Ontologies (Constellations
2006) here (pdf) 
Read
Hecht's Rupture-Talk in the Nuclear Age
(Social Studies of Science 2002) here (pdf) 


Print version of this Talk (pdf)



0
0
1
3775
21518
School of Global Studies/University of Gothenburg
179
50
25243
14.0








Normal
0




false
false
false

DE
JA
X-NONE









































































































































































/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-ansi-language:DE;
mso-fareast-language:DE;}

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Budagumpa-1microwatershed was conducted using village cadastral maps and IRS satellite imagery on 1:7920 scale. The false colour composites of IRS imagery were interpreted for physiography and these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the Microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 363 ha in Koppaltaluk 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 83 per cent is covered by soils, 13 per cent by rock out crops, four per cent by water bodies, settlements and others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 17 soil series and 21 soil phases (management units) and 6 land use classes.  The length of crop growing period is 150 cm).  About 14per cent of the area is having sandy at the surface, 16 per cent loamy soils and 53 per cent has clayey soils at the surface.  About 44per cent of the area has non-gravelly (200mm/m) in available water capacity.  An area of about 11 per cent has nearly level (0-1%) lands and 73 per cent has very gently sloping (1-3%) lands.  An area of about 39 per cent is slightly eroded (e1) and 44 per cent is moderately eroded (e2) lands.  An area of about 0.75%) in 2 per cent area of the soils.  Available phosphorus is medium (23-57 kg/ha) in 29per cent and high (>57 kg/ha) in 54 per cent area of the soils.  Available potassium islow (337 kg/ha) in 39 per cent of the soils.  Available sulphur is low (4.5 ppm) in 48per cent of the area.  Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in 81 of the area and sufficient in 3 per cent of the area.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in the entire area.  The land suitability for 28 major agricultural and horticultural crops grown in the microwatershed was assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (class S1) and moderately suitable (class 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 63(17) 137(37) Pomegranate 62(17) 145(40) Maize 25(7) 174(48) Guava 25(7) 135(37) Bajra 107(30) 110(30) Jackfruit 62(17) 98(27) Redgram 62(17) 130(36) Jamun 13(3) 186(51) Bengal gram 38(11) 165(45) Musambi 100(28) 107(30) Groundnut 12(3) 171(47) Lime 100 (28) 107(30) Sunflower 100(28) 129 (35) Cashew 10(3) 161(44) Cotton 88(24) 112(31) Custard apple 184(51) 77(21) Chilli 107(30) 45 (12) Amla 145(40) 115(32) Tomato 107(30) 45(12) Tamarind 13(3) 90(25) Drumstick 64(18) 156(43) Marigold 25(7) 174(48) Mulberry 64(18) 187(51) Chrysanthemum 25(7) 174(48) Mango 13(3) 51(14) Jasmine 25(7) 127(35) Sapota 62(17) 98(27) Crossandra 25(7) 130(36) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 6identified 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 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 and drainage line treatment palnshave been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change SALIENT FINDINGS OF THE STUDY  The data indicated that 35 farmers were sampled in Budagumpa-1 micro watershed among them 8 (22.86%) were marginal farmers, 7 (20 %) were small farmers, 7 (20 %) were semi medium farmers, 6 (17.14%) were medium farmers, 2(5.71%) were large farmers and 5 (14.29%) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there were 157 population households were there in the studied micro watershed. Among them 89 (56.69%) men and 68 (43.31 %) were women. The average family size of landless was 5, marginal, small and semi medium farmers were 7 and medium and large farmers were 6. On an average the family size was 4.  The data indicated that 20 (12.74%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 76 (48.41 %) were in 16-35 years of age, 47 (29.94 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 14 (8.92%) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Budagumpa-1had 42.04 per cent illiterates, 1.27 per cent functional literates, 22.93 per cent of them had primary school education, 8.92 per cent of them had middle school, 12.74 per cent them had high school education, 5.10 per cent of them had PUC education and 6.37 per cent of them had degree education.  The results indicated that, 77.14 per cent of households practicing agriculture, 8.57 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labour and 14.29 per cent of the household heads were general labour.  The results indicated that agriculture was the major occupation for 40.76 per cent of the household members, 23.57 per cent were agricultural labourers, 11.46 per cent were general labours and 0.64 per cent were in private sector, were in trade and business, housewives and children's and 21.02 per cent of them were students. In case of landless farmers 70.83 per cent of them were general labours and 29.17 per cent of them were students.  In case of marginal farmers 42.86 per cent of them were doing agriculture, 17.86 per cent of them were agriculture labour, 3.57 per cent of them were general labour and 35.71 per cent of them were students. In small farmers 61.29 per cent of them were doing agriculture, 16.13 per cent of them were agriculture labour, 3.23 per cent of them were in private service and 3.23 per cent of them were doing trade& business and housewives. In case of semi medium farmers 50 per cent of them were agriculturist, 34.62 per cent of them were agriculture labour and 11.54 per cent of them were students. In medium farmers 37.84 per cent of them were agriculturist, 35.14 per cent of them were agricultural labour and 21.62 per cent of them were students. Similarly in case of large farmers 54.55 per cent of them were agriculturist and 45.45 per cent of them were agricultural labour. 2  The results showed that 0.64 per cent of them participated in cooperative bank and 99.36 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions. Landless, marginal, semi medium, medium and large farmers were found to have no participation in any local institutions. Small farmers were found to participate in one or the other local institutions.  The results indicated that 65.71 per cent of the households possess thatched house, 25.71 per cent of the households possess Katcha house and 8.57 per cent of the households possess Pacca house.  The results showed that, 74.29 per cent of the households possess TV, 48.57 per cent of the households possess mixer/grinder, 17.14 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 31.43 per cent of the households possess motor cycle and 100 per cent of the households possess mobile phones.  The results showed that the average value of television was Rs. 8269, mixer/grinder was Rs. 1676, bicycle was Rs.2166, motor cycle was Rs.29583 and mobile phone was Rs.2303.  The result showed that about 17.14 per cent of the households possess bullock cart, 28.57 per cent of them possess plough, 8.57 per cent of the households possess power tiller, 11.43 per cent of the households possess tractor, 17.14 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 91.43 per cent of the households possess weeder, 5.71 43 per cent of the households possess harvester, 2.86 per cent of the households possess thresher and 5.71 per cent of the households possess chaff cutter.  The results showed that the average value of bullock cart was Rs.18333; the average value of plough was Rs. 1250, the average value of power tiller was Rs. 25000, the average value of tractor was Rs. 475000, the average value of sprayer was Rs. 10666, the average value of weeder was Rs. 80, the average value of harvester was Rs.35000, the average value of thresher was Rs. 37000 and the average value of chaff cutter was Rs. 3000.  The results indicated that, 31.43 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 17.14 per cent of the households possess local cow, 5.71 per cent of the households possess buffalo and 2.86 per cent of the households possess sheep.  The data indicated that in case of marginal farmers, 25 per cent of the households possess local cow and 12.50 per cent of the households possess local cow, buffalo and sheep respectively. In case of small farmers, 14.29 per cent of households possess bullock and 28.57 per cent possess local cow. In case of semi medium farmers, 28.57 per cent of the households possess bullock and 14.29 per cent of the households possess local cow and buffalo. 66.67 medium farmers possess bullock and 16.67 farmers possess local cow and 100 per cent of the large farmers possess bullock and 50 per cent of them possess local cow. 3  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 2, average own labour (women) available was 1.61, average hired labour (men) available was 8.80 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.38.  The data showed that in case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.25, average own labour (women) was also 1.11, average hired labour (men) was 7.67 and average hired labour (women) available was 7. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 1.71, average own labour (women) was 1.71, average hired labour (men) was 12.14 and average hired labour (women) available was 9.71. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was 1.43, average hired labour (men) was 10 and average hired labour (women) available was 8.33. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 3.17, average own labour (women) was 2.17, average hired labour (men) was 6.67 and average hired labour (women) available was 5. In case of large farmers average own labour men available was 2.50, average own labour (women) was 2.50, average hired labour (men) was 5 and average hired labour (women) available was 5.  The results indicated that, 88.57 per cent of the household opined equally that the hired labour was adequate.  The results indicated that, households of the Budagumpa-1 micro watershed possess 25.14 ha (43.40%) of dry land and 32.78 ha (56.60 %) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 5.43 ha (91.85%) of dry land 0.48 ha (8.15%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 7.89 ha (89.65 %) of dry land and 0.89 ha (10.14 %) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 4.05 ha (35.39 %) of dry land and 7.39 ha (64.61%) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 7.77 ha (41.56%) of dry land and 10.93 ha (58.44%) irrigated land. Large farmers possess 13.10 ha (100%) of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 345927.24 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 353,684.73. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 552,160.94 for dry land and Rs. 1,660,504.12 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 316,666.67 for dry land Rs. 898,181.80 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 247,000 for dry land and Rs. 541,073.38 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 283,020.83 for dry land and Rs. 384,222.22 for irrigated land. In case of large farmers the average land value was Rs. 137,391.84 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 14 functioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, there were 1functioning and 1 defunctioning open wells in the micro watershed. 4  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 40 per cent of the farmers and open well was source of irrigation for 2.86 per cent.  The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 35.71 meters.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers there was 0.96 per cent of irrigated land, in case of small farmers there was 0.89 ha of irrigated land, in case of semi medium farmers there was 9.31 ha of irrigated land, medium farmers were having 11.34 ha of irrigated land and large farmers were having 1.62 ha of irrigated land. On an average there were 24.12 ha of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, farmers have grown groundnut (11.58ha), ladies figure (1.29 ha), maize (26.93 ha), mango (2.43 ha), onion (0.40 ha), paddy (0.85 ha), sorghum (1.21 ha), tomato (0.81 ha) in kharif season. Also grown groundnut (2.43 ha) and maize (0.48 ha) in Rabi season. Marginal farmers have grown groundnut, ladies figure, maize and paddy. Small farmers have grown groundnut, maize, paddy and sorghum. Semi medium farmers have grown groundnut, maize and tomato. Medium farmers have grown groundnut, maize, mango, onion and tomato. Large farmers have grown groundnut, ladies figure and maize.