WATERSHEDS UNDER NEW GUIDELINESWATERSHEDS UNDER NEW GUIDELINESWATERSHEDS UNDER NEW GUIDELINES

Sponsored by Sponsored by

Na

tion

al W

ate

rshe

d D

eve

lop

me

nt P

roje

ct for R

ain

fed

Are

as –

National Watershed Development Project for Rainfed Areas –

Ma

cro M

an

ag

em

en

t of A

gricu

lture

Sch

em

e

Macro Management of Agriculture Scheme

(2008-2014)(2008-2014)

De

pa

rtme

nt o

f Ag

ricultu

re &

Co

op

era

tion

,

Min

istry o

f Ag

ricultu

re, G

ove

rnm

en

t of In

dia

Department of Agriculture & Cooperation,

Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India

ICAR – INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION

(Formerly Central Soil & Water Conservation Research & Training Institute)

ICAR – INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION

(Formerly Central Soil & Water Conservation Research & Training Institute)

20162016

218, Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun – 248 195 (Uttarakhand)

ICARICARHkkd`avuqiHkkd`avuqi

DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF MODEL

WATERSHEDS UNDER NEW GUIDELINESWATERSHEDS UNDER NEW GUIDELINES

tya ol, aj {k kn .e k l;h aLFr kj kk ukH

B.L. Dhyani Pradeep Dogra Nirmal Kumar G.C. Sharma Sangeeta N. SharmaB.L. Dhyani Pradeep Dogra Nirmal Kumar G.C. Sharma Sangeeta N. Sharma

Compiled and Edited by Compiled and Edited by

UnderUnder

Implemented byImplemented by

Production Guidance and Published by

Design, Layout and Production

Project Sponsored by

Suggested Citation

Dr. P.K. Misha,

ICAR – Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation

218, Kaulagarh Road

Dehradun – 248 195 (Uttarakhand)

Phone: 0135-2758564, Fax: 0135-2754213

Email: director@iiswc.icar.org.in

Nirmal Kumar

Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi

under National Watershed Development Project for Rainfed Areas – Macro Management of Agriculture Scheme (2008-2014)

Dhyani, B.L.; Dogra, Pradeep; Kumar, Nirmal; Sharma, G.C. and Sharma, Sangeeta N. (2016). Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines. ICAR – Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Dehradun : 112 p.

Printed at

Apna Janmat, Subhash Road, Dehradun (Uttarakhand)

© ICAR-Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, 2016

ISBN

PREFACENearly 73% of the world’s cropland and about 60% of India’s cultivated area is rainfed. This land in India contributes to 40% of the country’s total food production. Global food demand is expected to increase to more than double by 2050 because of population growth and is likely two diversify due to increase in per capita income. While the challenge cannot be met through increased agricultural production alone, increased production is an essential part of the solution. However, in many cases including India, production capacities are deteriorating in the pace of rapid population growth, misdirected agricultural practices, and widespread land degradation. Land degradation is mainly attributed to water erosion, resulting into loss of soil fertility, and vegetation and

ground water depletion, thus resulting into decline of economic and environmental potentials. Land degradation can be rectified through holistic watershed approach. Improving agricultural production and restoring ecological balance are the twin objectives of watershed programmes. Watershed programmes are recognized as potential engines for agricultural growth and sustainable development. Success and sustainability of these programmes are directly related to collective action for conserving natural resources to enhance crop productivity, and livelihoods for sustainable income generation. In addition, watershed approach also focuses on integrated farming systems and management of common property resources to augment family income and improve nutritional levels of communities participating in watershed programmes. The treatment of any watershed is expected to improve agricultural as well as livestock productivity, and livelihood of the beneficiaries.

Keeping in view the problems of different agro-ecological regions, watershed projects were undertaken by ICAR - Indian Institute of Soil & Water Conservation (formerly Central Soil & Water Conservation Research & Training Institute) at its HQ at Dehradun and its Regional Research Centres located in Union Teritory of Chandigarh, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Karnataka, Odisha and Tamil Nadu States during 2008-2014 with the sponsorship of Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India under Micro-Management of Agriculture (MMA), National Watershed Development Project for Rainfed Areas (NWDPRA) scheme.

The project concentrated on capacity building of the beneficiaries in conservation and production aspects with improvement in basic livelihood through different livelihood activities that sustain them, especially during drought years by sustainable use of land and water resources. A blend of the recommended location specific technologies and local level innovations was attempted under the project. This document of watershed project presents a comprehensive assessment of the bio-physical and socio-economic impacts of various interventions in the watersheds for augmenting socio-economic/livelihood security of stakeholders. It is expected that this publication will be very useful for various watershed functionaries and others who are working in the areas. I congratulate all the contributors at the Headquarters and the Research Centres for bringing out this important publication.

(P.K. Mishra)Director

ICAR - Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Dehradun

March, 2016

Acknowledgement

The editors are highly thankful to Dr V.N. Sharda, Ex-Director, ICAR-IISWC (formerly CSWCRTI) and Nodal Officer during project period (2008-09 to July 11, 2011) for his painstaking efforts in identification of interventions, planning and providing valuable suggestions during implementation of various activities. Authors are also thankful to Dr. K.S. Dadhwal, Acting Director during 12 July 2011 to 17 January 2012 and Director of ICAR-IISWC, Dr. P.K. Mishra from January 18, 2012 onward for his valuable guidance and moral support extended to the project. All the support provided by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New Delhi is duly acknowledged.

Financial support from the Department of Agriculture & Cooperation (DAC), Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India under National Watershed Development Project for Rainfed Areas – Macro Management of Agriculture (NWDPRA-MMA) scheme is also duly acknowledged. We also express our gratitude to the Secretary; Additional Secretary; Joint Secretary to Government of India and Additional Commissioner; Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner and all other Officers of Department of Agriculture & Cooperation (RFS Division), Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi during the project period for their technical and administrative guidance and support .

The team immensely benefitted from technical guidance and encouragement provided by different learned dignitaries, policy planners, bureaucrats, technocrats, and members of QRT and RAC teams of ICAR-IISWC who visited these projects from time to time. Project team is short of words to acknowledge their valuable technical guidance in accomplishing the project activities in most befitting manner.

Shri A.K. Khullar, Ex-Scientist (Selection Grade), ICAR-IISWC for his support till October 2009 in coordinating the project is heartily acknowledged. Cooperation and insights provided by the scientists and technical personnel of the Institute are also duly acknowledged. The technical support provided by various state department agencies in respective watershed for organizing camps on various themes from time to time is also thankfully acknowledged by the team.

The interventions of Heads of Village Councils and Watershed Associations of all the selected watersheds immensely helped in resolving differences and bringing out visible progress of the project. Farming community of the selected villages, which whole heartily participated in various project activities, deserve special thanks for their cooperation.

The help rendered by the present and past Chief Administrative Officers, Senior Finance & Accounts Officer, Administrative Officer, Finance & Account Officer, Officer-in-Charge (Store & Purchase), other staff of Administrative, Bill & Cash, Audit and Store Sections of ICAR-IISWC helped in smooth progress of the project is thankfully acknowledged. Staff of Prioritization, Monitoring and Evaluation (PME) Cell, Sh. S.K. Sinha, STO; Mrs. Meenakshi Pant, PA and Sh. Deepak Singh Thapa / Sh. Prem Singh Rawat for their Support Services are thanked for their sincere help and cooperation.

Editors

Guidance & Support

Technical Coordination

: Dr. V.N. Sharda Director & Nodal Officer upto July 11, 2011Dr. K.S. Dadhwal Acting Director during July 12, 2011 to January

17, 2012Dr. P.K. Mishra Director from January 18, 2012

: Er. C.P. Arora Principal Scientist (Engineering) upto July 31, 2011

Dr. B.L. Dhyani OIC (PME Cell) during August 2011 to December 2014

Dr. Pradeep Dogra Principal Scientist (Agricultural Economics)

Sh. Nirmal Kumar Chief Technical Officer

Ashti Watershed, Uttarakhand : Dr. G.P. Juyal Head (H&E) Division, Dehradun & Project Leader upto July 31, 2014

Dr. N.K. Sharma Principal Scientist (Agronomy)Dr. B.N. Ghosh Principal Scientist (Soils)Dr. Bankey Bihari Principal Scientist (Extension)Dr. J.M.S. Tomar Principal Scientist (Forestry)Dr. M. Muruganandam Senior Scientist (Fisheries)Dr. A.C. Rathore Senior Scientist (Horticulture)Er. S. Patra Scientist (Engineering)

Jalalpur Watershed, Uttar Pradesh : Dr. A.K. Singh Principal Scientist (SWCE) & Project LeaderDr. S.K. Dubey Principal Scientist (Soils) & Head, Research

Centre, AgraDr. P.K. Panda Senior Scientist (Agronomy) upto July 13, 2011Dr. R.K. Dubey Senior Scientist (Agronomy)Dr. S. Kala Scientist (Forestry)Dr. M. Praphawati Scientist (Soils)Dr. R.B. Meena Scientist (Soils)Dr. K.K. Sharma Senior Scientist (SWCE)

Ramasagara Watershed, Karnataka : Dr. S.L. Patil Principal Scientist (Agronomy) & Project LeaderEr. R.N. Adhikari Principal Scientist (Engineering) upto June 30,

2013Dr. A. Raizada Principal Scientist (Forestry) & Head, Research

Centre, Bellary from October 1, 2009Dr. D. Ramajayam Senior Scientist (Horticulture) upto March 19,

2012Dr. S.K.N. Math Principal Scientist (Soils) upto May 2010Mrs. M. Prabhavathi Scientist (Soils)Dr. Loganandan Senior Scientist (Extension)

Kajiyana Watershed, Haryana : Dr. R.P. Yadav Principal Scientist (Soils) & Project Leader upto November 3, 2014

Dr. Pratap Singh Principal Scientist upto July 2013Dr. S.L. Arya Principal Scientist (Agricultural Economics)

Contributor Scientist Teams

Contributors

Dr. V.K. Bhatt Principal Scientist ( )Dr. Pawan Sharma Principal Scientist (Soils)Dr. Ram Prasad Senior Scientist (Horticulture)Dr. Sharmistha Pal Scientist (Soils)Dr. A.K. Tiwari Principal Scientist & Head, Research Centre,

ChandigarhJigna Watershed, Madhya Pradesh : Dr. S.P. Tiwari Principal Scientist (Soils), Head, Research

Centre, Datia & Project LeaderDr. Dev Narayan Principal Scientist (Agronomy)Dr. Om Prakash Principal Scientist (Extension)Dr. H. Biswas Scientist (Soils) upto March 31, 2012Dr. P.P. Adhikari Scientist (Soils) upto May 23, 2012Sh. M.N. Ramesha Scientist (Forestry) upto July 20, 2013Dr. D.G. Durbude Senior Scientist (Engineering) from April 23,

2011 to April 17, 2013Sh. Prabhat Kumar Scientist (Soils) from May 24, 2012

Dhoti Watershed, Rajasthan : Dr. R.K. Singh Principal Scientist (Soils); Head, Research Centre, Kota & Project Leader

Dr. S.N. Prasad Principal Scientist and Head, Research Centre Kota upto January 2011

Dr. Ashok Kumar Principal Scientist (Agril. Economics)Er. B.K. Sethy Scientist (Engineering) upto Aug. 8, 2014Sh. H.R. Meena Scientist (Horticulture)Shakir Ali Senior Scientist (SWCE)

Lachhaputraghati Watershed, Odisha : Dr. K.P. Gore Head, Research Centre, Koraput & Project Leader upto Nov. 30, 2010

Dr. M. Madhu Principal Scientist; Head, Research Centre, Koraput & Project Leader from June 27, 2011

Er. B.S. Naik Scientist (Engineering)Sh. Praveen Jhakar Scientist (Agronomy)Sh. HC Hombe Gowda Scientist Dr. P.P. Adhikari Scientist (Soils) from May 26, 2012Sh. D. Barman Scientist (Soils)

Ayalur Watershed, Tamil Nadu : Dr. O.P.S. Khola Principal Scientist (Agronomy); Head, Research Centre, Udhagamandalam & Project Leader

Dr. K. Kannan Principal Scientist (Agronomy)Ms. V. Selvi Scientist (Engineering)Dr. D.V. Singh Principal Scientist (Agronomy) upto April 12,

2012Vejalpur-Rampura Watershed, Gujarat: Dr. R.S. Kurothe Principal Scientist (SWCE); Head, Research

Centre, Vasad upto December 9, 2014 & Project Leader upto November 2015

Dr. B.K. Rao Senior Scientist (SWCE)Dr. D.R. Sena Principal Scientist (SWCE) upto July 20, 2011 Dr. A.K. Vishwakarma Senior Scientist (Agronomy) upto July 31, 2013Dr. Gopal Kumar Scientist (Soils) upto September 28, 2015Dr. G.L. Bagdi Principal Scientist (Agricultural Extension) upto

May 30, 2015

Dr. V.C. Pande Senior Scientist (Agricultural Economics)

Engineering

Technical Support Teams

Ashti Watershed, Uttarakhand : Sh. R.K. Arya Senior Technical Officer ( )Sh. Ashok Kumar Chief Technical Officer (Agronomy)Sh. Rakesh Kumar Senior Technical Officer (Fisheries)

Jalalpur Watershed, Uttar Pradesh : Dr. S.C. Saxena Chief Technical Officer (Statistics) upto March 2015

Sh. A.P. Gawande Chief Technical Officer (Agriculture)Sh. B. Prasad Senior Technical Officer (Plant Science)Sh. Suresh Chandra Senior Technical Officer (Engineering) from July

11, 2011Sh. Radhey Shyam Senior Technical Officer (Agriculture)Sh. Prem Shankar Technical Officer (Engineering)Sh. Krishna Kumar Technical Officer (Agriculture) upto July 17,

2014Sh. Jamuna Prasad Technical OfficerSh. Than Chand Technical Officer (Agriculture)Sh. B.P. Joshi Technical Officer (Meteorology)Sh. Narayan Singh Technical Officer (Agriculture)

Ramasagara Watershed, Karnataka : Mr. K.K. Reddy Assistant Chief Tech. Officer (Agricultural Engineering)

Mr. K. Channabasappa Technical Officer (Social Science) upto February 2014

Mr. S.M. Mannikatti Technical Officer (Agronomy)Mr. B.N. Seshadri Technical Officer (Meteorology)Mr. P. Mohan Kumar Technical Assistant (Soils)

Kajiyana Watershed, Haryana : Sh. Ram Murti Assistant Chief Technical OfficerSh. Vikram Singh Senior Technical AssistantSh. Basudeo Technical Officer (Engineering)Sh. Harish Sharma Technical Officer Sh. A.K. Nitant Technical OfficerSh. A.N. Gupta Senior Technical Officer upto June 12, 2015Sh. Shailendra Yadav Senior Technical Officer (Horticulture)Sh. Surender Singh Chief Technical Officer (Economics)Sh. Akshay Kumar Technical Officer

Jigna Watershed, Madhya Pradesh : Sh. Pramod Kumar Technical Officer (Engineering)Sh. Santraj Assistant Chief Tech. Officer (Soils)Sh. Bangali Baboo Technical Officer (Statistics)Sh. B.D. Kushwaha Technical Officer (Meteorology)Sh. V.K. Dwivedi Assistant Chief Technical Officer (Forestry) upto

November 5, 2014Dhoti Watershed, Rajasthan : Sh. Hariom Arya Technical Assistant (Social Science)

Sh. B.K. Upadhyay Technical Officer (Horticulture)Sh. P.R. Raibole Technical Officer (Engineering)

Lachhaputraghati Watershed, Odisha : Sh. G.B. Naik Technical Officer (Plant Science)Sh. B.K. Dash Technical Officer (Engineering) upto December

31, 2014Ayalur Watewrshed, Tamil Nadu : Er. R. Mohanraj Senior Technical Officer (Engineering)

Er. E. Murugesan Senior Technical Assistant (Engineering)Vejalpur-Rampura Watershed, Gujarat: Sh. C.N. Damor Technical Officer

Sh. Anand Kumar Technical OfficerSh. D.G. Damor Technical Officer Sh. Prem Singh Technical Officer upto January 11, 2013Sh. J.K. Vankar Technical OfficerSh. M.J. Baraiya Ex Technical Officer upto June 30, 2013Sh. K.D. Mayawanshi Technical OfficerDr. Nyonand Senior Technical Officer

Engineering

Page

Preface AcknowledgementContributors

1. Introduction 1-2

2. Watershed Features 3-102.1 Salient features of basic resources of selected watersheds 3

3. Community Organization, Entry Point Activities and Capacity Building 11-203.1 Ashti watershed 113.2 Jalalpur watershed 113.3 Ramasagara watershed 123.4 Kajiyana watershed 143.5 Jigna watershed 153.6 Dhoti watershed 153.7 Lachhaputraghati watershed 173.8 Ayalur watershed 183.9 Vejalpur - Rampura watershed 19

4. Watershed Development Activates 21-244.1 Ashti watershed 214.2 Jalalpur watershed 254.3 Ramasagara watershed 284.4 Kajiyana watershed 364.5 Jigna watershed 394.6 Dhoti watershed 414.7 Lachhaputraghati watershed 444.8 Ayalur watershed 454.9 Vejalpur - Rampura watershed 51

5. Monitoring and Impact Evaluation 55-915.1 Ashti watershed 555.2 Jalalpur watershed 565.3 Ramasagara watershed 595.4 Kajiyana watershed 615.5 Jigna watershed 645.6 Dhoti watershed 665.7 Lachhaputraghati watershed 725.8 Ayalur watershed 785.9 Vejalpur - Rampura watershed 86

6. Physical and Financial Targets and Achievements 91-102

7. Lessons Learnt 103-104

8. Abbreviation & Acronyms 105-108

Annexure 1 : Project approval of RFS Division, Department of Agricu;ltural & Cooperation, 109Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi

st Annexure 2 : CSWCRTI, Dehradun Utilization Certificate as on March 31 2014. 111

Annexure 3 : Approval of RFS Division, DoAC, MoA, GoI, N. Delhi dated Aug. 8, 2015 for 112 stutilising unspent balance as on March 31 2014 for Publication

Contents

Introduction

Given the importance of the agriculture sector in the Indian economy in terms of its contribution to the GDP (16.11%), employment (52.3%) and the fact that it constitutes the backbone of the rural livelihood security system, the Union Government supplements and complements the efforts being made by the State Governments to promote agricultural production and productivity through technical and financial interventions. The Department of Agriculture & Cooperation formulates and implements National Policies and Programmes aimed at achieving rapid agricultural growth and development through optimum utilization of the country's land, water, soil, plant and Animal , Watershed Development Programme (WDP) is widely accepted as the panacea for accelerating agricultural production in the Country in general and from rain dependent agriculture in particular. It is one of the most popular development programme implemented across the country during 1998 to 2014 with different varieties. The Macro Management of Agriculture (MMA) Scheme is one of the major centrally sponsored schemes formulated by the Department in this endeveaour.

The Macro Management of Agriculture (MMA) Scheme was launched in 2000-01 by integrating 27 centrally sponsored schemes moving away from a programmatic to a macro management mode of assistance to the States in the form of Work Plans prepared by the States and implemented in a spirit of partnership with the States. The scheme was conceived to be a step to provide sufficient autonomy and initiative to State Governments to develop programmes and activities as per their felt needs and priorities. The scheme replaced the schematic rigid approach by a Work Plan based approach in an interactive mode to supplement / complement States' efforts in the agriculture sector. The MMA scheme was a major step towards decentralization, allowing flexibility to the States in selecting and prioritization of choose suitable interventions from the various components, in addition to their own efforts towards growth of the agriculture sector. Later, with the launch of the National Horticulture Mission in 2005-06, 10 components relating to horticulture were excluded from the MMA scheme. Thus, the MMA scheme comprised the 17 components, or sub-schemes, focusing on rice, wheat, coarse cereals, sugarcane, soil health, nutrient and pest management, farm mechanization and watershed development.

In the backdrop of launching of new initiatives, namely, the National Food Security Mission (NFSM) and the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY), it became imperative to revise the existing MMA scheme to improve its efficacy in supplementing and complementing the efforts of the States towards enhancement of agricultural production and productivity, in the larger context of broad based inclusive growth highlighted in the XI Five Year Plan Document, as well as the National Policy on Farmers, 2007. In the Revised Macro Management of Agriculture (MMA) Scheme, the role of the scheme has been redefined to avoid overlapping and duplication of efforts, and to make it more relevant to the present agriculture scenario in the States to achieve the basic objective of food security and to improve the livelihood system for rural masses.

Watershed projects are recognized as potential drivers of agricultural growth and sustainable development in rainfed areas. Success and sustainability of watershed programs are directly related to collective action directed towards conserving natural resources for enhancing crop, tree and water productivity, livelihood security and gender equity. Realizing the need and relevance of rain water management centeric approach for sustainable development of rainfed agriculture in India, efforts were initiated in 1974 by implementing soil and water conservation technologies on watershed approach. Four watersheds were initially developed through people’s participation, which was later expanded to 47 models watersheds in 1982-83. Success stories emerging from these model watersheds paved way for developing watershed programmes as a major rural development activity for rainfed areas at national level. Over the years, watershed programmes have come a long way enriching the experience of successes and failures in synergistic integration of production systems, effective community participation, water and land resource development, and other related issues. Accordingly, project implementation guidelines were framed and successively reframed. Depletion in ground water resources at an alarming rate, concerns over climate change, shifting farming preferences for farming systems, changing socio-economic conditions, and advancements in remote sensing and geo-spatial analytical and planning technology are some of the major issues suggesting that guidelines and technologies package for watershed development project need to be revisited and updated based on experiences gained during the project implementation.

Introduction 1

01

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

Table 1: IISWC HQ and Research Centres implementing selected watersheds with watershed area and budget allocated Village covered Watershed

area (ha) Treatable area (ha)

Budget

(Lakh `)

Latitude Longitude

Ashti, Dabra, Tangri, Jamuwa 473.0 421.0 47.16 30°

39' 10? to 30° 40' 35? N

77º 47' 34? to 77º 49' 59? E

Deori, Jalalpur and Dhanina 697.5 639.5 71.06 26° 49' to

26° 51' N

77º 32' 30? to 77º 35' 30? E

Ramasagra, Devasamudra, Hanumapur and Venk atapur

485.0

433.4

52.00

14° 49' 31? to 14° 50' 42? N

76º 47' 32? to 76º 49' 16? E

Kajiyana, Dhattogran, Nala Dakrog & Janouli

509.0

482.2

54.00

30° 46' to

30° 48' N 76º 56' to 76º

59' E

Jigna, Imaliya and Tiwaripura

620.0

535.0

62.16

25° 37' 00? to 25° 39' 30? N

78º 20' 30? to 78º 23' 30? E

Lachhamani, Kandaputraghati and Ariputraghati

601.0

557.0

54.12

19° 45' 30? to 19° 47' 20? N

82º 56' to

82º 58' E

Dheoti

677.0

660.0

75.00

24° 55' 58? to 24° 57' 38? N

76º 31' 22? to 76º 33' 11? E

Mallipalayam, Kulaimuppa-nur, Palapalayam, Semmandampalaiyam and Pulliyangadu

782.0

708.4

87.48

11° 22' 16? to 11° 25' 19? N

77° 22' 43? to 77° 24' 10? E

Vejalpur, Rampura, Garot, Chikhlod and Ramsoli

775.0

624.0

87.24

22° 58' 58? to 23° 00' 29? N

73º 05' 51? to 73º 08' 19? E

Total

5619.5

5060.5

590.22

The burgeoning population demands additional resources to meet the growing needs in terms of food, fodder, fibre, fuel and water. Each year an additional 0.25 billion metric tonnes of grain (21% higher) is required to be produced to feed the additional population. Sustainable and increased productivity depends primarily on the natural resources, viz; land, water and vegetation, alongwith technological breakthrough which need to be judiciously managed to meet the growing needs of food requirements and maintain environmental security for our future generations. Globally, 80% of agriculture is rainfed and contributes 60% to world’s food basket. Current productivity

-1of rainfed agriculture is low (<1 t ha ) in India and needs to be increased for sustainable agriculture. Water and soil resources are finite, non-renewable over the human lifetime frame, and prone to degradation through misuse and management. Scarcity of water for agricultural and domestic purpose remains a major problem and has led to low crop productivity and environmental degradation. Decline in per capita availability of agricultural produce has seriously affected food security and livelihoods of people. There is a considerable potential to bridge the yield gap between the actual and the potential yield through adoption of improved resource management technologies. The challenge before the Indian agriculture is to transform rainfed farming into more sustainable and productive systems through integrated and efficient use of natural resources following the concept of participatory integrated watershed management.

In recent years, the Government of India has accorded high priority to watershed development programs as a strategy for improving livelihood, ensuring sustainability, especially in drought prone areas that are vulnerable to climate change impacts and issued new guidelines (NRAA, 2008). Community participation is an important aspect of watershed development programmes, and it is necessary to include equity and gender parity into the programme design. The IISWC efforts through development of watershed models ensured improved productivity with the adoption of cost-efficient water harvesting structures, crop intensification and diversification with high-value crops in existing farming systems that allowed households to achieve increase in production of basic staple food and sale of surplus for modest incomes.

Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India assigned a project to the Central Soil & Water Conservation Research and Training Institute (presently ICAR - Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation), Dehradun (Uttrakhand) for implementation and development of nine model watersheds in different locations across the country under NWDPRA scheme during XI plan. For implementation of the project, 9 watersheds were selected at its Institute HQ and 8 Regional Research Centres for developing as model watershed in agrological region represented by them (Table 1). The document presents achievements of the selected watersheds in concise form.

02

Watershed name

Ashti

Jalalpur

Ramasagara

Kajiyana

Jigna

Lachhaputraghati

Dhoti

Ayalur

Vejalpur-Rampura

IISWC HQ/Res. Centrelocation with State

Dehradun (Uttarakhand)

Agra (Uttar Pradesh)

Bellary (Karnataka)

Chandigarh (UT)

Datia (Madhya Pradesh)

Koraput (Odisha)

Kota (Rajasthan)

Udhagamandalam

(Tamil Nadu)

Vasad (Gujarat)

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Watershed Features

Topographic map of each watershed selected for implementing Macro Management of Agriculture (MMA) Scheme during 2008 to 2014 through the network of Institute HQ and eight Regional Research Centres (located in different states) of ICAR - Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation (Formerly CSWCRTI), Dehradun is given in Plate 1.

Ashti watershed is located in Chakrata Tehsil of Dehradun district in mid-Himalayas of Uttarakhand on Dehradun - Vikasnagar - Sahia - Phedulani – Kwanu - Tuini road (88 km) towards upstream side from Phedulani and Dehradun - Haripur - Koti - Kwanu - Tuini road (76 km) towards downstream side from Jamuwa. Soils of the watershed are derived from igneous rocks with genesis, schist, shale and mica dominant

Plate 1: Maps of selected model watersheds for implementation with their District and State

2.1 Salient Features of Basic Resources of Selected Watersheds

Ashti Watershed, Uttarakhand:

Ashti Watershed, Dehradun (Uttarakhand) Jalalpur Watershed, Agra (Uttar Pradesh)

Ramasagara Watershed Chitradurga (Karnataka)

Kajiyana Watershed, Panchkula (Haryana Jigna Watershed, Datia (Madhya Pradesh) Dhoti Watershed, Baran (Rajasthan)

Lachhaputraghati Watershed, Koraput (Odisha) Ayalur Watershed, Coimbatore (Tamil Nadu) Vejalpur-Rampura Watershed, Kheda (Gujarat)

2

Introduction

03

minerals. Texturally, the soils are light with predominantly gravelly sandy loam to silty clay loam texture with high bulk density, and infiltration and permeability rates. Water holding capacity is very low, both at field capacity and permanent wilting point. Generally, soils are slightly acidic in nature with low available nitrogen, and medium to high in phosphorus and potassium availability. Due to steep elevation difference, the watershed interestingly presents climatic variation from sub-temperature to sub-tropical with Banj oak and mango growing in the same watershed. Most of the rainfall (75-80%) is received during monsoon (June-September). High intensity storms and, sometimes, cloud bursts are common occurrence. Stray snow fall is received in the high reaches.

The watershed has an area under community forest (44.9 ha) and reserve forest (46.2 ha). Community grassland/Ghasni (12.0 ha) besides privately owned agricultural lands in the watershed. Forests are mainly dominated by broad-leaved species. Major tree species in the watershed are Quercus leucotrichophora (Banj oak), Aesculus indica (Pangar), Rhododendron arboreum (Burans), Machilus spp., Bombax ceiba (Semal) and Terminalia belerica (Bahera). Some of the commonly found shrubs/bushes in the watershed are: Indigofera pulchella (saknya), Woodfordia fruticosa (Dayla), Adhatoda vasica (Basinga), Rhus parviflora (Tungla), Berberis asiatica (Kingore), Rubus ellipicus (Kotrana) and Myrsine africana. There are also bamboo species in the watershed, mostly Dendroclamus strictus, D. hamiltonii, and Arundinaria spp. Total area under grasslands (locally known as Ghasni or Maung) is limited in the watershed, mostly confined in the civil soyam, Panchayati as well as land under private ownership, and managed to meet the fodder requirement for large livestock population during the lean period (off-season). The major grasses in these are Chrysopogon fulvus and Heteropogon contortus with Themeda anathera and Arundinella sp. A well-established agroforestry system is being largely practiced by the farmers of the watershed. Common agroforestry tree species in the watershed are Quercus leucotrichophora (Banj oak), Boehmeria rugulosa (Gainthi), Grewia optiva (Bhimal), Prunus cerasoides (Panja), Celtis australis (Kharik), Ficus roxburghii (Timla), F. cunea (Khaina), F. glomerata (Umar), Myrica esculanta (Kaphal), Terminalia belerica (Bahera), Bauhinia purpurea (Guriyal) etc. There are no planned orchards in the watershed. However, common fruit trees in the watershed are temperate fruits like pear, peach, plum, apricot (chulu), walnuts and subtropical fruits like pomegranate, banana, papaya, guava and citrus species. The land capability classification showed that the maximum area (152.0 ha) is under Class VIII followed by Class III (140.0 ha) lands in the watershed. Area under Class VI and Class VII is 77 ha and 83 ha, respectively. Area under Class IV is 21.0 ha only. As per LCC criteria, 161.0 ha out of total (473 ha) watershed area of is under arable land use, and the remaining area of 312 ha is allocated to non-arable land use.

Drinking water is available in almost all the watershed villages through pipe lines from the natural springs. Irrigation water is available in limited areas adjoining to the main stream through Guhls mainly near Jamuwa village. Village Dabra is totally rainfed. Major source of livelihood in the watershed is the combination of farming (crop cultivation alongwith animal husbandry), labour (mainly agriculture and road construction under the PWD), and business, as well as solely farming, labour and service.

Agriculture is the main occupation of the watershed farmers. Main crops raised are mustard, lentil, wheat, bajra, and gram. Most of the land is kept fallow during the kharif season. Only about 25% area under agriculture is cropped during kharif season. Land is utilized for wheat and gram during rabi season. Land kept as fallow is used for sowing mustard (35%), lentil (30%), wheat (20%), gram (10%) and 5% for others during rabi season. Single crop rotation is fallow-mustard / wheat / gram / lentil / bajra / jowar - fallow. The watershed has 524 families and a human population of 3049 (male: 853; female: 725 and children: 1471). The general caste dominates in the watershed (52.31%) followed by scheduled caste (19.15%), other backward class as 10.04%, and minority and others (18.50%). Total livestock population in watershed was 782 (cows: 135; buffalos: 424; goats: 180 and sheeps: 43). Watershed is dominated by marginal and small farmers (< 2 ha) which constitute 84.2% of total land holdings. The watershed had 19 tractors; 19 trailers; 4 threshers/cutters; 3 diesel tube wells; 14 submersible pumps and 7 jugars based on ITKs.

nd The watershed represents the 22 most resource poor district in the Country (NRAA, 2012). The total population of the Ramasagara watershed was 1019 during pre-project period and increased to 1177 during post-project period with an average family size varying from 6.0 to 6.4 persons. There are 184 farm families residing in the watershed population (male 36%, female 35% and children 29%). In the watershed 19% of farm families belong to the marginal category (land holding <1 ha), 45% of families belong to small category (1-2 ha), 28% families have land holdings between 2 ha to 4 ha, whereas farmers with land holding > 4 ha are only 8% of total

Jalapur Watershed, Uttar Pradesh:

Ramasagara Watershed, Karnataka:

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

04

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

farm families. General economic condition of the farm families is poor. Total livestock population was 1065 during 2008-09 and increased to 1362 during post-project. Nearly 11% of the animal population is used for draught purpose, whereas, 17% meets the milk requirement, 14% are young stocks, and 58% meets the meat and chicken requirement indicating that a larger population of livestock is under sheep, goat and poultry rearing. Farmers’ literacy rate is low (15%). Among the beneficiaries in the watershed, only nine farmers have pucca houses. Nearly 124 farmers in the watershed have semi-pucca houses and 51 farmers are residing in kachha houses. Three tractors are owned by large farmers in the watershed. All farmers having irrigation facilities (bore wells) have sprayers and electricity powered pump sets for lifting water from bore wells. Nearly 50 farm families own chaff cutters. There are no State Government transport facilities in the watershed. Auto rickshaws/tempos are the only means of transport. All the families in the watershed are engaged in agricultural works, except five beneficiaries who are employed in Government service and 8 in private factories on regular employment. There is a seasonal migration of 120 people to the cities during summer when there are no agricultural activities at farms.

The watershed is in Shivalik hills having steep hills followed by eroded piedmont and fluvial valleys. Upper catchment consists of steep hill, middle portion has rolling topography and bottom is moderately sloping valleys. Three drains join Jabrot nala which ultimately flows into Ghaggar river. Out of a total area of 509 ha, 284 ha is under forest. Forest area is in two blocks. Upper one is natural vegetation comprising mainly of khair trees and second block in the middle of watershed has man-made plantation mainly of eucalyptus with lantana and other shrubs as under canopy. Out of the remaining 225 ha, major portion (144 ha) is under crops, besides area under habitation, wasteland and fallows. Rainfed areas is primarily used to produce maize, kulthi, wheat, gram etc. while irrigated area is put under a diverse range of cereals and cash crops like paddy, ginger, tomato, colocasia, turmeric, chillies, wheat and mustard production. Watershed consists of four villages, inhabited by 151 families. Total population is 867 (male 32%, female 31% and children below 18 years of age 37%). Average family size was 5.7. Sex ratio in the watershed villages is 967 females per 1000 males which is far above the State average (861). Total livestock population of the watershed is 666. Buffaloes contribute 38% followed by goats (25%). Buffaloes are preferred for milk selling. All the villagers have milk for selling to booths of Vita Milk Cooperative of Haryana State Government. Milk is sold on fat content basis. Of the 151 households in the watershed 5% are landless, 68% are in marginal category (<1 ha), and only 3% fall into large land holding category (>4 ha). Major source of livelihood of the people in watershed area is agriculture. About 51% of the working males are engaged in agriculture occupation followed by daily wages (19%) and Government service (17%).

Majority of the soils of Shivaliks in Haryana are developed from sandstone, shale and conglomerate. Dominant soils are shallow to moderately deep, well to excessively drained, dark reddish brown, loamy-skeletal occurring on moderately steep to steeply sloping hills. Land capability classifications (LCC) survey of the Kajiyana watershed brought out that the prevailing LCC Classes in the watershed are II, III, IV, V and VI with 104.29, 152.45, 193.99, 10.09, 48.18 ha area, respectively. In addition, sub-classes ‘e’ indicates erosion hazard and ‘s’ indicates shallow soil depth and limitation to root zone. About 95% of the household buildings are cemented and in most of the cases, cattle sheds are pucca. All the villages were electrified in 1976-77. All the villages have radio, television and telephone connectivity. There is one primary and one middle school in Janouli village and high school facility available in Dhattoghran village. Nearest police post is in Pinjore, which is 7 km away from watershed villages. The nearest veterinary hospital is in Ganeshpur Bhurian at the distance of 5 km from Janouli. The nearest small market is at Issarnagar town (7 km). The kuhl irrigation system in village Janouli is 400 years old and pucca kuhl was constructed in and around 1983. At present, the irrigation water is distributed as per barabandi system. This system is being followed as a part of the old settlement. In all the four villages, wherever the irrigation is available through kuhls, the farmers prefer sowing vegetables like ginger, colocasia, turmeric and tomato for being high value crops. Literacy rate is very high (above 85%) and so is the strong sense of community participation.

Watershed area represents semi-arid climate. Inspite of long term annual average rainfall of 835.5 mm distributed over 39 days, the uncertainty and erratic pattern of rainfall coupled with frequent long dry spells often cause crop failures in normal rainfall years. The region faced critical water deficit/drought situation in recent past which lead to severe scarcity of water for drinking as well as for agriculture and other purposes. Watershed is the part of the Sindh river basin. It drains in the river through a seasonal stream called Somla. Landscape is rugged, featuring undulating terrain with low rocky outcrops, narrow valleys, and plains. Surface rocks are predominantly granite of the lower pre-Cambrian/Archaen period. The watershed abounds in open scrub and thin forest. Major soil groups in the region are red (Rakar and Parwa), black (Kabar and Mar) and mixed red and

Kajiyana Watershed, Haryana:

Jigna Watershed, Madhya Pradesh:

Introduction

05

Watershed Features

black soils, belonging to the orders Entisol, Inceptisol and Vertisol. They occur in patches. A major portion (250.2 ha, 40%) of the watershed contains Class III land, characterized mainly by its susceptibility to erosion. About 24% of the Class III land has soil related problems (salinity, stoniness/gravelly). Capability Class II (171.5 ha) occupies 27.7% of the watershed, of which 68% is prone to erosion hazards. About 23% of capability Class II land remains submerged for about three months in a year. This class mostly surrounds the drainage lines. Class IV lands (41.9 ha) are characterized by moderate multi-directional slopes, moderate soil erosion, stoniness and shallow soil depth with rapid infiltration rates, occupying only 6.8% of the watershed and are mostly located along the ridges. Capability Class VI occupies about 4.76% (29.5 ha) of the watershed area and is characterized with moderate to steep multi-directional slope, shallow soil depths, stoniness and scanty vegetation. Capability Class VII (38.7 ha) and VIII (44.3 ha) together comprise about 13.4% of the watershed area and are characterized with steep to very steep slope, and rocky outcrops suffering from meager vegetation.

Human population within watershed recorded at the beginning of the project was 3031. Out of the three villages/hamlets, lying in the watershed, Jigna had largest population (2848) followed by Tiwaripura and Imaliya having 15 different castes. There were 403 families with an average of 5-7 members in each family. Agriculture and cattle rearing is the primary livelihood in the watershed in which about 75% of the villagers are engaged. About 20% population belongs to poor community dependant on labour based livelihood in nearby areas, and remaining 5% in other works. Out of the total population of livestock in the watershed, 28% is of cow and buffalo and remaining 62% are goat, sheep etc. comprising mostly non-descript and low productivity breeds. The livestock population follows the order: goat > sheep > cow > buffalo in the watershed. Diversified land use system exists in Jigna watershed (agriculture - 58.9%, open scrub - 20.1%, barren - 5.1%, fallow - 4.2%, water body - 2.7%, reserve forest - 1.5%, horticulture - 0.4% and others - 7.1%). Maximum number (200) of farming families in the watershed belongs to small category of farmers followed by marginal (150), medium (150) and large holding categories (50).