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Budagumpa-1 micro watershed was found to be 72.72 per cent. In case of marginal farmers it was 98.73 per cent, in small farmers it was 90.79, in semi medium farmers it was 90.48, in medium farmers it was 89.13 per cent and in large farmers it was 32.56 per cent.  The results indicated that, 85.71 per cent of the households have bank account and 77.14 per cent of the households have savings. 100 percent of marginal, small and large farmers possess both bank account savings respectively. In case of semi medium farmers, 100 per cent of possess bank account and 85.71 per cent farmer's savings. In Medium farmers, 100 per cent of farmers possess bank account and 66.67 per cent have savings respectively.  The results indicated that, 75 per cent of marginal, 71.43 per cent of small, 28.57 per cent of semi medium, 16.67 per cent of medium farmers and 50 per cent of large farmers have borrowed credit from different sources.  The results indicated that, 6.67 per cent have availed loan in cooperative Bank, 26.67 per cent have availed loan from friends/relatives, 53.33 per cent have availed loan in Grameena bank and 13.33 per cent have availed loan from money lender.  The results indicated that, marginal, small, semi medium and medium have availed Rs.50833.33, Rs. 109000, Rs. 316000 and Rs, 310000 respectively. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed is 119,466.67.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production.  The results indicated that, 81.82 per cent of the household's barrowed private credit for agriculture production and 18.18 per cent of the household's barrowed private credit for social functions like marriage. 5  Results indicated that 100 per cent of households were unpaid their institutional loan.  Results indicated that 54.55 per cent of the households have partially paid their loan and 45.45 per cent have unpaid their private credit.  The results indicated that 25 per cent of the households were opined that helped to perform timely agricultural operations and 75 per cent of the households were opined that higher rate of interest.  The results indicated that, 9.09 per cent of the households were opined that easy accessibility of credit, 54.55 per cent of the households were opined that loan amount was adequate to fulfill the requirement and 18.18 per cent of the households were opined that helped to perform timely agricultural operations.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 20131.66. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 22249.38. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs. 2117.73. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.11.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 52091.06. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 69130.38. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. 17039.32. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.33.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for paddy was Rs. 79623.59. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 67722.91. The net income from paddy cultivation was Rs. -11900.69. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.85.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 23029.06. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 22625.29. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. -403.77. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.98.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for tomato was Rs. 65128.50. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 49400. The net income from tomato cultivation was Rs. -15728.50. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.76.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for mango was Rs. 38242.52. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 24700. The net income from mango cultivation was Rs. -13542.52. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.65.  The results indicated that, 28.57 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 25.71 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was adequate.  The table indicated that, in landless farmers, the average income from wage was Rs. 106000. In marginal farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 28,750 and agriculture was Rs. 81,118.75. In small farmers the average income from business was Rs. 25,000, wage was Rs. 18,571.43, agriculture was Rs. 68,921.43 and dairy farm was Rs. 3,500. In semi medium farmers the average income from service/salary was Rs. 8,571.43, wage was Rs. 9,285.71 and agriculture was Rs. 72,142.86. In medium farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 10,833.33, agriculture was 6 Rs. 67,500, and dairy farm was Rs. 333.33. In case of large farmers the average income from wage was Rs. 10,000, agriculture was Rs. 110,000 and dairy farm was Rs. 1,000.  The results indicated that, in landless farmers, the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 23000, in marginal farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs.5750 and agriculture was Rs.40875. In case of small farmers the average expenditure from business was Rs. 115,000, wage was Rs. 6,600, agriculture was Rs. 24,571.43 and dairy farm was Rs. 15,000. In case of semi medium farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs.20000, wage was Rs. 1,600 and agriculture was Rs. 29,285.71. In case of medium farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 4,000, agriculture was Rs. 28,000 and dairy farm was Rs. 500. In large farmers the average expenditure from wage was Rs.500, agriculture was Rs.55000 and dairy farm was Rs.500.  The results indicated that, sampled households have grown 34 coconut and 131 mango trees in their field and also planted 2 coconut trees in their back yard.  The results indicated that, households have planted 2 teak, 76 neem and 5 tarmind trees in their field and also planted 1 neem tree in their back yard.  The results indicate that, households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 5,200.14 for land development, Rs. 2,314.43 in irrigation facility, Rs.2714.29 for improved crop production and Rs.971.43 for improved livestock management.  Marginal households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 2500 for land development, Rs. 750 for irrigation facility, Rs.1375 for improved crop production and Rs.875 for improved livestock management. Small farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 2857.14 for land development, Rs. 1142.86 in irrigation facility, Rs.1714.29 for improved crop production and Rs.428.57 for improved livestock management. Semi medium farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 7515 for land development, Rs. 4715 in irrigation facility, Rs.4428.57 for improved crop production and Rs.1142.86 for improved livestock management. Medium farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 11666.67 for land development, Rs. 4666.67 for irrigation facility, Rs.5166.67 for improved crop production and Rs.1833.33 for improved livestock management. Large farmers have an average investment capacity of Rs. 9000 for land development, Rs. 3000 for irrigation facility, Rs.5000 for improved crop production and Rs.2500 for improved livestock management.  The results indicated that, for land development, 2.86 per cent of the farmers were depend on government subsidy, 40 per cent were depend on loan from the bank and 2.86 per cent of the households were depend on soft loan. 2.86 per cent of the households were dependent on government subsidy; own funds and soft loan for land development for irrigation facility respectively and 28.57 per cent were dependent on loan from the bank for irrigation facility. Similarly for improved crop production, 7 31.43 per cent of the households were dependent on loan from the bank, 8.57 per cent were dependent on their own funds and 2.86 per cent of the households were dependent on soft loan. For improved livestock management 17.14 per cent of the households were dependent on loan from bank, 8.57 per cent were dependent on own funds and 2.86 per cent were dependent on soft loan.  The results indicated that, Bajra, ladies finger, maize, paddy, sorghum and tomato crops were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Groundnut and mango were sold to the extent of 90.99 per cent and 66.67 per cent respectively. Average price obtained by bajra was Rs.1300/q, groundnut was Rs.3531.82/q, ladies finger was Rs.1250/q, maize was Rs.1145/q, mango was Rs.2000/q, paddy was Rs.1450/q, sorghum was Rs.2100/q and tomato was Rs.1000/q.  The results indicated that, 40 percent of the households have sold their produce to local/village merchant, 42.85 percent of the households sold their produce in regulated markets and 2.85 percent of the households sold their produce in cooperative marketing society.  The results indicated that 17.14 per cent of the households have used cart as a mode of transport, 57.14 per cent of them have used tractor and 11.43 per cent have used truck as a mode of transport.  The results indicated that, 37.14 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 25 percent of marginal farmers, 28.57 per cent of small farmers, 57.14 per cent of semi medium farmers, 66.67 percent of medium farmers and 50 per cent of the large farmers.  The results indicated that, 82.86 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing including 100 per cent of marginal farmers, small farmers, semi medium farmers and large farmers and 83.33 per cent of the medium farmers respectively.  The results indicated that, 14.29 per cent of the households have adopted field bunding which includes 25 per cent of marginal, 28.57 per cent of small farmers and 14.29 per cent of semi medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households who adopted field bunding opined that bunds required full replacement.  The results indicated that 14.29 per cent of soil conservation structure is constructed by government.  The results indicated that, 97.14 percent used fire wood as a source of fuel.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the source of drinking water for 57.14 per cent, 25.71 per cent of them were using bore well and 14.29 per cents of the households were using lake/tank for drinking water.  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 100 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, 54.29 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 100 per cent of landless, 12.50 per cent of marginal, 100 per cent of small, 14.29 8 per cent of semi medium, 16.67 per cent of medium and 100 per cent of large farmers had sanitary toilet facility.  The results indicated that, 97.14 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL card.  The results indicated that, 28.57 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 20 per cent of the landless, 25 percent of the marginal, 14.29 per cent of the small, 42.86 per cent of the semi medium, 33.33 percent of the medium farmers and 50 per cent of the large farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits , milk, egg and meat were adequate for 100 per cent, 97.14 per cent, 5.71 per cent, 17.14 per cent, 25.71 per cent, 82.86 per cent, 85.71 per cent and 77.14 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that, oilseed; vegetables, fruits, milk, egg and meat were inadequate for 91.43 per cent, 80 per cent, 68.57 per cent, 11.43 per cent, 11.43 per cent and 17.14 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that milk were market surplus for 2.86 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil and wild animal menace on farm field was experienced by 82.86 per cent of the households, frequent incidence of pest and diseases was experienced by 37.14 per cent of the farmers, inadequacy of irrigation water was experienced by 31.43 per cent of the households, high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals was experienced and high rate of interest on credit was experienced by 40 per cent of the farmers, low price for the agricultural commodities was experienced by 71.43 per cent of the farmers, lack of marketing facilities in the area was experienced 80 per cent of the households, inadequate of extension services experienced by 71.43 per cent of the households, lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market was experienced by 74.29 per cent of the households and less rainfall was experienced by 2.86 per cent of the farmers. ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Abbagiri Tanda-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, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 644 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 88 per cent is covered by soils, 10 per cent rock outcrops, 2 per cent is by water bodies and 150 cm).  About 3 per cent area in the microwatershed has sandy soils, 54 per cent soils are loamy and 31 per cent clayey soils at the surface  About 14 per cent area has non-gravelly (200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  About 9 per cent in the microwatershed has nearly level (0-1% slope) lands, 74 per cent has very gently sloping (1-3% slope) lands and 5 per cent area is gently sloping (3-5% slope).  An area of about 68 per cent is moderately (e2) eroded and 20 per cent area is slightly (e1) eroded.  An area of about 15 per cent soils are strongly acid (pH 5.0-5.5), an area of about 37 per cent soils are moderately acid (pH 5.5-6.0), an area of about 18 per cent soils are slightly acid (pH 6.0-6.5) in soil reaction and an area of 17 per cent is neutral (pH 6.5-7.3).  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils in the entire area of the microwatershed is dominantly 0.75%) in 72 per cent area.  Available phosphorus is medium (23-57 kg/ha) in an area 18 per cent and high (>57 kg/ha) in an area of 70 per cent.  About 29 per cent is low (145 kg/ha) in available potassium, 51 per cent is medium (145-337 kg/ha) and 9 per cent is high (>337 kg/ha).  Available sulphur is low (4.5 ppm) in the entire area of the microwatershed.  Available zinc is deficient (0.6 ppm) in 83 per cent area.  Available copper and manganese are sufficient in all the soils.  The land suitability for 28 major crops grown in the microwatershed were assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (S1) and moderately suitable (S2) are given below. It is however to be noted that a given soil may be suitable for various crops but what specific crop to be grown may be decided by the farmer looking to his capacity to invest on various inputs, marketing infrastructure, market price and finally the demand and supply position. Land suitability for various crops in the microwatershed Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Sorghum 27 (4) 103(16) Pomegranate - 271(42) Maize 23 (4) 97 (17) Guava - 253 (39) Bajra 23 (4) 356 (55) Jackfruit - 253 (39) Groundnut - 417 (65) Jamun - 266 (41) Sunflower 4 (<1) 83 (13) Musambi 4 (<1) 265(41) Cotton 4 (<1) 123(19) Lime 4 (<1) 285 (44) Red gram - 70 (10) Cashew - 246 (38) Bengalgram 61 (9) 108 (17) Custard apple 9 (1) 503 (78) Chilli - 96 (17) Amla 4 (<1) 508 (79) Tomato 23 (4) 73 (11) Tamarind - 38 (6) Drumstick - 166 (26) Marigold - 129 (20) Mulberry - 400 (62) Chrysanthemum - 129 (20) Mango - - Jasmine - 92 (14) Sapota - 233 (36) Crossandra - 92 (14)  Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 7 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested for these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.,  Soil and water conservation treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SILENT FINDINGS OF THE STUDY  The results indicated that among 35 famers 11 (22.45%) were marginal farmers, 14 (31.82 %) were small farmers, 9 (20.45 %) were semi medium farmers and 5 (11.36 %) was medium farmer. Apart from these 5 landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there were 98 (52.69%) men and 88 (47.31%) were women among the sampled households. The average family size of marginal farmers was 4, small farmer was 4, semi medium farmer was 5, medium farmers were 3 and for landless farmers it was 4.  The data indicated that 32 (17.20 %) people were in 0-15 years of age, 81 (43.55%) were in 16-35 years of age, 59 (31.72 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 14 (7.53 %) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Abbagiri Tanda-2 had 33.87 per cent illiterates, 1.61 per cent functional literates, 23.12 per cent of them had primary school education, 10.75 per cent of them had middle school education, 14.52 per cent of them had high school education, 5.91 per cent of them had PUC education, 0.54 per cent of them had ITI, 1.08 per cent them had Diploma education, 4.84 per cent of them had degree education and 3.76 per cent of them had other education. The results indicated that, 81.82 per cent of households practicing agriculture and 9.09 per cent of the household heads were general labours.  The results indicated that agriculture was the major occupation for 56.45 per cent of the household members, 2.15 per cent were agricultural labourers, 5.91 per cent were general labours, 1.61 percent were in government service, 2.15 per cent of them were in private sector, 0.54 per cent of them were trade and business, 20.43 per cent of them were students and 2.69 per cent were housewives. In case of landless households 50 per cent were general labours, 5 per cent were in private service and 35 per cent were students. In case of marginal farmers 71.79 per cent were agriculturist, 2.56 percent were agricultural labour and general labour and 17.95 per cent were students. In case of small farmers, 62.07 per cent of the household members were practicing agriculture and 20.69 per cent of them were students. In case of semi medium farmers 58.54 per cent of the household members were practicing agriculture and 21.95 per cent of them were students. In case of medium farmers, 60.71 per cent of the household members were performing agriculture.  The results showed that 4.30 per cent of them participated in self help groups, 1.08 per cent of them participated in user group and 94.62 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions. Landless and medium farmers were found to have no participation in any local institutions. Marginal, small farmers and semi medium farmers were found to participate in one or the other local institutions. 2  The results indicated that 68.18 per cent of the households possess Katcha house. 100 percent of the landless farmers possess Katcha house.  The results showed that 68.18 per cent of the households possess TV, 36.36 per cent of the households possess Mixer grinder, 22.73 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 43.18 per cent of the households possess motor cycle, 77.27 per cent of the households possess mobile phones and 2.27 per cent of the households possess refrigerator.  The results showed that the average value of television was Rs.4800, mixer grinder was Rs.1400, refrigerator Rs.15000, bicycle Rs.1727, motor cycle was Rs.30350 and mobile phone was Rs.1220.  The results showed that, about 15.91 per cent of the households possess bullock cart, 27.27 per cent of them possess plough, 2.27 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 9.09 per cent of the households possess tractor, 20.45 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 15.91 per cent of the households possess sprinkler, 50 per cent of the households possess weeder, 6.82 per cent of the households possess harvester, 2.27 per cent of the households possess thresher and 11.36 per cent of the households possess chaff cutter.  The results show that the average value of plough was Rs.1318, the average value of bullock cart was Rs. 17000, the average value of power tiller Rs. 100000, the average value of tractor Rs. 300000, the average value of sprinkler Rs.3192, the average value of was sprayer Rs.2409, the average value of weeder Rs. 72, the average value of harvester Rs.4662 and the average value of chaff cutter Rs.3000.  The results indicated that, 31.82 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 11.36 per cent of the households possess local cow, 6.82 per cent of the households possess buffalo and 2.27 per cent of the households possess sheep and goat respectively. In case of marginal farmers, 27.27 per cent of the households possess bullock. In case of small farmers, 42.86 per cent of households possess bullock, 14.29 per cent possess local cow and buffalo and 7.14 per cent possess sheep and goat respectively. In case of semi medium farmers, 44.44 per cent of the households possess bullock, 11.11 per cent possess local cow and buffalo correspondingly. In medium farmers 20 per cent of the households possess bullock and 40 per cent of the households possess local cow.  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro-watershed was 1.53, average own labour (women) available was 1.26, average hired labour (men) available was 11 and average hired labour (women) available was 11.82. In case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.36, average own labour (women) was 1.09, average hired labour (men) was 6 and average hired labour (women) available was 6. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 1.46, average own labour (women) was 1.08, average hired labour 3 (men) was 10.23 and average hired labour (women) available was 12.38. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 1.88, average own labour (women) was 1.63, average hired labour (men) was 19.38 and average hired labour (women) available was 20. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 1.50, average own labour (women) was 2, average hired labour (men) was 10 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.50.  The results indicated that77.27 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was adequate About 100 per cent of the marginal farmers, 92.86 per cent of small, 88.89 per cent of semi medium and 40 per cent of the medium farmers have opined that the hired labour was adequate.  The results indicated that, 2 person was migrated from micro-watershed that belonged to small and semi medium farmer category. Total migration in the microwatershed was only 1.08 per cent. The results indicated that, people have migrated on an average of 375 Kms and average duration was 6.50 months. Small farmers have migrated 150 kms and on an average for 6months and semi medium farmers have migrated 600 kms and on an average for 7 months. The results indicated that, job/work was the only reason for migration for all the migrants.  The results indicated that, households of the Abbagiri Tanda-2 micro-watershed possess 21.53 ha (40.38 %) of dry land and 31.79 ha (59.62%) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 7.83 ha (95.08%) of dry land and 0.40 ha (4.92%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 11.27 ha (69.10%) of dry land and 5.04 ha (30.90 %) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 2.43 ha (16.18%) of dry land and 12.58 ha (83.82 %) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 13.76 ha (100%) of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 264642.86 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 380532.21. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 370372.28 for dry land and Rs. 741000 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 221643.93 for dry land Rs. 713643.66 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 123500 for dry land and Rs. 389414.42 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 239735.29 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 21 functioning and 12 defunctioning bore wells in the micro watershed. The results indicated that, there was only 1 functioning open well in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 47.73 per cent of the farmers and open well was source of irrigation source for 2.27 per cent of the farmers. The results indicated that, marginal farmers having 0.81 per cent of irrigated land. In case of small farmers there were 5.17 ha of irrigated land, semi 4 medium farmers were having 15.08 ha of irrigated land and medium farmers were having 11.34 ha of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, farmers have grown Bajra (12.61 ha), Bengal gram (0.91 ha), Chilly (0.81 ha), Ground nut (1.62 ha), Kanakambara (0.40 ha), Maize (21.16 ha), Navane (3.24 ha), Paddy (0.81 ha), Papaya (1.67 ha) and Tomato (0.87 ha) in kharif season and Bengal gram (1.21 ha), Ground nut (1.74 ha), Paddy (0.81 ha) and Red gram (1.46 ha) in Rabi season. Marginal farmers have grown Maize, Bajra, Navane and Kanakambara. Small farmers have grown Bajra, Maize, Navane, Tomato, Water melon and Groundnut. Semi medium farmers have grown Bajra, Bengal Gram, Chilly, Groundnut, Maize, Paddy and Papaya. Medium farmers have grown Groundnut and Maize.