Out of the total area (620 ha), about 59% area (365.3 ha) is under agriculture, of which 75% is rainfed. Rainfed agriculture is practiced mainly on sloppy lands, particularly above village pond. The main crop sequence followed in the watershed are: Groundnut - fallow / Fallow - lentil; Sorghum - fallow / Fallow - gram; Maize - fallow / Fallow - mustard; Pearlmillet - fallow / Maize - fallow and Sesame - fallow / Groundnut - fallow. Out of 365.3 ha area agriculture land, only 25% area (93.8 ha) is under irrigation. Irrigation to agricultural crops in watershed area is mainly given through open wells, bore wells and through open channels from village pond. About 35 ha area (10%) is estimated under assured irrigation through tube wells. Single cropping rotations are Fallow - wheat / barley, Fallow-pea, Fallow - mustard, Fallow - gram and Fallow - lentil while double cropping rotations are Paddy - wheat, Paddy- mustard, Paddy - gram, Maize - gram and Paddy - Barley. Village pond is major source of irrigation and it recharges wells in the vicinity. Productivity level of crops is very low in this area. Cropping technology to deal with effects of aberrant weather conditions is inadequate. Broadcasting is the commonly practiced method of seed sowing in kharif crops in the watershed. Area under forest is 9.1 ha. Natural vegetation consists of open scrub forest with scattered trees. Grasses, climbers and thorny shrubs are found in the lower and middle storeys. Foot hillocks are mainly under rainfed agriculture. There is no well established agroforestry system. Naturally regenerated trees were left on farm bunds to thrive as a source of fodder and fuel wood. These scattered trees are conspicuous throughout the watershed. There are no properly established live edges in the watershed. Live fencing with few thorny species has been maintained around the farm lands. Multi-purpose trees available in the watershed are mahua, mango, aonla, dhak, ber, neem, kardhai, imli, babul, khejri etc.

Dhoti watershed is located in the Panchayat Samiti Atru of Baran district of Rajasthan. Topography of the watershed is slightly undulating with 1% to 6% slope. The direction of general slope is from south-west to north-east with a total fall of 8 m from the highest contour to lowest contour. Climate of the region is dry sub-humid with surplus water in the months of July, August and September. Average annual rainfall in the watershed area is

-1874 mm with maximum intensity of 150 mm hr , and its distribution is highly erratic as more than 90% rainfall is received during July to September in the form of intense storms. Watershed is located in ‘Pathar and Bundelkhand Upland’ sub-region of Central Highlands. Landform is classified as Sedimentary Scrap Lands. The area lies in a typical alluvial terrain. The watershed field slopes range from 1% - 6%. A nala originating from the upper ridge passes through the watershed and forms part of the watershed. The watershed soil is classified as Fine, Typic Chromusterts of vertisols soil order. Surface texture varies from clay to clay loam (>35%). These soils are deep to very deep dark grayish brown, calcareous, moderately to well drained. Fine soils with weakly expressed slicken sides on nearly level plains constitute the dominant soil scape. The soils in levelled fields are generally having higher clay content (>35%)

Dhoti Watershed, Rajasthan:

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

06

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

and better fertility status, whereas fields with multidirectional slopes (1 to 3%) had eroded faces with lower clay content and fertility status. Soils are slightly alkaline and would require gypsum application for improving soil quality. One main gully with seven subsidiaries drains the watershed with total of 38 numbers of drains.

The watershed does not have any specified area as forest land, however, scanty and sparsely occurring natural trees, shrubs and grasses are observed along the field boundaries and community land. Among the forest trees spp., Acacia nilotica was most common followed by Acacia leucophloea, Azadirachta indica, Ailanthus excelsa, Butea monosperma, Dalbergia sissoo, Holoptelia integrifolia and Albizia lebbek. Common shrubs are Calotropis procera, Capparis deciduas, Capparis zeylancia, Balanites aegyptiaca species. Grass species observed are Cynodon dactylon, Cenchrus ciliaris, Dicanthium annulatum, Hetropogon contortus, Apluda mutica, Desmostachys bipinnata and Saccharum spontaneum. Maximum area is predominantly under rainfed farming in the watershed with soybean as major crop during kharif while mustard is the prominent crop during rabi followed by coriander / wheat / chickpea. There were no organized orchards present in the watershed, however, barring naturally occurring trees on field bunds, there were no well planned agro-forestry practices observed throughout the watershed.

Total population of Dhoti village is 1612 with average family size of 5 persons. Total livestock population of the watershed village is 2030. Maximum livestock population reared is goats (38%) followed by buffalo and cows due to scarcity of fodder and poor socio-economic conditions. Open grazing system is prevalent which lead to soil degradation. Average land holding is 2.8 ha, which is higher in comparison to region average. Literacy rate in the watershed is quite low despite of a very old primary school existing in the village, which was recently upgraded to high school. Village is electrified and has radio, television and telephone connectivity. Nearest market is 15 km at Baran town. About 20 castes are residing in the village but maximum households belong to Meena (ST) and Bairwa (SC) castes. Dhoti village is also very well connected with telephone and mobile networks.

Water resources status of Dhoti watershed was very poor. People depend upon open wells and bore wells for meeting their domestic needs and irrigation purposes. The watershed was very rich in respect of water resources from 1992 to 2002 as several bore wells were functional and plenty of groundwater was available at the depth of 30-35 m. The water table depth increased to 80 m to 100 m due to uncontrolled exploitation and non-adoption of conservation measures. The watershed has three land capability classes, Class II (510.18 ha), Class III (113.52) and Class VI lands cover nala of the watershed.

Climate of the watershed is warm and humid with normal annual rainfall of 1452.2 mm received in 77 rainy days. About 81% of the total rainfall is received during June to September (south-west monsoon). Bright sunshine hours vary from 1.84 to 3.98 and 6.29 to 9.04 during the monsoon and the post monsoon

-1 -1season, respectively. The average evaporation rate is 3.7 mm day with maximum in May (6.2 mm day ) and minimum -1during the month of August (2.1 mm day ). Water balance study showed that surplus water is available for agricultural

use between the month of May and October with a length of growing period of about 170 days.

The soils are red with sandy clay loam in texture, acidic in reaction, medium in organic carbon (0.69%), soil -1 -1 -1available nitrogen (288 kg ha ) and phosphorus content (11.1 kg ha ) and high in potassium content (313 kg ha ). The

LCC of the watershed revealed that maximum area is under Class III (43.1%) followed by Class VI (22.6%) and Class VII (20%). The Class II and IV account for 6.6% and 7.7% of the total watershed area, respectively. Class II is under paddy cultivation and the majority of the Class III & IV is under rainfed crops of paddy and ragi, whereas Class VI and Class VII land is under degraded forest and shifting cultivation. Out of the total geographical area of 601.24 ha, maximum area is under degraded forest (61%) followed by the net cultivated area (20.15%), current fallow (11.5%), area under non-agricultural use (6.0%) and area under pasture land (1.4%). Watershed has a total population of 992 living in 315 households. Tribal population accounts for about 66% of the total population of the watershed. Major occupation is agriculture providing family income of 2,500 per month.

Ayalur watershed drains into the river Bhavani. Slope of the watershed ranges from less than 1% to 7%. About 42% of the watershed area has slopes above 3%. Watershed lies in the tropical zone characterized with scanty rainfall and dry climate. Average annual rainfall is about 600 mm. Most of the annual rainfall (about 51%) is received during the north-east monsoon (October to December) accompanied with high intensity storms. Watershed also receives good rains (about 30%) during south-west monsoon. Soils of watershed are chiefly gravelly, stony and sandy of the red variety. Upper part of the watershed is mostly of red sandy. Red loam is prevalent

Lachhaputraghati Watershed, Odisha:

Ayalur Watershed, Tamil Nadu:

Introduction

07

Watershed Features

mostly in the middle and lower parts of the watershed. Soil depth ranges from less than 7 cm to 60 cm. soil depth and fertility are higher in lower reaches where irrigated agriculture is practiced with the help of bore wells. Natural vegetation in the watershed consists of Prosopis sp. in the wastelands, near percolation ponds and along the streams. Neem (Azadirachta indica), Erithrina indica, Accacia sp. and Palmyra are scattered all over the watershed. The watershed does not have diversified land use system except in the upper part where agro-forestry is followed with Palmyra trees. Agriculture is the major land use system. Poultry is practiced by few families.

Out of the total area (782.0 ha), about 90% (708.38 ha) area is under agriculture, of which 60.1% (430.47 ha) is under rainfed agriculture. Area under this land use is restricted to the upper and middle parts of the watershed. Only single cropping is followed in this area. Groundnut-fallow or fodder sorghum-fallow is the main crop sequence followed in the watershed. Fields are kept fallow during rabi season. Productivity of crops depends on amount and distribution of rainfall during south-west monsoon. The low water holding capacity of soils present in this area (gravely red sandy soil) also causes soil moisture stress. Average productivity of groundnut (main crop) is around 625

-1kg ha . About 17.27% (122.35 ha) is under partial irrigation. Bore well is the main source of irrigation. Average depth of bore well here is about 650 feet. Bore well water is pumped into open well before irrigating the crops. Some farmers are pumping water into surface ponds from where irrigation is given to field crops leading to low water use efficiency. Double cropping is followed in irrigated area. Since the water yield is poor in bore wells, crops are not fully irrigated. Only supplementary irrigation is given. Crops often experience moisture stress. Groundnut - tobacco, maize -tobacco, groundnut - fallow are the crop sequences followed. Soils of the area are red sandy to red sandy loam. Crops often express micro nutrient deficiencies (boron in groundnut and zinc in maize).

Irrigated agriculture using bore wells and open wells is practiced in the lower reaches of the watershed. Out of 708.37 ha total agriculture area, irrigated agriculture is practiced in 20.40% (144.53 ha) area. Average bore well depth in this area is around 400 feet and the yield from the bore well is sufficient to take up irrigated agriculture. However, use of high yielding varieties and good irrigation practices can increase WUE. Sugarcane, turmeric, banana and tapioca are mostly grown. Rice - rice, groundnut - tobacco are other rotations followed in this part of watershed. LCC is crucial for appropriate land use planning. In the watershed, LCC classes are I (64.93 ha), II (180.75 ha), III (428.76 ha), IV (101.87 ha) and V (5.59 ha).

Total population of five villages of the watershed was 3610 with average family size of 6 persons. Majority of the watershed farmers are in the category of small and marginal with average land holding of 1.2 ha. Percentage of marginal, small, medium and large land holdings are 32.5%, 50.2%, 8.8% and 8.5%, respectively. Annual net income from agriculture and allied activities in dryland area ranges from ` 15,000 to ` 65,000. Out of this, only 56% is contributed by the agricultural crops. Landless labours are 30% of the population. Their livelihoods are mainly dependent on labour demand on day to day basis.

The watershed lies in the Semi-Arid Zone. Average annual rainfall of the area is 812 mm. Most of the annual rainfall (about 94%) is received during the rainy season (June to September) accompanied with high intensity storms. Annual rainfall deficit of about 1335 mm aggravates rabi and summer crops’ prospects in the area. An annual runoff potential of about 12% is expected from the area which comes through short duration and high intensity rainfall. Long term monthly water balance computed for the watershed shows rainfed agriculture is not a suitable option for the production system, which is the case with most of the semi-arid regions. Therefore, supplemental irrigation with rainfed system or production system having less water requirement is essential for survival of the agricultural eco-system. Watershed area is the part of West Coast Gujarat Plain. The configuration of the area in general is gently sloping and is characterized by the problem of soil erosion varying from sheet and rill erosion in agriculture fields to gully erosion in the community wastelands. Soils are alluvial, very deep and moderate to well-drained on a gently sloping land. There is hard calcareous layer in the profile at depth of 0.7 to 2.0 m. Soils are fine loam to coarse loam in texture with mixed mineralogy. About half of the watershed is having sign of calcareousness. Soils are poor in fertility with surface organic carbon ranging from 0.20% to 0.32%.

Crops such as pearlmillet, pigeonpea, greengram, moth, cotton, sesame, sundhiya jowar, maize and castor as intercropping systems are grown under rainfed condition. Only 51 ha area is under irrigated agriculture, and irrigated crops are paddy, castor, fennel, cumin and wheat. Pearlmillet - fennel - cumin and cotton - wheat are the common cropping systems in irrigated lands. No vegetable crop is being cultivated by farmers. Natural vegetation comprises tree species like Acacia nilotica, Tamarindus indica and Prosopis cineraria spread along the village road and streams.

Vejalpur - Rampura Watershed, Gujarat:

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

08

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Species like Azadirachta indica, Prosopis cineraria, Holoptelia integrifolia etc. exist along field boundaries. There are very few fruit species like mango along the field boundary. Though no organized orchards are present in the watershed, homestead scattered planting of fruit trees of mango has been practiced by farmers. No agro-forestry practices exist in the watershed.

Out of the six villages/hamlets in the watershed, land of two villages, Nana Rampura and Vejalpur completely fall within the watershed boundary. Only few land holders of Mota Rampura, Garod, Ramsoli and Chikhlod are within the watershed boundary. The human population of Mota Rampura, Vejalpur, Nana Rampura and Ramsoli is 1089, 690, 970 and 735, respectively. Majority of the watershed farmers are in the marginal category (< 1 ha) and small (1-2 ha). Though, a considerable livestock is maintained for milk production, no improved breeds of different livestock are visible in Vejalpur-Rampura watershed. Milk is sold to Cooperative Dairy Society, Vejalpur-Rampura. In the watershed, 597 ha area is under regular cultivation out of which 545 ha is rainfed and only 50 ha is irrigated as per water availability. Main sources of irrigation are the old defunct natural ponds which have lost their functional utility for want of effective storability and water recycling systems. Area under grasslands and wastelands is about 130 ha.

A summary of features of selected watersheds for implementation of MMA is given in Table 2. Moreover, present and proposed land use plan for the selected watersheds is summarized in Table 3.

Particular Unit Watershed Ashti Jalalpur Ramasagara Kajiyana Jigna Lachaputra

ghati Dhoti Ayalur Vejalpur -

Rampura Elevation range m msl 660-1925 184-217 489-693 500-980 240-280 900-1258 900-1258 250-315 72-97 No. of families No. 80 292 175 151 403 315

Summer

temp.

°C

48

36

38.5

35.8

49

37.9

40

Winter temp.

°C

1

14

6.4

7.6

6.5

20

12

Rainfall

mm

1600

486

485.8

1220

835.5

1452.2

874

600

812 Monsoonal rainfall

%

75-80

85

72.2

80

81

90

51

94

Rainy days

No.

35

30.4

41

39

77 Stream length

m

17481

7201

7300

21000

42900

14659

20336

Perimeter

km

10.95

12.5

10.67

11

11.49

10.6

14.58

11.59 Average watershed slope

%

67

2.3

2.2

7.3

12

< 7

< 5

Max. elongated length

m

3740

5100

2750

4700

4800

2915

3125

4239

Max. elongated width

m

2568

2250

1747

1575

1650

2455

2625

2745 First order stream

No.

20

8

5

17

65

12

20

Second order stream

No.

4

3

2

5

14

3

6 Third order stream

No.

1

1

2

1

3

1

1

Fourth order stream

No.

-

-

-

1

-

2

-

-

-

Mean stream lengths

First order

m

553

3351

4700

9800

500

394

533 Second

order

m

854

850

1950

8000

357.1

2192

659

Third

order

m

3013

3000

650

2325

1316.7

3359

5719

Fourth

order

m

-

-

-

875

-

725

-

-

-

Drainage density

km km-2

3.7

1.029

1.52

4.2

2.31

7.14

3.03

1.87

2.62

Compactness ratio

1.42

-

1.36

1.35

1.5

1.22

0.939

1.47

2.32

Elongated ratio

0.81

-

1.57

0.585

0.57

0.922

1.06

0.52

0.74

Circulatory ratio

0.5

-

0.53

0.794

0.56

0.67

0.885

0.46

0.73

Form factor

0.27

-

0.63

0.226

0.26

0.67

0.69

0.21

0.43

Relief ratio

0.34

-

0.015

0.101

95.46

0.003

0.01

0.74

Community land

ha

44.9+12.0

40.6

Nil

-

-

63.98

Table 2: Summary of basic features of selected watersheds

Av. land holding ha 1.23 2.4 20.3 0.95 0.52 2.8 1.2 Cultivable land

ha

589

355.5

144

365.3

162

561.67

782

597

Farm families classification based on land holding size

Landless No. 2 30 25 8 84 Marginal (< 1.0 ha) No. 46 87 32 103 150 114 11 32.50% 172 Small (1-2 ha) No. 18 117 79 24 200 91 22 50.20% 133 Medium (2-4 ha) No. 11 57 49 11 150 22 55 8.80% 175 Large (>4 ha) No. 3 31 15 5 50 4 105 8.50%

Human population No. 901 1845 1056 867 992 1612 3610 3484

Livestock population No. 345 + 890

goat, sheep and poultry

1537 1240 666 3845 + 3066 goat

660 2030 2796+ 12000 poultry

1066

Introduction

09

Watershed Features

Ta

ble

3:

Pre

sen

t a

nd

pro

pos

ed l

and

use

pla

n f

or s

elec

ted

wat

ersh

eds

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

10

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

S.

No.

L

and

use

W

ater

shed

are

a (h

a)

Ash

ti

Jala

lpu

r

Ram

asag

ara

K

ajiy

ana

Ji

gna

D

hot

i

Lac

hh

apu

trag

hat

i

Aya

lur

V

ejal

pu

r-R

amp

ura

P

rese

nt

Pro

pos

ed P

rese

nt

Pro

pos

ed Pre

sen

t Pro

pos

ed Pre

sen

t Pro

pos

ed

Pre

sen

t

Pro

pos

ed

Pre

sen

t

Pro

pos

ed

Pre

sen

t

Pro

pos

ed

Pre

sen

t

Pro

pos

ed

Pre

sen

t

Pro

pos

ed

1 A

gric

ult

ure

15

3.9

15

3.9

49

9.15

49

9.15

33

1.09

29

3.27

144

.07

As per Detailed Project Report

407.

3

518.

4 5

61.6

7 56

1.67

153.

2 1

61.2

708.

4 73

5.9

597.

0 59

7.0

a R

ainf

ed

143.

7

128.

1

380.

77

346.

77

258.

9

175.

01

84.9

4

303.

5 3

88.4

421

.67

425.

67 12

7.2

109.

2 43

0.5

447.

8 54

5.0

530.

0

C

rops

14

3.7

12

8.1

38

0.77

33

8.52

25

7.9

16

7.01

84

.94

27

1.5

235.

8 42

1.67

421.

67 12

1.2

95.2

430.

5 42

6.6

531.

0 51

7.0

Agr

o-fo

rest

ry/ a

gri.-

horti

cultu

re /

fodd

er

deve

lopm

ent

Nil

8.

25

-

-

-

40

.7

4.

0

8.

0

-

5.2

13.0

D

ryla

nd h

ortic

ultu

re/

cultu

rabl

e w

aste

land

-

-

1.

0

8.0

-

-

-

-

-

6.

0

6.0

-

16

.0 14

.0

Fa

llow

land

-

-

-

-

24

.39

61

.91

-

26

.1

8.6

10

3.0

-

68

.9 60

.9

-

-

-

-

O

pen

srcu

b

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

124.

8 10

3.3

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

b Irrig

ated

10

.2

25.8

11

8.38

15

2.38

72

.19

11

8.26

59

.13

93

.8

130.

0

37.0

136.

0 26

.0 52

.0 27

7.9

288.

1 52

.0 67

.0

I

Ass

ured

10

.2

10.2

39

.46

73

.46

-

-

17

.30

-

-

-

-

26

.0 52

.0 14

5.1

175.

0 50

.0 50

.0

II

Par

tial

-

15

.6

78.9

2

78.9

2

72.1

9

118.

26

41.8

3

93.8

13

0.0

37

.0 13

6.0

-

-

12

1.8

99.1

2.0

17.0

c Coc

onut

gar

den

-

-

-

-

1.

0

2.0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

11

.0 14

.0

-

-

2 R

eser

ve fo

rest

46

.2

46.2

-

-

-

-

28

4.0

9.

1

9.1

36

6.0

366.

0

Civ

il s

oyam

210.

0

210.

0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Gra

ss la

nd

12.0

12.0

-

-

18.6

9

18.6

9

-

-

-

-

-

8.4

8.4

-

-

-

-

Com

mun

ity fo

rest

s

44.9

44.9

-

-

-

-

-

3

Was

te la

nd

/ Bar

ren

ro

cky

lan

d

180.

95

180.

95

97.0

97.0

-

31.6

31.6

63.9

8

63.9

8

32.3

4.8

130.

0

130.

0

a A

fore

stat

ion

Nil

24.0

-

8.0

-

6.4

4.8

2.0

b Past

ure

Nil

116.

35

-

28.1

6

33.8

2

8.2

8.2

15.0

c Silv

o/si

lvi -

past

ure

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1.0

-

-

-

1.0

d Hor

ticul

ture

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2.0

e Bam

boo

plan

tatio

n

-

-

--

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1.5

-

-

-

7.0

f Unt

reat

able

40.6

40.6

-

-

-

103.

0

Fuel

fodd

er

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2.0

-

-

-

-

Bio

dies

el

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1.5

-

-

-

-

Wat

er b

ody/

wet

land

/ na

la

& d

rain

/ ro

ads

-

-

7.20

7.20

38.1

1

16.7

16.7

34.3

5

34.3

5

75.0

75.0

17.4

17.4

34.0

34.0

4

Vil

lage

lan

d/ O

ther

s

6.0

6.0

17.4

17.4

2.0

2.3

9.00

44.2

44.2

17.0

17.0

23.9

23.9

14.0

14.0

Tot

al

473.

0

473.

0

697.

5

697.

5

485.

37

485.

37

509.

0

509.

0

620.

0

620.

0

677.

0

677.

0

601.

0

601.

0

782.

0

782.

0

775.

0

775.

0

Entry Point Activities, Community

Organization and Capacity Building

Past experience has indicated that watershed development without the participation of farmers has not created a positive impact on productivity and sustainablility in development and management of watersheds has been absent. Hence, as per guidelines of NWDPRA programme under Macro-Management of Agriculture (MMA) Scheme funded by the Department of Agriculture & Cooperation (MoA, GoI) in the XI Five Year Plan, the watershed projects were implemented in over 5600 ha from 2008 to 2014, in participatory mode. Nearly 5% of the total watershed budget was earmarked for Entry Point Activities (EPA) and spent to meet out immediate common needs in the first year of the preparatory phase. The EPA activities helped to develop good social rapport and confidence among the beneficiaries with the project implementing agency (PIA) in implementing watershed activities as planned. All the EPA activities were identified through PRA and Gram Sabha meetings.

Entry Point Activities: Construction of concrete roads (locally known as Kharanja) was conducted in the watershed on demand of the villagers to provide a better walking road and also help in easier transportation of household goods in the village compared to kachcha roads.

Farmers’ Training: Training on vermi-compost preparation techniques was organized at the Uttarakhand Livestock Development Board, Kalsi Centre during February 8-10, 2011. Training on soil and water conservation techniques was also organized at ICAR-IISWC, Dehradun under capacity building component during March 22-24, 2011.

Kissan Goshtis and Watershed Association Committee Meetings: Kissan goshtis were organized in Ashti watershed (Plate 2) at the beginning of both kharif and rabi seasons to provide detailed information on package of practices of different crops, agronomical demonstrations, on-farm trials and other interventions to be taken up in the watershed. Watershed committee and watershed association meetings were also conducted from time to time in the watershed. Exposure visit of women self help groups for value addition and income generating activities and user groups to water harvesting projects were organized.

Entry Point Activities: On the basis of community demand in Dhanina village, two entry point works (construction of waste weir and two bath rooms) were carried out near main water body catering to multiple uses like drinking water for human and livestock, bathing and washing etc. (Plate 3a). Another bath room was constructed where schedule caste community lives. In Jalalpur village, community was facing acute problem of drinking water particularly in summer seasons. Therefore, drinking water supply was created through 2000 litres tank for the community (Plate 3b). Total budget amount of 2.50 lakhs was invested on these entry point interventions.

3.1 Ashti Watershed

3.2 Jalalpur Watershed

Plate 2: Kissan Goshtis in Ashti watershed

Plate 3a: Waste weir renovation, bath rooms constructed in Jalalpur watershed

3

Introduction

11

Plate 4: Farmers training for Jalalpur watershed project

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

12

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Farmers’ Training: Six farmer training programmes, each of three days duration, were organized at the Research Centre, Agra (Plate 4). Farmers were trained in soil and water conservation, agroforestry and other profitable land use options, improved package of practices of crops, livestock management, beekeeping, mushroom cultivation etc. Training programme exclusive women was also organized. Training module comprised of an optimum blend of lectures and field visits. The total expenditure on farmer’s training was 4.80 lakhs.

Kissan Goshtis: Four kissan goshtis were organized in Jalalpur watershed (two each in Jalalpur and Dhanina villages) at the beginning of both kharif and rabi seasons in order to provide detailed information on package of practices of different crops, agronomical demonstrations and on farm trials and all other interventions to be taken up in the watershed (Plate 5). Experts from agricultural department and animal husbandry were also roped in and relevant lectures on crops and animal husbandry were delivered. More than 300 farmers attended kissan goshtis and benefited from deliberations. The total expenditure on kissan goshtis was 0.2 lakhs.

In Ramasagara watershed, while deciding the activities of EPA and capacity building following criteria were considered for successful implementation.

1. Community need of the village that involved higher number of stakeholders in watershed.

* Platform/Open theatre was constructed in front of community hall.

2. Common basic needs of the SC/ST colony in the watershed with special emphasis on daily animals’

drinking water .

* Two concrete water troughs were constructed at Ramasagara and Devasamudra.

3. Exposure and knowledge improvement of watershed beneficiaries, especially in the land based activities covering both arable and non-arable lands.

*Training in soil and water conservation and watershed management, including exposure visit to ICAR-

IISWC, Research Farm, Bellary.

3.3 Ramasagara watershed

Plate 3b: Drinking water systems constructed in Dhanina and Jalalpur watersged, Agra

Plate 5: View of kissan goshti in Jalalpur watershed

Introduction

13

Entry Point Activities, Community Organization and Capacity Building

Plate 6: Open-theatre platform constructed in Ramasagara watershed

Plate 7: Water trough constructed in Ramasagara watershed

Watershed Society: Ramasagara watershed society was formed during May 2009 with Mr. Guddada Ganganna as President and Mr. D.S. Parmeshwarappa as Secretary of the watershed and registered during December 2009 with Registration No. S.O.R.438/2009-10. The watershed society has two bank accounts i.e. (1) Ramasagara Watershed Project Account as Current Account and (2) Ramasagara Watershed Development Fund (WDF) Account for depositing the farmers contributions towards the Project as a Saving Banks Account. The contribution of the farmers

st till 31 March 2014 is 5,90,636, including accrued interest of 62,040.

Entry Point Activities: Masonry open-theatre platform was constructed of 12.6 m length, 6.10 m width and 0.60 m height (Plate 6). Platform was used for village meetings, cultural programmes, including marriages and drying of food grains. Total cost of construction was 1,14,172 and it generated an additional employment of 128 man days.

Two water troughs were constructed at Harijan (SC) colony at Devasamudra and Ramasagara village. The length, width and height of the water troughs were 4.8 m, 2.1 m and 0.6 m, respectively (Plate 7). These water troughs served as drinking water points for nearly 130 cattle in both villages and the cost incurred for construction was ` 19,366 at Devasamudra village and ` 21,115 at Ramasagara village. An additional employment of 128 man-days was created.

Capacity Building: Two training programmes were conducted during 17-20 March for 40 beneficiaries. In the training, beneficiaries of watershed were exposed to soil and rainwater conservation structures for black soils, importance of meteorological parameters in agriculture and shown the vermi-compost units at the Research Farm of Bellary centre. Five training programmes were conducted from 2009 to 2011 for 100 beneficiaries and these beneficiaries were exposed to soil and rainwater conservation measures in black soils; horticulture plantation and vermin-compost unit; meteorological observatory and importance of meteorological parameters in agriculture; interactions on crops, cropping systems, low cost technologies and integrated nutrient management.

Exposure Visits: Forty farmers of the watershed visited Zonal Agricultural Research Centre (ZARC) Babbur Farm; KVK, Hiriyur; BAIF, Tiptur; AICRP on Dryland Agriculture, GKVK, Bangalore; and KVK, Suttur during 2010 and 2011 and were exposed to:

Improved crops, their cultivars and improved cropping systems in red soils

Integrated farming systems in red soils and vermi-compost units

Cultivation of fruit plants, medicinal plants, agro-horti/agro-silvi systems

Raising of seedlings of mango, sapota, cashew, jack and medicinal plants in nursery

Farm pond and roof rainwater harvesting and its re-use

Improved agricultural implements

Improved livestock management for higher milk yields.

Kissan Goshti: Seven kissan goshtis were organized from 2009 to 2012 at Ramasagara, Devasamudra, Hanumapur and Venkatapur villages of watersheds (Plate 8) and farmers had discussions with scientists on:

`

•••••••

Plate 8: Meeting /goshtis of milk producers’ members, silage preparation and Kissan in Ramasagara watershed

Plate 9: Construction of boundary wall in primary school at Dhattogran (left) and renovated Dharmshala at Nala Dakrog (right) - Kajiyana watershed

Plate 10: Dr. V.N. Sharda, Director and Dr. B.L. Dhyani, Head (HRD&SS) deliberating key issues in watershed management during training of stackholders of Kajiyana watershed

•

••

•

Improved crops, cropping systems, horticultural plantations, grasses and forestry, soil and rainwater conservation practices, and human and animal health.

Critical management practices, in irrigated Bt. cotton, maize and onion with soil fertility maintenance.

Application of fertilizers and crops to be cultivated based on the nutrient availability in the soil and on the quality of the irrigation water available.

Common diseases in cattle, periodical vaccination, animal nutrition, silage preparation, Azolla cultivation and milk producer’s society for higher milk yield.

People participation is the key to the success of watershed programmes. For achieving active involvement of the community, institutional mechanism was established. Watershed association namely Watershed Association, Kajiyana was constituted by making all heads of 144 families in four villages its members. Watershed Committee was made by selecting a president, a secretary and ten members, including 2 women and 2 SCs in the general body meeting of the association. The society was registered under Societies Act with Registrar, Panchkula district, Haryana. The Society also received TAN No. from Income Tax Department for carrying out financial activities. Accounts in the name of the watershed committee namely Watershed Committee Account and Watershed Development Fund Account were opened in State Bank of India, Pinjore, District Panchkula (Haryana).

Entry Point Activities: Four percent of total budget was earmarked for defined entry point activities. These included making boundary wall for primary school at Dhattogran, renovation of Panchyat Ghar in Janouli and Kajiyana, and repair and renovation of Dharamsalas of Nala Dakrog (Plate 9). All these activities were completed within the stipulated budget.

Capacity Building: Technical capabilities of the local community need to be upgraded for handling watershed programmes. Two 3-days durations capacity building programmes were organized for the farmers. Sixty farmers were trained at the Institute

stheadquarters during May 12-14, 2010 (1 batch) and ndMay 15-17, 2010 (2 batch). The programmes

included classroom lectures and field visits to successful watersheds (Plate 10).

3.4 Kajiyana Watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

14

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

3.5 Jigna Watershed

3.6 Dhoti Watershed

Watershed Executive Committee: As per the common guidelines, Watershed Committee (WC) was formed by the Gram Sabha in general meeting organized by Sarpanch and Secretary of the village panchayat, Jigna (Plate 11) held on January 26, 2011 duly approved by Chief Executive Officer of Jila panchayat, Datia (MP). The Watershed Committee was constituted with a total 11 members, including Chairman, Watershed Secretary and one representative of IISWC (formerly CSWCRTI) RC, Datia.

Watershed Development Fund (WDF) account was also opened with State Bank of India jointly operated by Secretary WC and one nominated officer of IISWC RC, Datia for depositing the contribution of farmers as per the guidelines.

During the project period, forty meetings of WDT members with WC and villagers were convened at Village Panchayat Bhawan, Jigna for taking various decisions on watershed activities. The watershed development fund (WDF) contributed by beneficiaries in SBI A/C No. 31737132995 is accumulated to ` 95,471.

Entry Point Activities: Renovation of boundary wall and fixing of 3 new iron gates along village community campus, having school, panchayat office, anganwadi, veterinary hospital etc. was completed under entry point activities of the project. This not only provided safety to school children, but also was helpful to other offices located inside the boundary. Construction of RCC yard and stairs type path of village temple (Plate 12), which is also one of the important common places for all sorts of religious and other folk functions was also constructed on people’s demand, particularly women.

Capacity Building Activities (Exposure Visits): Three exposure visits for the Panchayat and WC members, including progressive farmers, were organized to give them exposure and create awareness about soil and water conservation technologies (Plate 13) at the IISWC, IWDP model watershed (Bajni), IGFRI and CAFRI, Jhansi (UP).

Community Organization: Earlier experiences on watershed development activities indicated that sustainability and replicability of these programmes can be enhanced through increased community participation. Prior to planning and

Plate 11: View of watershed Committee meeting held in Jigna watershed

Plate 12: Renovated boundry wall of Panchayat building (left) and repair of village temple yard and stairs (right) in Jigna watershed

Plate 13: Trainings organized for SHGs and exposure visits of progressive farmers of Jigna watershed

Introduction

15

Entry Point Activities, Community Organization and Capacity Building

implementation of watershed activities community was organized in different groups and an association called Watershed Development Society (WDS) by inclusion of all the 193 beneficiary households as its member in Dhoti watershed. The by-laws of the society were finalized in a general body meeting as per the norms and guidelines issued under Rajasthan Registration Rule No. 28, 1958 and this society was registered with the office of Registrar, District Baran (Rajasthan). The main function of WDS was to act as overall in-charge for planning, executing and monitoring the developmental plan with the assistance of watershed committee (WC) and watershed development team (WDT). Regular general body meetings were held to fulfill various functions of WDS. The Watershed Committee was formed to achieve the objective of WDS and execute the watershed development plan in the field. Total number of watershed committee members was eleven. One watershed development team (WDT) member of programme implementing agency (PIA) i.e. ICAR-IISWC Research Centre, Kota was also included in the executive body. The Chairman and Secretary of the society were nominated in general body meeting and elected with general consensus. The Chairman then nominated other members of the watershed committee, including one women member. The Secretary was responsible for convening meeting of watershed committee, record and execute the decisions taken in meetings, and maintaining the accounts and other records with transparency to all members. The Secretary was paid honorarium @ ` 3,000 per month. For increasing efficiency and income of watershed families engaged in various occupations, two Self-Help Groups (tailoring activity) for women was organized and seed money of 50,000 for purchasing sewing machine were provided (Plate 14). For maintaining transparency in project implementation, a bank account in the name of watershed committee was opened in State Bank of India, Baran jointly operated by Chairman, Secretary and PIA representative (Nodal Scientist). An account in the name of ‘Watershed Development Fund’ was also opened in which farmer’s contribution towards developmental activities was credited for use after withdrawal of project. People’s participation in executive body and general body meetings to generate awareness (Plate 15) and finalize work priories are given in Table 4.

Particulars Years

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

A. Watershed Committee Meetings Meetings held (No.) --- 1 2 1 --- Members attended (%) --- 91 73 55 --- Women member attended (%) --- 100 100 --- ---

B. General Body Meetings Meetings held (No.) 10 3 2 --- --- Total number of participants 656 172 74 --- --- Female participants (No.) 15 6 4 --- --- Female participants (%) 2.29 3.48 5.41 --- ---

C. Farmer Fair / Farmer Day Kissan fair organized (No.) 1 --- --- --- 1 Total number of participants 249 --- --- -- 176 Female participants (No.) 59 --- --- --- 49 Female participants (%) 23.70 --- --- --- 27.84

Table 4: People’s participation in Dhoti watershed meetings

Plate 15 : Farmers’ fair and general body meeting in Dhoti watershed

Plate 14 : Sewing machines given to women SHG for tailoring in Dhoti watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

16

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Entry Point Activities: Entry point activity is the first formal project intervention which was undertaken after selection and finalization of the watershed. During the rapport building and planning stages of project implementation, entry point activities (EPA) as per stachholders’ preferences were taken up for developing their confidence and to establish credibility of WDT members (Plate 16). Two EPA (renovation of village Hanuman temple and renovation of Mata Ji ka Chabootra) was carried out in Dhoti watershed.

Capacity Building: The beneficiary members of watershed and formed self help group (SHGs) were given basic training for skill up gradation and orientation on technical and organizational aspects of watershed development. Details of training programme conducted under the Dhoti watershed is given in Table 5.

Exposure Visit: The members of WC and other progressive farmers of watershed were taken for one exposure visit during September 14-17, 2009 to a model watershed and research institutions which helped in improving their level of understanding about the methodological details and expected benefits of watershed development project.

Community Organization: Community organization is considered to be an important component of any rural development project. A multi-disciplinary team of scientists and technical officers constituted watershed development team (WDT) who conducted several rounds of meeting with the watershed community. Participatory rural appraisal (PRA) exercise was conducted to generate awareness about the project and its mode of operation and execution (Plate 17). Further, exposure visits to successfully executed watersheds were conducted to build confidence of the watershed communities and several entry point activities (EPA) were undertaken by the WDT in the watershed with the community contributions (Table 6). Watershed level local people’s institutions represented

3.7 Lachhaputraghati Watershed

Table 5: Capacity building of stakeholders of Dhoti watershed S.

No. Topic of the training No. of participants Training date

Male Female 1 Watershed Management 25 -- 2-4 June, 20092 Watershed Management 26 -- 7-9 June, 20093 Avenues of income generation activities in rural setup 22 -- 15-17 June, 20114 Income of generation through handicraft and tailoring -- 20 18-21 June, 2011

Total 73 20

Plate 17: Community organization and capacity building activities in Lachhaputraghati watershed

Table 6: Activities for awareness and community confidence building in Lachhaputraghati watershed

Plate 16 : Rapport building and initiation of participatory planning in Dhoti watershed

Activity Year Total

2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 Village meetings 5 3 2 1 11

No to anti-liquor campaign

3

2

1 -

6

Campaign for health and hygiene

3

2

1 -

6

Motivation for enrollment of children in school

1

1

1 1

4

Wall paintings depicting benefits of the watershed programme

12

12 6

-

30

Participation in exhibitions

1

1

1

3

Campaign for Saving in bank account 1 1 1 - 3

Introduction

17

Entry Point Activities, Community Organization and Capacity Building

by various sub-communities of the watersheds were constituted for implementation and execution of various watershed development activities (Table 7).

Community Organization: As part of the community organization activities, five Village Resource Management Committees (VRMCs) had been initially formed for the five major villages / hamlets located in Ayalur watershed, viz; Semmandampalayam, Mallipalayam, Kulaimoopanur, Puducolony / Annanagar colony and Palapallayam / Pulliyangadu / Odaimedu. Twenty five members had been selected from these VRMCs to act as members of Ayalur Watershed Executive Committee. President, Vice-president, Secretary and Treasurer were then elected from these 25 members to function as office bearers of the Executive Committee.