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Abbagiri Tanda-2 microwatershed was found to be 95.82 per cent. In case of Marginal farmers, small farmers and medium farmers it was 100 per cent and in case of semi medium farmers it was 87.26 per cent.  The results indicated that, 61.36 per cent of the households have bank account and savings respectively. Landless farmers 80 percent of them possess both bank account and savings. 81.82 per cent of marginal farmers possess both bank account and savings correspondingly. Small farmers possess 71.43 per cent of both bank account and savings and medium category of farmers possess 44.44 per cent of bank account and also savings in that order.  The results indicated that, 80 per cent of landless, 81.82 per cent of marginal, 14.29 per cent of small and 44.44 per cent semi medium have borrowed credit from different sources. The results indicated that, 20.83 per cent have availed loan in Commercial bank, 50 per cent of the households availed loan in Grameena bank, 45.83 per cent have availed loan from money lender and 12.50 per cent have availed loan from SHGs/CBOs.  The results indicated that, landless, marginal, small and semi medium have availed Rs. 26,250, Rs. 50,000, Rs. 177,000, and Rs. 137,500 respectively. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro-watershed is 97,666.67.  The results indicated that, 93.75 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production and 6.25 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for Social functions like marriage. The results indicated that, agriculture production, bore well/irrigation related equipments, construction-house, construction-cattle shed, household consumption and other reasons were the main purpose for which marginal, small farmers, semi medium farmers borrowed loan. 33.33 per cent of the household's barrowed loan for agriculture production, 8.33 per cent of the household's barrowed loan for Bore well/irrigation related equipments, 5 Construction-house, Construction-cattle shed respectively and 25 per cent of them took loan for household consumption.  The data regarding the repayment status of credit borrowed from institutional sources by households in Abbagiri Tanda-2 showed that 47.06 per cent of the households partially their loan and 52.94 per cent of the households have unpaid their loan. Results indicated that 64.29 per cent of the households have repaid their private credit partially, 21.43 percent of the households have unpaid their loan and 7.14 per cent of them fully paid their loan.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 12086.76. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 26429.00. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. 14342.24, thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.19. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 16778.52. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 31106.06. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs.14327.53, and the income generated from red gram was Rs.1613.22, thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.85.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for navane was Rs. 11950.89. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 26799.50. The net income from navane cultivation was Rs. 14848.61. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.24. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for crossandra was Rs. 54865.08. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 173888.00. The net income from crossandra cultivation was Rs.119022.92. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:3.17.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bengalgram was Rs. 32635.87. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 76962.18. The net income from bengalgram cultivation was Rs. 44326.31. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.36. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 42105.75. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 70296.94. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. 28191.18. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.67.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for chilly was Rs. 49859.57. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 222300.00. The net income from chilly cultivation was Rs. 172440.43. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:4.46. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for paddy was Rs. 50482.00. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 81510.00. The net income from paddy cultivation was Rs. 31028.00. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.61.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for redgram was Rs. 13048.22. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 32933.33. The net income from redgram cultivation was Rs. 19885.12. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 6 1:2.52. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Papaya was Rs. 44258.18. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 575534.00. The net income from Papaya cultivation was Rs. 531275.82. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:13.0.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Tomato was Rs. 24942.81. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs.111150.00. The net income from Tomato cultivation was Rs. 86207.19. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:4.46. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Watermelon was Rs. 32084.97. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 526018.50. The net income from Watermelon cultivation was Rs. 493933.52. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:16.39.  The results indicated that, 27.27 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate, 2.27 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was inadequate also the data revealed that 22.73 per cent of the farmers opined that green fodder is adequate.  The results indicated that, Bajra, Bengal Gram, Chilly, Groundnut, Maize, Navane, Paddy, Papaya, Red Gram, Tomato, Water Melon and Kanakambara flower sold to the extent of 100 per cent.  The results indicated that the average income from service/salary was Rs. 10500, business Rs. 12727.27, wage Rs. 22340.91, agriculture Rs. 89061.36, dairy farm Rs. 1409.09 and goat farming was Rs. 454.55.  The results indicated that the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs. 340.91, business Rs. 4818.18, wage Rs. 8204.55, agriculture Rs. 52295.45, dairy farm Rs. 795.45 and goat farming was Rs. 386.36.The overall on an average expenditure was Rs.18800.  The results indicate that, sampled households have grown 36 coconut trees and 224 mango trees in their field.  The results indicated that, 40.91 per cent of the households are interested in growing horticultural crops which include 81.82 per cent marginal farmers, 35.71 per cent small farmers and 44.44 per cent semi medium farmers.  The results indicate that, households have planted 3 Teak and Eucalyptus trees in field respectively, also grown 108 neem tree and 1 tamarind tree in the field.  The results indicated that for 38.64 per cent of the households were dependent on government subsidy for land development. Similarly for the dependency was for irrigation facility 36.36 percent, 29.55 percent for improved crop production and only 2.27 per cent for improved livestock management.  The results indicated that, Bajra, Bengal Gram, Chilly, Groundnut, Maize, Navane, Paddy, Papaya, Red Gram, Tomato, Water Melon and Kanakambara flower sold to the extent of 100 per cent. 7  The results indicated that, 31.82 percent of the households have sold their produce to local/village merchants, 52.27 percent of the households sold their produce in regulated markets and 22.73 per cent of the households sold their produce to agents/traders.  The results indicated that 77.27 per cent of the households have used tractor as a mode of transport and 29.55 per cent have used cart.  The results indicated that, 54.55 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing i.e. 90.91 per cent of marginal farmers, 71.43 per cent of small farmers and 44.44 per cent of semi medium farmers have shown interest in soil testing.  The results indicated that, 22.73 per cent of the households have adopted field bunding, 54.55 per cent of the households have adopted summer ploughing and 9.09 per cent of the households have adopted dead furrow, mulching, contour cultivation and combination of deep and shallow root crops respectively. The results indicated that 15.91 per cent of the soil conservation structures are constructed by the government and another 2.27 per cent is constructed by other organization.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households who adopted field bunding opined that 100 per cent of the bunds required full replacement.  The results indicated that, 72. 73 percent used fire wood as a source of fuel, 25 percent of the households used LPG and 2.27 per cents of the households used Kerosene as a source of fuel.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the source for drinking water for 63.64 per cent of the households, 25 per cent of the households were using bore well and 2.27 per cent of the households were using open well as a source of drinking water.  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light which was found to be 97.73 per cent and only 2.27 per cent of the people were using kerosene as a source of light.  The results indicated that, 50 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 40 per cent of landless, 63.64 per cent of marginal, 50 per cent of small, 44.44 per cent of semi medium and 40 per cent of medium had sanitary toilet facility.  The results indicated that, 93.18 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL card and 6.82 per cent of the sampled households not possessed BPL card.  The results indicated that, 50 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 100 per cent of the landless, 45.45 percent of the marginal, 21.43 per cent of the small, 66.67 per cent of the semi medium and 60 percent of the medium farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits, milk, egg and meat were adequate for 100 per cent, 79.55 per cent, 34.09, 25 per cent, 2.27 per cent, 93.18 per cent, 84.09 per cent and 11.36 per cent of the households respectively. 8  The results indicated that, pulses were inadequate for 20.45 per cent, oilseeds were inadequate for 61.36 per cent, vegetables were inadequate for 75 per cent, fruits were inadequate for 63.64 per cent, milk was inadequate 2.27 per cent, eggs were inadequate for 4.55 per cent and meat was inadequate for 65.91 per cent of the households.  The data regarding farming constraints experienced by households in Abbagiri Tanda -2 micro-watershed is presented in Table 60. The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil was the constraint experienced by 45.45 per cent of the households, wild animal menace on farm field (77.27%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (75%), inadequacy of irrigation water (52.27%), high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals (68.18%), high rate of interest on credit (54.55%), low price for the agricultural commodities (56.82%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (59.09%), inadequate extension services (54.55%), lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market (56.82%), less rainfall (36.36%) and Source of Agri-technology information(Newspaper /TV/Mobile) (6.82). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Hire Shindhogi microwatershed was conducted using village cadastral maps and IRS satellite imagery on 1:7920 scale. The false colour composites of IRS imagery were interpreted for physiography and these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 526 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 83 per cent is covered by soils and 17 per cent by habitation and water bodies, settlements and others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below.  The soils belong to 9 soil series and 16 soil phases (management units) and 5 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is 200 mm/m) in available water capacity.  An area of about 18 per cent has nearly level (0-1%) and 65 per cent area has very gently sloping (1-3%) lands.  An area of about 44 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1) and 39 per cent moderately eroded (e2) lands.  An area of about 9.0) in soil reaction.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils is non-saline (0.75%) in 32 per cent area of the soils.  Available phosphorus is medium (23-57 kg/ha) in entire area of about 83 per cent in the microwatershed.  About 2 per cent of the soils are medium (145-337 kg/ha) and 81 per cent soils are high (>337 kg/ha) in available potassium content.  Available sulphur is high (>320 ppm) in the entire area of the microwatershed.  Available boron is low (0.5 ppm) in about 48 per cent area and 35 per cent are medium (0.5-1.0 ppm).  Available iron is sufficient (>4.5 ppm) in 81 per cent and deficient (0.6 ppm) in about 60 per cent area.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils.  The land suitability for 31 major agricultural and horticultural 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 70 (13) 283 (54) Sapota 18 (3) - Maize 1 (<1) 351 (67) Pomegranate 18 (3) 335 (64) Bajra 18 (3) 334 (64) Musambi 70 (13) 283 (54) Groundnut 17 (3) 57 (11) Lime 70 (13) 283 (54) Sunflower 70 (13) 283 (54) Amla 18 (3) 391 (74) Red gram 18 (3) 272 (52) Cashew 17 (3) 1 (<1) Bengalgram 52 (10) 301 (57) Jackfruit 18 (3) - Cotton 70 (13) 283 (54) Jamun 18 (3) 272 (52) Chilli 18 (3) - Custard apple 70 (13) 338 (64) Tomato 18 (3) - Tamarind 18 (3) 273 (52) Brinjal - 410 (78) Mulberry 18 (3) 207 (39) Onion - 75 (14) Marigold 18 (3) 334 (64) Bhendi - 410 (78) Chrysanthemum 18 (3) 334 (64) Drumstick 18 (3) 392 (74) Jasmine 18 (3) - Mango 18 (3) - Crossandra 18 (3) 79 (15) Guava 17 (3) 1 (<1)  Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 5 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops that helps in maintaining productivity and ecological balance in the microwatershed.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested for these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.  Soil and water conservation treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SALIENT FEATURES OF THE SURVEY  The results indicated that 38 farmers were sampled in Hire Shindhogi micro watershed among them 7 (18.42 %) were marginal farmers, 10 (26.32%) were small farmers, 11 (28.95 %) were semi medium farmers and 5 (13.16%) were medium farmers. Apart from these 5 (13.16%) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there were 96 (51.06%) men and 92 (48.94%) were women among the sampled households. The average family size of marginal farmers was 5, small farmer was 5, semi medium farmer was 5, medium farmers were 6 and for landless farmers it was 4.  The data indicated that 43 (22.87%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 73 (38.83%) were in 16-35 years of age, 55 (29.26 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 17 (9.04%) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Hire Shindhogi had 31.38 per cent illiterates, 1.06 per cent functional literates, 33.51 per cent of them had primary school education, 5.32 per cent of them had middle school education, 13.30 per cent of them had high school education, 7.45 per cent of them had PUC education, 0.53 per cent of them had ITI, 1.60 per cent of them had degree education and 5.32 per cent of them had other education.  The results indicate that, 84.21 per cent of households practicing agriculture, 5.26 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labourers and 2.63 per cent of the household heads were doing private service.  The results indicate that agriculture was the major occupation for 45.21 per cent of the household members, 21.28 per cent were agricultural labourers, 0.53 percent were in government service, 2.13 per cent of them were in private sector, 22.34 per cent of them were students and 0.53 per cent were housewives. In case of landless households 30 per cent were agricultural labourers, 5 per cent were private services and 40 per cent were students. In case of marginal farmers 50 per cent were agriculturist, 21.88 percent were agricultural labour and 25 per cent were students. In case of small farmers, 54.35 per cent of the household members were practicing agriculture and 17.39 per cent of them were students. In case of semi medium farmers 45.61 per cent of the household members were practicing agriculture and 19.30 per cent of them were students. In case of medium farmers, 48.48 per cent of the household members were performing agriculture, 18.18 per cent of them were agricultural labour and 21.21 per cent of them were students.  The results showed that 1.06 per cent of them participated in Sthree Shakthi Sangha, 0.53 per cent of them participated in user group and 98.40 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions. Landless, small and medium farmers were found to have no participation in any local institutions. Marginal and semi medium farmers were found to participate in one or the other local institutions. 2  The results indicated that 73.68 per cent of the households possess Katcha house, 7.89 per cent of them possess Pucca house and 21.05 per cent of them possess Semi Pacca house. 100 percent of the landless farmers possess Katcha house.  The results showed that 5.26 per cent of the households possess radio, 76.32 per cent of the households possess TV, 7.89 per cent of the households possess DVD, 42.11 per cent of the households possess Mixer grinder, 44.74 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 26.32 per cent of the households possess motor cycle, 5.26 per cent of the households possess auto, 2.63 per cent of the households possess car and 78.95 per cent of the households possess mobile phones.  The results showed that the average value of radio was Rs.400, average value of television was Rs.4968, the average value of DVD/VCD Player was Rs.2333, mixer grinder was Rs.2381, Auto was Rs.42500, bicycle Rs.1323, motor cycle was Rs.33150, Car was Rs. 250000 and mobile phone was Rs.1266.  The results showed that about 23.68 per cent of the households possess plough, 28.95 per cent of them possess bullock cart, 2.63 cent of the households possess seed/fertilizer drill, 10.53 cent of the households possess tractor, 23.68 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 36.84 per cent of them possess weeder, 5.26 per cent of them were possess chaff cutter and 2.63 per cent of the households possess JCB/Hitachi.  The results showed that the average value of plough was Rs.1655, the average value of bullock cart was Rs. 21072, the average value of seed/Fertilizer drill Rs. 15000, the average value of tractor Rs. 375000, the average value of sprayer was Rs.2655, the average value of weeder Rs. 69, the average value of chaff cutter Rs.1800, the average value of JCB Rs.1000000 and the average value of duster was Rs. 8000.  The results indicated that, 31.58 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 26.32 per cent of the households possess local cow and 2.63 per cent of the households possess crossbred cow and buffalo respectively.  The data showed that, in case of marginal farmers, 33.33 per cent of the households possess bullock and 50 per cent of the households possess local cow. In case of small farmers, 20 per cent of households possess bullock and local cow and 10 per cent possess buffalo. In case of semi medium farmers, 54.55 per cent of the households possess bullock, 18.18 per cent possess local cow and 9.09 per cent possess buffalo. In medium farmers, 20 per cent of the households possess bullock and 60 per cent possess local cow.  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 2, average own labour (women) available was 1.64, average hired labour (men) available was 5.03 and average hired labour (women) available was 5.36.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.71, average own labour (women) was 1.29, average hired labour (men) was 4.57 and average hired labour (women) available was 5.43. In case of 3 small farmers, average own labour men available was 1.90, average own labour (women) was 1.80, average hired labour (men) was 4.50 and average hired labour (women) available was 4. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 1.82, average own labour (women) was 1.55, average hired labour (men) was 6.27 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.09. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 3, average own labour (women) was 2, average hired labour (men) was 4 and average hired labour (women) available was 4.20.  The results indicated that, 65.79 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was adequate and 21.05 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was inadequate. About 71.43 per cent of the marginal farmers, 80 per cent of small, 63.64 per cent of semi medium and 100 per cent of the medium have opined that the hired labour was adequate and 28.57 per cent marginal farmers, 20 per cent of small farmers and 36.36 per cent of semi medium farmers were opined that hired labour was inadequate.  The results indicated that, 1 person was migrated from micro watershed that belonged to medium farmer category. Total migration in the micro watershed was only 0.53 per cent.  The results indicated that, people have migrated on an average of 390 Kms and average duration was 12 months. I.e. medium farmers have migrated 390 kms and on an average for 12 months.  The results indicated that, job/work was the only reason for migration for all the migrants.  The results indicated that, improved quality of the life and construction of house were the positive consequences of migration.  The results indicated that, households of the Hire Shindhogi micro watershed possess 36.16 ha (64.11%) of dry land and 20.24 ha (35.89%) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 4.21 ha (90.43 %) of dry land and 0.45 ha (9.57%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 9.25 ha (84.04%) of dry land and 1.76 ha (15.96 %) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 15.01 ha (63.53%) of dry land and 8.62 ha (36.47 %) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 7.69 ha (44.93%) of dry land and 9.43 ha (55.07 %) of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 343378.10 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 409856.06. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 510625 for dry land and 1122727.25 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 434,356.96 for dry land Rs. 512,211.99 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 246,467.10for dry land and Rs. 406,059.19 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 331500 for dry land and the average land value was Rs. 360,583.94 for irrigated land. 4  The results indicated that, there were 11 functioning and 10 defunctioning bore wells in the micro watershed.  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 28.95 per cent of the farmers.  The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 31.25 meters.  The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers there was 0. 45 ha of irrigated land, in case of small farmers there was 1.85 ha of irrigated land, semi medium farmers were having 7.81 ha of irrigated land and medium farmers were having 15.62 ha of irrigated land. On an average there were 25.72 ha of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, farmers have grown Bajra (6.89 ha), Banana (0.71 ha), Bengal gram (2.85 ha), Chilly (0.45 ha), Cotton (1.01 ha), Green gram (0.83 ha), Sorghum (1.62 ha), Maize (8.12 ha), Onion (0.93 ha), Red gram (4.45 ha), Sugandaraja (0.40 ha) and Sunflower (9.51 ha) in kharif season and Bajra (0.81 ha), Bengal gram (3.29 ha), Cotton (1.21 ha), Maize (5.09 ha), Sunflower (1.23 ha) and Sorghum (16.28 ha) in Rabi season.  