By-laws for the Watershed Committee (WC) were then framed, and during the month of July 2009, Ayalur Watershed Association was registered under the Society Registration Act. Regular meetings of WC were conducted in which all watershed development works were discussed before implementing them on farmers’ fields. The beneficiaries for the various project interventions in different villages were identified by the members of the respective VRMCs. All records pertaining to the watershed are being maintained in proper manner by the office bearers of the WC. Two accounts for Ayalur Watershed, viz; Ayalur Watershed Project Fund and Ayalur Watershed Development Fund were opened at Canara Bank, Kollapallur, Gobi taluk which is the nearest nationalized bank. All financial transactions pertaining to watershed works were operated through the former account while contributions received from beneficiaries and membership fee from members of the watershed association were being deposited in the latter.

Entry Point Activities: As a rapport building measure, a community hall for the SC community of the watershed was constructed (Plate 18) at a total cost of ` 3,45,562 in the Pudu Colony hamlet of Ayalur watershed as Entry Point Activity. An amount of ` 17,250 was contributed by the beneficiaries of community hall which was used for an additional entry point activity i.e. purchase of student desks for government school.

Capacity Building: As part of capacity building activities for the watershed community, three exposure visits and three skill development training programmes (Plate 19) were organized for effective implementation of the project and to give knowledge on general aspects of watershed projects, watershed technologies, horticulture, and livestock and poultry managements (Table 8).

3.8 Ayalur Watershed

Plate 18: Executive committee meeting and entry point activity (community hall construction) in Ayalur watershed

Overall coordination and liaison, execution of

Table 7: Details of local level institutions at Lachhaputraghati watershed level

Tailoring, pickle and sauce making (household production system), mushroom farming, honey production, cow rearing, goat rearing and poultry

Activity/Role

watershed development activities and other activities as per the guidelines. Watershed Project Account : SBI, Damanjodi, Account no. 30863631781. Watershed Development Fund Account : Utkal Gramaya Bank, Mathalput, Damanjodi bearing account number SBO 164.

2 Watershed Committee 01 13

group

1 SHGs 15 237

S. No.

People’s Institute No. of

Total members

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

18

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

3.9 Vejalpur - Rampura Watershd

Community Organization: A society named as ‘Vejalpur-Rampura Watershed Society’ was formed with farmers of these villages as members and application for registration of the society was submitted to Assistant Charity Commissioner, Nadiad on 06.11.2009. After the formation of the society a Watershed Executive Committee was formed consisting of 13 members through election among local farmers (Plate 20). Subsequently, 4 User Groups (UGs)

husbandry

Sl. No.

Nature of training Organizations involved Number of participants

Purpose

1 Skill development training (20-22 February, 2009)

ICAR-IISWC, Ooty District Livestock Farm, Ooty

27 Skill development on soil and water conservation in dry land areas

2 Exposure visit (27-28 February, 2009)

ICAR-IISWC, Research Centre, Ooty 52 Exposure to the watershed members on soil and water conservation in dry land areas

3 Exposure visit (09-10 February, 2010)

Coconut Research Station, Aliyarnagar (TNAU) Model Nursery recognized by National Horticultural Mission, Sultanpet

50 Exposure to the beneficiaries on dryland horticulture and agro-foresrtry

4 Skill development training (10-12 March, 2010)

ICAR-IISWC, District Livestock Farm, Ooty Central Institute of Ag. Engg., Research Centre, Coimbatore, Sugarcane Breeding Instt., Coimbatore

25 Skill development on soil and water conservation in dry land areas, improved agricultural tools, sugarcane cultivation methods.

5 Skill development - cum awareness campaign (03 January, 2011)

ICAR-IISWC, Ooty DWDA and AED, Erode district, District Panchayat, Erode district and DRDA, Erode district

100 Skill development on soil and water conservation in dry land areas, various programmes implemented by the governments in dry land area programmes

6 Exposure visit (30 December, 2013)

TANUVAS KVK, Namkkal 50 To acquire knowledge on gotary, poultry and animal

Table 8: Capacity building on natural resource management in Ayalur watershed

Plate 19: Capacity building activities in Ayalur watershed

Plate 20: Sensitization of watershed stakeholders for committee formation in vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Introduction

19

Entry Point Activities, Community Organization and Capacity Building

and 4 Self Help Groups (SHGs) were formed. The formed UGs were for crop development, horticulture & vegetable development, forest & pasture development, and soil & water conservation. The SHGs were for Grah Udyog Vikas, tailoring & embroidery, and poultry development. Four papad making groups having 10 women members were constituted from 4 villages of watershed. Four papad making units were purchased and training was given to women for their operation. Sixteen women were trained in garment making for 4 months duration. Ten sewing machines were distributed among women for tailoring work to earn their livelihood. A woman now earns 100-150 day by sewing

-1clothes. Ten farmers were distributed 25 poultry chicks each with iron cage for poultry rearing who earned 120 bird in a month by selling eggs.

Entry Point Activities: Under entry point activities, four solar street light systems (two each at Ramasodi and Mota Rampura) were installed. Three hand pumps (Plate 21) at Vejalpur Nana and Mota Rampura and two TV sets with dish connection were installed at Vejalpur and Rampura panchayats. Two chaff cutters, one each at Vejalpur and Rampura were distributed (Table 9).

Capacity Building and Exposure Visits: Capacities of the watershed committee and watershed executive members were built through regular training programmes on various aspects. A training programme on ‘Common Guidelines for Watershed Development’ was organized at ICAR-IISWC Research Centre, Vasad for farmers of Vejalpur-Rampura watershed to orient them about watershed guidelines (Plate 22).

Similarly, exposure visits of watershed farmers were conducted to expose them to community work execution. Watershed executive committee meetings along with local farmers were organized 11 times. Training-cum-exposure visit to Junagarh Agricultural University was conducted for 31 farmers. Kissan Diwas was also celebrated (Plate 23).

-1

Plate 21: Hand pump installation and TV with dish connection in vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Component activities Achievement Physical (Nos.) Financial ( `)

Solar street light system 4 116000 Hand pump 3 140626 TV set with dish connection 2 28000 Chaff -cutter 2 39000

Table 9: Details of entry point activities in Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Plate 23: Kissan Diwas celebrated in Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Plate 22: Capacity building of watershed executive members of Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

20

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Watershed Development Works

4.1 Ashti Watershed

Water Resource Development: To augment the irrigation potential further, three RCC water storage tanks of 27.0 cu-m capacity (6.0 m x 3.0 m x 1.5 m) each were constructed in the watershed. As a result of HDPE pipe line (about 5.7 km) installed at Ashti watershed, farmers have started shifting to vegetable crops, mainly tomato. The polylined tanks (Silpaulin - 120 GSM) of 7-8 cu-m capacity (total 6 nos.) constructed in the watershed are also working well with no seepage loss. Polytanks were integrated with low cost drip system working on about 4 m available head. Tomato crop

-1was taken by farmers with yield of 35-40 t ha .

Soil Conservation Works: soil conservation works, viz; loose boulder check dams (4 nos., 48.81 cu-m) for drainage line treatment, stone risers on terraces (4 nos., 33.77 cu-m), contour trenches (300 nos., 81.0 cu-m) and shoulder bunds on sloping fields (4 nos., 33.77 cu-m) were executed in the watershed.

Production and Micro-enterprises

Horticultural Development: To promote horticultural development in the watershed, a total of 3726 fruit plants were planted at different altitudes covering an area of about 18 ha during 2009-2011 (Table 10).

Pomegranate, citrus and mango showed good survival, whereas of jackfruit and litchi was poor (Table 10). Mean survival of fruit plants was observed to be about 70%. The performance of pomegranate, citrus, guava and jackfruit were not much influenced by altitudinal variations, except litchi.

INM Technology Demonstration: Specific demonstrations in different altitudes and aspects containing HYV seeds of maize, cowpea, urd, paddy, wheat, lentil, mustard and inter-crops along with INM inputs (chemical fertilizers, vermicompost, biofertilisers, ZnSO and FYM). Specific demonstrations data were recorded in aspects of yield, yield 4

attributes, soil nutrient status, soil moisture etc. (Table 11).

Table 10: Plantation of various fruit species at Ashti watershed (2009-10 to 2011-12)

Table 11: Demonstrations (number) for varietal and INM technologies in kharif and rabi seasons at different altitudes in Ashti watershed

Fruit plantation Number Area planted

2009 10 2010 11 2011 12 Total (ha)

Mango 356 700 500 1556 9.96 Guava 110 200 200 510 1.84 Pomegranate (Anar) 260 500 550 1310 4.72 Citrus 105 100 0 205 0.74 Litchi 95 0 0 95 0.61 Jackfruit (Kathal ) 50 0 0 50 0.32 Total 976 1500 1250 3726 18.18

Altitude (AMSL)

Aspects No. of farmers for kharif crops No. of farmers for rabi crops Maize Urd Paddy Cowpea Maize+

Cowpea Wheat Mustard Lentil Wheat +

mustard Wheat+

lentil High (1600-1800) NSEW 4 2 2 - - 8 4 2 2 2 Medium (1200-1600) NSEW 4 1 2 - - 7 4 2 2 2 Lower (900-1200) NSEW 4 1 2 05 01 8 3 2 3 2 Total 12 04 06 05 01 23 11 6 7 6

4

21

- - -

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

22

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Drip irrigation system: Drip irrigation system was installed in 0.25 ha area to promote vegetable cultivation in watershed area. Field demonstration of drip irrigation system on tomoto crop was shown (Plate 24).

Livelihood Support System

Stitching machines were procured & distributed among women who had already undergone training in stitching (Plate 25) so that they can impart training to other woman members as per their convenience of time and duration.

Hand maize shellers were procured and distributed among all families in the watershed to reduce the drudgery among farm women.

User groups (4 nos.) were formed for all the pipeline systems.

Tools for carpenters/blacksmith were procured and distributed in the watershed under the component of livelihood support.

Fish Farming Interventions: Based on the field surveys, farmers’ need and the potential for fish farming, a fish pond and a poultry unit for integrated fish farming was constructed in the watershed. Additionally, fish farming in 10 existing water tanks and in 4 paddy fields after providing suitable inlet, outlet, refuge depression/pond and raised bunds (Table 12 & 13; Plate 26) in the farmer’s fields of the watershed were undertaken, which showed 60-70%

2survival and 15-40 gm growth per fish per month and provided 34-40 kg fish per 100 m . Paddy fields were suitably improved with strong field bunds of 30-40 cm height, and suitable trench along all or 1-2 side bunds were made to

2introduce paddy-fish culture. A refuge pond of 1-2 m with 0.5-1 m depth safeguarded the stocked fish during emergency. Inlet and outlet points or channels in the fields were provided with filter to prevent entry of unwanted wild fish and escape of stocked fish, respectively. Paddy yields increased at least by 10% mainly due to fish movements, fertilizing potential of unfed feeds applied/feaces and predating ability of fish, which can help in release of nutrients from the clumps of paddy add plant nutrients and consume insects and pests of paddy. In turn, fish received food, space and other living requirements in paddy fields.

•

•

•

•

Plate 25 : Stitching machine distribution and training to women in Ashti watershed

Plate 24: Laying of drip irrigation system in tomoto crop fields in Ashti watershed

Sl.No. Farmer’s name Field size (m2) Elevation (m amsl) Production status 1. Sh. Ajab Singh 90 800 2.0 kg 50 m2 2. Sh. Bhajan Singh 70 900 1.5 kg 45 m2 3. Sh. Jalam Singh 70 600 2.5 kg 65 m2 4. Sh. Jalam Singh 70 600 0.5 kg 50 m2

Table 12: Paddy-fish culture introduced in four fields after improving paddy fields

Plate 26: Newly constructed fish pond for introducing pond-fish culture and paddy fish farmingin Ashti watershed

Sl. No. Farmer’s name Pond size (m3) Water area (m2) Village Elevation (m amsl) 1. Sh. Roop ram 5.0 x 3.0 x 2.0 15 Jamuwa 800 2. Sh. Bahuthia 5.0 x 3.0 x 3.0 15 Jamuwa 900 3. Sh. Jalam Singh 5.0 x 3.0 x 2.0 15 Jamuwa 600 4. Sh. Gajan Singh 3.0 x 1.5 x 1.5 4.5 Jamuwa 900 5. Sh. Sabal Singh 5.0 x 3.0 x 1.8 15 Ashti 1500 6. Sh. Puran Singh 5.0 x 3.0 x 1.8 15 Ashti 1600 7. Sh. Gopal Singh 5.0 x 3.0 x 1.8 15 Ashti 1400 8. Sh. Mega Ram 5.0 x 3.0 x 1.8 15 Dabra 1300 9. Sh. Labu 5.0 x 3.0 x 1.8 15 Dabra 1300

10. Sh. Sukhram 5.0 x 3.0 x 1.8 15 Dabra 1200

Table 13: Introduction of fish culture in existing irrigation tanks at different elevations

Animal Health Care: A massive animal vaccination programme was carried out in the watershed against Foot & Mouth Disease (FMD) and peste des petits ruminants (PPR) in goats and sheep covering 2230 and 160 animals, respectively. Treatment of animals against endo- and ecto-parasites was also carried out benefiting 280 and 370 animals, respectively. As a result of animal health care measures undertaken and nutritional feed, particularly Urea Molasses Mineral Blocks (UMMB) provided in watershed, the animal health problems reduced drastically. The problem of FMD, PPR and Hemorrhagic Septicemia (HS) were found negligible after the interventions, and ecto and endo-parasites problems reduced by 18% to 22%. Vaccination and medication against major animal diseases reduced the age of first calving and inter-calving periods of farm animals by 7 to 12 months and 4-6 months, respectively and increased the milk yield in cows and buffaloes by 8% to 15% and body weight by 5-15% in goats and sheep. Animal

th thhealth camps organized in the watershed (on 15 April, 2011 and 28 March, 2012) with involvement of State Animal Husbandry Department helped in spreading awareness towards animal care and establishing better linkages of state agency with the Institute and villagers.

Poultry Farming and Livestock Production Promoted: Six Kissan Goshti to disseminate watershed based fish farming, in tegra ted farming and management of animal husbandry interventions under the project were organized. Five animal health care camps were organized, which were well attended by farmers and publicized by local print media. Required medication, vaccination and animal medicines against major diseases and infections were given to farm animals (Photo 27-29; Table 14). A total of 230 and 160 animals were vaccinated against Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) and peste des petits ruminants (PPR; in goats and sheep), besides treatment of 280 and 370 animals against endo-parasites and ecto-parasites, respectively in the watershed. Two hundred Urea Molasses Mineral Blocks (UMMB; Photo 30) were also distributed to increase milk yield. Drudgery reducing implements/tools like chaff cutter and stall-feeding facilities such as mangers and drinking troughs were advocated to enhance outputs from animal husbandry.

Photo 27: Farmers being appraised on the livestock healthcare in Ashti watershed

Photo 28: Vaccination of cows and goats against FMD and PPR at Ashti watershed

Photo 29: Animal health care camp organized in Ashti watershed

23

Watershed Development Works

Photo 30: Distribution of UMMB to beneficiary farmers with milking animals in Ashti watershed

Sl. No.

Diseases and health care problems observed

Animals infected during pre-project phase

Treatment given by Veterinary Officer

1. Cough and pneumonia, etc. 55% goats and sheep Vaccinated against PPR 2. Ulceration in foot and

mouth 60% large animals including cows, buffaloes, and bullocks

Vaccinated against FMD

3. Muscle stretch (cernil) 10% of large animals including cows, buffaloes, and bullocks

Advised for minor operation

4. Endo-parasites 100% in small and large animals De-wormers given 5. Ecto-parasites 100% in small and large animals Medicated with ecto-parasite killers 6. Loose motion and

constipation due to liver-fluke

25% of small and large animals Medicines and tonic were distributed and de-worming carried out

7. Leach infection in nose 18% of small and large animals Advised to follow indigenous technique of leach removal since no treatment is available for the infection

8. Eye cancer Negligible Advised for minor operation and closure of infected one eye after thorough cleaning

9. Nutrition deficiency and infertility

100% of small and large animals Feed supplements such as mineral mixtures distributed

10. Cystic ovary 1% Cyst removal and medication for fertility given

Table 14: Required medication and vaccination under taken and medicines distributed in Ashti warweshed

Consequent to repeated vaccinations and medications and improvement of animal feeds, particularly using UMMB and improved feeding processes, the animal health problems observed in the villages during pre-project phase reduced drastically, i.e., nil to negligible with reference to FMD, PPR and Hemorrhagic Septicemia (HS), and 18% to 22% with reference to ecto and endo-parasites. Vaccinations and medications against major diseases reduced the age of first calving and inter-calving periods of farm animals by 7 to 12 months and 4 to 6 months, respectively and increased milk yields in cows and buffaloes by 8% to 15% and body weight by 5% to 15% in goats and sheep.

Nine hundred poultry chicks (Kuroiler, Photo 31) for backyard poultry farming were distributed to all 84 families (8-20 each) of the watershed. The newly introduced Kuroiler chicks for backyard poultry farming trenched well into the watershed households through self-sustainability towards food and economic security. Ultimately, number of backyard poultry units as an integrated farming in every household increased. Upon consolidating the outcome of the project

Photo 31: Introduction of Kuroiler chicks for backyard poultry farming in Ashti watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

24

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

interventions, farmers were directly linked with the State agency to create a via media for enhanced adopt ion of newer technologies and help their spread.

Improvement of Human Health Care and Sanitation: Four human health care camps were organized with the help of local residential doctors from nearby hospitals to improve healthcare status of farmers (Photo 32). Disease or problem-specific medicines, health care additives like tonics, minerals, and vitamins, deworming tablets/syrups, required medical prescriptions, sanitary and health care guidance were given to villagers under the project. These interventions showed very promising results about improvement of health status of the villagers.

Desiltation Work from Existing Water Bodies: Dhanina village having one old water-harvesting structure (village pond) serves the purpose of drinking water to cattle and others uses like bathing, washing clothes, recreation, percolation etc. Over time, due to siltation, its capacity has considerably reduced. Therefore, this village pond was desilted

3(approx. 2000 M ) with a cost of 0.90 lakhs, to enhance capacity of pond and increase groundwater recharge so that acute water crisis is solved up to great extent (Plate 33).

Animal Health Camps: Four animal health care camps were organized in Jalalpur and Dhanina (two in each village) with the help of doctors from Animal Health Department, Agra (U.P.) and CIRG, Makhdoom (Mathura). More than 1023 animals were checked and medicines were given according to the diseases (Plate 34). Total cost of organizing animal health camps was about ` 1.18 lakhs. After animal health camp in both villages, general health of animals improved and milk production increased by 39%.

Construction of Vermi-compost Pits: Twelve vermi-compost units (twin set) were constructed in three villages (Deori, Jalalpur and Dhanina) of Jalalpur watershed with a cost of ` 0.92 lakhs (Plate 35). BPL farmers having sufficient cattle were given the vermi-compost units to improve their livelihood after selling vermi-compost to watershed farmers. Farmers are using the compost in their fields and selling to other watershed

-1farmers @ 6.5 kg .

4.2 Jalalpur Watershed

`

Plate 34: Animal health camp in Jalalpur watershed

Plate 35: Vermi-culture unit in Jalalpur watershed inspected by DDG (NRM)

Photo 32: Human health camp organized in Ashti watershed

Plate 33: Desilted Dhanina village pond for enhanced rainwater storage and water chestnut in Jalalpur watershed

Rejuvenated pondRejuvenated pond Chestnut cultivationChestnut cultivation

25

Watershed Development Works

Plate 39: Construction of bunds in Jalalpur watershed

Plate 40 : Contour bunds in fields in Jalalpur watershed

Plate 36: Honeybee on plates in beekeeping programme in Jalalpur watershed

Plate 37: Agro forestry systems in Jalalpur watershed

Plate 38: Supervision of pits shape & size for plantation in Jalalpur watershed

Apiary Unit Distribution: Twenty five units of honeybee boxes having 10 plates along with high honey providing species were purchased from Pune with a cost of ` 0.82 lakhs for distribution among BPL and landless farmers in Jalalpur watershed in order to improve their livelihood and economic status (Plate 36). Each unit is producing 70 to 80 kg honey worth ` 80,000 to ` 10,000 per season per set

-1@ 125 kg .

Development of Silvi-pastoral Systems: Sivi-pastoral systems were developed on an area of about 3.08 ha by planting about 1119 seedlings of Prosopis julifera (168 on 0.17 ha), Acacia nilotica (168 on 0.41 ha), Acacia arabica (162 on 0.42 ha), Azadirachta indica (379 on 1.11 ha), papdi (142 on 0.61 ha) and karang (100 on 0.36 ha) with grasses like napier, para, guinea and anjan (Plate 37). The tree seedlings were planted in pits of 60 cm x 60 cm x 60 cm after filling the pit with farm yard manure (2 cubic feet), malathion (100 g) and good quality soil. The cost of development of silvi-pastoral systems was about 1.75 lakhs.

Development of Dryland Horticulture: About 2238 fruit trees were planted on an area of 14.32 ha that comprised of aonla, bael and ber seedlings of 788, 615 and 835 in number on an area of 5.04, 3.94 and 5.34 ha, respectively (Plate 38). These tree seedlings were planted in

3 pits of 1 m by the farmers who were handed over the responsibility of all future management and care of fruit tree species. The knowledge of package of practices was given to the farmers by organizing meetings in Jalalpur watershed itself.

Renovation of Old Bunds and Construction of New Bunds: Old bunds having existing

2cross sectional area 0.38 m with dimensions top width: 0.45 m, bottom width: 1.45 m and height: 0.5 m were renovated with cross

2sectional area of 0.9 m with top width: 0.45 m, bottom width: 1.95 m and height: 0.75 m in 20 ha area that constituted 3500 running meter length. New bunds with dimensions of top width: 0.45 m, bottom width: 1.95 m and height: 0.75 m (about 2500 rm length) with

2cross section area of 0.9 m was constructed (Plate 39 and 40). Total cost of bunding work in Jalalpur watershed was 2.215 lakhs.

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

26

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Trenching: Staggered trenches (dimension; 30 cm: bottom width; 120 cm: top width and 45 cm: depth) were dugout in 7 ha area (2000 rm) with a cost of ` 1.856 lakhs to harvest runoff to increase moisture availability to plants as well as to allow water to infiltrate in to soil (Plate 41).

Recharge Filters: Five recharge filters were constructed in two bandhis’ submergence areas in villages of Jalalpur and Dhanina with 2.35 lakhs in order to promote artificial groundwater recharge (Plate 42). Recharge filter units had dimensions of top: 5 m x 5 m and depth: 1.5 m with 1.0 m filled with boulders: 30 cm, jelly: 30 cm and river sand: 20 cm. Depth of the recharging profile is 45 cm. Due to five recharge filters, area under irrigation increased by 27% and drinking water availability to Dhanina and Jalalpur village improved significantly. Additional 50 ha area brought under irrigation.

Gully Plugs (Retaining Wall): Ten gully plug structures (masonry retaining wall type) were constructed with a cost of ` 1.873 lakhs to harvest rainwater as well as to retain soil behind the structures (Plate 43). Enhanced soil moisture on account of soil and water conservation in upper reaches will be useful for improving agricultural productivity. After construction of gully plug (retaining wall), runoff and soil loss from the watershed reduced drastically.

Meteorological Observatory: A meteorological observatory having instruments rain gauges (standard and recording type), U.S. Class I pan evaporimeter, anemometer, thermometers (dry and wet) and soil thermometer was established in Jalalpur watershed (Plate 44) for precise data collection on different weather parameters with a cost of `1.60 lakhs.

On-farm Agronomical Trials: Pulses are important widely grown agricultural crops in semi arid tracts (SAT) from point of view of food security to large vegetarian society in rural areas. Cultivation of pulses generally involves low cost, low irrigation and low fertilizer usage. SATs are beset with diversified production constraints, viz; poor socio-economic status, lack of infrastructure and hostile climate (high evaporation and erratic distribution of limited annual rainfall). Pulses are usually deep rooted, have good soil binding capacity and mitigate water erosion hazards on low to mild sloping lands if grown pure or as inter/strip crops, and are generally cultivated on marginal to sub marginal soils without use of Rhizobium or PSB culture, irrigation, fertilizers and insect-pest control. Farmers are also repeatedly using seeds of unidentified old varieties of pulses year after year which is also one of the reasons behind poor pulse

Plate 41: Trenches in waste land of Jalalpur watershed

Plate 42: Recharge filter for groundwater recharge in fields of Jalalpur watershed

Plate 43: Gully plugs (retaining wall) in Jalalpur watershed

Plate 48: Meteorological observatory in Jalalpur watershed

27

Watershed Development Works

productivity. Therefore, to improve the pulse productivity, development of nutrient schedule in lentil (Lens esculenta L.) and gram; nutrient management in legumes (greengram, blackgram and arhar) and foodgrains (jowar and bajra) on-farm trials were conducted in the backdrop of carried out PRA (Plate 45).

Arable Land Treatment

The most serious soil erosion problem in the Ramasagara watershed is sheet and rill erosion, which has a serious effect on agricultural production in red soils, covering an area of 72 M ha located in low to high rainfall regions in

-1which soil erosion annually varies from 2 to 40 t ha . Adoption of conservation measures in arable and non-arable lands conserves the top fertile soil, stores rainwater and recharges the soil profile and leads to increase in productivity. In view of this situation, conservation measures were taken up in the watershed.

Field bunding: Field bunding is a major erosion control activity aimed to enhance in-situ rainwater conservation and increase yields from rainfed crops. Trapezoidal earthen contour bunds were constructed across the major slope (1 to 3%) on individual fields.

2The cross section of bund is 0.82 m (bottom width = 2.25 m; top width = 0.45 m and height = 0.65 m) with a total length of 41,263 rm at a vertical interval of 0.6 to 1.0 m (Fig.1). Total area bunded in arable lands was 333 ha at a cost of ` 8,58,487. Horsegram, greengram and castor were cultivated on the bunds for productive utilization and Stylosanthes hamata was spread for its stabilization and increase fodder production.

The bunds conserved rainwater, top fertile soil in-situ and reduced runoff and soil loss, thus improving soil moisture in the profile. The impact of bunding was more evident during years of low and erratic rainfall (2011 with an annual rainfall of only 392 mm) during which farmers harvested 21% higher groundnut yields as compared to un-bunded areas outside watershed (Plate 46). An additional employment of 675 man days was created during bund construction.

Waste weirs/stone checks: Surplussing arrangement through waste weirs by using stone rubbles were provided in valley points where the contour bunds met waterways to dispose the excess runoff water safely from upper terraces to lower terraces. The crest height above ground level was kept at 0.45 m having upstream and gentle downstream slope of 1:1 and 1:2, the ends being anchored to side walls with a height of 0.7 m above ground while the length of crest is equal to the width of the waterway. A total of 197 waste weirs were constructed covering an area of 330 ha at a cost of ` 4,64,142 (Plate 47). After 3 years of land treatment by bunding with

4.3 Ramasagara Watershed

Plate 46: Field bunding of arable lands with groundnut in Ramasagra watershed

Plate 47: Waste weir and groundnut crop on the upstream of weir in Ramasagara watershed

Fig. 1: Cross section of 0.81 sq m contour/field bund and borrow pit in Ramasagara watershed

0.30

m

0.45m

2.72

m

2.25 m

GL

Bottom width

0.65 Height

Borrow Pit (3 m x 2.72 m x 0.3 m)

Note: 1. Figure not to scale

Plate 45: Lentil and mustard grown on large scale by farmers in Jalalpur watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

28

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

-1 -1wiers, it was revealed that considerable silt was retained (4.13 t ha yr ) on upstream side of waste weirs. An additional employment of 1348 man days was created during the construction of waste weirs.

Drainage Line Treatment

Repairs and modification of an existing check dam: Repairs and modification of an existing check dam with a catchment area of 60 ha, was done to convert it into a gauging station for runoff and soil loss measurement (Plate 48). The crest length and height is 11.0 m and 1.0 m, respectively with a dam height of 2.6 m. The cost incurred for repairs and modification of check dam was ` 91,907. An additional employment of 296 man days was also generated. A gauging house for installing stage level recorder was constructed beside the modified check dam at a cost of 16,000.

Construction of check dam (CD) cum drop weir: A small check dam-cum-masonry drop weir with a catchment area of 25.8 ha was constructed at a cost of ` 1,12,301 on the upper reaches of watershed to reduce peak flow velocity and create

3storage capacity of 475 m (Plate 49). The dam length, including extension, is 17.5 m with a height of 1.95 m. Earthen embankment (length of 60 m) on either side of CD was constructed for providing firm planks and anchoring to reduce the cost of construction. The location was based on the impounding area available on the upstream which will increase ground water recharge that will benefit numerous borewells situated downstream of the structure.

Construction of masonry drop weir: To avoid gully erosion, a masonry drop weir was constructed for safe disposal of flow in the drain at a cost of 22,964. The length and height of crest is 5.0 m and 0.6 m with a dam height of 2.0 m.

Construction of rock fill dams using boulder and embankment with revetment: Two rock fill dams using boulders were constructed across the water courses at middle and lower reaches with a cost of 51,218 and 1,22,208, respectively to reduce gully erosion (Plate 50). The catchment areas are 8.82 ha and 31.54 ha partly with hill slope. In Sy No.19, foundation spot consists of made-up (silt accumulation of many years) necessitating the excavation of a deep foundation wall up to 0.9 m depth. The peak discharge is 9.0 cumecs with high flow velocity. A cart road is passing through on the downstream side which required to be protected while disposing excess runoff from the proposed structure. In view of this special site condition, the head wall as per the standard design was constructed with a bottom width of 4.0 m in foundation and total height of 3.0 m. The rock fill dam was later reinforced with cement mortar and concrete to prevent displacement of stones from the structure.

Stone revetment for the side face of watercourse: At sites vulnerable to severe nala bank erosion, stone revetment were provided to the stream side face to control gully expansion in arable lands in the middle and lower reaches of the watershed (Plate 51) and also upstream side of the bunds on either sides of waste weir for bund stability, at a cost of ` 24,510.

Plate 50 : Rock fill dam in Ramasagra watershed

Plate 49: Check dam-cum-drop weir in Ramasagara watershed

Plate 48 : View of the check dam modified as a gauging station in Ramasagara watershed

29

Watershed Development Works

De-siltation of percolation tank at the upper reach: In view of the increase in number of bore wells becoming dysfunctional due to depleting water table, the beneficiaries through watershed committee had requested for the de-siltation of the existing percolation tank situated on the upper reaches. It was anticipated that due to the highly permeable geological condition of the tank bed, the stored water will percolate to deep aquifers and would recharge the ground water benefitting the bore wells which are the only source of irrigation in the watershed.

Hence, de-siltation activities were taken up to increase the capacity of the percolation tank by about 3095 m3 at a cost of 1,18,780 (Plate 52). An additional employment of 1671 man-days was also created. Construction of spill way and repairs for earthen embankment of percolation tank was also taken up for further increasing the storage capacity and safety of the earthen embankment. On the whole, a net storage capacity

3 of 5570 m was created in the post-project period. A minimum of two fillings are occurring every year

3which amounts to a gross storage of 11140 m per year, which favours groundwater recharge. The tank silt that was also taken away by farmers at their own cost was applied in arable lands which improved the soil physical and chemical properties and increased crop yields of both rainfed and irrigated areas.

Non-arable Land Treatment

Diversion drain: A diversion drain was excavated all along the foot of hillocks at three places on watershed boundary located in the upper and middle reaches to intercept runoff from hill slope (6% to 25%) for protecting arable lands (92.1 ha). Total length of diversion drain was 5102 m with width varying from 1.3 m to 1.7 m and average depth of 0.8 m, and it costed ` 4,56,577 (Plate 53). Original drainage line that was chocked / encroached was also restored or trained by widening and deepening the nala and removal of vegetation for safe disposal of runoff through arable lands. On the downstream side, runoff was diverted safely into a natural nala. Bed stabilizers were constructed to prevent future gulling in the diversion drain. Nearly 6 ha of marginal land affected at the hill foot was rehabilitated and brought under plough after construction of the diversion drain. This drain ensured that high volumes of water emerging from the hillocks did not enter arable lands and cause any damage.

Plate 53: Diversion drain at foot of hillock in Ramasagara watershed

Plate 51: Revetments for side walls of water course in Ramasagra watershed

Plate 52 : De-silted percolation tank showing stored runoff water and depth of excavation carried out in Ramasagara watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

30

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Conservation of rainwater in non-arable lands of upper reaches of watershed

Masonry spillway: One spillway of size 8.0 m × 0.6 m for the percolation tank was constructed to store runoff water of 2.34 ha m for groundwater recharge and also to protect the arable land down below (Plate 54). The estimated potential groundwater recharge is around 15 mm based on the model formula of analogous situation.

Percolation tank and fish pond: A dugout percolation pond was constructed in a natural depression situated in the nala course for groundwater recharge to increase water table in the downstream

3and in adjacent bore wells. The capacity of pond is 1222 m collecting a portion of runoff water from 24.6 ha, and was 3constructed at a cost of 83,900. One mini-fish pond with a capacity of 421 m was constructed at a cost of 28,644 for

fish rearing (Plate 55).

Runoff reduction: Monitoring of runoff through broad-crest weir was carried out. A gauging scale was fixed, and runoff and soils loss gauging was initiated in the pre-project year (2008) and continued up to 2014 with an automatic stage level recorder. Runoff reduced by 63.5% during post-project period (6.46%) as compared to 12.55% observed during the pre-project period.

rd thReduction in soil loss: The data on silt survey during the pre-project year (2008) and in 3 to 5 year (2011 to 2013) -1 -1indicated that an estimated soil loss of 4.91 t ha yr was observed and it was within the permissible soil loss limit (6 t

-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1ha yr ) and much below the estimated soil loss of 11 t ha yr to 16 t ha yr in untreated areas. Reduced soil loss was attributed to conservation structures constructed in arable and non-arable lands in the watershed during the watershed project implementation period.

Groundwater recharge: It was estimated that additional water storage created in the project period and high infiltration rate/aquifer transmissivity led to enhanced ground water recharge in the watershed. The two major contributors for increase in groundwater recharge are - seasonal flows in the Chinnhagari river, which flows along the boundary in the lower reaches, and the hilly terrain in the watershed. Hence, efforts were made for harvesting runoff generating from hillocks and agricultural lands by constructing various water harvesting structures (WHS) at suitable locations in the watershed during the project period.

The interaction of land slope and high intense rains leads to higher potential runoff in the watershed. By 3harnessing this advantage, 45810 m of runoff storage was created in the project period by various structures

3 3 3 3(diversion drain 24488 m ; percolation tank 11140 m ; mini check dam 2850 m and percolation pond 7332 m ) for improving ground water recharge. Based on reports of the Central Ground Water Board, it is estimated that 70% to 87% of stored water percolates into the sub-soil of which a small part is available for ground water recharge. The inherent permeability of structures’ bed geology ensures the rapid percolation of stored water. Pump tests carried out

3 -1 -1is some bore wells which revealed that geological conditions of this area is active (35.28 m day m of transmissivity) that helps in groundwater recharge. It also points to the lopsided time of recharge effect in the sense that a good rainfall year has a time lag extended to the succeeding year, and bore well pump yields are observed to be normal in the succeeding year, even if it happens to be a ‘below normal’ rainfall year.

Plate 54: Nala bund with spillway for storing water in Ramasagara watershed

Outlet

Inlet

Plate 55: Percolation tank and fish pond-cum-water storage structure in nala course and arable lands in Ramasagara watershed

31

Watershed Development Works

Ground water utilization: There were 47 bore wells irrigating over an area of 72.2 ha during pre-project period in the watershed. Number of wells (55) increased by 17% during first year of the watershed implementation (2009-10) to 40% (66 nos) during 2013-14 while the irrigated area increased from 72 ha (2008-09) to 154 ha (2013-14). The command area per well in pre-project period was 1.6 ha while it ranged from 1.4 ha to 2.3 ha during post-project period depending on the rainfall, indicating the overdraft in groundwater utilisation. Besides the prospective scenario of increased irrigated area and crop productivity, distress is present in terms of decline in ground water table, poor success rate in drilling of fresh borewells, ever increasing failure of existing bore wells and over burden of farmers’ debt. However, a competitive spirit among the farmers still persists in drilling bore wells despite the increasing probability of failure as number of attempts for a successful bore well are roughly three to four failures.

Dryland Horticultural Plantation: A total of 8 ha area was established under dry land horticulture by planting 1569 nos. of mango (cv. Mallika, Baneshan and Alphanso), sapota (cv. Cricket ball), lime (cv. Balaji), and coconut (cv. Tiptur tall) plants in the fields of 16 farmers (Plate 56). Dryland horticulture was more successful, especially in case of mango and coconut plantation. The mango trees have grown up to a height of 2.0 m in Mr. Amarappa’s field and coconut up to a height of 3.6 m in Mr. G. Ganganna’s field. Drip irrigation for mango and sapota for one ha was done at a cost of ` 46,575 for increasing the water use efficiency and yield of fruit crops. A total of 450 kg of mango was harvested and sold for 4,500 during 2013-14.

Afforestation: Nearly 1.9 ha of non-arable land was afforested by planting 695 jackfruit, jamun, teak, silver oak and Melia dubia saplings. Grasses were provided to 8 farmers who had irrigation facilities. Nearly 6000 slips of hybrid napier, 4000 slips each of Panicum maximum and Bracharia decumbens were distributed among the farmers to develop green fodder banks for their animals. Nearly 80 kg of Styloxanthus hamata seeds were sown on contour bund of 4907 rm in 22 farmers’ fields. Two farmers have multiplied the fodder grasses and are able to harvest sufficient green material on a daily basis.

Agronomic Practices

Seed treatment: Two hundred and eighteen farmers were supplied with Rhizobium and Trichoderma for groundnut seed treatment to enhance N availability and protect crop against fungal diseases.

Livelihood Support System

Agriculture and allied activities support livelihood of nearly 60% of India’s rural population. In the recent years, land based livelihoods of small and marginal farmers are increasingly becoming unsustainable, since their land has not been able to support the family’s food requirements and fodder for their cattle. As a result, rural households are forced to look at alternative means for supplementing their livelihoods. A sustainable livelihood approach is essentially a way of improvement in living standards of small, poor and landless farmers, especially during capricious climate situations.

Agricultural implements: Three farmers were distributed with seed-cum-fertilizer drill for simultaneously sowing crop seeds along with fertilizer at a cost of 45,000. Cycle weeders were provided to four small farmers at a cost of 5,200. Groundnut decorticators (10 nos.) were distributed among ten farmers at a cost of 20,000.

Plate 56: Drip irrigated mango, sapota with cotton as intercrop and border plantation of coconut with onion in Ramasagara watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

32

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Kitchen garden: Seed of ten different vegetable crops were distributed to 138 farmers at a cost of 20,732. These vegetables were cultivated in 0.2342 ha during kharif season of 2011-12 in all four villages and produced 4124 kg seed with a productivity of

-117.61 t ha and total gross income of 24,744 (Plate 57).

Vermi-compost: Ten small and marginal farmers from all the four villages of the watershed converted their FYM pits into vermi-compost units. Each vermi-compost unit was constructed at a cost of ` 1,500 with a total project cost of ` 15,000 and beneficiaries’ contributed 3,000 towards WDF fund.

Masonry vermi-compost units: Sixteen masonry vermi-compost units were constructed by the beneficiaries during March 2011 to 2013 (Plate 58). An amount of 1,30,654 was contributed by the project in construction of these units and beneficiaries contributed ` 26,055 towards WDF fund. The vermi-compost production started from December 2011. These 16 units produced 389 q of vermi-compost with its current market value of 1,94,500 till March 2014. In addition, three farmers with integrated farming systems produced 168.9 q which fetched them 84,450. Application of vermi-compost reduced the use of fertilizers by 20%.

Dairy: To improve the milk production in the watershed, four interested beneficiaries were provided with four crossbred Jersey cows at a project cost of ` 44,000 and farmers additionally invested ` 13,000 during March 2010. All four farmers contributed ` 8,800 towards watershed development fund (WDF). Three cows started yielding 4 to 6 liters milk per day (Photo 59). Total value of cows during March 2014 was ` 87,000. Total gross and net returns from four cows during 2011-12 to 2013-14 was ` 360,070 and ` 164,352, respectively and total net returns after deducting the investment from farmers / project was ` 181,852 including the cost of animals on March 2014.

Sewing machine: In all the four villages, five women beneficiaries trained in tailoring skills were given five sewing machines (one to each) for improving their livelihood (Plate 60). Monthly income varied from 1,000 to ` 2,500 with a total income of 2,50,000 during four years of project period. Beneficiaries contributed ` 6,300 towards WDF.

Carpentry and masonry kits: Four carpentry kits were distributed to three beneficiaries of different villages during

Plate 59: Dairying enterprises in Ramasagara watershed

Plate 60: Woman beneficiary sewing garment for improving livelihood in Ramasagara watershed

Plate 57: Kitchen gardening in the watershed in Ramasagara watershed

Plate 58: View of different types of vermi-compost pits made in Ramasagara watershed

33

Watershed Development Works

2010-11 and 2011-12 (Plate 61). Total income earned by these carpentry beneficiaries up to March 2014 during project period was ` 404,050. Four beneficiaries were also provided masonry kits during 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 belonging to Ramasagara, Hanumapura and Venktapura villages. During the project period they earned 1,85,400.

Blacksmith kits: Two blacksmith kits were distributed to beneficiaries of Devasamudra and Ramasagara villages and both of them earned 5,19,800.

Barber kits: Two barber kits were distributed during 2009-10 to the beneficiaries of Hanumapura village. Income from these kits varied from ` 400 to ` 600 per month and the total income earned during project period was ` 4,77,700.

Distribution of poultry birds: In order to introduce backyard poultry as a secondary source of income, about 275 chicks of a breed called ‘Giriraj’ were distributed to 20 farmers at a cost of ` 20,000 during May and October 2011 (Plate 62). About 7,200 was contributed to the WDF by the beneficiaries. Total return from poultry birds up to March 2013 was 92,085. During 2013-14 only one beneficiary, Mr. Tirumala maintained poultry birds. He sold 10 birds for 5,000 and possessed nearly 30 birds having value ` 12,000 on March 2014. Mr. Tirumala’s income from poultry birds, including their cost, during 2013-14 was 17,000. Total income derived from poultry birds was ` 28,000. Total income from poultry birds up to March 2014 was 115,585 from an investment of 20,000 from the project.

Distribution of rams (sheep and goats): Rearing of goats and sheep is a major activity among farmers of the SAT. These animals provide nutritional security and are easily sold in times of need for fetching money. Ninety two rams were procured at a cost of 1.90 lakhs during 2009 to 2012 which were distributed to 46 farmers (two each) in all four villages (Plate 63). All the beneficiaries were of marginal category. They contributed 38,000 towards WDF. During the watershed development/implementation period, 46 farmers after sale of their rams re-invested ` 678,850 for purchase of rams/cow/buffalo to improve their livelihood and derived the benefit of 1,632,700 as gross returns and ` 762,220 as net benefit. Hence, rearing of rams has been identified as one of the most enterprising income generation activity for farmers and serves like a mobile ATM (Any Time Money), since farmers can sell rams any time for fetching money especially during drought years. Hence, in any watershed development activity in the arid to semi-arid region, the animal husbandry based income generation livelihood activities, should invariably be given priority.

Plate 63: Distribution of rams to beneficiaries in Ramasagara watershed

Plate 61: Beneficiaries with carpenter and masonry kits in Ramasagara watershed

Plate 66: Introduction of backyard poultry as source of income in Ramasagra watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

34

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

35

Watershed Development Works

Production and Micro Enterprises

Crop diversification: During kharif (rainy) season of 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 seeds of improved varieties (K-6 and TMV-2) were introduced for improving the yields of the major crops especially groundnut under rainfed conditions. The improved cultivars of bajra (ICTP-8203), castor (GCH-4 and DCH-177), redgram (ICPL-87 and BRG-2) and cowpea (C-152) were distributed to the beneficiaries. In the irrigated area, improved maize hybrid Super 900M Gold, paddy varity Gangavathi Sona (GGV-05-01) and cotton varities. Super Mallika, Mallika Gold, Sarvodaya Kanaka and Sashyashamla were introduced during 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13.

Animal health camps: Animal health camp thwas organized on 29 June 2009 at

Ramasagara village in collaboration with A n i m a l H u s b a n d r y D e p a r t m e n t , Molkalmur, Chitradurga district (Plate 64). About 31 infertile cows and buffaloes were treated along with vaccination of 600 cows, bullocks and buffaloes for Haemorrhagia septicimia and 2000 sheep and goats with PPR for parasitic de-worming. In total, 8748 sheep and goats were vaccinated with PPR for parasitic deworming; 3558 cows,

Plate 64: Cows and buffaloes are being treated in animal health camp in Ramasagara watershed

Overall, project invested 510,786 in livelihood activities and derived gross benefit of 4,612,049 with a net benefit of 2,597,627. Additional benefits derived from supply of improved implements, groundnut decorticators and cycle weeder were not included in the estimated benefits, as these items offer intangible benefits.

Land Use Pattern: In the watershed, out of the total 480.37 ha, nearly 74% of the area is arable (355.18 ha) and 26% (125.19 ha) is non-arable land as hillocks, pasture land, roads, village settlement etc. (Table 15). Under arable land, either rainfed or irrigated and fallow, varied mainly as per the rainfall situations and farmer’s economc status. During 2013-14, the area under rainfed agriculture decreased to 175.01 ha from 258.90 ha (pre-project). The percentage decrease was 32%. The area under current fallow (rainfed) increased from 24.39 ha to 61.91 ha, and it was attributed to low rainfall received during 2013 in general, and especially during sowing period i.e. June and July. Even the area under irrigation increased from 72.19 ha during pre-project to 147.98 ha during 2012-13 and the increase was 105%. Greater area under irrigation during 2012-13 was attributed to increased number of bore wells, and higher water availability from bore wells and also higher rainfall received during 2012 (607.9 mm) that recharged the bore wells. The area under irrigation decreased to 118.26 ha during 2013 and was attributed to 36% lower rainfall during 2013 (312.8 mm). There was 64% increase in area under protective irrigation from bore wells during post-project period compared to pre-project period. Hence, rainfall during the year plays a major role in the increase or decrease in the irrigated area in the region. There is little change in the land use pattern of non-arable lands in watershed and these changes were attributed to construction of houses in agricultural lands in Ramasagara village.

` `

Land use Particulars Pre-project Post-project

2008-2009

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

Arable

Rainfed

258.90

244.99

216.24

199.09

152.88

175.01

Protective Irrigation

72.19

78.30

109.29

137.80

147.98

118.26

Current Fallow (Rainfed)

24.39

32.19

29.95

18.59

54.32

61.91

Sub Total

355.48

355.48

355.48

355.48

355.18

355.18

Non arable

Hillock

97.00

97.00

97.00

97.00

97.00

97.00 Pasture Land

18.69

18.69

18.69

18.69

18.69

18.69

Others (Roads, Village site)

9.20

9.20

9.20

9.20

9.50

9.50 Sub

Total

124.89

124.89

124.89

124.89

125.19

125.19

Grand Total

480.37

480.37

480.37

480.37

480.37

480.37

Table 15: Land use pattern (area in ha) in the Ramasagara watershed

bullocks and buffaloes were vaccinated for Haemorrhagia septicemia; and 75 infertile cows and buffaloes were artificially inseminated in 7 animal health camps held at Ramasagara, Devasamudra, Venktapur and Hanumapur villages.

ndHuman health camp: was organized at Ramasagara village on 22 December 2009 in collaboration with Primary Health Centre, Rampur and Ashok Siddapur and Ayurvedic Hospital Devasamudra. In this health camp, nearly 100 farm families were treated for malaria, acute respiratory tract infection, acute diarrhoea diseases, worm infestation, antenatal cases, Pyoderma, viral fever, scabies and sexually transmitted diseases. Blood smear examination was conducted for patients and medicines were distributed to farm families (Plate 65). The physicians examined and treated nearly 767 farm families at all the four villages and all the patients were distributed with medicines.

Soil and water analysis: Soil samples analyzed from 35 farmers fields (irrigated and rainfed), indicated that these soils were medium in available N and K, low to medium in available P and have neutral pH. Irrigated soils were more fertile compared to the rainfed. Water samples analysed from 33 bore wells indicated that pH of the water is good in the upper reach and alkaline in lower reach. Quality of water in all the reaches is usually saline with better quality of water in the upper reach. Majority of the bore wells in lower reach are saline and the water can be used for protective irrigation only.

Establishment of Agro-meteorological Obervatory

Agro-meteorological observatory was established to obtain climatic parameters data and relate it to various indicators of watershed development. An undulating field under control of Panchyat at Janouli representing watershed was terraced and fenced to install important equipments (Plate 66). Automatic and ordinary rain gauge, Stevenson screen, pan evaporimeter and anemometer were installed which came into operation before monsoon in the year of roject initiation.

Regular monitoring of rainfall was done. Highest recorded monsoon rainfall of 1617.8 mm was received during June to September 2011 (Table 16). Year 2011 proved to be year of good monsoon with a maximum rainfall of 729.5 mm in July followed by 408.9 mm in September. The data was used to record runoff in four sub-watersheds of the Kajiyana watershed.

Hydrological studies: Four natural sub micro-watersheds were selected in the Kajiyana watershed for monitoring of runoff and soil loss and SOPs were constructed (Plate 67). Areas of these

4.4 Kajiyana Watershed

Plate 66: A view of newly established agro-meteorological observatory at village Janouli in Kajiyana watershed

Month No of rainy events Rainfall (mm)

June 6 137.8 July 18 729.5 August 18 341.6 September 13 408.9

Plate 65: Farm families treated in human health camp in Ramasagara watershed

Plate 67: SOP at the watershed outlet to monitor hydro- logical behaviour in Kajiyana watershed

Table 16: Rainfall received during monsoon months in Kajiyana watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

36

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Plate 68 : Underground PVC pipeline laid in Nala Dakrog of Kajiyana watershed

Watersheds Area (ha) Land use WS1 22.0 Agril. (30%) Forest (70%) WS2 5.62 Agril. (100%) -- WS3 11.0 Agril. (80%) (Forest 20%) WS4 481.0 Agril. (20%) (Forest 80%)

Table 17: Landuse of different sub-micro-watersheds in Kajiyana watershed

Year Runoff producing rainfall (mm)

No. of rainy days

Runoff (mm)/% WS1 WS2 WS3 WS4 2009 604.5 32 1.81 (0.30) 17.95 (2.97) NA NA 2010 1617.8 55 15.61 (1.24) 240.14 (19.04) 49.6 (3.93) NA 2011 689.8 37 6.29 (0.91) 34.73 (5.03) 18.81 (2.73) 6.85 (0.99)

watersheds varied from 5.62 to 481 ha. Land uses are different in all the micro-watersheds. Three watersheds have mixed land use, with forest and agricultural land in the ratio given in Table 17. Three watersheds are being gauged by broad crested triangular weirs and thefourth by Cipoleti weir. The runoff is being measured by automatic water level recorders from all the watersheds.

On analyzing the relationship between rainfall and runoff, it was observed that, in general, mixed land use watershed gave 0.91% to 2.73% runoff (Table 18). However, agricultural sub micro-watershed gave highest runoff of 5.03% during a year from total effective rainfall of 689.8 mm.

Improving water use efficiency: Kuhl system in the village Janouli was in bad shape, particularly in the tail end supplying irrigation water to Bhutali village. This 120 m stretch was an open earthen kuhl resulting in heavy conveyance losses. This part was renovated by laying underground PVC pipeline of 20 cm diameter at a cost of 1.25 lakhs. Now irrigation water is reaching with better discharge.

Existing water resources were not being utilized efficiently. It was realized during survey that much more area can be brought under irrigation by improving these resources. At Nala Dakrog village, water was being harvested by sub-surface dam and conveyed up to the village through pipes. However, it was being distributed through open earthen channels resulting in heavy seepage losses during conveyance. To improve conveyance efficiency, a 660 m underground pipeline was laid with 17 risers to distribute to nearby fields (Plate 68).

Similarly, water from sub-surface dam was being stored in a tank and then used for irrigation as flow is very low. This tank has developed cracks resulting in loss of all stored water after 0.5 m depth. It was renovated to check the storage losses.

A brick masonry check was constructed across a stream in village Kajiyana in lower part of the watershed to store runoff and save agricultural fields downstream. The measure retained significant amount of runoff and proved effective in achieving the desired goals.

Improving Crop Productivity

Lack of improved practices was one of the reasons of poor crop productivity and soil health. To demonstrate the utility of modern technologies, large numbers of demonstrations were laid/conducted during kharif and rabi seasons. Crop production technologies of integrated nutrient management, crop diversification and organic farming were demonstrated. A total 53 and 106 numbers of demonstrations were laid on farmers fields for important crops of maize,

Table 18: Runoff from different sub micro-watershed during 2011

37

Watershed Development Works

blackgram, sorghum, kulthi, greengram and dhaincha during kharif and wheat, mustard, onion, potato and tomato during rabi season, respectively.

Maize and kulthi during kharif are major crops sown under rainfed condition in the watershed. During rabi season, the land is kept fallow. Proper land use plan can enhance farm income considerably. To demonstrate suitable crops and their varieties, experiments were laid down on maize, kulthi, urd, mungbean during kharif and wheat, mustard, gram and pea during rabi season. Under crop diversification, yields of alternative crop or varieties during kharif and rabi season were good. Even existing crops having potential for better crop diversification were introduced with improved package of practices. It caused marked improvement over farmers’ practices. Fodder crops were introduced to meet fodder requirement of animal population.

In the degraded lands, soil health can be improved by adopting organic farming with use of organics alone. In the first year, integrated nutrient management and organic farming caused slight reduction in yield. Effect of organic farming on yield of kharif crop during 2010-11 is shown in Table 19.

Integrated Farming System

To increase the farm income, horticulture based farming system was developed. Under this programme, mango, guava, aonla, lemon, jamun and kaornda numbering 435 were planted. Additionally 1950 slips of Hybrid Napier were transplanted at field boundaries.

Two agri-horticultural based farming systems were demonstrated at two farmer’s fields to monitor long term consequences and serve as demonstration for other farmers. The performance of these orchards of Mr. Sanjiv Kumar and Ms.Vimla Devi were studied. Survival and growth were found satisfactory.

Livelihood Security for Landless People

To provide a source of income to landless, marginal farmers and weaker sections of the society, six Self Help Groups were constituted to take up various income generating activities. About 130 people were involved in tailoring and embroidery, paper and cloth bag making, carpet weaving, silage making and vermi-composting through constitution of six SHGs. A large number of soft toys were made which were used for giving gift and presentation in social events. Performance of SHGs in terms of income earned/saved during the period 2010-11 as a consequence of land-less activity.

For carrying out vermi-composting, two vermi-compost sheds were constructed for SHG on vermi-composting. Similarly, for silage making 3 silo pits were constructed (Plate 69).

Table 20 : Farmer/village Maize yields (q ha-1)

100% organic Integrated 50:50 100% inorganic Straw Grain Straw Grain Straw Grain

Gurcharan/ Janauli 88.24 55.88 117.65 52.94 129.41 47.06 Sanjeev/ Janauli 132.35 52.94 64.71 52.94 117.65 58.82 Babu Ram / Janauli -- -- 117.65 52.94 -- -- Babu Ram / Kaziana -- -- 129.41 58.82 -- -- Bimla / Datogara -- -- 100.00 47.06 -- -- Average 110.29 61.67 105.88 52.94 123.53 58.82

Plate 69: One of the silo pit constructed to make silage for animal nutrition in Kajiyana watershed

Table 19: Yield under organic farming on farmer’s fields in Kajiyana watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

38

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

4.5 Jigna Watershed

Arable Land

Crop improvement programme: Agronomical interventions were initiated in watershed (Plate 70) since kharif 2010 by providing critical inputs in participatory mode to the farmers as per common guidelines. The yield data from demonstration and non-demonstration (control) fields revealed increase in grain yield of sesame by 121%, blackgram by 67% and greengram by 106%, respectively, over control (Table 20). Moisture deficiency often occur at the time of grain filling stage of maize and groundnut which adversely affect the yield of these crops under rainfed conditions. Demonstration under protective irrigation coupled with improved critical inputs could increase the yield of groundnut (var. Tag 24) and maize (var. Azad Uttam) by 28% and 134%, respectively over control.

Fruits and forest plantation on farmer’s field: Due to acute stray cattle problem in the watershed area, establishment of fruit plants was very challenging. However, about 900 seedlings of 8 fruit species were distributed among 101 farmers (Table 21) contributing their share in terms of money/labour as per common guidelines of cost in participatory mode.

Non-arable Land

Construction of contour staggered trenches of dimension 3.0 m x 0.5 m x 0.3 m was taken up in an area of 10 ha to control runoff and soil loss in the non-arable lands of the watershed (Plate 71). The water storage capacity was created

3to the extent of 1060 m by construction of these trenches in these areas.

Plate 70: Crops demonstrations undertaken in Jigna watershed

Plant Species No. of farmers No. of plants Mango 27 156 Aonla 27 192 Lemon 4 87 Karonda 15 20 Guava 2 40 Jackfruit 2 2 Sagaun (Boundary) 3 260 Bamboo 3 20 Ber (Budding) 18 142 Total 101 919

Table 21: Horticulture intervention and boundary plantation on farmer’s field in Jigna watershed

Crops

Varieties

No. of farmers

Area (ha)

Avg. yields (kg ha-1) Increase over control (%) Control Demo

Kharif season Sesame Guj-2, RT-46, T-78 17 7.75 172 380 121 Blackgram Azad-1 15 3.75 297 497 67 Greengram PDM- 139 11 4.40 233 480 106 Groundnut Tag 24 1 0.40 425 546 28 Maize Azad Uttam 7 2.80 363 797 134

Rabi season Wheat PBW 343, GW-273, Raj 6560 30 12.0 2795 3821 36.7 Mustard Pusa Agrani, RCC 4 28 11.2 652 1082 66.0

Plate 71: Contour staggered trenches in arable land of Jigna watershed

Table 20: Yield of crops under demonstrations undertaken in Jigna watershed

39

Watershed Development Works

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

40

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

3For providing protection against wildlife/stray cattle, a CPT of size 1.0 m was also excavated around the hillock. It was further strengthened by seeding (4 kg) and planting of Prosopis juliflora (220 saplings) as hedge row. Trenches (>300) burms were also strengthened with four grass species (Cenchrus ciliaris, C. setigerous, Stylosanthus hamata and guinea grass).

The area was also seeded with subabul and siris species as fodder trees. Considering the aesthetic value of the community land adjoining the temple, some hardy ornamental species e.g. pipal, bargad, pakhar, gulmohar, bougainvillea and cassia spp. were also planted. Being hardy in nature, 60 number of karonda plants were also planted on this community lands.

Drainage Line Treatments

A series of water harvesting structures (WHS) were constructed on community as well as private lands in participatory mode, with the objective of stabilization of drainage channel, increasing water availability for protective/supplementary irrigation, and ground water recharge. Summary of such structures is given below (Table 22).

Percolation stop dam: A percolation stop dam was constructed in middle reach of drainage line in the watershed on farmer’s field through people participation with the basic objective of ground water recharge (Plate 72). To harvest the water yield of catchment area (nearly 40 ha) for

3percolation, the storage capacity of 750 m was created.

Check dam cum gauging weir: Three gauging structures were constructed at upper, middle and at the outlet of the watershed to monitor the runoff and soil loss (Plate 72). Apart from runoff gauging, these structures also acted for stabilization of the gullies/channel as well as life saving irrigation during water stress period.

Repair of existing check dam: Repair of defunct WHS on a major stream was taken up during 2010-11. This structure was not retaining any water during rainy season due to its broken side wall and scouring. The repair could help to create additional

3storage capacity of about 7500 m (Plate 73).

Table 22: Details of water harvesting structures in Jigna watershed during 2009-2013

Year Water Harvesting Structures (WHS)

Storage (Cum)

Cost (`)

Ownership Major Purpose

2009-10 CD cum weir-I 1500 66271 Private Check erosion & GWR 2010-11 WHS-II (repaired) 7500 37248 Community Supplementary irrigation 2011-12 WHS-I 7500 189489 Community Supplementary irrigation 2011-12 Percolation stop dam 750 63214 Private GWR & Suppl. Irrigation 2011-12 CD cum weir-II 1200 81172 Community Check erosion and GWR 2011-12 CD cum weir-III 240 68895 Community Check erosion and GWR 2011-12 Gully plugs 10 Nos. - 44502 Community Gully stabilization &GWR 2013-14 Check dam (2 Nos.) 7415 216243 Community GWR & Suppl. Irrigation

Total 26105 CD -Check dam; GWR - Ground water recharge.

Plate 72: Percolation stop dam and check dam-cum-gauging wier in Jigna watershed

Plate 73: Existing check dam after repair in Jigna watershed

Water harvesting structures: Three new water harvesting structures (WHS) were constructed during 2011-14 across the drainage line near village Tiwaripura and Imaliya with the objective of harvesting water for supplementary irrigation as well as for ground water recharge (Plate 74). It is estimated that, in all, these structures may benefit adjacent 50-60 ha area by providing life saving irrigation in addition to ground water recharge in vicinity wells.

Construction of gully plugs: Construction of series of gully plugs (10) using stone slabs across nala were undertaken during 2011-12 for stabilizing the gullies/ drainage line and preventing their further advancement (Plate 75). These structures are helpful in checking erosion losses as well as improving water regime in the vicinity. Since, the gully plugs were constructed by fixing the stone slabs in pillars, these can also act as harvesting structures, if water is required for life saving irrigation.

Animal Health and Artificial Insemination (AI) Camps: One animal health and artificial insemination (AI) camp was organized in the watershed with the help and guidance of department of Animal Husbandry, Datia. During the camp, a team of six veterinary doctors checked 390 animals for any infestation of animal diseases. Medicines were also distributed free of charges to the cattle owners in the watershed areas (Plate 76). A total of 89 farmers of different communities (General, OBC and SC/ST) were benefitted from the camp.

Human Health Check-up Camp: A human health check-up camp was also organized in the watershed with the help and guidance of Government Hospital, Datia. A team of doctors and other medical staff checked-up a total of 230 patients (men, women and children) and medicines were distributed to them free of cost (Plate 77). The sarpanch, panchayat members and villagers gave their full co-operation in making the camp successful.

In accordance with the new guidelines, the watershed development plan for Dhoti watershed was implemented. Various interventions were undertaken in the watershed based on the problems, needs, priorities of the watershed community and their technical suitability.

Conservation Measures in Arable Lands

Contour/field bunding: In view of fields large slope length (200 to 400 m) and 1-3% slope, graded bunds of cross section 1.0 sq m (top width - 0.5 m, bottom width - 3.5 m and height - 0.75 m) on 0.1% to 0.2% grade at 0.6 m vertical

4.6 Dhoti Watershed

Plate 75: Gully plugs using stone slabs across nala for checking erosion

Plate 76: Examining the health of animals during animal health camp in Jigna watershed

Plate 77: Medical check-up by doctors and the medicinesprescription to Jigna watershed farm families

Plate 74: Newly constructed WHSs across the drainage line in Tiwaripur and Imaliya villages of Jigna watershed

41

Watershed Development Works

interval were constructed over 30 ha land area. Nine ha area was also covered under renovation of existing field bunds in conjunction of graded bunds.

Conservation bench terracing: 2:1 ratio of donor: recipient area has been found suitable for south-eastern Rajasthan. About 3 ha arable lands with slope up to 3% were treated with CBT measures in which lower 1/3 field is levelled to collect runoff from upper 2/3 part of the field.

Contour furrow: For improved in-situ soil moisture availability and better improved drainage net work, contour furrows are well suited with predominant rainfed cropping systems of south-eastern Rajasthan. Contour furrow can easily be constructed with common farm implements with meager cost. The demonstration of contour furrows of 20 cm to 30 cm in depth and 40 cm to 50 cm in width at 6 m distance across the field slope over 2 ha area every year in soybean cropping during kharif was conducted in the watershed.

Conservation Measures in Non-arable Lands

Staggered contour trenches: Dhoti watershed had significant area as community land. These community lands were generally devoid of vegetation due to improper management and biotic pressure. The soil erosion and limiting soil moisture are major constraints in these lands. To overcome these problems, staggered contour trenches of 3.00 m x 0.60 m x 0.45 m size at 8 m x 8 m spacing were implemented over 3.7 ha community lands (Plate 78).

Bio-fencing and ditch cum bund: Community pasture lands are required to be protected from heavy biotic pressure of grazing animals for which cattle proof ditch and live hedge fencing or bio-fencing is the most effective measures. Therefore, a total 30 ha pasture community area was treated with ditch-cum-bund supported with bio-fencing. The size of the cattle proof ditch was 1.5 m top width, 1.0 m bottom width and 1.2 m depth of ditch. The entire soil of the ditch was heaped in the shape of a bund 0.30 m away from the berm. Thorny plants such as Agave, Acacia, Carissa were planted in three rows on the side slope of the bund.

Drainage Line Treatments

Masonry check dams: Masonry check dam (MCD) is an efficient drainage line measure and very popular among beneficiaries of watershed of the region. A total of 4 stone masonry check dams were constructed as drainage line treatment in the watershed. Crest length of these MCDs ranged between 3-5 m and depth of flow over crest was 1.0-1.5 m. The fall varied from 1.5 m to 2.0 m. Runoff contributing areas of the MCDs were 60 - 320 ha.

Anicut: Anicuts are masonry check dams (MCDs) usually constructed at the lowest reaches of the main gully to retain silt free runoffs from the upper and middle reaches of the watershed. The water retained in the anicut helps in providing live saving irrigation to crops; artificial groundwater recharging and improving groundwater level. One anicut was constructed at the outlet of the watershed (Plate 79). Crest length of the anicut was 8 m and depth of flow over crest was 1.25 m. The fall was 2.0 m.

Earthen check dam: Nine earthen check dams (ECDs) with stone pitching were constructed to retain runoff and silt, stabilize gully and protect stream bank. Length of these ECDs ranged between 8-10 m with top and bottom widths were 1.5 m and 5 m, respectively. The maximum depth of ponding was 1.75 m. The vegetative and loose boulder surplus weirs were provided for safe disposal of excess runoff from unexpected heavy rain storm.

Plate 78 : Staggered contour ditching for afforestration on community land in Dhoti watershed

Plate 79 : Anicut in main nala in Dhoti watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

42

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Loose boulder check dam: A total 16 loose boulder check dams (LBCDs) were constructed at upper reaches of the drainage line. Length of these LBCDs ranged between 3-5 m with top and bottom width of 1.0 m and 2.0 m, respectively. Maximum depth of ponding was 1.50 m. These LBCDs were reinforced with vegetation for improving stability of the structure.

Bank stabilization by wattling and planting: Ipomea carnia and Agave amaricana species were planted at 5-7 m interval over the contour across slope of streams to stabilize stream bank in 2000 running meter length.

Water Resources Development

Dug-out pond: About 20-25% of annual rainfall is lost as runoff once the soil profile is saturated and there is no runoff detention structure in the watershed. Three embankment types farm ponds of 2.07 ha m, 4.85 ha m and 4.4 ha m capacity were constructed on community land for multiple uses (Plate 80). Catchment area of these three farm ponds ranged between 26 ha and 118.2 ha and depth of water in ponding varied between 2.5 m and 3.0 m. These ponds equipped with masonry surplus weirs (SW) for safe disposal of excess runoff due to unexpected heavy rain storms. Crest length of these SW ranged between 3-5 m and depth of flow over crest was 0.75-1.0 m. The fall varied from 1.5 to 2.0 m.

Recharge filter: To improve groundwater situation in the watershed, it was imperative to divert surface runoff, otherwise going waste, from the watershed to a defunct open well for recharging groundwater. Three recharge filters were constructed to enhance the process of groundwater recharge for quick recovery of depleting water table of the existing defunct open wells. Size of these recharge filters unit ranged from 4.0 m x 3.5 m x1.75 m to 2.0 m x 2.0 m x1.5 m. One of the recharge filters was constructed in conjunction with silt retention basin (5.0 m x4.0 m x 0.75 m) and other two recharge filters had no silt retention basin. The size of defunct open wells ranged from 5.5 m to 6.5 m in diameter and 22 m to 25 m depth. Runoff contributing area to the recharge filter varied between 2 ha to 5 ha.

Development of Community Land

Silvi-pasture: An area of 5 ha in community land was developed for fuel and fodder as silvi-pasture system. The tree species planted in pasture land were Acacia nilotica, Leucaena leucocephala, Azadirachta indica, Delbergia sisoo, Zizipus rotundifolia etc. Trees were planted in rows with 20 m x 2 m spacing so that inter-row open space is available for growth of fodder grasses. Sodding of grass slips of Cenchrus ciliaris, Dicanthium annulatum and Stylosanthus hamata was done in 0.4 m x 0.4 m spacing.

Livestock management: For livestock management, ecto and endo parasite control, and Foot and Mouth disease (FMD) vaccination programme were carried out intensively through animal health camps and door-to-door compaign for protecting animals within the watershed area from infectious diseases. In order to improve the basic infrastructure facilities for livestock, two service crates were established in watershed villages, namely Dhoti and Jirod. The farmers were also motivated to adopt improved feeding, breeding and management practices for improving milk production and to discontinue rearing of unproductive animals.

Livelihood Activities

To ensure livelihood security for watershed beneficiaries, two women SHGs for tailoring activities were formed and 50,000 was provided as seed money for purchasing sewing machines and tailoring related items. They were also imparted training during the programme.

Production System and Micro-enterprises

In order to diversify the cropping pattern for mitigating the risk and to meet nutritional needs, agri-horti system (soybean + guava) was introduced in 2 ha. Under crop improvement programme, a number of crops and their varieties

Plate 80 : Construction of dug-out pond on community land in Dhoti watershed

43

Watershed Development Works

VII Capacity building No. 49

were introduced in the watershed for adoption by the farmers to maximize production under rainfed farming and limited irrigation situation. Additionally, attempts were also made for motivating the farmers for in-situ moisture conservation through summer ploughing, across the slope tillage and seeding, and creation of dust mulches after rainy season to have adequate moisture in seeding zone for germination and establishment of rabi season crops.

Various interventions were undertaken in the watershed based on problems, needs, priorities of the watershed community, and their technical suitability and economic viability. The watershed development activities taken in the watershed are soil and water conservation measures in arable lands, water resource development, productivity enhancement activities, entry point and income generation activities and community organization including capacity building (Table 23).

4.7 Lachhaputraghati Watershed

Table 23: Natural resource management, production, income generating activities, entry point activities and capacity building activities in Lachhaputraghati watershed

S.No. Activity Unit Quantity

I. Conservation Measures

1 Vegetative filter strips Running meter 300

2 Field bunding ha 32.7

3 Hedge plantation ha 17

4 Stone bunding ha 9

5 Trenching ha 13

II. DLT Measures

1 Live check dam No. 35

2 Brushwood check dam No. 30

3 Live brushwood check dam No. 44

4 Gabions No. 13

5 Stream bank stabilization Running meter 1124

III. Productivity enhancement

1 Agri-horticulture system ha 8

2 Bamboo plantation ha 1.5

3 Fuel and fodder plantation ha 2

4 Biodiesel plantation ha 1.5

5 Silivi-pasture system ha 1

6 Agronomic interventions No. 7

IV. Water Resource Development

1 Farm pond No. 6

2 Jhola kundi No. 20

3 Renovation of water harvesting structure No. 2

4 Renovation of pipeline system No. 1

V Income generating activities Group 15

VI Entry point activities No. 5

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

44

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Plate 82: Percolation ponds constructed in Ayalur watershed

4.8 Ayalur Watershed

Water Resource Development and Soil Conservation Measures

Hydrologic characteristic of semi-arid watershed typically contains ephemeral streams having flow mostly during the north-east monsoon. In Ayalur watershed, after the cessation of rains, sub-surface flow contribution could also be noticed in these streams, but for a limited time. Rapid surface runoff due to poor vegetation cover, light soil, graveliness/stoniness, low rainfall and high evaporation causes reduced sub-surface flow and ground water recharge. Water deficiency or moisture stress is expected, except little surplus water during October. The stored soil moisture is utilized in the subsequent months. Maximum stream flow could be expected during October-November. Hence, the major opportunity of harvesting rainwater for storage and/or ground water recharging exists during this period. There also exists ample scope to check and store runoff in the watershed by constructing a series of check dams, percolation tanks and ponds. Keeping these points in view, the following soil conservation and water harvesting activities were taken up in arable and non arable lands in the watershed.

Soil and water conservation measures: As part of in-situ soil and moisture conservation activities earthen field bunds were constructed in 4.5 acres covering 782.5 m while contour stone bunds have been laid in 1.5 acres covering 340.5 m (Plate 81). Trenches were dug in 1.5 acres of coconut garden with a total length of 226.8 m.

Water harveting and DLT measures: Three each of small, medium, large percolation ponds and check dams with surplus weirs were constructed and four existing percolation ponds were rejuvenated through desilting and bund formation during the project period (Plate 82). Five dugout ponds were constructed to harvest surface runoff for supplemental irrigation (Plate 83). Four loose boulder check dams were constructed in first order streams and three gabion check dams in second order streams of Ayalur watershed to act as silt detention structures. Three existing RR masonry check dams were desilted and made unctional (Plate 84).

Plate 81: In-situ moisture conservation practices in Ayalur watershed

45

Watershed Development Works

Water Conservation through Irrigation System Management

The following activities were taken up for efficient utilization of available water resources in Ayalur watershed.

Water conservation through lining: The groundwater resources in Ayalur watershed depleted as a result of deficient recharge and increased dependence on groundwater. Infiltration is quite high due to gravelly loamy sandy texture of the soil. As a result, farmers in the watershed dug bore wells to a depth greater than 200 m to obtain water. These bore wells are mostly fitted with 7.5 HP air compressor pumps in order to fill water in open wells and surface ponds. The low discharge from bore wells is not adequate for direct surface (flood, furrow or basin) irrigation. Hence the farmers first pump water from bore wells either to open wells or to an open unlined small surface storage pond for temporary storage from where it is pumped through centrifugal pump or under gravity flow to irrigate fields. In this method, lot of seepage losses occurs due to prevalence of coarse textured soil. Hence, demonstrations on lining of surface storage ponds were taken up using two different materials, viz; silpaulin sheet and cement : soil lining (Plate 85). Following the success of silpaulin lining of ponds, these demonstrations were further up-scaled to 7 farmers.

Drip and sprinkler irrigation: Micro-irrigation techniques were propagated by way of installing 40 drip irrigation units and 5 units of sprinkler covering an area of 32 ha for crops like sugarcane, coconut and banana (Plate 86).

`

Plate 83: Farm ponds constructed for supplementary irrigation in Ayalur watershed

Plate 84: Gabion check dam and RR masonry check dam in Ayalur watershed

Plate 86: Demonstration on Drip and sprinkler units in Ayalur watershed

Plate 85: Unlined and silpaulin lined surface storage pond in Ayalur watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

46

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

47

Watershed Development Works

Plate 87: Crop demonstrations for higher productivity in Ayalur watershed

Plate 88: Crop diversification with cauliflower and marigold in Ayalur watershed

Production Systems and Micro- Enterprises

Crop demonstrations for higher productivity: Increased use of chemical fertilizers as source of major nutrients, combined with declining use of organic sources of nutrients over time, has led to deficiency of micronutrients in soils and reduction in beneficial microbes, resulting into poor soil fertility. Nutrients such as boron and zinc are important for plant growth and yield of groundnut and maize, respectively. Cultivation of groundnut and maize is the major land based activity in the watershed. Traditional cultivation practices, coupled with poor quality seeds and varieties

-1resulted into low crop yields. The pod yield of rainfed groundnut ranges from 850 - 900 kg ha . Based on the nutritional deficiency identified in the fields in watershed, farmers evaluated the response to integrated nutrient management (INM).

Hence, 32 number of crop demonstrations on various crops (Plate 87) were taken up in the watershed. For groundnut, along with recommended dose of chemical fertilizer, improved and recently released varieties, viz; VRI-2 CO-6 were introduced. In addition to that, as a part of convergence approach, groundnut variety ICGV 00351 developed by ICRISAT and promoted by the TNAU was also introduced along with INM. Bio fertilizers (Rhyzobium

-1and Phosphobacteria each 2 kg ha ), gypsum -1 -1200 kg ha and boron 5 kg ha were used in

the demonstration fields. In case of maize, along with the recommended dose of chemical fertilizer, bio fertilizer (Rhyzobium

-1and Phosphobacteria each 2 kg ha ), and zinc -1sulphate 25 kg ha were applied.

Intercropping for higher productivity and rainwater use efficiency: Even though the watershed received both south-west and north-east monsoons, cropping activities in dry land confined to kharif only as the number of rainy days during north-east monsoon are very less. In order to utilize both monsoons effectively, long duration (180 days) redgram variety CO6 was intercropped with groundnut variety VRI-2 (110 days duration) at 10:1 ratio. Groundnut was harvested during October and redgram was harvested in of February.

Crop diversification: Groundnut-tobacco or maize-groundnut was the cropping pattern followed in partially irrigated area in the watershed. In order to diversify the crops and increase yield, marigold and cauliflower cultivations were introduced for groundnut crop (Plate 88).

Fodder improvement: Since the watershed has large animal population and area under coconut cultivation, latest improved fodder Hybrid Napier grass (Variety CO4) was introduced in the watershed in an area of 1 ha involving 10 farmers in 2009 and the cutting from the farmers fields were planted in other farmers’ fields. Thus, the area spread into another 4 ha area. During the year 2013-14, improved fodders like multi-cut fodder sorghum and African tall fodder maize were introduced in another 5 ha area (Plate 89).