Data showed that, marginal farmers have grown Bengal Gram, chilly, bajra, cotton, Maize and Sorghum. Small farmers have grown Bajra, Green gram, Maize, Red Gram, Sunflower, Sorghum and Bengal Gram. Semi medium farmers have grown Bajra, Banana, Cotton, Bengalgram, Maize, Redgram, Sugandaraja, Sunflower and Sorghum. Medium farmers have grown Bajra, Bengal gram, Sorghum, Maize, onion, Red gram and Sunflower.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Hire Shindhogi micro watershed was found to be 76.82 per cent. In case of Marginal farmers it was 87.10 per cent, for small farmers it was 100 per cent, in case of semi medium farmers it was 78.94 per cent and medium farmers had cropping intensity of 61.78 per cent.  The results indicated that, only 10.53 per cent of the households have bank account and savings respectively. Among marginal farmers 28.57 percent of them possess both bank account and savings respectively. Small farmers possess 9.09 per cent of both bank account and savings correspondingly and medium farmers possess 20 of bank account and savings in that order.  The results indicated that 28.57 per cent marginal farmers, 9.09 per cent of semi medium farmers and 20 per cent of medium farmers have borrowed credit from different sources.  The results indicated that, 50 per cent of the households have availed loan from Grameena bank and Commercial bank respectively.  The results indicated that marginal farmers have availed Rs. 27500, semi medium farmers have availed Rs. 55000 and medium farmers have availed Rs.100000. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed is 52500. 5  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production from institutional source.  The results indicated that, agriculture production was the main purpose for which semi medium farmers have borrowed loan from private credit.  The results indicated that 100 per cent of the households have unpaid their institutional loan.  Results indicated 50 percent of the households have unpaid their loan and 50 percent of the households have fully paid their private credit.  The results indicated that 25 per cent of the households were opined that they were forced to sell the produce at low price to repay loan in time and 75 per cent of households were not given any opinion on institutional source of credit.  The results indicated that 50 per cent of the households were opined that the rate of interest was high in non-institutional credit and 50 per cent of households were not given any opinion on non-institutional source of credit.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 23881.74. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 22503.93. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. -1377.81, thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.94.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 30364.35. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 32931.72. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs.6626.43, thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.08.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for sorghum was Rs. 18449.10. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 27728.81. The net income from sorghum cultivation was Rs. 9279.71. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.5.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bengalgram was Rs. 29334.18. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 48503.01. The net income from bengalgram cultivation was Rs. 19168.83. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.65.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for redgram was Rs. 32495.55. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 30698.57. The net income from redgram cultivation was Rs. -1796.98. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.94.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for cotton was Rs. 63323.50. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 50427.06. The net income from cotton cultivation was Rs. -12896.44. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.8. 6  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Onion was Rs. 34570.60. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 34515.28. The net income from Onion cultivation was Rs. 55.32. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.0.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Sunflower was Rs. 28043.53. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 73693.85. The net income from Sunflower cultivation was Rs. 45650.32. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.63.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Banana was Rs. 25564.87. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 105858.The net income from Banana cultivation was Rs. 80293.13. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:3.41.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Chilly was Rs. 69680.27. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 75447.27. The net income from Chilly cultivation was Rs. 5767. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.08.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Green gram was Rs. 26706.19. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 72900.97. The net income from Green gram cultivation was Rs. 46194.78. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.73.  The results indicated that, 39.47 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 7.89 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was inadequate also the data revealed that 39.47 per cent of the farmers opined that green fodder is adequate and 7.89 per cent of the farmers opined that green fodder is inadequate.  The results indicated that the average income from service/salary was Rs. 8578.95, business Rs. 5157.89, wage Rs. 4368.42, agriculture Rs. 53161.32 and non farm income Rs. 6842.11and dairy farm Rs. 5018.42.  The results indicated that the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs. 2289.47, business Rs. 2631.58, wage Rs. 1552.63, agriculture Rs. 31,815.79 and dairy farm Rs. 1921.05.  The results indicated that, sampled households have grown 53 coconut trees, 20 lemon trees and 1 mango tree in their field and also grown 1 coconut tree in back yard.  The results indicated that, 2.63 per cent of the households are interested in growing horticultural crops which include 14.29 per cent marginal farmers.  The results indicated that, households have planted 90 Neem, 8 Banyan trees and 2 people trees in their field and also grown 27 Neem tree in the backyard.  The results indicated that for 2.63 per cent of the households were dependent on government subsidy for irrigation facility and 5.26 percent of the households were have their own fund for additional investment. 7  The results indicated that, Bajra, Chilly, Green gram Cotton and Onion were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Banana, Bengal gram, Sorghum, Maize, Red gram and Sunflower were sold to the extent of 72 per cent, 96.30 per cent, 98.36 per cent, 85.30 per cent, 91.67 per cent and 95.19 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that, 65.79 percent of the households have sold their produce to agents/ traders, 34.21 percent of the households sold their produce in local/village merchant, 31.58 percent of the households sold their produce to regulated market and 7.89 percent of the households sold their produce to cooperative marketing society and contract marketing arrangement respectively.  The results indicated that 57.89 per cent of the households have used cart as a mode of transport, 71.05 per cent have used tractor and 2.63 per cent have used Bus and Truck respectively. 5.26 households have used head load as a mode of transport.  The results indicated that, 5.26 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 14.29 percent of marginal farmers and 9.09 percent of semi medium farmers.  The results indicated that only 5.26 per cent of the households have showed interest in soil testing i.e. 14.29 per cent of marginal farmers and 9.09 per cent of semi medium farmers have showed interest in soil testing.  The results indicated that, 5.26 per cent of the households have adopted field bunding which includes 14.29 per cent of marginal and 9.09 per cent of semi medium farmers. Farm pond was adopted by 2.63 per cent of the households i.e. 9.09 per cent of the semi medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households who adopted farm pond opined that farm ponds are good, 50 per cent opined that field bunds are good and another 50 per cent of the households have opined that field bunds are slightly damaged.  The results indicated that 5.26 per cent of soil conservation structure is constructed by farmers on their own and 2.63 per cent of the soil conservation structures are constructed by the farmer's organization.  The results indicated that, 84.21 percent used fire wood, 10.53 percent of the households used LPG and 2.63 percent of the households used Biogas as a source of fuel.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the major source for drinking water for 50 per cent, 31.58 per cent of households used bore well water and 15.79 per cent of households used bore well water.  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 97.37 per cent of the households in micro watershed.  The results indicated that, 34.21 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 60 per cent of landless, 14.29 per cent of marginal, 50 per cent of small, 18.18 per cent of semi medium and 40 per cent of medium had sanitary toilet facility. 8  The results indicated that, 81.58 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL card, 7.89 per cent of the sample households possess APL card and 7.89 per cent of the households have not possessed BPL card.  The results indicated that, 34.21 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 100 per cent of the landless, 28.57 percent of the marginal, 30 per cent of the small, 9.09 per cent of the semi medium and 40 percent of the medium farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits, milk, Egg and meat were adequate for 89.47 percent, 39.47 percent, 18.42 percent, 47.37 percent, 42.11 percent, 55.26 percent, 31.58 percent, and 13.16 percent of the households respectively.  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits, milk, egg and meat were inadequate for 7.89 per cent, 57.89 per cent, 50 per cent, 28.95 per cent, 34.21 per cent, 28.95 per cent, 44.74 per cent and 52.63 per cent of the households respectively.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil was the constraint experienced by 15.79 per cent of the households, wild animal menace on farm field (39.47%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (34.21%), inadequacy of irrigation water (18.42%), high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals (36.84%), high rate of interest on credit (47.37%), low price for the agricultural commodities (18.42%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (31.58%), inadequate extension services (5.26%), lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market (60.53%), less rainfall (89.47%) and Source of Agritechnology information(Newspaper/TV/Mobile) (57.89). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project

Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Bisarahalli-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, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the Microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 531 ha in Koppal taluk and district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought - prone with an average annual rainfall of 662 mm, of which about 424 mm is received during south –west monsoon, 161 mm during north-east and the remaining 77 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 99 per cent is covered by soil and 1 per cent by water body. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below  The soils belong to 21 soil series and 30 soil phases (management units) and 7 land management units.  The length of crop growing period is 150cm) soils.  About 35 per cent loamy (sandy loam and sandy clay loam) and 64 per cent has clayey (sandy clay and clay) soils at the surface.  About 71 per cent of the area has non-gravelly (200mm/m) in available water capacity.  An area of about 1 per cent has nearly level (0-1%) lands and 98 per cent has very gently sloping (1-3%) lands.  An area of about 19 per cent is slightly eroded (e1) and 80 per cent is moderately eroded (e2) lands.  An area of about 3 per cent is slightly acidic (pH 6.0-6.5), 18 per cent is neutral (pH 6.5-7.3), 32 per cent is slightly alkaline (pH 7.3-7.8), 24 per cent is moderately alkaline (pH 7.8-8.4), 22 per cent is strongly alkaline (pH 8.4-9.0) and 9.00) in reaction.  The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are non saline (0.75%) in 89 per cent area of the soils.  Available phosphorus is medium (23-57 kg/ha) in entire area of the microwatershed.  Available potassium is medium (145-337 kg/ha) in 48 per cent and high (>337 kg/ha) in 51 per cent of the soils.  Available sulphur is medium (10-20 ppm) in 1per cent and high (>20 ppm) in 98 per cent area of the soils.  Available boron is low (4.5 ppm) in the entire area.  Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in the entire area of the microwatershed.  Available manganese and copper are sufficient in the entire area.  The land suitability for 31 major agricultural and horticultural crops grown in the microwatershed was assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (class S1) and moderately suitable (class 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 62(12) 275(52) Sapota 27(5) 93(18) Maize 27(5) 310(59) Pomegranate 27(5) 196(37) Bajra 66(12) 332(63) Musambi 32(6) 191(35) Groundnut 5(1) 358(67) Lime 32(6) 191(35) Sunflower 32(6) 159(30) Amla 66(13) 439(82) Redgram 27(5) 100(19) Cashew - 97(18) Bengal gram 16(3) 321(60) Jackfruit 27(5) 93(18) Cotton 43(8) 293(55) Jamun 27(5) 99(19) Chilli 61(11) 155(30) Custard apple 82(16) 422(79) Tomato 61(11) 155(30) Tamarind 27(5) 28(5) Brinjal 40(7) 339(65) Mulberry 27(5) 315(59) Onion 5(1) 254(48) Marigold 27(5) 310(58) Bhendi 5(1) 375(71) Chrysanthemum 27(5) 310(58) Drumstick 27(5) 271(50) Jasmine 27(5) 207(39) Mango 27(5) - Crossandra 27(5) 253(49) Guava - 119(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 other horticulture crops.  Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested to these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc.,  Soil and water conservation and drainage line treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required.  As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SALIENT FINDINGS OF THE STUDY  The results indicated that 35 farmers were sampled in Bisrahalli-2 micro watershed among them 6 (17.14%) were marginal farmers, 12 (34.29 %) were small farmers, 8 (22.86 %) were semi medium farmers, 7 (20%) were medium farmers and 2(5.71%) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey.  The data indicated that there were 190 population households were there in the studied micro watershed. Among them 97 (51.05%) men and 93 (48.95 %) were women. The average family size of landless was 5, marginal farmer was 4, small farmer was 5, semi medium farmer was 7 and medium farmer was 6. On an average the family size was 5.  The data indicated that 39 (20.53%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 87 (45.79 %) were in 16-35 years of age, 47 (24.74 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 17 (8.95 %) were above 61 years of age.  The results indicated that the Bisrahalli-2 had 28.95 per cent illiterates, 24.74 per cent of them had primary school education, 5.26 per cent of them had middle school, 15.79 per cent them had high school education, 7.37 per cent of them had PUC education, 2.63 per cent of them had ITI education, 3.68 per cent of them had degree education, 1.05 per cent of them had masters education and 10.53 per cent them had others.  The results indicated that, 82.86 per cent of households practicing agriculture, 5.71 per cent of the household heads were housewives and 2.86 per cent of the household heads were in government service and in trade & business respectively.  The results indicated that agriculture was the major occupation for 30 per cent of the household members, 35.26 per cent were agricultural labourers, 2.63 per cent government service and private sector, 0.53 per cent of them were trade and business, 17.37 per cent of them were students, 7.89 per cent of them were children and 2.11 per cent were housewives. In case of landless households 20 per cent were doing agriculture, 40 per cent of them were agricultural labour and 30 per cent were students. In case of marginal farmers 34.62 per cent were agriculturist, 46.15 percent was in agricultural labour and 15.38 per cent were students. In case of small farmers 33.33 per cent of them were agriculturist, 31.58 percent were in agricultural labour and 19.30 per cent of them were students. In case of semi medium farmers 30.19 per cent of the family members were agriculturist, 32.08 per cent of them were agricultural labour and 13.21 per cent of them were students. In case of medium farmers 25 per cent of the family members were agriculturist, 36.36 per cent of them were in agricultural labour and 18.18 per cent of them were students.  The results showed that 1.05 per cent of them participated in Sthree Shakthi Sangha, 0.53 per cent of them participated in Raitha Sangha and 98.42 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions. Landless and medium farmers were found to 2 have no participation in any local institutions. Marginal, small and semi medium farmers were found to participate in one or the other local institutions.  The results indicated that 65.71 per cent of the households possess Katcha house, 22.86 per cent of the households possess Pucca house and 14.29 per cent of the households possess Semi Pacca house. 100 percent of the landless and marginal farmers possess Katcha house.  The results showed that, 2.86 per cent of the households possess radio, 80 per cent of the households possess TV, 14.29 per cent of the households possess DVD/VCD Player, 40 per cent of the households possess Mixer grinder, 68.57 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 34.29 per cent of the households possess motor cycle, 2.86 per cent of the households possess both Auto and tempo, 8.57 per cent of the households possess Car/Four Wheeler and 88.57 per cent of the households possess mobile phones.  The results showed that the average value of radio was Rs.1000, television was Rs. 5123, DVD/VCD Player was Rs. 2200, mixer grinder was Rs.2030, bicycle was Rs.2503, motor cycle was Rs.27642, Auto was Rs. 300000, Tempo was Rs.500000, car was Rs.333333 and mobile phone was Rs.1346.  The results indicated that about 17.14 per cent of the households possess bullock cart, 22.86 per cent of them possess plough, 2.86 per cent of the households possess power tiller, 14.29 per cent of the households possess tractor, 11.43 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 2.86 per cent of the households possess sprinkler, 28.57 per cent of the households possess weeder and 2.86 per cent of the households possess chaff cutter.  The results showed that the average value of bullock cart was Rs.21166; the average value of plough was Rs. 2812, the average value of power tiller was Rs. 200000, the average value of tractor was Rs. 460000, the average value of sprayer was Rs. 1825, the average value of sprinkler was Rs. 2000, the average value of weeder was Rs. 90 and the average value of chaff cutter was Rs. 1600.  The results indicated that, 20 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 22.86 per cent of the households possess local cow, 2.86 per cent of the households possess crossbred cow and 8.57 per cent of the households possess sheep.  In case of marginal farmers, 16.67 per cent of the households possess local cow and sheep respectively. In case of small farmers, 8.33 per cent of households possess bullock, 16.67 per cent possess local cow and sheep respectively. In case of semi medium farmers, 50 per cent of the households possess bullock and 37.50 per cent of the households possess local cow and 28.57 medium farmers possess both bullock and local cow respectively and 14.29 per cent of them possess crossbred cow.  The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 2.09, average own labour (women) available was 1.52, average hired labour (men) available was 4.19 and average hired labour (women) available was 3.28. 3  In case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.33, average own labour (women) was also 1.67, average hired labour (men) was 3 and average hired labour (women) available was 3.17. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was 1.42, average hired labour (men) was 4 and average hired labour (women) available was 2.92. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 2.25, average own labour (women) was 1.75, average hired labour (men) was 3.86 and average hired labour (women) available was 3. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 2.71 average own labour (women) was 1.29, average hired labour (men) was 5.86 and average hired labour (women) available was 4.29.  The results indicated that, 45.71 per cent of the household opined equally that the hired labour was adequate and hired labour was inadequate respectively.  The results indicated that, 1 person was migrated from micro-watershed that belonged to small farmer category. Total migration in the micro-watershed was only 0.53 per cent.  The results indicated that, people have migrated on an average of 650 Kms and average duration was 12 months. Small farmers have migrated 650 kms and on an average for 12 months.  The results indicated that, job/work was the only reason for migration for all the migrants.  The results indicate that, Construction of house was the major positive consequences of migration for 100 per cent of the persons who migrated from the micro watershed.  The results indicate that, 100 per cent of the migrated persons opined that there health hazards was the negative consequences of migration.  The results indicated that, households of the Bisrahalli-2 micro watershed possess 48.72 ha (77.13%) of dry land and 14.45 ha (22.87 %) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 3.24 ha (100 %) of dry land. Small farmers possess 14.96 ha (91.35 %) of dry land and 1.42 ha (8.65 %) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 11.04 ha (70.89 %) of dry land and 4.53 ha (29.11 %) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 19.49 ha (69.63%) of dry land and 8.50 ha (30.37%) irrigated land.  The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 262,613.17 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 404,747.90. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 540,312.50 for dry land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 327,373.55 for dry land Rs. 705,714.29 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 303,428.68 for dry land and Rs. 573,392.85 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 143,634.47 for dry land and Rs. 264,642.86 for irrigated land.  The results indicated that, there were 13 functioning bore wells and 11 defunctioning bore wells in the micro watershed. 4  The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 37.14 per cent of the farmers.  The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 27.01 meters.  The results indicated that, in case of small farmers there was 2.63 ha of irrigated land, in case of semi medium farmers there was 4.57 ha of irrigated land and medium farmers were having 8.91 ha of irrigated land. On an average there were 16.11 ha of irrigated land.  The results indicated that, farmers have grown bajra (4.45 ha), Bengal gram (3.64 ha), cotton (1.21 ha), sorghum (5.26 ha), maize (27.02 ha), red gram (0.61 ha) and sunflower (6.88 ha) in kharif season. Farmers also grown bajra (10.99 ha), Bengal gram (3.64 ha) and maize (3.64 ha) in Rabi season. Marginal farmers have grown maize and bajra. Small farmers have grown bajra, cotton, maize, red gram and sunflower. Semi medium farmers have grown bajra, Bengal gram, sorghum, maize and sunflower. Medium farmers have grown Bengal gram, sorghum, maize and sunflower.  