Plate 89 : Improved fodder (CO FS 29 and CO 4 Hybrid Napier) in Ayalur watershed

Plate 90: Demonstration on coir pith compost and vermi-compost in Ayalur watershed

Control plot Coir pith applied plot

Plate 91: Dryland horticulture (high density mango plantation) in Ayalur watershed

Composting: Coir pith, the waste from coir industry, contains slow degrading constituents like lignin (30%) and cellulose (26%), which can be decomposed by employing fungus Pleurotus sojar-caju with urea supplementation. Demonstra t ions were carr ied out successfully in Ayalur watershed, where availability of coir pith was in plenty and the soil of the watershed is red lateritic and poor in soil organic matter, soil texture and structure. Since the soil of the watershed has low nutrient content, low water holding capacity and poor soil depth, emphasis was given on maximum use of FYM and suitable modifications were suggested for increasing the quantity and quality of FYM and production of compost using locally available materials. First, 100 kg of coir pith was spread and then one bottle of Pleurotus spawn was applied over this layer. Again 100 kg of coir pith was spread and over this one kg of urea was sprinkled. This alternate application of Pleurotus and urea was done for the whole one tonne of coir pith. In addition to coir pith composting, 6 vermi-composting units were also installed (Plate 90).

Dryland horticulture and agri-horticulture: In drylands, fruit trees provide a better substitute and offer alternative opportunity in areas where cultivation of annual crops may not be possible due to non-availability of irrigation. Considering frequent crop failure due to erratic monsoon in the region, dryland horticulture was introduced in an area of 10.5 ha with mango, sapota, lime and aonla (Table 24, Plate 91). Micro-site improvement technique was adopted for proper establishment of tree species in the degraded areas. Under this technique, digging pits of proper size (1 m x 1 m x 1 m), removal of gravels from soil in the

-1pits and application of FYM (30 kg pit ), -1bio-agent (Neem cake @ 200 gm pit ) and

bio-fertilizers (VAM, Phosphobacteria and -1Azospirillium @ 50 gm each pit ) were

demonstrated in the watershed providing very high survival and establishment of seedlings. For developing agri-horticulture, coconut in 14.0 ha and sapota in 0.5 ha were established in areas where earlier only annual crops were cultivated in the watershed.

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

48

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Agro forestry and farm forestry: Melia is a money making tree of short duration. Since there is a total mismatch between demand and supply for wood, block planting of 300 to 400 trees per acre can ensure a minimum profit of ` 1.0 lakh

-1yr from an acre. Grazing by cattle is the major problem when taking up any forestry intervention in a watershed. This problem was solved in Ayalur watershed by planting Melia trees as the leaves are non palatable. In Ayalur watershed, where the soil was poor in texture and nutrient, block plantation of Melia dubia was successfully established in one hectare of area with micro site improvement technique (Plate 92). Pits of 0.45 m x 0.45 m x 0.45 m were dug at spacing of 3 m x 3 m to accommodate 1100

-1seedlings ha and applied with FYM (10 kg -1 -1pit ), bio-agent (neem cake @ 100 gm pit )

and b io - fe r t i l i ze r s (Azop i r i l lum, phosphobacteria and VAM @ 50 gm each

-1pit ).

Integrated farming system: Integrated farming system model (Plate 93) for 2.5 ha of land is developed with the components, viz; agriculture (groundnut 0.4 ha, fodder sorghum 0.4 ha, maize 0.4 ha and sugarcane 1.3 ha); cow 4 numbers; surface pond

2diameter 200 m ; high density pisiculture (common carp-surface feeder) introduced

-2@ 2 m since water is always available in the surface pond (2 feet as dead storage); and Girijaj poultry introduced in the cage (64 sq feet) constructed over the pond @ 1 per sq. feet.

In addition to this live model, two chaff cutters were introduced in the watershed for better utilization of available fodder. Since desi chicken meat and eggs fetches very good market price, backyard poultry with 30 units (500 chicks) Asseel variety was introduced (Plate 94).

Table 24: Agro-forestry trees introduced in Ayalur watershed

Agro forestry No. of seedlings Guava Lemon Sapota Coconut Teak Melia dubia Ailanthus

250 350 500 1400 3000 3100 200

Plate 94: Backyard poultry and chaff cutting machines in Ayalur watershed

Plate 92: Block plantation of Melia dubia and teak in Ayalur watershed

Plate 93: Integrated farming system (crop, livestock, poultry and fishery) in Ayalur watershed

49

Watershed Development Works

Animal health camp for livestock improvement: Three animal health camps for livestock improvement were conducted during 2011-12 (Plate 95). In these camps, around 2500 animals were administered various treatments. Vaccination was done, pregnancy diagnosis was carried out and de-worming, castration, artificial insemination, infertility test were done for the animals, and salt licks and mineral mixture were distributed to weak as well as high yielding animals.

Livelihood Opportunities and Employment Generation

Thirty-two SHGs (17 women and 15 men) and 12 user groups were formed with ten members each from resource poor community in the watershed (Table 25, Plate 96).

Table 25: Livelihood activities for the resource poor inAyalur watershed

Plate 95: Animal health camp in Ayalur watershed

S.No. Activity No. of woman SHGs

No. of male SHGs Total amount invested (`)

1 Goat rearing 5 0 100000 2 Tailoring 7 1 57704 3 Grinding work 5 0 57500 4 Carpentry 0 1 6547 5 Black smithy 0 2 13447 6 Small workshop 0 2 32968 7 Laundry 0 1 13850 8 Spraying work 0 8 42912 Total 17 15 324928

Plate 96: Livelihood activities for resource poor in Ayalur watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

50

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

4.9 Vejalpur – Rampura Watershed

The development works included levelling in 25 ha, 20 nos. of check dam, 6 water harvesting ponds, 6 nos. of pond deepening, trenching in 30 ha, plantation in 10 ha, 100 nos. of crop demonstrations, and 10 recharge filters. Staggered contour trenches of sizes 1.2 m x 0.3 m x 0.3 m, 2.0 m x 0.5 m x 0.5 m were made in 22 ha. Continuous contour trenches of 0.3 m x 0.3

2m were made in 10 ha. Field bunds of 0.6 m cross section in 6000 m length in 100 ha were constructed. Due to bunding (Plate 97), crop yields increased by 20%. Gully and rill formations were observed in the fields where field bunds were not constructed and gully was extended up to 1 m.

Staggered contour trenches of sizes 1.2 m x 0.3 m x 0.3 m, 2.0 m x 0.5 m x 0.5 m were made in 22 ha (Plate 98). Continuous contour trenches of 0.3 m x 0.3 m were made in 10 ha. Plantation and grass sodding was done in these areas. In these trenches, water holding was observed up to 3 days. During drought year also, higher survival, better growth of plants and fodder was recorded in plantation with trenching.

Water resource development structures included embankment ponds, dugout farm ponds, water harvesting check dams; and recharge filters (Plate 99). Under water resource development in arable lands, 6 dugout ponds of 500 cu-m capacity were constructed in farmers’ fields. Daily depth of water and water utilization of these ponds were recorded. It was observed that water was stored up to December. Fish culture was also introduced in these ponds.

3 -2 -1Seepage losses were observed to be 0.030 m m day 3 -2 -1and 0.0042 m m day in unlined and lined ponds,

respectively. Three embankment ponds, 10 check dams and 10 recharge filters were constructed. The recharge filters are functioning well and increased the water availability in the wells. Embankment ponds and check dams were able to store large quantity of runoff water and increased the water yield of the surrounding wells. The number of irrigations increased and yield increases were recorded up to 50%.

Under afforestation activity, 640 plants of Acacia nilotica and Azadirachta indica were planted in 1.6 ha area in Rampura community land. The area was protected with bio-fence of Euphorbia spp. to check biotic interference. Similarly, under silvi-pasture activity, 1 ha Ramosadi community land was

Plate 98: Forest plantation supported with trench at community land, Ramosadi in Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Plate 97: Field bunds for conservation of runoff water in Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Plate 99: Water storage structures – an over view in Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

51

Watershed Development Works

put under the block plantation of Acacia nilotica, Azadirachta indica and Cenchrus setigerus grass. Good survival of trees was observed as a result of moisture retained in trenches.

Under drainage line treatment structures, earthen gully plug structures, and masonry check dams were constructed. Gully plug structures (30 nos.) were also constructed (Plate 100). In these structures, silt deposition was recorded up to 25 cu-m and water storage capacity varied from 20- 800 cu-m.

Four recharge filters of low-cost were constructed in farmers’ fields to increase recharge of the wells (Plate 101).

Ten hectare community land (4 ha at Ramosadi community land and 6 ha at Vejalpur community land) was ploughed with MB plough and seeded with grass seed of Cenchrus spps. during monsoon season (Plate 102).

Improved crop cultivation practices in terms of balanced fertilization, improved varieties and timely availability of inputs were key factors for increasing production and profitability of pearl millet, cotton, castor and vegetable crops on 63 ha of land. Crop demonstration on these aspects were conducted on farmers' field (Plate 103).

Cenchrus setigerus

grass

Seeding pasture

Ploughing with MB plough

Plate 100: Gully plug structures in drainage line in Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Plate 102: Seeding pasture grass in Ramosadi community land development in Vajalpur – Rampura watershed

Plate 101: Recharge filter in arable land in Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

52

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Recharge filter-cum-check dam: One recharge filter-cum-check dam was constructed near to Panchayat well to rejuvenate groundwater for a hand pump located nearby (which is NO rich and 3

unsuitable for drinking). Check dam was constructed to reinforce this recharge filter with adequate water at the upstream (Plate 104).

Pond deepening: Pond renovation and deepening activities at existing ponds were carried out at 4 places of which Vejalpur main pond accounts for a major chunk. The work aimed at renovating a major bund near Vejalpur outlet, which was washed away earlier and had submerged the village Nana Rampura.

Drainage Line Treatment Structures

Gully plug structures: Seven gully plug structures were constructed in gullies of community land (Plate 105). In these structures, silt deposition was recorded up to 40 cu-m.

Check dams: Eight check dams were constructed for effectively treating the upper part of the catchment and create storage so as to augment ground water recharge for the wells adjacent to it (Plate 106). Two check dams (water harvesting cum drainage line treatment type) were constructed on the upper part of the catchment encompassing two major gullies that contribute to the largest

Plate 103: Introduction of improved cropping through crop demonstrations in Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Plate 105: Gully plug structures in Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Plate 104: Recharge filter cum check dam in Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

53

Watershed Development Works

pond (Vejalpur pond) in the watershed. Other two check dams were constructed in two major gullies that pass through the Nana Rampur village and have a pronounced effect in submerging larger tract downstream. Beside, these two check dams provide huge storage behind for augmenting groundwater recharge in natural way and also have scope for surface irrigation through mechanical l if t ing. Two check dams were constructed at the outlet of two ponds, namely Panipurotha pond and Bhehat pond that are expected to assure huge storage on the upper part of catchment and can ensure multiple usage of water. One check dam was constructed in Thoribas assisting the plantation activities resulting in better soil moisture regime. One check dam is located at the extreme outlet, which was simultaneously utilized for gauging the watershed and ensuring in-channel water storage in about 1.32 kms.

Vermi-compost development: Four vermi-compost units were established in farmer’s fields (Plate 107) and farmers were trained in vermi-compost production technology. Production of compost was initiated by farmers and vermi-compost yield of

-1500 kg pit was recorded.

Production System and Micro Enterprises

The micro-enterprises for income generation included poultry, tailoring and papad making.

Tailoring and papad making: Training in sewing for sixty identified women beneficiaries was completed. Ten sewing machines including accessories and practice materials were given to the beneficiaries. Two grinding machines for Papad making unit were procured and handed over to beneficiaries after training (Plate 108). Forty Papad making hand tools were procured.

Poultry bird rearing for supplementing income: Ten units of poultry bird units with iron cages were distributed to poor marginal farmers (Plate 109). Average investment of ` 1,953 per household was incurred on iron cage and poultry birds, which generated an income of ` 2,030 per household per year.

Plate 106: Check dams constructed for drainage line treatment in Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Plate 107: A vermi-compost unit installed at Ramosadi village in Vejalpur – Rampura watershed

Plate 109: Poultry bird rearing for supplementing income in Vejalpur – Rampura . watershed

Plate 108: Livelihood activities (tailoring and flour mill) introduced in Vejalpur– Rampura watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

54

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

55

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

5.1 Ashti Watershed

Team involved in the project regularly visited the watershed. Farmers appreciated the work of improving water use efficiency in watershed. Majority of farmers are satisfied with augmented availability of water, increased production, increased income, soil and water conservation measures and dry land horticulture activities. Benefits of project are still being harnessed by farmers.

Horticultural Development: To promote horticultural development in the watershed, a total of 3726 fruit plants were planted at different altitudes covering an area of about 18 ha during 2009-2011 (Table 26).

Pomegranate, citrus and mango showed good survival, whereas of jackfruit and litchi was poor (Table 26). Mean survival of fruit plants was observed to be about 70%. The performance of pomegranate, citrus, guava and jackfruit were not much influenced by altitudinal variations, except litchi. Growth parameters of various fruit species planted in the watershed are presented in Table 27.

Note: PH= Plant height (cm), CD= Collar diameter (cm).

Optimal Use of Ferlizers: Soil quality parameters were assessed through scoring technique for optimum use of chemical and organic fertilizers as affected by landscape and integrated nutrient management technologies. They are and presented in Table 28. Water productivity of kharif and rabi demonstrations in Asthi watershed were monitored. Increase in water use efficiencies (%) due to integrated nutrient management over conventional for various kharif and rabi crops was calculated as shown in Fig. 2.

Table 26: Plantation of various fruit species at Ashti watershed

Table 27: Growth parameters of various fruit species planted in Ashti watershed

Altitude (m)

Mango Litchi Guava Pomegranate Citrus Jackfruit

PH CD PH CD PH CD PH CD PH CD PH CD

800 98.5 5.2 82.3 3.90 58.5 3.0 65.8 3.0 57.0 3.9 70.5 3.7

1000 97.6 4.9 80.9 3.85 55.9 2.9 66.9 2.9 59.1 3.0 67.0 3.5

1200 95.4 5.0 78.1 3.80 57.2 3.0 65.7 3.0 58.5 2.5 63.9 3.2

1400 95.0 4.8 - - 55.2 3.0 64.0 2.8 56.2 1.9 60.0 2.8

Fruit plantation Total plantation (nos.)

Area planted (ha)

Survival

Nos. %

Mango 1556 9.96 800 51.41 Guava 510 1.84 332 65.10

Pomegranate (Anar) 1310 4.72 1100 83.97 Citrus 205 0.74 135 65.85

Litchi 95 0.61 15 15.80 Jackfruit (Kathal) 50 0.32 15 30.00

Total 3726 18.18 2588 64.33

5

Application of modern technology: Application of remote sensing (RS)/geographic information system (GIS), in collaboration with IIRS, Dehradun was carried out in Ashti watershed using Resource Sat-I Satellite data of LISS-IV (5.8 m resolution) and Cartosat-I (2.5 m spatial resolution) to generate landuse/cover, slope, aspect, drainage maps etc. This resulted in better planning for the watershed compared to conventional method in terms time saved and accuracy.

On-farm Agronomical Trials in Watershed

Pulses are important and widely grown agricultural crops in semi arid tracts (SAT) from point of view of food security to large vegetarian society in rural areas. Cultivation of pulses generally involves low cost, low irrigation and low fertilizer usage. Pulses are generally cultivated on marginal to sub marginal soils without use of Rhizobium or PSB culture, irrigation, fertilizers and insect-pest control. Farmers are also repeatedly using seeds of unidentified old varieties of pulses year after year which is also one of the reasons behind poor pulse productivity. To improve pulse productivity, following on farm trials were conducted in backdrop of PRA carried out.

Development of nutrient schedule in lentil (Lens esculenta L.): An on farm study was conducted in Jalalpur and Dhanina villages by sowing lentil (Cv. K-75) in rainfed fields of 12 farmers having wide variations in crop history and soil texture (light to heavy), fertility and water holding potential, during first fortnight of November.

5.2 Jalalpur Watershed

Quality parameter Land scape Upper slope Middle slope Lower slope

Conventional INM Conventional INM Conventional INM Infiltration of air and water 0.60 0.66 0.58 0.64 0.74 0.82 Preservation of soil moisture 0.42 0.48 0.45 0.44 0.70 0.77 Soil organic matter and nutrient cycling

0.65 0.72 0.59 0.66 0.71 0.76

Resistance to erosion 0.68 0..64 0.68 0.75 0.73 0..82 Biological properties and habitat for flora and fauna

0.52 0.58 0.56 0.60 0.72 0.85

Over all average 0.57 0.62 0.57 0.63 0.74 0.82 Increase due to INM over conventional (%)

6.7 8.4 11.5

Table 28: Soil quality parameters as affected by landscape and INM technologies in Ashti watershed

Fig. 2: Water productivity of kharif and rabi demonstrations in Asthi watershed

Maize Cowpea Maize+cowpea Urd Paddy

Kharif crops

Wheat Wheat Wheat Wheat Lentil MustardVL-616 HS-295 HS-375 VL-829

Rabi crops and variety

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

56

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Performance of lentil under farmer’s practice and no fertilizer was almost at par, which may be attributed to raising high yielding lentil variety without fertilizers while farmers applied limited fertilizers in their own varieties in T1. All nutrient management options invariably improved grain and straw yields of lentil over farmer’s practice (Table 29) yield of lentil due to nutrient management options over farmer’s practice ranged from 8.4% in T to 41.1% 3

in T . Data indicated that source to sink relation (translocation of food material from aerial parts to grain) improved to a 7

tune of 0.9% to 1.85% under different nutrient management options over the farmer’s practice. Seed treatment with Rhizobium outperformed PSB while Rhizobium + PSB out produced the use of either Rhizobium or PSB alone. Similarly, Rhizobium + PSB + RDF outperformed RDF in grain and straw yield of lentil.

Nutrient management in greengram (Vigna radiata), blackgram (Vigna mungo) and arhar (Cajanus cajan L.): Highest grain yield of all kharif legume crops was recorded in T (Table 30) indicating that effect of Rhizobium + 6

PSB + RDF was more pronounced on productivity of kharif legumes than independent use of Rhizobium, PSB or RDF in semi arid soils in Aravalli hills. On these poorly fertility soils, kharif legume productivity was T > T > T > 7 6 5

T > T > T > T . 4 3 1 2

Nutrient management in jowar (Sorghum biclor L.) and bajra (Pennesetum typhoides L.): Highest grain yield of pearlmillet and jowar were produced under T9 which establishes that combined effect of RDF + PSB + weed mulch was higher than the independent effect of RDF, PSB and weed mulch (Table 31). Treatments combining live weed mulch produced higher grain yield of jowar and bajra than other treatments, which may be attributed to higher rainwater conservation and suppression of weed growth that enabled both the crops to withstand droughts of variable duration and intensity, common in semi arid regions. T produced numerically higher grain yield of both pearlmillet 1

and bajra than T , which may be attributed to farmers’ use of new seeds of high yielding hybrids, composites varieties 2

of these crop every year and also applying limited quantity of fertilizers in these crops. RDF produced higher grain yield of both pearlmillet and jowar than 75% RDF either alone or in combination with PSB or weed mulch or PSB + weed mulch.

Table 29: Effect of different nutrient management on grain, straw and biological yield and harvest index of lentil and gram in semi arid Aravalli soils (Jalalpur watershed)

Table 30: Grain yield of greengram, blackgram and arhar under different nutrient management options in semi arid soils of Aravalli hills (Jalalpur watershed)

*RDF is recommended fertilizer dose..

Treatments Grain yield (kg ha-1)

Greengram Blackgram Arhar T1 : No fertilizer 466.7 387.5 1096.7 T2 : Farmers practice 443.3 361.9 1018.0 T3 : PSB only 483.3 395.6 1223.3 T4 : *RDF 512.2 416.3 1257.8 T5 : Rhizobium only 533.3 441.2 1268.9 T6 : Rhizobium + PSB 564.4 466.9 1312.2 T7: Rhizobium + PSB + RDF 607.8 498.6 1372.2

Treatments Lentil yield (kg ha-1) Harvest Index

Gram yield (kg ha-1) Harvest Index Grain Straw Biological Grain Straw Biological

T1 : Farmer’s practice 887.17 1064.33 1951.50 45.46 561.22 691.33 1252.56 44.83 T2 : No fertilizer 896.83 1053.33 1950.16 45.99 579.78 711.11 1290.84 44.94 T3 : Phosphorus solubilising bacteria (PSB) 981.00 1135.08 2116.08 46.36 640.33 779.44 1419.78 45.18 T4 : Rhizobium 1073.58 1227.00 2300.58 46.67 706.11 845.33 1551.44 45.60 T5 : PSB + Rhizobium 1115.58 1268.33 2383.92 46.80 826.22 975.00 1801.22 45.92 T6 : Recommended dose of fertilizers (RDF) 1185.58 1323.00 2508.58 47.26 876.00 1026.89 1902.89 46.09 T7 : PSB + Rhizobium + RDF 1302.83 1450.83 2753.67 47.31 960.78 1116.67 2077.44 46.29

57

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

-1Table 31: Grain yield of pearlmillet and jowar (kg ha ) under different nutrient management in semi arid soils

of Aravalli hills (Jalalpur watershed)

Table 32: Average economics of different crops in Jalalpur watershed villages

Economics of different crops in watershed villages: Bajra, mustard, wheat, lentil and gram are the main crops grown in Jalalpur watershed villages. All these crops were economically viable in all the three watershed villages (Jalalpur, Devri and Dhanina) based on B:C ratios (Table 32). Crop performance of wheat and bajra in the fields of Jalalpur watershed is shown in Plate 110.

Plate 110: Arhar and wheat crops after development programme in Jalalpur watershed

Crops Jalalpur Devri Dhanina

Cultivation cost

(` ha-1)

Gross income

(` ha-1)

Net income

( ha-1)

B:C Ratio

Cultivation cost

( ha-1)

Gross income

(` ha-1)

Net income

(` ha-1)

B:C Ratio

Cultivation cost

(` ha-1)

Gross income

(` ha-1)

Net income

(` ha-1)

B:C Ratio

Bajra

14949

17675

2726

1.18

12597

15500

2903

1.23

15600

18745

3145

1.20

Mustard

18230

35650

17420

1.96

18168

35650

17482

1.96

17361

33810

16449

1.95

Wheat

26853

45474

18621

1.69

28818

42900

14082

1.49

25337

43030

17693

1.70

Lentil

18139

41350

23211

2.28

16327

40500

24173

2.48

16733

47925

31192

2.86

Gram

15201

25278

10077

1.66

20679

24115

3436

1.17

17874

35260

17386

1.97

Treatments Bajra Jowar

T1 : Farmer’s practice 1388 838.9 T2 : HYV seed 1390 823.9 T3 : 75% RDF* 1497 880.0 T4 : 100% RDF 1552 918.9 T5 : 75% RDF + PSB 1644 856.1 T6 : 100% RDF + PSB 1714 949.6 T7 : 75% RDF + weed mulch 1723 1040.0 T8

: 100% RDF + weed mulch

1861

1086.1

T9 : 75% RDF + PSB + weed mulch

1816

1129.6

T10: 100% RDF + PSB + weed mulch

2086

1171.1

*RDF is recommended fertilizer dose.

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

58

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

5.3 Ramasagra Watershed

Crop diversification: During kharif (rainy) season of 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 under rainfed conditions seeds of improved varieties (K-6 and TMV-2) were introduced for improving the yields of the major crops especially groundnut. The improved cultivars of bajra (ICTP-8203), castor (GCH-4 and DCH-177), redgram (ICPL-87 and BRG-2) and cowpea (C-152) were distributed to the beneficiaries. In the irrigated area, improved variety of maize hybrid i.e. Super 900M Gold, paddy i.e. Gangavathi Sona (GGV-05-01) and cotton i.e. Super Mallika, Mallika Gold, Sarvodaya Kanaka and Sashyashamla were introduced during 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13.

In 2009, heavy rains were received during May (205.2 mm) and June (55.8 mm) which resulted into wetting of soil profile. No rainfall was received during July month, the critical month for optimum sowing of kharif rainfed

ndcrops. After receipt of 103.0 mm rainfall during 2 fortnight of August, rainfed crops were sown late during last week of August. Hence the yields of groundnut were only 30% to 40% whereas cowpea yields were about 80% of the normal yields in the region. Even though the total rainfall was higher (718.0 mm) by 48%, the rainfed crop yields were lower, which was attributed to bad distribution of rainfall.

• Groundnut yield increased by 35% by cultivation of TMV-2 and further increased by 51% with introduction of K-6 (Breeder seed) over local variety, whereas B:C ratio was higher by 20% for both varieties over the traditional variety.

• In groundnut and cowpea intercropping, the groundnut pod equivalent yield increased by 31% with cultivation of groundnut (TMV-2) + cowpea (C-152) and further increased up to 48% with cultivation of groundnut (K-6) + cowpea (C-152) over cultivation of local varieties of groundnut, and cowpea and B:C ratio increased by 23% and 26%, respectively over farmer’s practice.

• Bajra grain yield increased by 83% with cultivation of ICTP-8203 over local variety.

• Castor hybrids GCH-4 and DCH-177 and redgram variety ICPL-87 were procured from UAS, Dharwad and distributed to 38 farmers. Both crops failed due to low rainfall.

• The groundnut and bajra yields reduced by 68% and 110%, respectively over 2008-09 due to low and ill distributed rainfall.

Higher yields of groundnut and redgram in 2010 were attributed to higher rainfall by 66% (808.4 mm) with its thuniform distribution prior to sowing and during cropping season. Crops under rainfed situations were sown from 17

July (optimum sowing time) till the end of July. Rainfall that fell during cropping season was 424.6 mm in 26 rainy days.

• The yield of groundnut and redgram increased 23% and 76% with improved cultivars and further up to 83% and 171% with improved cultivars and conservation measures.

• Net returns increased by 82% in groundnut (TMV-2) intercropped with redgram and by 100% with groundnut (K-6) intercropped with redgram (BRG-2) over local varieties of groundnut and redgram.

• Intercropping of groundnut (K-6) and redgram (BRG-2) recorded 2.33 B:C ratio, whereas intercropping of groundnut (TMV-2) and redgram (BRG-2) recorded B:C ratio of 2.08 (Fig.3).

• The B:C ratio increased by 31% in intercropping groundnut (TMV-2) and redgram (BRG-2) and by 43% groundnut (K-6) and redgram (BRG-2) over cultivation local of cultivars of groundnut and redgram.

-1• Cultivation of improved hybrid maize (Super 900M Gold) increased maize grain yield by 27% (6118 kg ha ) and -1straw yield by 20% (82.53 q ha ) over local maize hybrid (CP-828) cultivated by farmers in the watershed

(Fig.3).

• In bajra, yield increased from 29% up to 74% with improved hybrid (ICTP-8203) and watershed management over local variety outside watershed. The ICTP-8203 cultivar recorded 40% higher gross returns, and 156% greater net returns (Fig.3).

-1 -1• The productivity of Bt. cotton increased from 1312 kg ha (2008-09) up to 2271 kg ha (2010-11).

59

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

48166118

24275

35636

1.99

2.36

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

Control (CP 828) Super 900M Gold

Mai

zeY

ield

(kg/

ha)

1.8

1.9

2

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

B:C

Ratio

668

9621.18

1.52

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Control ICTP-8203

Gra

inYi

eld

(kg/

ha)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

B:C

Ratio

811729

982

1178

15440

10130

20225

8505

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Control K-6 + BRG-2 Control TMV-2 + BRG-2

Treatments

Gro

und

nutp

odeq

uiva

len

t

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

Net

Ret

urn

s

Groundnut pod equivalent Net Returns

G.nut + redgram

ICTP 8203Bajra- Super 900M GoldCP 828Bt. Cotton

K-6 TMV-2 Local

Groundnut + redgram intercropping

Fig. 3: Introduction of improved cultivars (maize, bajra, groundnut and redgram) during 2010-11 in Ramasagara watershed

Maize Bajra

Plate 111: Cultivation of improved crop cultivars in rainfed and irrigated conditions in Ramasagara watershed

During 2011, lower rainfall of 391.1 mm (-20%) was received and it was poorly distributed thus resulting in insufficient soil moisture during early vegetative stage and severe moisture stress during critical flowering to pod formation stage in groundnut producing only 50% to 60% of the normal yields. A 12 mm rainfall received in October increased pod size and weight otherwise yields would have been low.

• Groundnut grain yield inside watershed was 22% greater than outside watershed and it was attributed to cultivation of improved varieties of groundnut i.e. TMV2 and K6.

• Grain yield of bajra (ICTP-8203) inside watershed was 33% higher than the yield recorded outside watershed (Plate 111).

• Grain yield of Gangavathi Sona rice variety increased from 9% to 22% whereas straw yield increase varied from 6% to 21% during kharif 2012. The market rate was also higher for Gangavathi Sona compared to Mulla batta or Hamsa coarse variety cultivated by farmers.

• Improved Bt cotton hybrid, Super Mallika increased lint yield by 33%, gross returns by 98% and fetched additional income of 22,184 ha over farmer cultivated hybrids.

-1 -1• Productivity of Bt cotton increased by 72% from 1487 kg ha (outside the watershed) to 2552 kg ha (Inside watershed). Hybrid sorghum productivity inside watershed was 37% higher over outside watershed. Higher yields of Bt cotton and sorghum was attributed to cultivation of improved hybrids with timely sowing, optimum plant population and application of micro-nutrients.

-1

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

60

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

5.4 Kajiyana Watershed

Regular hydrological monitoring is being done ever after the completion of project. Most of the Scientists involved in the project are regularly visiting the watershed. Farmers have appreciated the work of improving water use efficiency in Jenouli and Nalagagrok villages of watershed. Majority of farmers are satisfied with availability of water, increased production, increased income, soil and water conservation measures, dry land horticulture and vermi-composting. Benefits of project are still being harnessed by farmers.

Status of Present Water Utilization: More than 60% area of watershed is irrigated through surface water. Water is conveyed from perennial stream to fields by small lined channels with a discharge of 12-18 litres per second (Table 33). These channels are locally called as kuhls. There are conveyance losses from these kuhls mainly due to seepage. Source of drinking water is also the same stream, from which drinking water is conveyed through GI pipe lines.

Villages Kajiyana, Dhattogran and Nala Dakrog are located in middle reach of watershed. In these villages, about 20-30% agricultural fields are irrigated through sub-surface irrigation. These villages are getting 6-12 litres per second water in their fields through PVC or RCC pipe lines. Except Dhattogran, drinking water is supplied in all villages from stream. In Dhattogran, drinking water is supplied from tube walls located at downstream.

Improving Crop Productivity: To demonstrate utility of technologies, large numbers of crop demonstrations of integrated nutrient management, crop diversification and organic farming were done during kharif and rabi seasons. A total 53 and 106 numbers of demonstrations were laid on farmers’ fields for important crops of maize, blackgram, sorghum, kulthi, greengram and dhaincha during kharif and wheat, mustard, onion, potato and tomato during rabi season, respectively. Experiments were conducted with four treatments in 15 fields of 5 farmers at different physiographic positions. The yield data revealed marked improvement in productivity of maize crop. INM with ZnSO application proved most effective practice of nutrient management (Table 34).4

Maize and kulthi during kharif are major crops shown under rainfed condition in the watershed. During rabi, land is kept fallow. Proper land use plan can enhance farm income considerably. To demonstrate suitable crops and their varieties, experiments were laid down with maize, kulthi, urd, mungbean during kharif and wheat, mustard, gram and pea during rabi season. Under crop diversification, yields of alternative crop or varieties during kharif and rabi season were good as shown in Table 35.

Table 34: Range of maize yield in 15 plots under different package of practices in Kajiyana watershed

Village Name of structure Source of water Discharge/Capacity Availability of water

Utilization

Janouli

Kuhl Pond-1

Perennial stream Runoff water and kuhl

12-20 litre/second 850 cum

Good Good

Irrigation Cattle drinking

Kajiyana

Pond-2 Cement tank Pipe and lined/ unlined kuhl Pond Pipe and unlined kuhl

Runoff water Spring water Surface water from perennial stream

1350 cum 650 cum 12 litre/second

N.A. Good Fair

Cattle drinking Irrigation Irrigation

Nala-Dakrog Runoff water Subsurface

5700 cum 9 litre/second

Good Good

Cattle drinking Irrigation

Treatment Yield range (q ha-1) T1 : Farmers practice of giving fertilizers (@ 80 kg ha-1 21 days after

sowing of crop) 25.0-31.0

T2 : Recommended doses of fertilizers (N, P, K in the ratio of 100:40:20 kg ha-1 and as per recommended practice of split application

31.0-38.4

T3 : Integrated nutrient management (25% N replacement by FYM) 39.8-45.0 T4 : INM + ZnSO4 (T3 + ZnSO4 @ 25 kg ha-1) 41.0-48.8

Table 33: Water utilization status through surface and sub-surface irrigation in Kajiyana watershed

61

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Table 35: Yield under crop diversification trials on farmers’ field in Kajiyana watershed

Table 36: Yield under organic farming on farmer’s field during 2010-11 in Kajiyana watershed

Even existing crops having potential for better crop diversification were introduced with improved package of practices. It caused marked improvement over farmers’ practice. Fodder crops were introduced to meet the requirement of animal population.

In degraded lands, soil health can be improved by adopting organic farming with use of organics alone. In the first year, integrated nutrient management and organic farming caused slight reduction in yield. Yield is expected to increase in the coming years when soil fertility builds up under these conditions. Effect of organic farming on yield of kharif crops during 2010-11 is shown in Table 36.

Crop Farmer Yield (q ha-1) - Demonstration Yield (q ha-1) – Farmer’s practice Grain Straw Grain Straw

Rabi 2009-10 Wheat Ram Pratap 23.13 40.36 17.25 35.60 Pyare Lal 22.50 42.55 16.50 40.20 Mustard Roop Lal 6.25 NA 4.15 NA Nath Chand 6.10 NA 4.75 NA Barley Sat Pal 17.50 36.00 12.50 25.58 Gur baksh 16.00 40.70 10.70 30.25 Taramira Rikhi Ram 4.63 NA 2.95 NA Yog raj 4.10 NA 3.25 NA Lentil Raghav Sharma 5.00 22.70 4.20 14.26 Sondhi Ram 5.25 25.90 3.75 16.23

Kharif 2010-11 Maize Baboo Ram 47.5 82.5 32.6 70.45 Biru Ram 52.5 77.5 29.5 72.50 Achchharu Ram 42.5 90.5 34.7 80.5 Nath Chand 45.2 87.5 33.5 74.6 Green Air dry Jowar fodder Jai Chand 350 270 NA NA Bimla Devi 385 295 NA NA Ram Swaroop 415 270 NA NA Balak Ram 325 275 NA NA Man Singh 385 295 NA NA Kulthi Shiv Kumar 7.45 27.3 4.3 25.2 Ishwar Singh 8.05 35.5 4.15 23.6

Farmer Village Maize yields (q ha-1)

100% organic Integrated 50:50 100% inorganic

Straw Grain Straw Grain Straw Grain

Gurcharan Janauli 88.24 55.88 117.65 52.94 129.41 47.06 Sanjeev Janauli 132.35 52.94 64.71 52.94 117.65 58.82

Babu Ram Janauli -- -- 117.65 52.94 -- -- Babu Ram Kaziana -- -- 129.41 58.82 -- --

Bimla Datogara -- -- 100.00 47.06 -- -- Average 110.29 61.67 105.88 52.94 123.53 58.82

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

62

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Integrated Farming System

To increase farm income, horticulture based farming system was developed. For this, mango, guava, aonla, lemon, jamun and karonda numbering 435 were planted (Table 37). Additionally, 1950 slips of Hybrid Napier were transplanted at field boundaries (Table 38).

Two agri-horticultural based farming systems were demonstrated at two farmer’s fields to monitor the long term consequences and serve as demonstration for other farmers. The performance of orchards of Sanjiv Kumar and Vimla Devi were studied. Survival and growth were found satisfactory (Table 39).

Livelihood Security for Landless People

To provide a source of income to landless, marginal farmers and weaker sections of the society, six SHGs were constituted to take-up various income generating activities. About 130 people were involved in tailoring and embroidery, paper and cloth bag making, carpet weaving, silage making and vermi-composting through these six SHGs (Table 40). A large number of soft toys were made which were used for giving gifts and presentations in social events (Table 41). Earlier, these toys had to be purchased from the market.

Table 37: No. of fruit species planted in Kajiyana watershed

Table 38: Number of slips of Hybrid Napier planted at different farmer’s fields in Kajiyana watershed

Table 39: Performance of orchard established in Janouli and Dhattogarh villages (Kajiyana watershed)

Plant species Cultivar No. Mango Dasheri 60 Mango Amarpalli 20 Guava Allahabadi 60 Aonla NA-7 120 Lemon Baramasi 150 Jamun Seedling 55 Karonda Local 100 Total - 435

Name of Farmer Rooted slips Cuttings Total Shyam 150 150 300 Sanjiv Kumar 150 150 300 Krishna Devi 150 150 300 Bimla Devi 150 150 300 Madan Lal 0 150 150 Achroo Ram 0 300 300 Lazza Ram 150 150 300 Total 750 1200 1950

Farmers Sanjiv Kumar, Village Janouli Vimla Devi, Village Dhattogarh Name of fruit spp. No. % Survival Average plant

height (cm) No. % Survival Average plant

height (cm) Aonla 25 92 67.35 - - - Mango (Dasheri) 10 90 87.75 12 92 69.25 Mango (Amarpalli) 5 100 58.20 3 67 47.50 Guava 10 100 90.67 2 50 47.00 Lemon 10 70 81.20 4 100 56.00 Karonda 5 100 29.75 2 50 30.00 Total 65 23

63

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Table 40: Details of Self Help Groups working for different activities (Kajiyana watershed)

Table 41: Details of soft toys made by trainees in Kajiyana watershed

Table 42: Performance of SHGs in Kajiyana watershed

Table 43: Effect of soil and water conservation technologies on runoff and soil loss in Jigna watershed

Performance of SHGs in terms of income earned/saved during the period 2010-11 as a consequence of land-less activity is shown in Table 42.

Runoff and Soil Loss: Recording of runoff and soil loss data was started regularly from rainy season 2012 onwards at all the three SMS stations installed with stage level recorders. Runoff and soil losses in the watershed ranged from

-1 -113.0% to 22.1% and 0.8 t ha to 2.0 t ha in different years (Table 43).

Ground Water Availability: Monitoring of water table depth in wells/tube wells from ground surface was taken up in the watershed at fortnightly/monthly intervals. While average minimum and maximum water table depth in watershed during the month of June varied from 4.9 m to 12.5 m in 2012, the same varied from 1.83 m to12.9 m in 2014.

Temporal variation in water level depth in wells/tube wells from ground surface in the Jigna watershed decreased overtime, which indicated a positive trend towards increased availability of ground water in wells (Fig.4). Substantial increase in water yield of wells/tube wells was also reported by number of farmers in the water, particularly in close vicinity/ influence of the water harvesting structures.

5.5 Jigna Watershed

Name of Self Help Group Activities No. of Beneficiaries Tailoring & Embroidery Training in sewing and toy making 47 Paper bag Making Material and training 29 Carpet weaving Providing adda making machine 32 Cloth bag making Material and training 11 Animal husbandry Construction of silo pits for silage making 3 Vermi-composting Vermished and preparation of vermi-compost 8

Soft toy No. of trainees No. of items prepared Dogs 47 84 Dolls 25 28 Teddy bear 36 44 Rabbit 2 4

Particulars No. of females participated

Income earned/ saved (`)

Paper bags 20 11,868 Soft toys 47 29,380 Stitching of clothes 36 31,190 Making of dari 30 50,400 Cloth bags 10 11,500

Year SMS No. 23 (Upper Reach) SMS No. 21 (Middle Reach) SMS No. 22 (Lower Reach)

Rainfall (mm)

Runoff (mm)

Runoff (%)

Soil loss (t ha-1yr-1)

Rainfall (mm)

Runoff (mm)

Runoff (%)

Soil loss (t ha-1 yr-1)

Rainfall (mm)

Runoff (mm)

Runoff (%)

Soil loss (t ha-1 yr-1)

2012 468.2 81.3 17.4 1.2 436.8 96.6 22.1 1.6 571.6 74.4 13.0 1.0 2013 534.4 100.0 18.7 2.0 525.4 97.2 18.5 1.9 547.0 89.6 16.4 1.3 2014 468.2 81.3 17.4 1.2 300.4 49.7 16.6 0.8 Data c ould not be collected for all events

due to weir damaged by mischievous persons during rainy season; later repaired.

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

64

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Fig. 4: Temporal variation in water level depth in wells/tube wells from ground surface in Jigna watershed

Water Availability in Embankment-cum-Pond Constructed for Cattle/Livestock: Construction of pond in the panchayat land with the basic purpose for cattle/livestock usage was very much appreciated by the watershed people (Plate 112). Success story of this pond started since its filling with water in first year of its construction and its immediate benefit recognized by down below farmers in their defunct wells which started yielding water and became functional as they were dry since long. Out of the total live stock population of 6911 in the watershed, on an average 10-15% livestock are more or less dependent for grazing in the panchayat and nearby other private lands lying fallow adjacent to the newly constructed pond. Based on random count estimate, more than 1000 livestock, including major and minor ruminants come to this pond daily during different spells of time (Table 44).

As per the farmer’s perception due to construction of this pond, (1) there is saving of about 3-4 hours a day otherwise spent in moving in search of water or forced to come back to village early; (2) water in this pond keeps grazing animals nearby grazing area thus reduceing pressure on crops etc; and (3) increased number of animals and milk production. Sample survey conducted for 60 cattle rearing farmers also indicated that size of herds and milk production increased in the watershed during 2013 compared to pre-project period (Table 45).

Table 44: Beneficiary village community/families and cattle population dependent on dug out pond constructed in pasture land in Jigna watershed

Table 45: Size of animal herds and milk production in pre and post project period in Jigna watershed

Plate 112: Water availability in embankment-cum-pond constructed for livestock in Jigna watershed

Villages Farm families

Cows Buffaloes Goats/Sheep Others (wild blue bulls, etc.)

Beneficiary communities

Jigna 58 250 150 700 >50 Bagla (25), Kumhar (5), Harijan (10), Yadav (8), Brahmin (10)

65

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Sl. No.

Characteristics Category Number of farmers Pre-project Post project

1 Animal herd size Small (upto 3 animals) 31 (52.0) 18 (30.0) Medium (3-5 animals) 26 (43.0) 34 (56.7) Large (above 5 animals) 03 (05.0) 08 (13.3)

2 Milk production Low (upto 1 litre day-1) 42 (70.0) 23 (38.3)

Medium (1-3 litre day-1) 11 (18.0) 21 (35.0)

High

(above 3

litre day-1)

07

(12.0)

16

(26.7)

Figures in parentheses indicate percentage of farmers.

Monitoring of water availability in this pond was started since September 2012 (i.e. after second filling) at fortnightly/monthly intervals. In the beginning years of construction, water dried in the pond during peak summer season (May-June), but drying days reduced over consecutive years (Fig. 5). However, during last summer season of 2014, water remained available throughout the summer period, ranging from 1.2 m to 1.5 m and no drying was recorded.

Crops Yields and Productivity: Data was collected from a user group of 25 farmers covering 44.17 ha area in the vicinity of a check dam located in Tibaripura hamlet (WHS-I) at pre and post construction phase. It is clear from Table 46 that majority of farmers switched over from mustard to wheat crop during rabi season due to increase in water availability for irrigation in well /tube wells. Total crop production from 44.17 ha land in terms of wheat equivalent yield (WEY) increased by almost two fold from 996 q to 1836 q during rabi season 2013-14.

* Figures in parenthesis are total number of farmers; ** Based on minimum support price fixed by Govt. of India for the year 2013-14 for-1 -1 -1 wheat @ 1400 q , mustard @ 3050 q and blackgram @ 3100 q , WE – Wheat equivalent.

Monitoring of executed plan was continued after setting a benchmark of all parameters during the very first year of implementation of the project for assessing the effects of developmental activities on various ecological and socio-economic parameters. Data on bio-physical and socio-economic parameters were collected through regular field visits and periodic beneficiary household survey on regular basis. Periodic monitoring and measurement of hydrological, soils, and plant growth parameters, and yield of crops were done to develop data base for assessing impact of the programme. Five gauging stations were also installed for runoff and soil loss monitoring.

Fig. 5: Water availability in a dugout pond constructed in panchayat grazing lands for cattle/animals (2011-14) in Jigna watershed

-1Table 46: Crop pattern and productivity changes (q ha ) in terms of wheat equivalent yield during rabi in

vicinity of a water harvesting structures at Jigna watershed

5.6 Dhoti Watershed

Before WHS After WHS

Crop Area Yield (q ha-1)

WEY (q ha-1)**

Total productionin terms of WE (q)

Crop Area Yield (q ha-1)

WEY (q ha-1)

Total Productionin terms of WE (q)

Mustard (14)* 21.50 5.14 11.19 240.60 Wheat (19) 33.33 36.86 36.86 1228.50 Mustard + gram (6)

11.50 4.00 + 4.42

18.50 212.80 Wheat + gram (1)

2.00 40.0 + 3.75

48.30 96.60

Mustard + wheat (4)

8.67 5.15 + 36.25

47.46 411.48 Mustard + wheat (1)

1.33 10.0 + 40.0

61.79 82.18

Mustard + gram + wheat (1)

2.50 5.00 + 3.10 + 35.00

52.75 131.87 Mustard + gram + wheat (4)

7.51 5.78 + 3.63 + 36.42

57.05 428.44

Total (25) 44.17 996.75 Total (25) 44.17 1835.72

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

66

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Rainfall: The normal annual rainfall in the watershed is about 874 mm received mainly in June-September (90%). During 5 years period, only 2014 had normal rainfall and for rest of the period the rainfall was either low or high with erratic behaviour (Table 47). The rainfall received in 2011 and 2013 was 68% and 39% more than normal, and in the other years, the deficit ranged from 2% to 51%. In 2011, the total rainfall received was much higher during June and July month, which adversely affected the crop production of kharif season.

Runoff and Soil Loss: In order to monitor the impact of soil and water conservation measures on surface runoff, five water stage level recorders were installed in the watershed (Plate 113) and samples were collected for soil loss estimation (Table 48). Results revealed a significant reduction in runoff from the watershed (23.6% to 4.6%) after the imposition of treatments. Soil loss was

-1 significantly reduced from 21.3 t ha (pre-project) to 3.2 t -1 ha (post-project), to well within the permissible limits. This

implies that mechanical as well vegetative measures were effective in reducing surface runoff and promoted in-situ moisture conservation in the watershed.

Effect of Conservation Measures: Farmer-based soil and water conservation measures implemented in individual fields were bunding, graded bund with west weir, and contours furrow during kharif season to conserve in situ soil and water for enhancing yield. Impact assessment of these measures showed that farmers obtained 39% to 52% of yield in case of coriander, soybean and mustard, respectively in bunded field whereas farmers harvested 16% to 69% higher yield of different crops in those fields where graded bund with weir measure was imposed (Plate 114, Table 49). Formation of contour furrows in soybean crop during kharif enhanced the yield by 26% compared to control field.

Table 47: Monthly distribution of rainfall (mm) in Dhoti watershed during project period

Table 48: Effect of soil and water conservation measures on runoff and soil loss in Dhoti watershed

Months 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 5 years average January 0 0 0 0 0 0 February 0 0 0 0 12.4 2.48 March 0 0 0 0 0 0 April 0 0 0 0 0 0 May 0 9.4 6.4 0 5.6 4.28 June 0 654.2 35.4 48 49.6 157.44 July 52.8 403.2 212.6 471.2 280.2 284 August 130.4 335.8 236.5 636.6 430.2 353.9 September 188.2 65.2 58 36.2 75.8 84.68 October 0 0 0 26.8 5.2 6.4 November 30.2 0 0 0 0 6.04 December 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 401.6 1467.8 548.9 1218.8 859 899.2 % deficit -54.05 67.94 -37.20 39.45 -1.72

Plate 113 : Installation of stage level recorder for monitoring runoff and soil loss in Dhoti watershed

Year Rainfall (mm) Runoff (mm) Runoff (%) Soil loss (t ha-1) 2009 350 82.8 23.6 21.3 2010 406.4 59.3 14.6 11.2 2011 1467.8 150.4 10.3 7.8 2012 542 31.4 5.8 3.1 2013 1218.7 74.6 6.1 3.4 2014 859 39.5 4.6 3.2

67

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Table 49: Effect of different conservation measures on crop yield in Dhoti watershed

Table 50: Water harvesting structures and their impact on groundwater table in Dhoti watershed

Depth of Water Table: There are 94 tube wells in Dhoti watershed, and most of them were non-functional and few were in use for partial irrigation only at the time of project initiation because of over exploitation during 2002 to 2009.Therefore, to replenish groundwater in watershed area, a number of soil and water conservation interventions like construction of 3 ponds on community land, anicut and other engineering and biological conservation measures were taken up (Plate 115). Water table of tube wells in the vicinity of selected rainwater harvesting structures was monitored periodically i.e. before monsoon (May-June) and after monsoon (October-November) to measure the effect on groundwater recharge. There was a significant improvement in the water table. Based on five years (2010-2014) observations of groundwater table in tube wells, the estimated mean average water table rise under different structures varies from 13-18 m (Table 50).

Type of conservation measure Crop Crop yield (kg ha-1) Percentincrease/ decrease

With conservation measure

Without conservation measure

Bunding soybean 1817 1200 51.41 Mustard 2158 1417 52.29 Coriander 1600 1150 39.13

Graded bund with waste weir Soybean 2400 1423 68.65 Mustard 2010 1437 39.87 Coriander 1362 1120 21.60 Wheat 4880 4200 16.19

Contour furrow Soybean 1666 1325 25.73

Plate 114 : Impact of conservation measures and improved practices in enhancing the yield of coriander and soybean crops in Dhoti watershed

CorianderCoriander SoybeanSoybean

Plate 115 : Water harvesting in community land in Dhoti watershed

Structure

Cost (` Lakh)

Capacity (cubic meter)

No. of tube wells in vicinity

Depth of water table from ground surface (m)

Water table rise (m)

Before monsoon After monsoon Pond-01 4.86 20700 5 57.10 44.25 12.86 Pond-02 4.60 48500 7 62.94 44.58 18.36 Pond-03 4.18 44000 4 56.13 43.05 13.08 Anicut 2.73 4280 11 53.92 36.91 17.01

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

68

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Soil Fertility Improvement: Improved crop management practices which included deep tillage, balance fertilization and in-situ rainwater conservation had overall favourable influence on soil properties (Table 51). The pH and EC reduced by possible redistribution of salts by deep tillage and increased cumulative infiltration. Nitrogen and potash availability improved with balanced fertilizer application and clay redistribution. Organic carbon reduced due to intensification of tillage operations.

Improved Package of Practices and Crop Diversification: To demonstrate improved package of practices for crops and encourage diversification, 316 demonstrations of soybean (100), maize (12), greengram (20), sesame (25), soybean + maize (4) and blackgram (15) in kharif, and mustard (140) in rabi season were conducted during 2009-10 and 2010-11 (Table 52). Among the crops, blackgram recorded the highest yield improvement (80%) followed by maize (72%) in kharif, and mustard (26%) in rabi. On an average, improved package of practices recorded 17% to 80% higher grain yield of crops during kharif and rabi seasons, respectively than traditional cropping in the watershed.

Cropping Pattern: The trend of cropping pattern showed that farmer’s crop choice almost remains the same, but the area changed over pre project situation. Soybean remained the dominant crop in both pre- and post project situations during kharif, and area increased by 55% after the project implementation, and as a result, overall fallow area in kharif reduced by 13%. Mustard occupied maximum area followed by coriander under pre-project situation in rabi. However, a significant change in wheat area (107%) was observed after the project. Increase in area under wheat may be attributed to increase in assured irrigated area as a result of rise in water table in tube wells (Table 53). It is interesting to note that some of the farmers introduced new cash crops (garlic and onion) in watershed area during the project. These crops are known for fetching remunerative prices in the region.

Table 51: Changes in soil properties in Dhoti watershed

Table 52: Demonstrations for yield improvement and crop diversification in Dhoti watershed

LCC Pre/Post project pH EC (d Sm-1)

OC (%)

Clay (%)

Available nutrient (kg ha-1) N P K

IIe Pre-project 8.75 1.25 0.43 38 150 18.5 290 Post project 8.35 0.97 0.37 41 222 15.23 346

IIIe Pre-project 8.65 1.35 0.31 14.5 125 16.25 170 Post project 8.26 0.86 0.38 22.5 175 19.5 269

VIe Pre-project 8.25 1.5 0.37 28.5 112 30.5 265 Post project 8.19 0.73 0.31 32 189 21.6 269

Crop 2009-10 2010-11 Nos. Yield Increase (%) Nos. Yield Increase (%) Soybean 50 9.76 50 23.50 Maize 2 69.40 10 71.70 Soybean + maize (4:1) 4 28.27* -- -- Greengram 5 38.40 15 45.28 Blackgram -- -- 15 80.20 Sesame

--

--

25

60.37

Mustard

60

26.17

80

22.12

* Intercropping system over pure soybean.

Crop season Crop Area (ha) Pre-project Post project

Kharif Soybean 103.36 159.97

Greengram 0.36 0.90

Maize

0.16

--

Til

(sesame)

1.02

--

Fodder (chari)

--

1.12

Fallow

area

456 .47

399.38 Rabi

Mustard

376.68

360.59

Coriander

66.60

54.90

Wheat

27.10

56.21

Barley

0.16

--

Taramira

2.03

--

Garlic

--

0.72

Gram

--

1.71

Onion

--

0.32

Fallow

area

88.8

86.92

Table 53: Change in cropping pattern (area in ha) in Dhoti watershed

69

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Bio-physical Impact Indices: Different indices were worked out below to assess the watershed impact and summarized in Table 54.

Cultivated land utilization index (CLUI): Cultivated land utilization index was worked out for watershed under pre and post situations. CLUI is calculated by summing the products of land planted to each crop, multiplied by actual duration in days of that crop, divided by the total cultivated land area times 365 days. CLUI value increased from 0.34 to 0.37. This clearly indicated the impact of watershed interventions reflected in the increase in cropped area and duration of crop cultivation.

Crop productivity index (CPI): Crop productivity index was calculated by using farmers' yield data and normal yield of crops as per the package of practices to know changes in the productivity level of crops which are cultivated in the watershed. Overall CPI increased from 0.73 during the pre project period to 0.79 after the project, registering an increase of 8% in the crop productivity of whatershed, which may be due to availability of moisture and partly due to adoption of improved package of practices.

Crop diversification index (CDI): Crop diversification index was worked out based on the area under each crop in different seasons for the pre and post project situations. CDI values near to 1 indicate complete diversification. The overall pre-project CDI was 0.44 and it increased to 0.49 during the post project period registering an increase of 11%.

Induced watershed eco-index (IWEI): Induced watershed eco index is used to measure change in vegetation in watershed. This represents an additional area made green through watershed treatment as a proportion of the whole watershed area. There was 9% increase in green cover and the IWEI value is 0.09.

Overall Project Impact: The productivity in the watershed was worked out in soybean grain equivalents considering -1 -12014-15 support prices. Productivity of about 2249 kg ha at the time of project initiation rose to 2436 kg ha during

2014-15. Total production from the watershed increased by19%. Rise in productivity and total production of watershed showed overall impact of the project (Table 55). Gross irrigated area increased from 37.5 ha to 275 ha during 2014-15 due to rejuvenation of non-functional tube-wells and their enhanced pumping hours as a result of water table rise. Cropping intensity increased by 11% after the project implementation.

Table 54: Bio-physical impact indices of Dhoti watershed

Table 55: Overall project impact on total crop production in Dhoti watershed

Name of indices Pre project Post project

Crop Productivity Index (CPI) Cultivated Land Utilization Index (CLUI) Crop Diversification Index (CDI) Induced Watershed Eco- Index (IWEI)

0.73 0.34 0.44 ---

0.79 0.37 0.49 0.09

Particulars Productivity parameters Pre-project Post-project Crop area (ha) Kharif 104.9 161.99 Rabi 472.57 474.45 Total 577.47 636.44

Cropping intensity (%) 102.81 113.31 (10.5)* Irrigated area (ha) 37.5 275

No. of crops grown Kharif 4 3 Rabi 5 6 Total production Soybean grain equivalent ( kg ha-1) 2249 2436 (8.32) Soybean grain equivalent (q watershed-1) 12990 15506 (19.37) Figure in parentheses indicate changes in % over pre project situation; * Cropping intensity changes is in percentage points.

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

70

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Performance of Silvi-pasture Development: Farmers were motivated for adoption of various agro-forestry systems but they did not show much interest. However, 5 ha of community land was developed as silvi-pasture block to meet out fuel and fodder requirements. Survival of tree and yield of grasses on pasture land was monitored and found that on

than average 43% of trees was survived and registered good growth after 5 year of plantation. Prominent species like acacia, siras (Albezia lebbek) and shisham (D. Sissoo) recorded 97%, 25% and 27% survival rate, respectively. Total

-1air dry fodder as a result of planting grass slips in silvi-pasture system was produced in the range of 6.87-9.12 t ha during 2011 to 2014-15 (Table 56).

Bovine Productivity: The distribution of milch animal species shows variations over a period of time and did not show any definite trend (Table 57). However, a marginal reduction in numbers of animals was observed in post project situation. Reason for reduction in population of milch animals may be attributed to culling of unproductive animals and maintaining of less number of animals to avoid fodder scarcity and high maintenance cost. Average milk

-1 -1production per household per day increased from 4.31 litre day to 5.35 litre day over pre-project period. The reason for increase in milk production may be attributed to more availability of fodder in view of increased biomass in watershed and gradually shifting of farmers towards high yielding animals.

Employment Generation: Out migration in search of gainful employment, especially by landless and marginal and small farmers is one of the major problems in rainfed areas in general, and Baran district in particular. Casual employment opportunities to the tune of more than 6400 man days were generated during implementation of the project activities (Table 58). Apart from this, changes in cropping intensity and adoption of improved packages of practices in crop production and livestock also generated additional regular employment opportunities for beneficiaries.

Income Levels: Over all, about 13.5% increase in income of watershed community was estimated from different sources. Maximum overall incremental income was observed in case of marginal and small farmers (57% and 26%), as they earned significant income from wages, especially under MNREGA scheme. Increase in income from

Table 56: Survival of tree species and yield of grass under silvi -pasture system

Table 57: Changes in bovine population and milk production in Dhoti watershed

Name of species No. of tree sapling planted (on 01/09/2010)

Year wise survival (numbers) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Neem (Azadirachta indica) 700 360 230 140 135 130 Shisham (D. Sissoo) 400 190 160 108 108 108 Siras (Albezia lebbek) 300 240 170 81 75 75 Ber 150 70 55 21 21 21 Babool (Acacia arabica) 450 440 437 437 437 437 Khejadha 50 50 50 40 40 40 Chulaha 129 129 129 129 129 129 Total 2179 1489 1244 956 945 940 Yield of grasses (t ha-1 ) --- 9.12 8.47 7.98 7.52 6.7

Year Total livestock unit Standard livestock unit (SLU)*

SLU per household

Average milk production (litre day-1 household-1) Cow Buffalo Goat Bullock

2009-10 376 380 281 20 682.87 3.54 4.31 2010-11 285 311 263 20 548.91 2.84 4.62 2011-12 273 316 167 20 538.79 2.79 4.67 2012-13 294 355 225 6 582.55 3.02 5.26 2013-14 282 352 217 6 570.59 2.96 3.37 2014-15 270 374 278 7 589.46 3.05 5.35 * Animals were converted in to standard livestock units (buffalo equivalent) on the following basis : 1 animal unit =1

buffalo / 1bullock / 0.7 cow / 7 goats.

71

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

agriculture interventions was highest for small farmers (33%) due to adoption of improved packages of practices and irrigation besides better watch and ward efforts (Table 59).

Table 58: Activities wise employment generation in Dhoti watershed

Category Source of income Agriculture Dairy Service Business Wages Total

Marginal (N=11)

44131 (48823)

--- 8182 (18181)

--- 5454 (23636)

57767 (90640)

Small (N=22)

84074 (112361)

24389 (26380)

--- 20864 (4773)

19318 (44318)

148645 (187832)

Medium (N=55)

126079 (147740)

32850 (45194)

4727 (9090)

5818 (11436)

7455 (8727)

176929 (222187)

Large (N=105)

228392 (272017)

64579 (69663)

--- 3810 (6560)

--- (3048)

296781 (351288)

Overall (N=193)

172283 (205681)

47275 (53785)

1813 (3627)

6109 (7372)

4637 (10544)

247611 (281009)

Table 59: Changes in level of income (`) in Dhoti watershed

5.7 Lachhaputraghati Watershed

Data on bio-physical and socio-economic parameters were collected through field visits, detailed resource survey, household survey, PRA techniques, meetings, interviews and FGDs during pre-project and post-project implementation of the watershed project. Periodic monitoring and measurement of hydrological, soils, growth parameters and yield of crops, horticultural and forest plants, land use, and social and economic parameters were collected. Two gauging stations were installed for runoff monitoring. Siltation behind check dams, DLTs and ponds was also measured periodically at selected places during the implementation phase of the watershed. Besides biophysical data, socioeconomic data in terms of contribution, change in income, income from SHGs, participation of the community in different activities etc., were collected through pre-tested questionnaires and interviews.

Bio-Physical Impacts

Potential soil erosion rate (PSER): Potential soil erosion in the watershed was estimated for pre- (2008) and post- (2012) project periods (Fig. 6). During the pre-project period, the maximum area

-1 -1under PSER was in the erosion class of >40.0 t ha yr (20.4%) -1 -1 -1 -1followed by 15-20 t ha yr (18.2%) and 10-15 t ha yr (18.0%).

This was due to the absence of suitable conservation measures and vegetation cover in the watershed. However, during the post- Fig. 6: Potential soil erosion rate during the pre and post

project period in Lachhaputraghati watershed

Budget head Name of the activity Employment generation (man days)

Entry point activities Renovation of temple and Mata ji ka Chabootra 592 Administrative Secretary watershed committee 1460 Works Crop demonstrations 650 Construction of ponds 300

Construction of recharge filter 90 Masonry check dams 340 Loose boulder check dams 60 Earthen dam with pitching 20 Field bunding 160 Silvi-pasture/agri-horticulture/agro forestry plantation 220 Livestock management (Vaccination and health camps) 78 Monitoring of runoff data / watch and ward of silvi -pasture area 2470

Total 6440

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

72

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

project period, the per cent area under high erosion classes (moderate to very high) decreased and these areas shifted towards lower erosion classes (very low and moderately low). This reduction in PSER from higher erosion classes to lower classes was attributed to various conservation measures taken in the watershed which contributed towards reducing the length of slope by field bunding and decreased CP factors due to vegetation cover coupled with bunding and trenching. Average PSER in

-1 -1 -1 -1the watershed for pre and post project periods is estimated to be 30.24 t ha yr and 25.03 t ha yr , respectively (Fig. 7). The average actual soil deposited in the trenches was calculated from the silt deposition data and worked out to be

-1 -113.69 t ha yr of soil actually arrested on the site. Otherwise, this soil have deposited in the streams and water storage structures.

Runoff: The estimated runoff for different land uses in the watershed varied from 14.7% to 29.9% and 7.3% to 15.4% for the pre and post project period, respectively (Fig. 8). The maximum runoff was observed in upland ragi (29.92%) during pre-project period and it decreased to 15.4% in post-project period due to field bunding in degraded sloping lands. The average estimated runoff in the watershed decreased to 14.6% during post-project period from 24.4% in pre-project period.

Water resource development: The interventions such as dugout ponds, lined ponds, jhola kundi and check dams were taken up in the watershed to increase rainwater storage and availability in the watershed (Plate 116 and 117). A total of 93.91 ha-cm rainwater storage capacity was created and harvested in the watershed (Fig. 9). An additional area of 24.2 ha was brought under protective irrigation for cultivation of paddy and vegetables benefiting 177 beneficiaries in the watershed (Table 60).

Fig. 7: Potential soil erosion map for pre and post project periods in Lachhaputraghati watershed

Fig. 8: Estimated runoff under different land uses during pre- and post-project period in Lachhaputraghati watershed

Plate 117: Silpauline lined pond for rainwater in Lachhaputraghati watershed

Plate 116: Rainwater harvesting pond for multiple use of water in Lachhaputraghati watershed

73

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Table 60: Water resource development on irrigated area and beneficiaries in the Lachhaputra ghati watershed

Depth of water table: The average water table depth was raised by 0.18 m (5.9%) and the depth of water storage in the well increased by 0.17 m (17.8%) during the post-project period compared to pre-project period (Fig. 10). The rise in water table depth was more prominent during post monsoon months. The rise in water table and depth of water storage in wells was attributed to increased base flow due to soil and water conservation measures in the watershed areas.

Productivity of crops and crop diversification: A total of 45.4 ha area increased under cereals, pulses and oil seed crops during the project period. Similar ly, area increased under horticultural crops to the extent of 24 ha (Fig. 11). The average yield of different crops was recorded for pre- and post-project periods from the watershed areas (Fig. 11). The yield of all the crops increased considerably and in the range of 3% to 15% with the overall average increase of 9.14%.

Fig. 9: Rainwater storage capacity created and harvested during project period in Lachhaputraghati watershed

Water harvesting structure Cost (`)

Irrigated area (ha) Crops grown Beneficiaries

Before After Additional

Convey channel (Ariputraghati) 2,19,476 2 6 4 Paddy and ragi 30 Check dam-I (Ariputraghati) 48,636 0 6 6 Paddy and vegetables 52 Check dam-II (Ariputraghati) 78,034 0 1.6 1.6 Paddy 17 Check dam-III (Ariputraghati) 1,24,878 0 2 2 Paddy and vegetables 12 New farm pond 99,641 0 3.2 3.2 Paddy and Ginger 14 Convey channel 66,006 3.6 13 9.4 Paddy and vegetables 52 Total 6,36,671 5.6 29.8 24.2 177

Fig. 10: Depth of water storage and water table depth in open well during the pre and post project periods in Lachhaputraghati watershed

Fig. 11: Area and mean yield under different crops during pre- and post-project period in Lachhaputraghati watershed

Vegetable/cash crops Vegetable/cash crops

Cereals and pulses Cereals and pulses

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

74

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Cultivated land utilization index (CLUI): Cultivated land utilization index was worked out for the period before and after the project. CLUI is calculated by summing the products of land planted to each crop, multiplied by the actual duration in days of that crop, divided by the total cultivated land area times 365 days. CLUI increased by 0.05 from 0.35 to 0.40 in the watershed areas as a result of large scale introduction of horticultural plantation in dry land and increased area under irrigation.

Crop productivity index (CPI): Crop productivity index indicates the extent of crop productivity level in comparison to the normal yield of crops as per the package of practices. It was calculated by using farmers’ yield data and normal yield of crops as per the package of practices to evaluate changes in the productivity level of crops which are grown in the watershed. Overall CPI increased from 0.547 during the pre-project period to 0.613 after the project, registering an increase of 12% in the productivity level of crops. It was partly due to distribution of inputs, viz; seeds and fertilizers.

Crop fertilization index (CFI): Crop fertilization index indicates the extent of crop nutrients (NPK) applied to the crop in comparison to the recommended level of nutrients to that crop. Overall CFI increased from 0.21 during the pre-project period to 0.30 after the project, registering an increase of 43% in rate of nutrient application. In general, vegetable crops are fertilized more than the grain crops due to better price for vegetable crops. This was partly due to distribution of inputs during the project period. The CFI is still low indicates that NPK consumption in the watershed areas is very less than half of the recommended dose of nutrients to the crops.

Watershed productivity (WP): Watershed productivity indicates the overall productivity level in the watershed. This was calculated by taking the yield of crops, cropped area and output price of different crops grown in the watershed and expressed in equivalent yield of dominating crops in the area. Overall watershed productivity was

-1expressed in equivalent yield of ragi. The overall WP increased from 4962 kg ha of ragi during pre-project period to -16126 kg ha after the project period. This was mainly due to increased area under irrigation, slightly increased

productivity of crops and diversification of crops towards vegetable crops.

Induced watershed eco-index (IWEI): Induced watershed eco index is used to represent the fraction of green area in the watershed. This represents an additional area made green through watershed treatment as a proportion of the whole watershed area. The value of IWEI was observed to be 0.04, suggesting that an additional 4% of watershed area was rehabilitated through green biomass cover.

Dry land horticulture: Prominent cultivation of mango (Mangifera indica) was introduced in the watershed area. The average overall survival per cent of fruit plants at the end of five years was 68%. Economic analysis was done for a mango plantation under rainfed condition by projecting costs and benefits up to 15 years to know the economic viability. Benefit cost analysis was carried out at 10%, 15% and 20% discount rates. The BCR worked out to be 3.01 and 2.75 at 10% and 15% discount rates, respectively for mango with the internal rate of return (IRR) of 21.28%. Due

-1 -1to agroforestry interventions, the density of trees, particularly in dry land, increased to 14 trees ha from 7 trees ha .

In-situ rainwater conservation measures in mango plantation: Soil moisture content was higher at 15-30 cm compared to 0-15 cm in all the treatments. The average soil moisture content at both the depths with mulching was higher by 9.16% (0-15 cm) and 5.56% (15-30 cm) over treatments with no mulching. In general, soil moisture content was high at 0.5 m compared to 1.0 m and 2.0 m away from the plant due to in-situ rainwater conservation measures. Among the in-situ rainwater conservation measures, staggered contour bund (SCB) and SCB with trenching conserved rainwater efficiently in the soil which was reflected in soil moisture content at both the depths. The growth of mango plants was better in all the conservation measures as compared to the control due to increased soil moisture availability in the soil (Plate 118).

Plate 118: Mango plantation with in-situ rainwater conservation measures in Lachhaputraghati watershed

75

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Fig. 12: Estimated total carbon sequestration potential of different plantations in Lachhaputraghati watershed

Fig. 13: Human population carrying capacity of different land uses in the Lachhaputraghati watershed

Rain water use efficiency and water productivity of crops: Rain water use efficiency (RWUE) of the rainfed crops -1 -1 -1 -1was calculated. Maximum RWUE was in the upland paddy (4.49 kg ha mm ) followed by maize (3.77 kg ha mm )

-1 -1and low land rice (3.00 kg ha mm ) among the cereals. Among pulses and oilseeds, RWUE was maximum in -1 -1 -1 -1redgram (1.81 kg ha mm ) and groundnut (1.48 kg ha mm ), respectively. Among the vegetable crops, maximum

-1 -1RWUE was in the cabbage (57.4 kg ha mm ) followed by ginger, turmeric and tomato.

Carbon sequestration potential: Total carbon sequestration potential was estimated after the period of 10 years and 20 years for different plantations in the watershed areas considering the present survival rate, and expected growth rate and stand of each plantation (Fig. 12). The maximum carbon sequestration potential is from energy plantation followed by miscellaneous plantation, bio-diesel and agri-horticulture plantations. A total of 391.24 t and 1114.65 t of carbon sequestration potential were estimated over 10 years and 20 years, respectively in the watershed areas. The average carbon

-1 -1 -1sequestration potential worked out to 2.12 t ha yr and 3.4 t ha -1yr after 10 years and 20 years, respectively from the plantation

area in the watershed. Estimating the carbon credit at a carbon -1price of US$ 20 t of C, it worked out to US$ 42.8 (` 2,544) and

-1 -1US$ 68 (` 4,080) ha yr after 10 years and 20 years, respectively (1 US$ = 60).

Human population carrying capacity (HPCC): Human population (adult) carrying capacity of cultivated lands in the watershed was worked out as per their production potential during pre and post project periods. The HPCC is the ratio of energy output from the land use or production system to the annual energy requirement of an adult. Annual energy requirement for an adult was calculated based on daily energy requirement recommended by the National Institute of Nutrition (NIN), Hyderabad. The HPCC of different crops is presented in Fig. 13 with spatial demarcation in the watershed area. The HPCC is lowest in niger (1.0) and the maximum in potato (12.2). Among the cereals, paddy in jhola land, up land paddy and maize have the HPCC of 4.9 to 6.6 during pre-project period and 5.5 to 7.2 during the post-project period. The HPCC of vegetables varied between 2.2 (beans) and to 12.2 (potato) during pre-project period and it increased to 2.4 and 13.1 during the post-project period due to increase in productivity of crops. The average HPCC of crops increased to 4.4 during post-project period from 4.0 during pre-project period and registered an increase of 9.3% due to enhanced productivity of crops through watershed activities.

Socio-economic Impacts

People’s participation: People’s participation in watershed management project is an important index for its sustainability and it can be measured through People’s Participation Index (PPI). The people’s participation index was worked out at preparatory phase, watershed work phase and at the consolidation phase of the project. The overall PPI was estimated to be 56% indicating that the stakeholder’s overall participation was just above the medium level. Among the three stages of the project, the level of people’s participation was highest (64%) at preparatory phase followed by 58% at work phase and 46% at consolidation phase indicating high to medium level of participation.

Change in income and expenditure pattern: Income expenditure analysis is an important activity which provides insights into real development of the watershed populace. The analysis was done before (2008) as well as after (2012)

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

76

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

(AG: Agriculture, FL: Finance Lending, BE: Business/Employment, O: Others, AL: Agri. Labours, FUS: Fuel Wood Sale)

Fig. 14: Source of income under different categories of farmers in Lachhaputraghati watershed

(AI: Agriculture Inputs, L:Labours, BL: Bank Loan, HH: House Hold, ED: Education, AL: Alcoholism & O: Others

Fig. 16: Employment generated during Lachhaputraghati watershed development

Fig. 15: Expenditure pattern of different categories of farmers in Lachhaputraghati watershed

`( )

`( )

Plate 119: Income generating activities in the Lachhaputraghati watershed

the implementation of watershed projects. The analysis was carried out on the basis of random sampling from all categories of farmers, viz; large, medium and small. The analysis reveals that before implementation of the project (2008), for large farmers, the source of income was from an array of enterprises, viz; agriculture, animal husbandry and employment. After implementation of the project (2012), there was a shift of income from non-institutional finance to agricultural activities to the tune of 5% (Fig. 14 and 15). WDT made efforts in capacity building of all categories of farmers for different income generation activities. Large farmers showed interest in initiating large scale enterprises i.e. poultry and livestock etc. In expenditure analysis, large farmer increased expenditure on inputs procurement and labour work by 5%. However, expenditure on food and education remained unchanged.

Employment generation: A total of 14052 man days employment was generated where in maximum employment generation was through water harvesting structures, DLTs and plantation works. Maximum employment generation was during the watershed work phase (84%) followed by a consolidation phase (15.3%) of the watershed development (Fig. 16).

Income generating activities for livelihood development: Landless farmers and families constitute considerable population (84 families, 27%) of the Lachhaputraghati watershed. To provide seasonal as well as year around income, landless farmers, women and unemployed youths were supported with various income generating activities in the watershed areas (Plate 119). A total of 221 beneficiaries benefited from these activities. The annual gross income per SHGs varied between 14,000 and 40,000 (Table 61). On an average the annual gross income (AGI) per beneficiary was 900.

77

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

78

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Table 61: Details of income generation activities and annual gross returns in the LPG watershed

Community contribution: Contribution of the community towards watershed activities/works is considered as a measure of participation. Moreover, contribution in terms of cash and kind enhances the responsibility and commitment to maintain the works and activities created under the project. People came forward enthusiastically to contribute for private as well as Panchayat land in terms of cash and kind giving indication of sustainability of works carried out under the project. A total amount of 1,21,252 was received as a contribution under various works in the watershed that will be utilized in the post project maintenance of the assets created in the watershed.

Convergence activities in the watershed: Substantial public investments are being made for the strengthening of the rural economy and the livelihood base of the poor, especially the marginalized groups like SC/STs and women. Watershed management cannot be realized in isolation as it involves different administrative wings of the government. To have an effective implementation of watershed management schemes like Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, MGNREGA, Swarnajayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojna (SGSY), Odisha Forestry Sector Development Project and such other schemes or private players, they must converge to yield desired results.

Economic viability of the project: Economic analysis of the project was carried out for the entire watershed (arable and non-arable) by considering cost and direct benefits from different activities, assuming productive life of 20 years of the watershed project. BCR @ 10% discount rate was estimated to be 1.16 and IRR was worked out to be 19.5% for arable lands. The BCR and IRR for arable and non-arable lands reveal the economic viability of the project.

Water Resource Development

A total of 18 water harvesting and gully control structures were constructed and 4 existing structures were 3rejuvenated in the watershed during the project period through which 60749 m storage capacities were created (Table

62). As a result of water harvesting through these activities, a total of 242 ha-cm water was harvested (January to October, 2010) and the impact on ground water recharge was visualized by rise in ground water table ranging from 2.3 m to 13.9 m with average of 8.0 m in the vicinity of the structures in the watershed.

The change in the cropping system due to better yield of bore well which resulted from rejuvenation of percolation pond near Mr. Nataraj farmer’s field (Table 63) was studied for economics. Earlier, the farmer used to cultivate groundnut in kharif and maize in rabi. Because of rise in the water table, he switched over to cultivation of tobacco in rabi which fetches good market price. Also he was able to give more irrigation to the kharif groundnut. During the year 2010, the farmer could be able to give two extra irrigations for groundnut and got additional yield and income to the tune of 20% and 47%, respectively. During rabi season, farmer raised tobacco crop and it fetched an

5.8 Ayalur Watershed

Income generating activity

Activity Self help group Beneficiaries Annual gross income (` Group-1)

Small entrepreneur system

Tailoring Gramdevi, Swetapadma Mahadevi

33 18,000

Household production system

Pickle and sauce making

Swagatika, Budirani, Janani 30 30,000

Biomass based rural industry

Mushroom Gramdevi, Swagtika, Neelabadi

39 35,000

Honey production Prayas, Brhminbuda, Budirani

32 14,000

Dairy activity Cow rearing Aakanshya, Shanti 20 35,000 Livestock management Goats Kalamgam, Pritam,

Neelabadi 36 27,000

Poultry Maamangla, Janani, Sagarika

31 40,000

-1 -3 -3additional income o f 48,246 ha with higher water productivity ( 5.9 m ) compared to maize ( 4.4 m ). Total farm -1net income before and after intervention was ` 35,445 and ` 89,776 ha , respectively. ICRISAT (Hyderabad) in

watershed management studies clearly demonstrated that areas with good soils in semi-arid tropics can support double cropping, while surplus rainwater can recharge groundwater.