The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Bisrahalli-2 micro watershed was found to be 79.87 per cent. In case of marginal farmers it was 100 per cent, in small farmers it was 76.35, in semi medium farmers it was 78.31 and in medium farmers it was 80.88 per cent.  The results indicated that, 11.43 per cent of the households have bank account and 8.57 per cent of the households have savings. Among marginal farmers 33.33 percent of them possess bank account and 16.67 per cent of the households have savings. 8.33 per cent of small farmers possess both bank account and savings correspondingly. Medium farmers possess 14.29 per cent of both bank account and savings respectively.  The results indicated that, 16.67 per cent of marginal, 8.33 per cent of small and 14.29 per cent of medium farmers have borrowed credit from different sources.  The results indicated that, 66.67 per cent have availed loan in commercial bank and 33.33 per cent have availed loan in cooperative bank.  The results indicated that, marginal, small and medium have availed Rs.162000, Rs. 100000 and Rs. 305000 respectively. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed is 199000.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the household's barrowed private credit for household consumption.  Results indicated that 33.33 per cent of the households have repaid their institutional credit partially, 33.33 per cent of them were unpaid their loan and 33.33 per cent of them were fully paid their loan.  Results indicated that 100 per cent of the households have unpaid their private credit. 5  The results indicated that 66.66 per cent of the households were opined that easy accessibility of credit and 33.34 per cent of the households were opined that loan amount was adequate to fulfill the requirement.  The results indicated that, 50 per cent of the households were opined that higher rate of interest and 50 per cent of the households were opined that they were forced to sell the produce at low price to repay loan in time.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 40736.58. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 12830.39. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. -27906.19, thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.31.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 30806.84. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 24111.70. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs. -6695.14. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.78.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Sorghum was Rs. 17401.03. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 24763.72. The net income from Sorghum cultivation was Rs. 7362.69. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.42.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for cotton was Rs. 59633.56. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 46312.50. The net income from cotton cultivation was Rs. -13321.06. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.78.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Bengal gram was Rs. 33952.88. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 39204.59. The net income from Bengal gram cultivation was Rs. 5251.71. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.15.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Sunflower was Rs. 44382.42. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 33152.89. The net income from Sunflower cultivation was Rs. -11229.53. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.75.  The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Red gram was Rs. 42805.27. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 37050.00. The net income from Red gram cultivation was Rs. -5755.27. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.87.  The results indicated that, 17.14 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 25.71 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was inadequate. Similarly 40 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was adequate and 8.57 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was inadequate.  The results indicated that, in landless farmers, the average income from wage was Rs. 22500. In marginal farmers the average income from service/salary was Rs.4000, business was Rs.8333.33, wage was Rs.5833.33, agriculture was Rs.22916.67 and non farm income was Rs.21166.67. In small farmers the average income from 6 service/salary was Rs.11333.33, business was Rs.7333.33, wage was Rs.2000, agriculture was Rs.49933.33, non farm income was Rs.7750 and dairy farm was Rs.1500. In semi medium farmers the average income from service/salary was Rs.12000, wage was Rs.3750, agriculture was Rs.38750, non farm income was Rs.21875 and dairy farm was Rs.2330. In medium farmers the average income from service/salary was Rs.65714.29, business was Rs.9285.71, agriculture was Rs.169285.71, non farm income was Rs.17571.43 and dairy farm was Rs.5331.43. On an average, the average income from the service/ salary was Rs.20457.14, business was Rs.5800, wage was Rs.3828.57, agriculture was Rs.63762.86, non farm income was Rs.14800 and dairy farm was Rs. 2113.14.  The results indicated that, in landless farmers, the average expenditure from wage was Rs. 30000, in marginal farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs.600, business was Rs.27000, wage was Rs.25000, agriculture was Rs.12833.33 and non farm income was Rs.3000. In case of small farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs.25000, business was Rs.19500, wage was Rs.1333.33, agriculture was Rs.29000 and dairy farm was Rs.4250. In case of semi medium farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs.20000, wage was Rs.1000, agriculture was Rs.23000, non farm income was Rs.2750 and dairy farm was Rs.2333.33.In case of medium farmers the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs.50000, business was Rs. 25000, agriculture was Rs.69500, non farm income was Rs.10000 and dairy farm was Rs.7500.  The results indicated that, sampled households have grown 16 coconut trees in their field and also planted 4 coconut and 2 mango trees in their back yard.  The results indicated that, households have planted 39 Neem, 1 tamarind, 1 acacia and 10 banyan trees in their field and also planted 3 neem and 1 peeple trees in their back yard.  The results indicate that, households have an average investment capacity of Rs.1142.26 for land development and Rs.1428.57 in irrigation facility. Marginal households have an average investment capacity of Rs.329.67 for land development. Small farm households have an average investment capacity Rs.166.75 for land development. Medium households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 5142.86 for land development and Rs. 7142.86 for irrigation facility.  The results indicated that for 14.29 per cent of the households were dependent on own funds for land development and 5.71 per cent of the households were depend on loan from bank for irrigation facility.  The results indicated that, Bajra, Bengal gram, cotton, maize and red gram crops were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Sorghum and sunflower were sold to the extent of 80.13 per cent and 72.58 per cent respectively. Average price obtained by bajra was Rs.1288.33/q, Bengal gram was Rs.3690/q, cotton was Rs.3750/q, sorghum was 7 Rs.1500/q, maize was Rs.1160.87/q, Red gram was Rs.4500/q and sunflower was Rs.2120/q.  The results indicated that, 51.43 percent of the households have sold their produce to agent/traders, 17.14 percent of the households have sold their produce to local/village merchant, 62.86 percent of the households sold their produce in regulated markets, 28.53 percent of the households sold their produce in cooperative marketing society and 8.57 percent of the households sold their produce in contract marketing arrangement.  The results indicated that 8.57 per cent of the households have used head load as a mode of transport, 25.71 per cent of them have used cart, 120 per cent have used tractor and 14.29 per cent have used truck as a mode of transport.  The results indicated that, 17.14 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 33.33 percent of marginal farmers, 16.67 per cent of small farmers, 12.50 per cent of semi medium farmers and 14.29 percent of medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 22.86 per cent of the households have shown interest in soil testing including 66.67 per cent of marginal farmers, 16.67 per cent of small farmers, 12.50 per cent of semi medium farmers and 14.29 per cent of medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 17.14 per cent of the households have adopted field bunding which includes 16.67 per cent of marginal, 8.33 per cent of small farmers and 57.14 per cent of medium farmers.  The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households who adopted field bunding opined that bunds are good.  The results indicated that 14.29 per cent of soil conservation structure is constructed by own and 2.86 per cent is constructed by farmers organization.  The results indicated that, 88.57 percent used fire wood as a source of fuel and 11.43 percent of the households used LPG.  The results indicated that, piped supply was the source of drinking water for 28.57 per cent, 48.57 per cent of them were using bore well, 20 per cent of the households were depend on open well and 2.86 per cents of the households were using canal/nala for drinking water.  The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 100 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, 60 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 100 per cent of landless, 66.67 per cent of marginal, 75 per cent of small, 62.50 per cent of semi medium and 14.29 per cent of medium had sanitary toilet facility.  The results indicated that, 82.86 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL card, 11.43 per cent of the sampled households have possessed APL card and 5.71 per cent of the sampled households have not possessed BPL card. 8  The results indicated that, 48.57 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 100 per cent of the landless, 66.67 percent of the marginal, 41.67 per cent of the small, 50 per cent of the semi medium and 28.57 percent of the medium farmers.  The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits , milk, egg and meat were adequate for 100 per cent, 37.14 per cent, 8.57 per cent, 40 per cent, 40 per cent, 45.71 per cent, 34.29 per cent and 5.71 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that, pulses, oilseed, vegetables, fruits, milk, egg and meat were inadequate for 60 per cent, 48.57 per cent, 8.57 per cent, 17.14 per cent, 34.29 per cent, 51.43 per cent and 45.71 per cent respectively.  The results indicated that oilseed were market surplus for 40 per cent of the households, vegetables were market surplus for 51.43 per cent, fruits were market surplus for 40 per cent and milk was market surplus for 2.86 per cent of the households.  The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil was the constraint experienced by 22.86 per cent of the households, wild animal menace on farm field was experienced by 17.14 per cent of the households, frequent incidence of pest and diseases was experienced by 85.71 per cent of the farmers, inadequacy of irrigation water was experienced by 14.29 per cent of the households, high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals was experienced by 40 per cent of the farmers, high rate of interest on credit was experienced by 14.29 per cent of the farmers, low price for the agricultural commodities was experienced by 22.86 per cent of the farmers, lack of marketing facilities in the area was experienced 91.43 per cent of the households, lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market was experienced by less rainfall was experienced by 97.14 per cent of the farmers and source of Agri technology information was experienced by 74.29 per cent of the farmers. ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project