` ` `

Table 63: Cropping system change and its economics (Mr. Natraj farmer’s field) of Ayalur watershed

Particulars Before intervention After intervention Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi

Crop Groundnut Maize Groundnut Tobacco Crop duration (days) 115 100 115 120 Irrigation number 5 8 7 20 Irrigation depth (mm) 60 60 60 60 Yield (kg ha-1) 1150 4500 1380 3400 Total depth of irrigation (mm) 300 480 420 1200 Irrigation water use efficiency (kg mm-1) 3.8 9.4 3.3 2.8 Net income (` ha-1) 12545 22900 18450 71326 Water productivity (` m-3) 4.18 4.77 4.4 5.9

Table 62: Total water harvested through water harvesting structure and their impact on groundwater table in Ayalur watershed

79

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Rej PP - Murugesan 29,434 5980 2 11960 4 12.3 1 11.3 Rej PP - Palani 72,502 10575 4 42300 3 14.5 0.6 13.9 Rej CDs 8,463 114 CD - Chi. Pal 36,508 76 4 304 1 14.1 4.1 10 CD - Nataraj 107,278 257 4 1028 2 16 4.8 11.2 CD - Rajamani 110,866 280 3 840 3 13 5.5 7.5 DP - Samyappan 20,047 252 4 1008 2 23.3 12.6 10.7 DP - Rajamani 30,484 427 3 1281 4 12.6 3.5 9.1 DP - Pongiannan 26,104 338 4 1352 3 15 8.6 6.4 DP - Senthil 27,433 365 6 2190 2 17.2 11.5 5.7 DP - SP Raju 27,360 308 3 924 4 14 4 10 FP - Thangavelu 12,474 324 2 648 1 16.5 14.2 2.3 FP - Ganesan 14,419 306 3 918 2 13.2 6 7.2 PP - S. Palayam 69,677 1620 5 8100 4 15.3 2.2 13.2 PP (L) Mallipalayam 354,735 11420 3 34260 6 14 7 7 PP (M) - Odaimedu 217,177 952 3 2856 4 15 8 7 PP (S) - Kannan 152,112 656 4 2624 3 16.2 10.4 5.8 Total/Average 208,1676 60749 242192 36 14.1 4.1 8.0

PP: percolation pond; Rej PP: Rejuvenation of PP; CD:Check dam; DP: Dug out pond.

Details of WHS Cost (`) Capacity (cum)

No. of fillings

Total storage (cum)

No. of wells in vicinity

Depth to water table (m)

Max. water table rise (m)

Before After

PP (M) C. Thotam 239,981 541 5 2705 3 13.9 1.8 12.1 PP (S) Murugesan 132,435 1016 4 4064 4 12.3 3.3 9.1 PP (M) Subramani 170,099 550 3 1650 2 14.9 7 7.9 PP (S) - Ramasamy 182,154 780 4 3120 3 6.2 2.9 3.4 Rej PP - Natraj 39,934 23612 5 118060 2 13.2 1 12.2

Water Conservation through Irrigation System Management

Lining of surface pond: Lining of surface storage with silpaulin sheet (300 GSM) - a high density polyethylene sheet was demonstrated in three farmers’ fields in Ayalur watershed. The result of this intervention for one farmer as case study is given here. The total cost of the intervention (one number) was ` 38,453 which include the cost of silpaulin sheet (` 33,483) and that of laying it (` 4,970). The usual practice is to fill the pond in the evenings and then irrigate the fields in the day time, nearly after 12 hours. Once the pond was filled, the losses from the pond, both through seepage or evaporation was measured on monthly basis and compared with a control pond which had no lining. The average rate of water losses measured over the months showed that there was nearly 60% reduction in the losses from the pond with silpaulin lining in comparison with the pond with no lining (Table 64). The amount of water saved per day

3 amounted to 18.96 m and the total amount of water saved during the irrigation period of the particular year was 2834.5 3m which was calculated by total number of times the pond was filled to provide irrigation during that year (Table 65).

* Water filled one time in pond can irrigate 0.2 ha.

The water thus saved by provision of lining was used by the farmer to increase the cropped area under irrigation (Table 66). It is evident from this table that even after the project intervention, cropping system had witnessed no change, viz; groundnut in kharif, tobacco in rabi and fodder sorghum in zaid. However, except for fodder sorghum, whose area remained the same before and after the project intervention, viz; 0.2 ha, the gross irrigated area under increased by nearly 44%. The yield of crops, the gross returns and the additional benefit due to the pond lining are given in Table 67. The increase in irrigated area fetched the farmer a handsome return of nearly ` 40,000 in the year 2011. The simple technology of lining the ponds with silpaulin earned the appreciation of the farming community in Ayalur watershed which has responded with a huge demand for this technology, and thus five numbers of more ponds were lined with silpaulin during the consolidation phase of the project. In times when rainfall is playing truant during most of the years and the depth to the ground water level is sinking to newer heights, every drop of water saved will play a vital role in increasing the productivity.

Table 64: Impact of lining surface storage pond in Ayalur watershed

Table 65: Water saved during crop period due to lining of surface storage pond in Ayalur watershed

Table 66: Irrigated area before and after lining of surface storage pond with groundwater in Ayalur watershed

Details of pond Pond size (m x m x m)

Average losses through seepage and evaporation (m3 day-1)

Amount of water saved (m3 day-1)

Control pond with no lining 17x7.5x0.55 2.62 - Pond with silpaulin lining 23.8x7.8x0.75 1.04 18.96

Crops Area irrigated (ha)

No. of irrigations

Total number of pond fillings*

Amount of water saved (m3)

Groundnut 1.3 10 65 1232.4 Tobacco 1.1 15 83 1564.2 Fodder sorghum 0.2 2 2 37.9 Total 2.6 27 150 2834.5

Crop Irrigated area before intervention (ha)

Irrigated area after intervention (ha)

Increase in irrigated area (ha)

% increase in irrigated

area Kharif Rabi Zaid Total Kharif Rabi Zaid Total Groundnut 0.8 - - 0.8 1.3 - - 1.3 0.5 62.5 Tobacco - 0.8 - 0.8 - 1.1 - 1.1 0.3 37.5 Fodder sorghum - - 0.2 0.2 - - 0.2 0.2 - - Gross cropped area (ha) 1.8 2.6 0.8 44.4

Gross cropped area (ha)

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

80

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Table 67: Crop production and returns before and after lining of surface storage pond in Ayalur watershed

Table 68: Impact of drip irrigation on water saving and irrigated area in Ayalur watershed

Table 69: Improved cultivation practice benefits over farmers’ practice for different crops in Ayalur watershed

Micro irrigation: Micro-irrigation techniques were propagated by installing 40 drip irrigation units and 5 units of sprinkler covering an area of 32 ha for crops sugarcane, coconut and banana. During 2010, five sample sites were selected for monitoring the water use under drip irrigation and this was compared with the amount of water used by the farmers and the area under irrigation prior to installation of drip irrigation. It was observed that around 17% to 50% water saving was realized through this micro irrigation technique (Table 68).

Crop production measures: One of the major short comings/reason of non adoption of improved technologies by rainfed farmers is the incompatibility of technology with their socio- economic conditions and risk taking capacity. Thus, it is essential to indentify different levels of package of practices to give the farmer an option to choose the level of technology as per the site condition and socio-economic conditions and risk taking capacity. Based on the nutritional deficiency identified in the fields in watersheds, farmers evaluated the response to integrated nutrient management along with the improved varieties. In ground nut, 73% higher yield with additional net income of ` 21,732 ha was obtained. In case of maize, an additional yield of 1000 kg ha with additional net benefit of 5,253 was achieved (Table 69).

-1 -1

Crop Before intervention After intervention Additional return

(`) Yield

(kg ha-1) Total

production (kg)

Gross return

(`)

Yield (kg ha-1)

Total production

(kg)

Gross return

(`) Groundnut 1062 849.6 18700 1100 1430 31460 12760 Tobacco 2250 1800 63000 2337 2571 90000 27000 Fodder sorghum 15000 3000 7000 15000 3000 7000 -

Sample site

Crop Volume of water (lit re) Area (ha) Before After Before

(per flood irrigation)

Drip used for flood irrigation

interval

% of water saved

Before After % increase

1 Sugarcane Sugarcane 122400 61568 49.7 0.8 1.1 37.5 2 Tobacco Sugarcane 216000 166400 23.0 3.2 4.8 50.0 3 Tobacco Sugarcane 97200 66560 31.5 0.8 1.0 25.0 4 Coconut Coconut 43200 36000 16.7 1.4 1.4 0.0 5

Coconut

Coconut 86400 45864 46.9 1.6 1.8 12.5 Total 565200 376394 33.4 7.8 10.1 29.4

81

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Interventions Yield (kg ha-1)

Additional yield

(kg ha-1)

Additional cost

( ha-1)

Additional income ( ha-1)

Rain water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm)

Groundnut Farmer’s practice 1650 - - - 3.8 Local seed with INM 2400 750 3668 12832 5.6 Truthful seed without INM 1950 300 2000 4600 4.5 Truthful seed with INM 2850 1200 4668 21732 6.6

Maize

Farmer’s practice 4500 - - - 10.0

Hybrid seed with INM 5500 1000 2747 5253 12.2

Intervention yield (kg ha-1) RWUE (kg ha-1-mm-1)

LER Groundnut Redgram Groundnut equivalent

Groundnut alone 2840 - 2840 3.32 1.0 Groundnut + redgram intercropping 10:1 ratio

2840 250 3408 3.98 1.2

Groundnut + cowpea intercropping 6:1 ratio

2720 150 3129 3.65 1.1

Treatment Plant height (cm)

Cob length (cm)

No. of grains per ear

Grain yield (kg ha-1)

Stover yield (kg ha-1)

Water use efficiency

(kg ha-1 mm) Control 158 17.4 530 4210 5473 4.95 Coir pith 184 21.2 610 4925 6382 5.79

Particulars Groundnut Marigold Cabbage Yield (kg ha -1) 1875 8120 28560 Cost of cultivation 16500 50950 51000 Gross income 43125 121800 114240 Net income 26625 70850 63240 Additional net income - 44225 36615

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

Intercropping for higher productivity and rain water use efficiency: Cowpea was intercropped with groundnut at 6:1 ratio for insurance against crop failure. In this system, 20% and 10% higher groundnut equivalent yield was achieved with groundnut + redgram and groundnut + cowpea intercropping, respectively (Table 70). Higher rain water use efficiency (RWUE) and land equivalent ratio (LER) were achieved due to the intercropping system.

Coir-pith composting and its application: Demonstrations on preparation of compost with locally available materials (coir-pith) were carried out and well decomposed coir pith compost thus prepared was applied to maize crop

-1variety COH (M) 4 @ 5 t ha for improving soil condition and soil moisture. Plant height, length of cob and stover yield of maize were higher under coir pith compost applied field compared to control plot. Higher yield of maize grain (17%) was achieved with the application of coir pith compost compared to normal practice due to higher soil moisture content with the application of coir pith compost in rainfed maize. Number of grains per maize cob was 15% higher

-1 than the control. Higher (5.79 kg ha mm) rain water use efficiency (RWUE) was also achieved with the application of coir pith compost. There was an average increase of net income to the tune of ` 5,350 due to coir pith compost application in rainfed maize (Table 71).

Alternative Land Use System

Crop diversification: Groundnut - tobacco or maize - groundnut is the cropping pattern followed in the partially irrigated area in the watershed. In order to diversify the crops and increase the net income, cultivation of marigold and cabbage was introduced for groundnut crop. The price of groundnut pod, marigold and cabbage during the intervention were 23, 15 and 4 per kg, respectively. Among three crops cultivated, marigold generated the highest

-1 -1net income (` 70,850 ha ) which was followed by cabbage (` 63,240 ha ). Marigold and cabbage generated 62.4% and 57.8% higher net income compared to the conventional crop groundnut (Table 72).

Fodder improvement: Since the watershed has large animal population and area under coconut cultivation, improved and latest fodder Hybrid Napier grass (Variety CO-4) was introduced in the watershed in an area of 1 ha involving 10 farmers in the year 2009, and slip cutting from these fields were planted in other farmers’ field. Thus the

-1area spread into another 4 ha. The average fodder yield was 250 t ha . During 2013-14, multi-cut fodder sorghum CO

Table 70: Intercropping in groundnut on productivity and rainwater use efficiency in Ayalur watershed

Table 71: Effect of coir pith compost on maize growth, yield and rainwater use efficiency in Ayalur watershed

Table 72: Economics (` ha ) of crop diversification (Average of three farmers) in Ayalur watershed-1

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

82

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

-1 -1 -1 -1FS-29 and African tall fodder maize were introduced. The average yields were 158 t ha yr and 32 t ha yr , respectively.

Dryland horticulture: A large number of fruit saplings as systematic orchards and in agro-forestry systems were supported through the project. There was more than 70% survival in all fruit seedlings, except in one particular field for the mango variety Senthura where the problem of water stagnation had caused nearly 50% saplings to perish. However, more than 90% establishment was achieved in the third year after gap filling and proper management (Table

-1 -173 and 74). During the initial growth period of mango, fodder yield of 20 t ha from fodder sorghum and 840 kg ha of groundnut pod was achieved as intercrop during kharif season. Fruiting started in the third year of planting. Intercrop yield in mango based agro-forestry systems (Coconut and Tobacco) is given in Table 75.

Agro-forestry and farm forestry: Melia dubia block plantation was introduced first time in the watershed using micro-site improvement technique. In this technique, 92% survival was achieved with average DBH of 12 cm and height of 6.4 m within one year (Table 76). Each tree is expected to produce 5-7 cu-ft of timber and the farmers may

-1get ` 15 lakh from one hectare of land after six years with current price of wood (` 300 cu-ft ) After seeing the successful establishment and good growth of this tree species, many farmers in the watershed came forward for taking up this tree as farm forestry and agro-forestry. Five thousand number of trees, which included 2000 number of Melia were planted by the farmers in the watershed. Many line department officials, WDT members and farmers visited the site and were convinced that this kind of farm forestry can be taken up as commercial basis.

Table 73: Fruit trees planted in Ayalur watershed and their survival rate

Table 74: Growth of mango varieties under agri-horticulture system in Ayalur watershed

Table 75: Intercrop yield in mango based agro-forestry systems (average of 3 years: 2010-12) in Ayalur

watershed

Table 76: Growth of Melia and teak in Ayalur watershed

Fruit trees Variety No. of saplings Survival % in first year

Survival % in third year after gap filling

Mango Bangalura 840 79.8 98.2 Mango Neelum 425 69.9 95.6 Mango Alphonsa 649 95.3 95.3 Mango Senthura 146 52.0 88.6 Sapota CO-4 80 100.0 100.0 Lime Grafted 50 80.0 85.5 Aonla BSR-1 40 72.5 75.6

Variety Survival (%)

Canopy (m) Plant height (m)

Dia. at breast hight (cm)

Yield after 4 years of planting (kg tree-1)

Bangalura 98.2 E-W: 2.7 m; N-S: 27 m 2.1 6.4 50 Alphonsa 95.3 E-W: 2.5 m; N-S: 2.4 m 1.8 4.5 42

Season/Crop Yield (kg ha-1)

Cost (`)

Return (`)

Net return (`)

Kharif : Groundnut 1450 13000 36250 23250 Rabi : Tobacco 3175 36960 101600 64640

83

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Plantation age Melia dubia Teak

Height (m) Girth (cm) Height (m) Girth (cm)

Six months 1.8 7.0 0.95 2.1 One year 6.4 12.0 4.08 3.6 Two years 8.5 13.5 6.2 6.8

Plate 120 : Convergence : Field day jointly organized by ICRISAT, TNAU and IISWC and desilting of percolation pond with MGNREGS

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

84

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Integrated farming system models: An integrated development model (2.5 ha) was developed in the partially irrigated area with agriculture, livestock, fish in the surface storage pond and poultry in the platform made above the surface storage pond. Results showed that one can reduce fertilizer application for sugarcane by 50% by fertigation with cow urine. About 64 poultry birds produced 70 kg meat every three months which produced gross income of ` 8,400 for every three months. Sixty kg of fish (fry lings) was harvested from 200 m area after six months. In addition to this, 500 number of Aseel desi chicks were introduced as backyard poultry in the watershed (25 units) to increase farm income.

Convergence approach: In Ayalur watershed, desilting of percolation pond was converged with Mahatma Gandhi NREGS in which loosening of hard rock was done with the JCB machine from the watershed fund and the removal of soil was done under MGNREGS. Convergence was also done for crop demonstration of improved groundnut variety ICGV 00351 developed by International Crops Research Institute for Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Hyderabad and promoted by the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (TNAU), Coimbatore along with the integrated nutrient management to increase productivity of groundnut (Plate 120). This intervention led to increased groundnut yield to

ththe tune of 48% over local practice. A field day was organized on 11 October, 2012 to following this success jointly by IISWC RC (Udhagamandalam), ICRISAT and TNAU in the watershed (Plate 120). Assistant Director of Agriculture assured that seed villages will be formed to further promote this variety. An exposure cum skill development workshop was conducted on 03-01-2011 in the watershed in which District Panchyat Chairman, Joint Director of Agriculture, DRDA Project Officer from Erode district and officials from KVK, agriculture, panchayat union and agricultural engineering department participated and informed the participants about the various schemes being operated from various departments.

Field visit, media news and award: Project Implementing Agency (PIA); Officials from Tamil Nadu Watershed Development Agency (TNWDA), Chennai; Watershed Development Team (WDT) members from State Government and farmers from Tamil Nadu and adjoining states visited and took keen interest in the interventions in the watershed (Plate 121). News paper coverage of the watershed programme is presented in Plate 122. Ayalur watershed programme was also recognized in the form of National Award ‘Vasantrao Naik for outstanding Research Application in Dryland Farming 2012’ awarded by Indian Council of Agricultural Research (Plate 123).

2

85

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Plate 121: Visit of PIA, Officials from TNWDA, Chennai, WDT members from State Govt. and farmer from Tamil Nadu and adjoining states visiting the interventions in the watershed

Plate 122: News paper coverage of the watershed programme

Plate 123: Ayalur watershed programme received the National Award

Fig. 17: Monthly water balance of the Vejalpur-Rampura watershed depicting surplus and deficit in water

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Rai

nfa

ll (

mm

)/ P

ET

(m

m) Rainfall(mm) PET (mm)

SurplusDeficit

5.9 Vejalpur - Rampura Watershed

Vejalpur watershed lies in the semi-arid zone with 812 mm average annual rainfall. About 94% annual rainfall is received during rainy season (June to September) accompanied with high intensity storms. High intensity storms and cloud burst during rainy season often cause floods in the streams and heavy sedimentation. Temperature in the area rises above 40°C during summer and reaches 12°C during winter. Monthly water balance of the watershed (Fig. 17) indicates that except during 4 months (June to September), all other months remain dry. The monsoon rainfall occurs

thfrom 16th June to 26 September (moist + humid period) during which moisture availability in excess of PET is about -1 st -11.5 mm day . During humid period (1 July to 10th September) the excess moisture is as high as 2.8 mm day . Rest of

th ththe season (27 September to 15 June) remains dry mostly.

The aridity index was estimated to be 0.41 which evidently classifies the area as semi arid type (close proximity -1 -1to the dry sub-humid climate). Wind velocity decreases from 12.8 km hr during mid-June to about 4.3 km hr during

-1 -1mid-October. Evaporation from open surface area is about 678 mm yr (PET is about 1887 mm yr ). An annual rainfall deficit of about 1335 mm aggravates rabi and summer crops’ prospects in the area. An annual runoff potential of about 12% is expected from the area which occurs through short duration and high intensity rainfall. Long term monthly water balance computed for Vejalpur-Rampura watershed (Kapdwanj Taluka) and presented in Table 77 shows rainfed agriculture is not a suitable option for production system. Therefore, supplemental irrigation with rainfed system or production system having less water requirement is essential for survival of the agricultural eco-system.

P = Rainfall (mm), PET = Potential Evapotranspiration (mm), AET = Actual Evapotranspiration (mm) St = Plant available water (mm)? S = Soil moisture change (mm) W = Runoff or Surplus water (mm)D = Deficit (mm) SMI = Soil Moisture index MAI = Moisture Adequacy Index (AET/PET).

Table 77: Monthly water balance of Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

86

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Month Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total P 2.0 0.9 1.2 1.4 10.1 96.4 281.8 254.2 130.3 21.5 9.0 2.9 811.6 PET 110.2 122.5 178.8 216.7 268.0 217.5 148.2 128.7 140.6 141.2 112.9 101.8 1886.9 AET 2.0 0.9 1.2 1.4 10.1 96.4 148.2 128.7 130.3 21.5 9.0 2.9 552.4 St 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 114.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 114.7 ? S 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 114.7 -114.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 W 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 240.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 259.2 D -108.2 -121.6 -177.6 -215.3 -257.9 -121.1 0.0 0.0 -10.4 -119.6 -104.0 -98.9 -1334.6 SMI 0.018 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.038 0.443 2.675 1.975 0.927 0.152 0.080 0.028 0.018 MAI 0.018 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.038 0.443 1.000 1.000 0.927 0.152 0.080 0.028 0.018

Plate 124: Field bunds in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Crop Average % increase in yield Bajra 5.08 Maize 5.58 Rainfed paddy 7.85

Plate 125: Peripheral bunds in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

87

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Item Pond 1 Pond 2

Capacity 450 cum 450 Crop Rainfed paddy Sorghum(Fodder) Life saving irrigations (No.) 2 1 Area irrigated (ha) 0.3 0.25 % Yield increases 42

Plate 127: Staggered contour trenches in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Plate 126: Dugout ponds in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Treatment Technologies and their Impact

(a) Arable land

Field and peripheral bunds: Under arable land treatment, field bunds of 0.54

2m cross section (Plate 124) in 1650 m length (26 ha) and peripheral bunds of 0.7

2m cross section (Plate 125) in 2334 m length (45 ha) were constructed which increased crop yields by 5% to 8% (Table 78). Gully and rill formations were observed in the fields where peripheral bunds and field bunds was not

ndconstructed 5 gully was extended up to 1 m.

Dugout ponds: Daily depth of water and water utilization of these ponds (Plate 126) revealed that water was stored up to first week of February. These ponds provided one to two life saving irrigations. Increase in yield was reported up to 42% (Table 79).

3Seepage losses were observed to be 0.032 m -2 -1 3 -2 -1m day and 0.0045 m m day in unlined

and lined ponds, respectively.

(b) Non-arable land

Staggered and continuous contour trenches: Plantation and grass sodding was done which was supported by staggered contour trenches (Plate 127) and continuous contour trenches (Plate 128) in community areas. In these trenches, water storage was recorded up to 5 days (Table 80). Better growth of plants (Tables 81) was recorded in trenching land (Plate 129).

Table 78: Yield increase due to field and peripheral bund

Table 79: Impact of dugout ponds in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Table 80: Observations on water storage trenches in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Table 81: Plants survival under silvipasture and due to moisture conserved in trenches in community land of Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Table 82: Silt deposition and water storage behind gully plugs in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Gully plug structures: Observations on gully plug structures revealed good silt retention and water storage behind the structures (Table 82).

Location

Size Days of

water holding

Ramasodi village

2.0 x 0.5 x 0.5 m 3

Ramasodi village

1.2 x 0.3 x 0.3 m 2

Vejalpura village

2.0 x 0.5 x 0.5 m 3Vejalpura village 1.2 x 0.3 x 0.3 m 2Nana- Rampura village 2.0 x 0.5 x 0.5 m 5Nana- Rampura village 1.2 x 0.3 x 0.3 m 3

Plate 129: Performance of tree plantation and grass in community land in Vejalpur-Rampura watershedPlate 128: Continuous contour trenches in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

88

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Community land village

Plant species Plantation date

Under silvipasture Average plant survival due to moisture

conserved in trenches (%)

Numbers planted

Average plant survival (%)

Ramosadi Acacia nilotica July, 2009 200 74 74 Azadirachta indica July, 2009 200 11 11 Azadirachta indica July, 2010 - - 67 Nana-Rampura Acacia nilotica July, 2009 240 38 30 Azadirachta indica July, 2009 400 19 20

Gully plug No. Silt deposition (cu-m) Water Storage (cu-m)

Gully Plug 1 17.37 75 Gully Plug 2 15.48 165 Gully Plug 3 39.97 790 Gully Plug 4 28.29 189 Gully Plug 5 32.34 202 Gully Plug 6 14.64 61.2

Crop demonstration and balanced fertilization: Demonstrations for replacement of old varieties in 7.25 ha area were conducted in farmer’s fields with cotton crop (Plate 130). Under balanced fertilization and method of

-1application, 11.25 ha was demonstrated with bajra crop (Plate 131, Table 83). Higher grain yield (32.14 q ha ) was -1recorded in demonstrations as compared with farmer’s practice (18.40 q ha ).

Demonstration on balanced nutrition not only improved the fertilizer application but also the yield of pearlmillet (Table 84). About 14.75 ha area was put under balanced fertilization with bajra crop and data revealed that even during scanty rainfall year (424 mm) in the watershed, farmers were able to successfully harvest good crop from

-1demonstrations (23.29 q ha ) as compared to farmers yield -1(17.02 q ha ), an increase in crop yield by 36.83%.

Replacement of old variety and conservation tillage: Better performance of crop (Plate 132) was observed as a result of introduction of high yield variety and conservation tillage (Table 84). Even during scanty rainfall (424 mm) period, farmers were able to successfully harvest good crop.

-1Under demonstrations, higher cotton yield (13.77 q ha ) was -1realized as compared to farmers’ yield (12.13 q ha ).

Table 83: Balanced nutrition of bajra crop in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

89

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation

Plate 131: Bajra crop with balanced nutrition in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Plate 130: Cotton crop (replacement of old variety with new variety) in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Particular Farmer’s practice Demonstration N 110 120 P2O5 46 70 K2O 0 60 Zn 0 10 Variety Hybrid bajra Pioneer hybrid-86, M-52 Yield (q ha-1) 18.40 32.14

WUE 3.34 5.84

Plate 132: Crop performance under replacement of old variety and conservation tillage in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Table 84: Yield increase of cotton due to high yielding variety seed and performance under conservation tillage in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Table 85: High yield of fennel and cumin realized under spices improvement programme in Vezalpur - Rampura watershed

Spices development: Under spices development, 10.5 ha area was demonstrated in farmer’s field with fennel and cumin crop (Plate 133). Farmers realized higher returns (Table 85) with improved practices as compared to farmers’ existing practices.

Fodder development: Under fodder development, 5.75 ha area was demonstrated in farmers field (Plate 134) with fodder sorghum. Under rainfed conditions, higher fodder yield

-1(15 q ha ) dry weight basis was recorded as compared to farmers’ yield

-1(12.15 q ha ) an increase in crop yield by 23.45% was recorded from demonstrations over farmers’ practice.

Plate 133: Fennel and cumin crop in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Fennel Fennel CuminCumin

Particular Yield increase due to high yielding variety seed Performance under conservation tillage

Farmers practice Demonstration Farmers practice Demonstration

N 120 120 110 120 P2O5 60 60 46 70 K2O 0 60 0 60 Zn -- -- 0 10 Variety BT Cotton BT Cotton, Vikram-5 GCH-4 GCH-4 Yield (q ha -1) 15.00 19.54 13.00 16.50 WUE (kg mm-1) 1.76 2.29 3.34 5.84 Returns (ha-1) 62825 81841 53534 67985

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

90

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Particular Fennel crop Cumin crop

Demonstration Farmer’s practice Demonstration

N 100 120 120 120 P2O5 46 60 60 60 K2O 0 40 0 40 Variety Local Local Local Gujarat-4 Yield (q ha -1) 10.00 13.50 5.0 7.75 WUE (kg mm-1) 1.56 2.11 1.25 1.93 Returns (ha-1) 79302 107058 52645 81600

Farmer’s practice

Plate 134: Fodder development through crop demonstration in Vejalpur - Rampura watershed

Budget approval (Annexure-1), released and utilization (Annexure-2 & 3) for nine watersheds’ DPR with physical and financial progress of these watersheds located in different states under the MMA-NWDPRA programme implemented by ICAR-IISWC (formerly CSWCRTI), Dehradun and its Regional Centres during 2008-09 to 1013-14 (XI Plan). Componentwise budget approval and utilization is summarised in Table 86 and Figs. 18 to 22, respectively.

Table 86: Component-wise budget approval of nine model watersheds for implementation under NWDPRA-MMA Scheme during XI Plan

Budget component

% Watershed name, location and state-wise budget (Lakh `) Total

Ashti (Uttara Khand)

Jalapur (Uttar

Pradesh)

Ramasagara (Karnataka)

Kajiyana (Haryana)

Jigna (M.P.)

Lachhaputra- Ghati

(Odisha)

Dhoti (Rajasthan)

Ayalur (Tamil Nadu)

Vejalpur-Rampur

(Gujarat)

Management component

Administrative cost 10 4.71 7.00 5.20 5.40 6.66 5.41 7.21 8.75 9.00 59.34

Monitoring 1 0.47 0.70 0.52 0.54 0.66 0.54 0.75 0.875 0.87 5.925

Evaluation 1 0.47 0.70 0.52 0.54 0.66 0.54 0.75 0.875 0.90 5.955

Total 12 5.65 8.4 6.24 6.48 7.98 6.49 8.72 10.5 10.77 71.23

Preparatory Phase

Entry Point Activity 4 1.94 2.50 2.08 2.16 2.56 2.16 3.17 3.50 3.50 23.57

Institutional & capacity building

5 2.36 5.25 2.60 2.70 3.30 2.71 3.96 4.375 4.35 31.605

Preparation of DPR 1 0.47 0.52 0.54 0.66 0.54 0.00 0.875 0.88 57.945

Total 10 4.77 7.75 5.20 5.40 6.52 5.41 7.13 8.75 8.73 59.66

Watershed Works Phase

Watershed work 50 24.19 37.30 26.00 27.00 30.30 27.06 37.64 43.74 42.89 296.12

Livelihood support/ activities

10 4.40 6.11 5.20 5.40 6.60 5.41 7.53 8.75 8.75 58.15

Production system & macro enterprises

13 5.80 8.00 6.76 7.02 7.68 7.04 10.23 11.37 4.10 68.00

Total 73 34.39 51.41 37.96 39.42 44.58 39.51 55.40 63.86 63.38 429.91

Consolidation Phase

5 2.35 3.50 2.60 2.70 3.08 2.71 3.76 4.37 4.36 29.43

Total 100 47.16 71.06 52.00 54.00 62.16 54.12 75.00 87.48 87.24 590.22

Total budget approved, released and utilized Overall budget utilization under major heads

Fig. 18: Budget utilization during project period (2008-09 to 2013-14) in selected nine watersheds

Fig. 19: Overall treatable and treated area of watersheds during project period (2008-09 to 2013-14)

Physical and Financial Achievements 6

91

Fig. 20: Watershed-wise budget approved and utilized in nine watersheds during the project period (2008-09 to 2013-14)

Fig. 21: Watershed-wise budget utilization under major components during project period (2008-09 to 2013-14)

Fig. 22: Watershed-wise area alongwith treatable and treated areas during project period (2008-09 to 2013-14)

` `

92

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Watershedwise progress of physical and financial achievements of 9 watersheds selected in different States for implementation during 2008-08 to 2013-14 is presented in Tables 87 to 95 as under:

Table 87: Physical and Financial Achievements of Ashti Watershed, Uttarakhand (2008-09 to 2013-14)

S. Component/Activities

Unit as per

Total Target as per DPR

2008-14

No.

Target

Achievement

DPR

Physical

Phy.(ha)

Financial

Physical

Phy.(ha)

Financial

Physical

Phy. (ha)

Financial

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

1 Management Component

Administrative Costs (TA, DA, vehicle hiring, contractual services, computer accessories and software, stationary, contingency etc)

LS

471000

0

471000

0

433489

Monitoring

3

47000

0

47000

0

0Evaluation

1

47000

0

0

47000

0

0Sub total

565000

0

565000

0

433489

2 Entry Point Activities

194000

0

192842Institution and Capacity building

1

236000

0

163000

0

0

98676Preparation of DPR

1

47000

0

47000

1

0

10000Sub total

477000

0

210000

0

301518

3 Watershed Development Works Phase

Arable land

Field bunding ha 3 3 50000 3 3 50000 0 1.04 15884Stone risers construction cum 149 13.5 80000 168 117 80000 48.33 7.11 42617Water harvesting structures HDPE pipe line km 5 155 1115000 10 310 1115000 0 164.07 1108228Inlet chambers nos. 3 71000 6 0 71000 0 1.5 68532Irrigation tanks nos. 4 76 464000 6 114 464000 0 71.6 323853Repair of guhl/tank LS LS 15 90000 26.5 90000 0 15.66 94010

Non-arable lands Staggered contour trenching ha 20 20 108000 21 19.5 108000 0.7 3.03 40824Recharge pond (chaal) no. 8 12 40000 9 7.5 40000 0 2.89 9639Road side erosion control/land slide control 0 0 0 0 0 0Vegetative filter strips rm 800 15 40000 400 3.5 40000 0 5.63 15000Use of geotextile material and plantation sqm 700 9.3 55000 300 4 54000 0 0 0

Drainage line treatment Live/brush wood check dams rm 90 3.6 20000 90 3.6 21000 0 1.26 7000Loose boulders check dams cum 160 26 98000 160 16 99000 49 8.25 49865Gabion structures/drop spillway rm 90 45 189000 100 38 199000 0 13.88 68963

Sub total 393.4 2420000 662.6 2431000 295.92 1844415Livelihood support system Activities for asset less persons

Animal vaccines, médecines, médication etc,

LS 50000 0 50000 34941Fish farming, poultry, piggery, apiculture,

rice fish culture No. 5

150000 6 0 150000 2 0 84716

Technology demonstration sprinkler/drips, polythene lined ponds etc. LS

80000 0 80000 0 4.25 40024

Tailoring masonry, carpentry, mechanic etc. LS 80000 0 80000 49650Misc. (seed money for the groups/society

etc., training, meeting, exposure visits. LS 80000 0 80000 29585

Sub Total 440000 0 440000 4.25 238916

Production and Micro Enterprises Vegetable and horticulture ha 15 15* 90000 15 90000 0 89669Agriculture crops ha 45 45* 180000 55 180000 0 84623Forestry/Agro- forestry ha 9 9* 45000 9 45000 3 73070Live stock management units 5 100000 6 0 100000 0 44922

Health camps Human heath camp No. 3 30000 3 0 30000 2 0 19997Animals No. 3 15000 3 0 15000 2 0 10000Animal/human health care unit 3 20000 3 0 20000 0 12980

Nursery/polyhouse No. 2 40000 3 0 40000 0 0 6000Integrated farming system No. 2 60000 3 0 60000 1 1 22577

Sub total 580000 0 580000 1 363838

4 Consolidation phase 235000 0 0 235000 0 0 0

Grand Total 393.4 4717000 662.6 4461000 301.17 3182176

93

Physical and Financial Achievements

Table 88: Physical and Financial Achievements of Jalalpur Watershed, Uttar Pradesh (2008-09 to 2013-14)

S. Component/Activities Unit as per

Total Target as per DPR 2008-14

No. Target Achievement

DPR Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

1 Management Component Administrative Costs: TA/DA, PO L/Hiring of

vehicles/Office and payment of electricity & phone bills etc., Computer, stationary and office consumable and Contingency, skill labour

LS 700000 0 700000 0 540971

Monitoring LS 70000 0 105000 0 0 Evaluation LS 70000 0 0 35000 0 0 Sub total 840000 0 840000 0 540971

2 Entry Point Activities LS Improvement in drinking water system, school,

temple etc. LS 250000 0 250000 0 0 250000

Institution and Capacity building LS 525000 0 525000 0 525000 Other (skill labour) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Preparation of DPR LS 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub total 775000 0 775000 0 775000

3 Watershed Development Works Phase a) Arable land (Details of activities) ha Vegetative filter strips RMT 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construction of bunds(graded, contour and field

bunds) ha 30 30 450000 30 30 450000 0 30 130500

Renovation of existing bunds for in situ soil moisture conservation

No. 35 50 250000 30 45 250000 0 40 91000

Minor levelling of bunds fields ha 20 20 150000 15 20 150000 0 0 0 Generation of soil health card for individual

farmers/land holdings No. 1000 500000 750 0 500000 250 0 129300

Community pond No. 2 60 200000 3 30 200000 0 0 0 b) Non Arable land (Details of activities) ha 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dryland horticulture development ha 20 20 400000 20 20 400000 7.5 15 437103 Contour trenching (staggered) 500 CST/ha ha 50 50 500000 60 60 500000 0 10 185500 Afforestation and Silvi-pastoral system

development ha 24 24 300000 24 24 300000 10 25 282654

Construction of recharge filter No. 12 100 180000 12 120 180000 5 65 234263 c) Drainage line treatment (Details of

activities) No. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Renovation of existing WHS-lower reaches No. 3 63 180000 3 61 180000 3 80 120000 Gabion structure, gully plugs and vegetative

barriers No. 20 160 360000 20 160 360000 15 125 341882

Skill labour LS 260000 0 260000 0 135600 Sub Total 577 3730000 570 3730000 390 2087802

Livelihood support system Establishment of vermin-compost units No. 20 80000 20 0 80000 12 0 76080 Mushroom cultivation No. 40 100000 40 0 100000 0 0 0 Bee keeping No. 15 150000 15 0 150000 25 0 93750 Block plantation of Prosopis juliflora for

firewood No. 4 12 75000 4 12 75000 0 0 0

Livestock development activities (Goatry Piggery)

LS 206000 0 206000 0 170572

Others LS 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub Total 12 611000 12 611000 0 340402

Production System and Micro Enterprises Demonstration and assessment of improved

composting system using alternate materials and nutrient analysis

ha 20 20* 100000 20 100000 10 216197

Introduction of improved crop production practices (i) For kharif crops

ha 200 200* 700000 200 700000 50 270000

(ii) For rabi crops Sub Total 0 800000 0 800000 0 486197

4 Consolidation phase LS 350000 0 350000 0 0 0 Grand Total 589 7106000 582 7106000 390 4230372

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

94

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Table 89: Physical and Financial Achievements of Ramasagara Watershed, Karnataka (2008-09 to 2013-14)

S. Component/Activities Unit as per

Total Target as per DPR 2008-14

No. Target Achievement

DPR Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

1 Management Component Administrative Costs : (TA/DA, POL, Office hiring ,

Electricity, Stationary & Contingency) 520032 0 520032 0 480815

Monitoring 52003 0 52003 0 0 0 Evaluation 52003 0 52003 0 0 0

Sub Total

624038

624038

480815

2

Preparatory Phase

Entry Point Activit ies

a)

Platform for village meetings

No.

1

120000

1

0

120000

1

0

114172

b)

Water Trough

No.

2

46000

2

0

46000

2

0

40481

c)

Animal Camp

No.

1

5000

1

0

5000

1

0

5000

d)

Human Camp

No.

1

10000

1

0

10000

1

0

10000

e)

Soil sample test

No.

30

12900

30

0

12900

30

0

12900

f)

Water sample test

No.

30

13800

30

0

13800

30

0

13800

Sub Total

207700

207700

196353

Institutional and capacity building

0

0

0

0

0

60266

(a)

Training

5

50000

5

0

50000

4

0

40000

(b)

Exposure visits

2

100000

2

0

100000

1

0

39865

(c)

Kisan Ghosti

6

20100

5

0

20550

2

0

10050

(d)

Kisan mela

3

90000

2

0

90000

0

0

0

Sub total

260100

260550

150181

Preparation of DPR

52003

0

0

52003

0

3

Watershed Development Works Phase

a)

Arable land treatment

i)

Stone checks/Gabions

No.

16

160*

160000

16

160*

160000

188

330*

464142

ii)

Bunding

ha

133.3

333

1600000

133.3

223.3

1600000

337

880087

iii)

Horticulture plantation

ha

8

8

160000

6

8*

160000

0

21*

206374

iv)

Agronomic practices

ha

192

192*

60000

128

85*

60000

20

343*

12250

v)

Strengthening of existing bunds

ha

11.4

11.4

80000

11.4

11.4

80000

0

0

0

b) Non Arable land treatment

96.1+3095

i)

Diversion drain / Bund

Rmt

1000

43.8

100000

800

43.8

100000

m3

604938

ii)

Afforestation

ha

8

8

52000

6

7.9

52000

0

4.9

44288

iii)

Grass sodding

ha

29.16

29.16

28160

19.16

38.32

28160

0

14

20600

c) Drainage line treatment

0

0

0

0

0

0

i) Upper reaches

-

Stone checks

No.

12

120000

12

0

120000

7

18194

ii)

Middle reaches

-

Loose boulder stone/

Gabion

No.

10

120000

8

0

120000

2

173426

iii) Lower reaches -

Check dam

(masonry)

No.

1

120000

1

0

120000

2

0

204208

Sub Total

433.36

2600160

324.72

2600160

452

2628507

Livelihood support system

Details of Activities

a)

Kitchen garden

LS

21532

0

21532

0

21532

b)

Agave fibre extraction unit

No.

1

10000

1

0

10000

0

0

0

c)

Vermicompost units

i) Masonry unit

No.

15

90000

15

0

90000

16

0

130655

ii)

Conversion of FYM pits to Vermi units

No.

15

22500

15

0

22500

10

0

15000

d)

Dairy (Buffalo/Cow)

No.

4

44000

4

0

44000

4

0

44000

e)

Poultry

herds

10

20000

10

0

20000

5

0

20000

f)

Goats

herds

6

120000

0

120000

10

0

190000

g)

Tailoring machine

No.

6

21000

6

0

21000

5

0

21000

h)

Barber improvement kit

No.

2

6000

2

0

6000

2

0

6000

i)

Artisan tools (Blacksmith, carpenter, etc.)

No.

10

20000

10

0

20000

10

0

19903

j)

Groundnut decorticators

No.

40

80000

40

0

80000

10

0

20000

k)

Cycle weeder

No.

20

20000

20

0

20000

4

0

5200

l)

Farm implements (Seed cum fertilizer drill)

No.

3

45000

3

0

45000

3

0

45000

Sub Total

520032

0

520032

0

538290

Production and Micro Enterprises

a)

Crop diversification (ha)

i)

Rainfed (ha)

ha

114

114*

477000

76

477000

25

85*

447600

ii)

Irrigated (ha)

ha

27

27*

88050

18

88050

0

34.4*

116801

b)

Livestock management

0

0

0

0

0

0

i)

Animal camp (Nos.)

No.

9

45000

10

0

45000

12

0

40000

ii)

Human camp (Nos.)

No.

6

60000

8

0

60000

6

0

60000

iii)

Artificial insémination (Nos.)

No.

120

6000

200

0

6000

100

0

5000

Sub-total

0

676050

0

676050

0

669401

Consolidation phase

LS

260016

0

0

260016

0

0

0

Grand Total

433.36

5200099

324.72

5200549

452

4663547

* The area not accounted in treatable area as these areas are accounted elsewhere as treatable area.

4

95

Physical and Financial Achievements

S. Component/Activities Unit as per

Total Target as per DPR 2008-14

No. Target Achievement

DPR Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

1 Management Component Administrative Costs: TA, DA, Vehicles LS LS 540000 0 540000 0 355750 Monitoring No 54000 4 0 54000 0 1880 Evaluation No 54000 2 0 54000 0 7000 Sub Totals 648000 0 648000 0 364630

Entry Point activity Repair and renovation of community and school buildings

No 5 216000 5 0 216000 5 0 215207

Institution and capacity building No 5 270000 5 0 270000 5 0 269630 Preparation of DPR No 1 54000 1 0 54000 1 0 49904 Others LS 0 0 0 0 0 Sub Totals 540000 0 540000 0 534741

3 Watershed Development Works Phase

a) Arable land Soil & moisture conservation activities ha 20 20 110000 20 20 110000 3 3 22942 Agronomic conservation practices ha 20 20

Combined with above

10 10 0 0 0

Others Renovation of ponds etc. No. 3 15 128000 0 15 128000 2 10 109554 b) Non Arable land - Runoff management

structures

Laying of RCC pipe line in fields m 700 50 1201000 700 25 584000 900 60 1188022 Repair of kuhls LS LS 65 200000 65 200000 35 169151 Watershed harvesting structure cu-m 100 50 364000 100 50 364000 50 50 363571 Staggered contour trenches No. 1000 6 39000 1000 6 39000 0 0 0 c) Drainage line treatment

Upper reaches 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Brushwood check dam No 12 25 12000 12 25 12000 0 0 0 - Coir geo textile work sq m 550 1 11000 550 1 11000 0 0 0 - Middle reaches – Dry stone check dam No. 10 35 73000 10 35 73000 0 0 0 - Gabion check dam cum 40 30 74000 40 30 74000 0 0 0 - Lower reaches - Gabion check dam cum 100 90 185000 100 90 185000 100 90 139594 - Stone masonry check dam cum 82 25 303000 82 25 303000 0 0 0 Sub-total 432 2700000 397 2083000 248 1992834

Livelihood support system

Small entrepreneurship / Tailoring & embroidery

No. 80 90000 0 90000 0 78200

Household production system / Paper bag making /Homestead gardening

No 60 90000 0 90000 0 70400

Biomass based rural industry activities/ Carpet weaving

No. 60 90000 0 90000 0 63493

Dairy based integrated farming system (IT enabled)

No. 60 90000 0 90000 0 0 0

Livestock management including goatary / piggery etc. (Cloth bag making)

No. 10 90000 0 90000 0 39243

Others (Vermi-composting) No. 2 90000 0 90000 0 31427 Sub-total 540000 0 540000 0 282763

Production and Micro Enterprises Establishment of nurseries for planting material No. 2 5 20000 1 2 20000 2 3 17709 Crop diversification ha 5 25* 122000 5 122000 15 130055 Integrated farming system No. 2 10* 100000 2 100000 2 45900 Adoption of proven/new technologies No. 20 30* 200000 62 200000 72 187734 Livestock management No. - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Others (Organic farming) No. 3 10 150000 3 9 150000 4 4 78500 Others (Bio fencing) m 2895 15 110000 11895 14 110000 2000 11 108129 Sub-total 30 702000 25 702000 18 568027

4 Consolidation phase LS 270000 0 0 270000 0 0 0 Grand Total 462 5400000 422 4783000 266 3742995

Table 90: Physical and Financial Achievements of Kajiyana Watershed, Haryana (2008-09 to 2013-14)

2

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

96

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

S.

Component/Activities

Unit as per

Total Target as per DPR

2008-14

No.

Target

Achievement

DPR

Physical

Phy.(ha)

Financial

Physical

Phy.(ha)

Financial

Physical

Phy.(ha)

Financial

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

1

Management Component

Administrative Costs : TA/DA, POL/Hiring of vehicles etc.

LS

181000

0

181000

0

92292

Skilled person / field worker

No.

2

360000

0

0

360000

0

0

53946

Stationary, Photography etc.

LS

35000

0

35000

0

0

16750

Contingencies

LS

90000

0

90000

0

0

11399

Monitoring

LS

66000

0

0

66000

0

0

4400

Evaluation

LS

66000

0

0

66000

0

0

0

Sub Total

798000

0

798000

0

178787

2

Preparatory Phase

Entry Point Activities

Repair of school path, Culvert lift, Temple yard path etc.

No.

256000

0

0

256000

2

0

143105

Institution and Capacity building

330000

0

0

330000

2

0

149620

Preparation of DPR

LS

1

66000

1

0

66000

0

0

0

Sub Total

652000

0

652000

0

292725

3

Watershed Development Works Phase

a)

Arable land (Agriculture under)

0

0

0

0

0

0

·

Rainfed situation

ha

30

30*

105000

20

105000

10

60761

·

Irrigation situation

ha

30

30*

135000

20

135000

10

106224

·

Limited water situation

ha

8

8*

60000

6

60000

0

0

0

·

Organic farming system

ha

1

1*

5000

1

5000

0

0

0

·

Alley cropping

ha

2

2*

15000

2

15000

0

0

0

Horticulture

·

Dryland hort./Agri. Horti

ha

6

6

150000

6

6

150000

3

3

31000

·

Rejuvenation of desi ber through budding

No.

1000

8

25000

750

6

25000

0

0

0

Forestry, Agro-forestry

·

Vegetative grass barrier / live bunds

R mt

400

5

16000

400

5

16000

0

0

0

·

Live fencing

rmt

1500

4

60000

1000

3

60000

0

0

0

·

Agro forestry/social forestry

ha

15

15

89850

11

11

89850

0

0

0

·

Vegetative hedge/live bunds

ha

4

4

19200

8

2

19200

0

0

0

Engineering measures

·

Field bunding with outlet

ha

25

25

350000

20

20 350000

0

0

0

·

Farm pond

No.

2

48

200000

2

48 200000

0

0

0

·

Recharge structures for bore well /pumps

No.

10

40

70000

8

24

70000

0

0

0

·

Contour farming with bunding

ha

32

32

192000

22

22 192000

0

0

0

·

Land configuration / levelling & smoothening

ha

40

40

320000

30

30 320000

0

0

0

b)

Non-arable land

·

Pasture development

ha

4

4

160000

4

4 160000

2

2

21000

·

Water harvesting structures

No.

1

52

150000

2

94 150000

1

52

189489

·

Staggered trenching

ha

20

20

120000

20

20 120000

4000

10

63720

·

Strengthening of existing pond

No.

1

19

50000

1

19

50000

1

19 106311

c)

Drainage line treatment

·

Check dam

No.

5

60

250000

5

60 250000

2

62

285015

·

Gully plugs

No.

20

35

160000

20

35 160000

10

18

44502

·

Percolation stop dam

No.

1

26

150000

2

52 150000

1

26

63214

·

Loose boulder structures

No.

16

40

128000

16

40 128000

0

0

0

·

Repair of existing stop dam

No.

1

35

50000

1

35

50000

1

35 37248

Sub Total

518

3030050

536

3030050

227

1008484

Livelihood support system

Small entrepreneurship

No.

5

40000

3

0

40000

0

0

0

Household production system No. 5 50000 3 0 50000 0 0 0 Biomass based rural industry No. 2 20000 1 0 20000 0 0 0 Dairy, apiculture, lac cultute, poultry etc. No. 26 390000 20 0 390000 0 0 0 Livestock management including goatery No. 16 160000 11 0 160000 0 0 0 Sub Total 660000 660000 0 Production and Micro Enterprises · Nursery establishment / plant material No. 2 80000 2 0 80000 0 0 0 · Crop diversification No. 6 33000 4 0 33000 0 0 0 · Integrated farming system No. 4 200000 4 0 200000 0 0 0 · Adoption of new technologies : seed drill etc. No. 4 20000 4 0 20000 0 0 0 · Rain gun / Sprinklers etc. No. 20 200000 20 0 200000 5 0 63755 · Drip irrigation No. 4 120000 4 0 120000 0 0 0 Health camps etc.

· Human No. 4 40000 4 0 40000 2 0 27817 · Animal No. 4 30000 4 0 30000 2 0 26990 · Artificial insemination No. 200 20000 150 0 20000 0 0 0 · Hybrid animals for breed up-gradation No. 1 25000 1 0 25000 0 0 0 Sub Total 768000 0 768000 0 118562

Table 91: Physical and Financial Achievements of Jigna Watershed, Madhya Pradesh (2008-09 to 2013-14)

97

Physical and Financial Achievements

4 Consolidation phase

i)

Up scaling of successful activities

No.

1

40000

0

0

0

0

0

0

ii)

Watershed plus activities

No.

4

80000

0

0

0

0

0

0

iii)

Documentation of successful experiences

No.

1

40000

0

0

0

0

0

0

iv)

Preparation of project completion report

No.

1

147950

0

0

0

0

0

0Sub Total

307950

0

0

0

0

Grand Total

518

6216000

536

5908050

227

1598558

* The area not accounted in treatable area as these areas are accounted elsewhere as treatable area.

S. Component/Activities

Unit as per

Total Target as per DPR

2008-14

No. Target

Achievement

DPR

Physical

Phy.(ha)

Financial

Physical

Phy.(ha)

Financial

Physical

Phy.(ha)

Financial(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

1 Management Component

Administrative Costs:

LS

720940

0 720940

0

688031

Monitoring

No.

LS

75280

0

75280

0

0

0Evaluation

No.

LS

75389

0

75389

0

0

0

Sub total

871609

0

871609

0

6880312 Preparatory Phase

Entry Point Activities 0 0 0 0 0 0Renovation of Mataji & Hanuman ji temple No. 2 316800 2 0 316800 2 0 311210Institution and Capacity building 3 to 7 days training of farmer, WDT & UGs (6), Farmer’s fare (2), Exposure visit (1)

No. 9

396000 9

0

496000

0 245229

Preparation of DPR No. 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Sub Total 712800 0 812800 0 556439

3 Watershed Development Works Phase Agriculture

Crop demonstration and agro-forestry

ha

60

60*

420000

60

420000

#VALUE!

384854Agri-Horticulture

ha

4

4*

48000

4

48000

2

33060Silvipasture

ha

5.5

5.5

66000

5.5

5.5

66500

5.5

5 65770

Biofencing

ha

30

30

90000

30

30

90000

30

30 90000

Bank stabilization by wattling &Planting

rm

2000

116

18000

2000

116

18000

2000

116 17900

Water resource Development

Pond

No.

5

120

1378503

5

80

1378503

3

120

1365799Recharge filter

No.

5

90

112010

8

65

112010

1

3

40000Contour staggered trenches

ha

6.5

6.5

58338

6.5

6.5

58338

3.7

3.7

58320Anicut

No.

1

90

562215

1

155

562215

1

90

273246Soil and water conservation measures

Field/marginal bund

ha

15

15

154388

30

30

154388

30

30

87389Graded bund with grass sodding

ha

9

9

54000

18

18

54000

6

6

53982Renovation of graded bund with grass sodding

ha

12

12

36000

24

24

36000

9

9

36000Construction of CBT

ha

3

3

36000

6

6

36000

3

3

36000Contour furrow

ha

3

3

15000

6.15

6.15

15000

2

2

9600Ditch cum bund fencing

ha

25

25

92492

15

15

53999

22

22

92399Earthen dam with stone pitching

No.

5

10

18335

5

10

18335

5

9

28091Loose boulder check dam (LBCD)

ha

25

5

31325

25

25

31325

16

65

100100Gabion check dam

ha.

40

40

71575

40

40

71575

0

0

0Masonry check dam

No.

4

45

491711

4

45

491711

5

35

594867Repairs/stone pitching on pond and renovation of side bund (DLT)

0

0

0

0

0

332572

Sub total

625

3753892

677.15

3715899

548.7

3699949Livelihood activities for asset-less persons

0

0

0

0

0

0Apiculture

No.

20

200000

20

0

200000

0

0

0Tailoring

No.

10

100000

10

0

100000

2

0

50000Food processing & preservation

No.

20

120000

20

0

120000

0

0

0Commercial poultry

No.

10

100000

10

0

100000

0

0

0Carpentry

No.

10

100000

10

0

100000

0

0

0Blacksmithy

No.

10

52000

10

0

52000

0

0

0Vermicompost

No.

20

80800

20

0

80800

0

0

600Sub Total

752800

0

752800

0

50600

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Table 92: Physical and Financial Achievements of Dhoti Watershed, Rajasthan (2008-09 to 2013-14)

Production and Micro Enterprises

Crop diversification

ha

30

30*

210000

30

210000

22

102248

Fisheries

No.

5

75000

4

0

75000

0

0

0

Livestock Management

Ecto-parasite control

No.

8

80000

8

0

80000

4

0

40000

Endo-parasite control

No.

8

100000

8

0

100000

4

0

61894

FMD vaccination

No.

2

37500

2

0

37500

1

0

16260Artificial insemination No. 2 100000 4 0 100000 2 0

30752Introduction of Hybrid animals for breed up gradation

No. 30 420000 60 0 420000 0 0

0

Sub Total 0 1022500 0 1022500 0 251154

4 Consolidation phase 376400 0 0 376400 0 86 414253Grand Total 625 7490001 677.15 7552008 634.7 5660426

* The crop demonstrations /agri-horticulture / crop diversification implemented on areas treated with conservation measures and therefore may not be added to the total treated area.

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

98

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Table 93: Physical and Financial Achievements of Lachhaputraghati Watershed, Odisha (2008-09 to 2013-14)

S. Component/Activities Unit as per

Total Target as per DPR 2008-14 No. Target Achievement

DPR Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) 1 Management Component

Administrative Costs LS 541200 0 0 394134 0 0 309874 Monitoring LS 54120 0 0 39414 0 0 0 Evaluation LS 54120 0 0 39414 0 0 0 Sub total 649440 0 472962 0 309874

2 Preparatory Phase

Entry Point Activities

LS 216480 0 0 216480 0 0 216480

Institution &Capacity building LS 270600 0 0 319796 0 0 270600

Preparation of DPR

LS

54120

0

0

54120

0

0

0

Sub total

541200

0

590396

0

487080

3

Watershed Development Works Phase

a)

Arable land

Vegetative filter strip

Rmt

440

5

14960

340

5

14960 300

3.5

10880

Vegetative hedges( by bund/ trench)

ha

30

30

35790

22

30

35790

17

17

25740

Farm pond

No.

4

50

440000

3

50

440000

3

64.7

412010

Renovation of WHS & conveyance channel

No.

2

20

132900

2

10

132900

2

20

120901

Contour farming

ha

2

2

10000

2

2

10000

2

2

10000

Organic farming

ha

1

1

9000

1

1

9000

1

1

9000

Multi-tier cropping

ha

1

1

31000

0

1

31000

1

1

30995

b)

Non Arable land (Runoff management

structures)

Check dam

No.

4

57

373000

3

40

279750

3

40

251548

Trenching Staggered

ha

19

19

151130

13

19

151130

13

13

100750

Gully control structure

No.

15

20

115500

10

24

115500

13

12

36358

Renovation of WHS

& conveyance channel

No.

1

31

235000

1

31

235000

1

1

245049

Dugout pond

No.

1

15

100000

1

15

100000

1

15

72986

Energy plantation

ha

2

2

48400

2

2

48400

2

2

48400

Silvipastoral system

ha

2

2

28802

1

2

28802

2

2

28802

Bamboo plantation

ha

2

2

9195

2

2

9195

2.5

2.5

9176

Bio-fuel plantation

ha

3

2.5

42650

2

2.5

42650

3

2.5

42550

Horticulture block plantation

ha

2

2

20953

1

1.5

20953

2

2

20950

c) Drainage line treatment

Live check dam

-

Upper reaches

No.

52

5

13000

35

3.5

8750

35

0

8750

Brushwood check dam -

Upper reaches

No.

50

6

17500

30

4.5

14750

30

0

10500

Loose boulder check dam -

Upper reaches

No.

34

35

170000

24

35

170000

24

15

114525

Percolation tank (Jholakundi) -

Middle reaches

No.

20

10

50500

15

7.6

37875

20

0

48214

Loose boulder structure -

Middle reaches

No.

30

50

300000

20

50

300000

20

18

173251

Dugout pond -

Middle reaches

No.

1

22

123000

1

22

123000

1

0

116533

Water harvesting structure -

Lower reaches

No.

3

25

200000

3

25

200000

2

33

193684

Bank stabilization -

Middle reaches

Rmt

1124

7

33720

824

7

33720

1124

3

236972

Sub Total

421.5

2706000

392.6

2593125

270.2

2378524

Livelihood support system

Small entrepreneurship system

LS

100000

0

100000

0

79482

House hold production system

LS

100000

0

90000

0

68116

Biomass based rural industry

LS

110000

0

110000

0

79247

Dairy, sericulture etc

LS

105000

0

115000

0

89510

Livestock management (goatary, piggery)

LS

101200

0

101200

0

77267

Others

LS

25000

0

25000

0

9635

Sub Total

541200

0

541200

0

403257

Production and Micro Enterprises

Establishment of nurseries

No.

LS

136340

0

136340

0

0

102192

Oil grass

cultivation

ha

4.6

4.6

95220

2

4.6

95220

2

2

41400

Off season vegetable cultivation

ha

1

1*

30000

1

30000

2

2

30000

Agri-Horti system

ha

25

25

161000

2

25

161000

25

25

161000

IFS-Small farmers-Type I Med.

No.

1

50000

0

1

50000

1

0

50000

IFS-Small farmers-Type II Med.

No.

2

120000

1

1

120000

2

1

119980

Bio fertilizer use

ha

2

2*

10000

1

10000

2

1*

10000

Vermi-composting

No.

3

45000

3

0

45000

3

0

44881

SRI cultivation

ha

2

2*

30000

1

30000

1

1*

30000

Others

LS

26000

0

26000

0

0

0

Sub Total

29.6

703560

31.6

703560

30

589453

99

Physical and Financial Achievements

S. Component/Activities Unit

as per

Total Target as per DPR 2008-14 No. Target Achievement

DPR Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

ii. Development of waste lands

a. Live fencing rm 1515 14.75 57600 1215 11.5 57600 0 1.5 43931b. Agro-forestry ha 10.25 10.25 246000 10.25 10.25 138000 0 10 155262

4

Consolidation phase

Up scaling of successful activities

LS

65000

0

0

0

0

0

0

Watershed plus activities

LS

35000

0

0

0

0

0

0

Documentation of successful experiences LS 50000 0 0 0 0 0 0Preparation of project completion report LS 70000 0 0 50000 0 0 0Mechanism for sustainability of interventions LS 50600 0 0 70000 0 0 0

Watershed development fund & its management

-

0

0

50600

0

0

0

Sub Total 270600 0 170600 0 0

Grand Total 451.1 5412000 424.2 5071843 300.2 4168188

1

Management Component

S.

Component/Activities

Unit as per

Total Target as per DPR

2008-14

No.

Target

Achievement

DPR Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Administration costs

LS

874800

0

874800

734656

Monitoring

LS

87500

0

87500

43600

Evaluation

LS

87500

0

0

87500

0

Sub Total

1049800

0

1049800

0

778256

2

Preparatory Phase

0

0

0

0

0

Entry point activity (Construction of community hall)

No.

1

349920

0

0

349920

1

345562

Institution and capacity building

0

0

0

0

0

0

i. Exposure visit/Awareness campaign

No.

2

144900

2

0

144900

2

106749

ii.Skill Development Training

No.

4

292500

3

0

292500

2

103786

Preparation of DPR

LS

1

87500

1

0

87480

1

53055

Sub Total

874820

0

874800

0

609152

3

Watershed Works Phase

Watershed Development Works

A. Arable Land

i. Soil and moisture conservation measures

0

0

0

0

a. Vegetative hedges

ha

6

6

6000

6

6

6000

0

b. Vegetative hedges supported by bunds

ha

5

5

6000

5

5

6000

0

c. Field Bunding (Earthern)

rm

5000

50

56000

3500

35

56000

1257.5

27.5

35455

d. Field Bunding (Stone)

rm

1000

1

136000

1000

1

136000

340.5

5.5

278161

e. Trenches

rm

2000

2

14400

2000

2

14400

226.8

0.5

4191

f. Farm ponds

No.

2

2

30200

2

2

30200

2

2

26893

g, Dugout ponds

No.

5

7.5

178400

5

7.5

178500

5

7.5

131429

h. Surface pond lining with Cilpaulin Sheet

No.

2

2

115000

2

2

115000

2

2

90868

i. Surface pond lining with soil cement (8:1)

No.

2

2

27600

2

2

27600

0

1

4556

j. Surface pond lining with soil cement (12:1)

No.

1

1

10400

1

1

10400

0

0

0

ii Agronomic Conservation Practices

a. Strip Cropping

ha

4

4

2000

4

4

2000

1

1

632

b. Dryland horticulture

ha

14

14

246400

14

14

246400

12.5

12.5

236413

c. Agri horticulture / Coconut

ha

10

10

220000

10

10

220000

4.5

218882

d. Crop Demonstration-Single Crop

No.

17

8.5

85000

14

7

85000

3

19.8

57068

e. Crop Demonstration-

Double Crop

No.

15

7.5

150000

12

6

150000

11

9.8

92787

f. Organic Farming System

No.

4

4

4000

4

4

4000

2

8

7575

B.

Non-Arable land

i. Runoff management structures

a. Percolation pond (large)

No.

3

270

1036500

3

270

1036500

3

115

424412

b.. Percolation pond (medium)

No.

3

114

699400

3

114

699300

3

94

639312

c. Percolation pond (small) No. 3 68 421600 3 68 421600 3 63 429489d. Rejuvenation of Percolation pond (large) No. 2 72 69200 2 48 69200 2 72 81445e. Rejuvenation of Percolation pond (medium) No. 2 30 41500 2 30 41400 2 31 60425

Table 94: Physical and Financial Achievements of Ayalur Watershed, Udhagamandalam (2008-09 to 2013-14)

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

100

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

S. Component/Activities

Unit as per

Total Target as per DPR

2008-14

No.

Target

Achievement

DPR Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

C. Drainage Line Treatment

i. Structures

a. Loose Boulder Checkdam

No.

3

3

22200

3

3

22200

1

1

18561

b. Gabion Check dam

No.

5

7.5

113000

5

7.5

113000

2

3

52311

c. RR Masonry Check dam

No.

3

9

296900

3

9

296900

3

9

279809

d. Desilting and repair of Existing Check dam

No.

3

1

9200

3

1

9200

0

0

8463

ii. Planting of trees along Drainage lines

No.

380

3

60800

330

2.6

60800

525

1

6600

D. Others (Renovation of water tank)

No.

1

1*

12900

0

0

0

1

1

11807

Sub total

729

4374200

683.35

4253200

492.6

3396737

Livelihood Support System

i. Small Enterpreeurship/ small business

No.

35

525000

30

525000

4

0

302140

ii. Household production system

No.

30

285000

24

285000

39

0

271465

iii. Dairy, sericulture, bee keeping etc.,

No.

2

25800

2

25800

1

0

25000

iv. Livestock management including goatery

No.

3

39000

3

39000

0

0

25000

Sub total

874800

0

874800

0

623605

Production System and micro enterprises

i. Crop Diversification

No.

10

10*

7500

8

7500

4

4000

ii. Integrated farming system

No.

3

3*

90000

3

90000

3

3*

87970

iii Drip irrigation for fruit trees

No.

30

30*

730800

30

730800

34

718763

iv.Sprinkler irrigation

No.

10

10*

200000

10

200000

8

119183

v. Adoption of proven / new technology

No.

12

12*

42000

12

42000

4

6400

vi. Livestock improvement

No.

30

15000

20

15000

0

0

vii. Health Camps

0

0

0

0

a. Human

No.

2

15900

2

16000

0

0

b. Animal

No.

4

36000

4

36000

3

50885

Sub total

0

1137200

0

1137300

0

1020951

4

Consolidation Phase

LS

437400

437400

0

Upcsaling od successful activities

11

2.54

361664

Documentation od successful experiences 6 31800Sub total 2.54 393464

Grand Total

729

8748220

683.35

8627300

495.14

6822165

* Taken up / to be taken up in treated / treatable area covered under watershed development works.

Table 95: Physical and Financial Achievements of Vejalpur - Rampura Watershed, Gujarat (2008-09 to 2013-14)

1

Management Component

S. Component/Activities Unit as per

Total Target as per DPR 2008-14

No. Target Achievement

DPR Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Administrative Cost

Transport/DA

LS

300000

0

285000

0

218133

Skilled Persons

No.

2

450000

5

0

450000

7

0

377389

Stationary

LS

50000

0

35000

0

50153

Contingencies

LS

100000

0

80000

0

52114

Monitoring

LS

87000

0

64000

0

0

Evaluation

LS

90000

0

0

0

0

0

0

Sub Total

1077000

0

914000

0

697789

2

Entry point activities

Solar street light system

No.

4

120000

4

0

120000

4

0

116000

Hand pump

No.

2

100000

2

0

100000

3

0

140626

Chaff-cutter

No.

2

40000

2

0

40000

2

0

39000

TV set with dish in panchyat office No. 2 30000 2 0 30000 2 0 28000Drinking water tank in school* No. 1 20000 1 0 20000 0 0 0Platform construction at temple in Nana-Rampura*

No. 1 40000 1 0 40000 0 0 0

Sub Total 350000 0 350000 0 323626

101

Physical and Financial Achievements

Institution & capacity building (Training)

Training capacity building

No.

10

300000

10

0

300000

6

0

151129

Exposure visits.

No.

10

135000

9

0

135000

2

0

50988

Preparation of DPR

88000

0

0

88000

0

0

0

Sub Total

523000

0

523000

0

202117

3

Watershed works phase

Arable Land -Agri-horticulture

m

2000

6.25

56000

2000

6.25

56000

1590

6

45852

Agro-forestry development

m

1007

2

4229

1007

2

4229

1225

2

5875

Field bunds

cum

1000

26

90000

1000

26

90000

909

50

188767

Soil Conservation Measures

Peripheral bunds

cum

1833

45

164970

1833

45

164970

1667

45

149426

Dugout ponds (small)

cum

2500

20

270000

0

0

270000

1600

16

269857

Land smoothening / levelling

ha

20

20

240000

20

10

240000

6.5

20

164174

Check dams with recharge filter

No.

10

134

600000

10

134

600000

9

34.76

217104

Non-arable land

Pasture development with fencing

ha

15

15

378600

15

10

378600

0

12

146635

Silvi-pasture development

ha

1

1

22965

1

1

22965

0

1

38756

Afforestation development

ha

1.6

1.6

28442

1.6

1.6

28442

0

24037

Bamboo / forests plantation

ha

7

7

179319

7

7

179319

0

5.75

77350

Nursery raising / Kissan

nursery

ha

LS

0.05

20975

0.05

0.05

20975

0

0.01

4370

Staggered trenches

ha

20

20

240000

20

20

240000

15

20

240820

Continuous contour trenches

ha

10

10

60000

10

10

60000

0

10

60000

Pond deepening / capacity enhancement

Cu-m

2500

38

225000

2500

38

225000

0

33.53

224195

Recharge filter and check dam

No.

3

40

225000

3

3

225000

2

21.4

126257

Drainage Line Treatments

Details of Activities

i)

Embankment types ponds

No.

5

101

405000

5

101

405000

2

90.83

403632

ii)

Small earthen gully plug structures

Cu-m

3650

50

328500

3650

50

328500

2150

44.98

361770

iii)

Water harvesting check dams

No.

10

127.5

750000

10

128

750000

7

125.4

807665

Sub Total

664.4

4289000

592.9

4289000

538.66

3556542

Livelihood support system

Fish culture

ha

0.4

0.4

100000

0.4

0.4

100000

0

58918

Poultry enterprise

No.

15

150000

15

0

150000

20

0

81250

Goat rearing of 5 animals unit per family

No.

25

625000

25

0

625000

0

0

0

Sub Total

0.4

875000

0.4

875000

0

140168

Production and Micro Enterprises

Sewing machines

No.

10

60000

10

0

60000

6

0

53800

Replacement of old varieties

No.

10

10

70000

10

0

70000

7.25

21.25

136627

Balanced fertilization & method of placement

No.

10

10

70000

10

0

70000

11.75

25.75

139766

Vegetative development

No.

10

10

100000

10

0

94000

0.5

0.5

8400

Spices development

No.

10

10

70000

10

0

76000

0.25

10.5

66398

Fodder development

No.

10

10

50000

10

0

50000

5.75

11

50189

Crop of diversification

No.

5

5

50000

5

0

50000

2

2

19935

Floriculture development

No.

2

2

20000

2

0

20000

0

0

0

Conservation tillage

No.

5

5

50000

5

0

50000

2

5

43409

Drip micro irrigation development(Horti & Agri.)

No.

7

280000

7

0

280000

0

0

0

Vermi compositing unit

No.

2

64000

2

0

64000

4

0

76944

Evaporation based cool chamber

No.

2

34000

2

0

34000

0

0

0

Bee keeping

No.

20

60000

20

0

60000

0

0

0

Accessories for common use

No.

2

16000

2

0

16000

0

0

0

Papad making unit

No.

4

80000

4

0

80000

4

0

34000

Roof water harvesting system

No.

4

100000

4

0

100000

0

0

0

Others (Soil analysis)

0

0

0

0

0

29472

Sub Total 62 1174000 0 1174000 76 658940

4 Consolidation phase - Details of activitiesi) Watershed plus activities LS 80000 0 0 0 0 0 0

ii) Project completion report LS 56000 0 0 0 0 0 0iii) Post project satellite imageries / Documentation LS 300000 0 0 0 0 0 592

Sub Total 436000 0 0 0 592

Grand Total 726.8 8724000 593.3 8125000 614.66 5579774

S. Component/Activities Unit as per

Total Target as per DPR 2008-14

No. Target Achievement

DPR Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial Physical Phy.(ha) Financial

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

102

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Based on experiences registered during the project implementation process and impact evaluation analysis following recommendations are made:

Need based entry point activities should be taken up as they establish credibility of the Watershed Development Team (WDT) and a rapport with the village community.

Detailed Project Report (DPR) should be prepared with primary stakeholder active participation, and cover all the proposed works including landless after ground verification.

Active participation of local community at each and every stage is a pre-requisite for any programme on development and management of watersheds.

Capacity building of primary stakeholders holds the key to achieve the desired results from watershed development projects.

Common interest of the community in getting benefits from a particular watershed activity undertaken on community land needs to be exploited for management of common property resources.

Degraded forest lands on high slopes needs to be protected and developed on priority through community participation and transparent mechanism of sharing of benefits with the community be developed for sustainability.

Need based conservation measures in arable lands (field bunding) should be adopted as they play a significant role in in-situ moisture conservation and thereby reducing runoff, soil loss and improving crop yields in rainfed crops, especially during drought years.

As far as possible ridge to valley sequenced approach should be adopted towards implementation of the watershed works.

Selection of appropriate site and type of conservation measures and gully control structures to be adopted in non-arable land are essential for reducing runoff peaks, silt deposition, water storage etc. which helped in gully stabilization and recharges groundwater and bore wells in watersheds.

Management of available water resources through renovation of village pond, construction of water harvesting tanks and improvement in water conveyance efficiency with improved diversified crop production system provides significant impact among farmers of a watershed.

Productivity enhancement and livelihoods should be the top priority of the watershed development.

For introducing any alternate land use system, simple distribution of seeds or tree seedlings leads to failure of the activity. Hence, associated technologies like micro-site improvement, micro irrigation, live fencing, drip irrigation should be given due importance for success of dry land horticulture and agro-forestry system, which plays a major role in improving water productivity.

Formation of local community based organization with crisp clear roles, responsibilities and benefit sharing mechanism helps to make them sustainable.

Annual and human development related activities are equally important in watershed development and be given due importance.

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Lessons Learnt 7

103

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Proper participatory can current monitoring and evaluation facilitate mid-term correction in confidence building about demonstrated technology.

Concept of social fencing needs to be strengthened to regulate grazing habits of animals and develop community land for improving fodder availability to boost milk production.

Success rate of activities pertaining to water resource creation and their efficient use is very high as farmers show high interest in these activities. These activities should be given high priority and more fund allocation.

Soil health cards should be prepared under every watershed project and provided to each and every farmer of watershed.

One of the mandatory conditions for selection of villages for watershed projects should be written agreement of primary stakeholders for contribution towards the Watershed Development Fund (WDF).

All members of Watershed Committee and staff such as Watershed Secretary should be given orientation and training to improve their knowledge and upgrade technical/ management and community organisational skills to a level that is appropriate for successful discharge of their responsibilities after withdrawal of the watershed development.

High priority be given to the project activities yielding quick returns to the primary stakeholders individually.

Livelihood activities introduced in a watershed do not get success if these are not linked with market intelligence and bank credit. The watershed plus activities must emphasize on such commercial issues after revisiting them.

Local communities play a pivotal role in natural resource management and therefore effective community sensitization and its mobilization is very critical for ensuring successful project implementation. Generally NGOs have proved to be far more successful than Government Organizations in social mobilization and therefore, credible NGOs having adequate experience of working with natural resource management projects may be involved in community organization.

Convergence of resources (technical and / or financial) with proper agreed mechanism with state government will facilitate to produce effective results in present and make them sustainable.

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

104

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Abbreviation & Acronyms 8

105

AED Agricultural Engineering Department

AET Actual Evapotranspiration

AI Artificial Insemination

AICRP All India Coordinated Research Project

amsl Above Mean Sea Level

ATM Any Time Money

BAIF Bharatiya Agro Industries Foundation

BCR Benefit Cost Ratio

CAFRI Central Agro-Forestry Research Institute

CD Check Dam; Collar Diameter

CDI Crop Diversification Index

CFI Crop Fertilization Index

CIRG Central Institute for Research on Goats

CLUI Cultivated Land Utilization Index

CPI Crop Productivity Index

CPT Circular Pit Trench

CSWCRTI Central Soil & Water Conservation Research & Training Institute

Cu-ft Cubic feet

cu-m Cubic meter

DAC Department of Agriculture & Cooperation

DBH Diameter at Breast Height

DLT Drainage Line Treatment

DP Dugout Pond

DPR Detailed Project Report

DRDA District Rural Development Agency

DWDA District Watershed Development Agency

EC Electrical Conductivity

ECD Earthen Check Dam

EPA Entry Point Activities

FGD Flue Gas Desulfurization

FMD Foot & Mouth Disease

FP Farm Pond

FYM Farm Yard Mannure

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GI Galvanized Iron

GIS Geographic Information System

GKVK Gandhi Krishi Vignana Kendra

GoI Government of India

GSM Grams per Square Metre

ha Hactare

HDPE High-density Poly-Ethylene

HPCC Human Population Carrying Capacity

HQ Headquarter

HS Hemorrhagic Septicemia

HYV High Yielding Variety

ICAR Indian Council of Agricultural Research

ICRISAT International Crop Research Institute for Semi-Arid Tropics

IGFRI Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute

IIRS Indian Institute of Remote Sensing

IISWC Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation

INM Integrated Nutrient Management

IRR Internal Rate of Return

ITK Indigenous Technical Knowledge

IWDP Integrated Wasteland Development Project

IWEI Induced Watershed Eco-Index

JCB Joseph Cyril Bamford excavator

kg Kilogram

KVK Krishi Vigyan Kendra

LBCD Loose Boulder Check Dam

LCC Land Capability Classification

LER Land Equivalent Ratio

m Metre

MAI Moisture Adequacy Index

MB plough Mould Board plough

MCD Masonry check dam

MGNREGS Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme

mm Millimetre

MMA Macro Management of Agriculture

MNREGA Mahatma Gandhi Rural Employment Guarantee Act

MoA Ministry of Agriculture

MP or M.P. Madhya Pradesh

N, P, K Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Potash

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

106

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

NFSM National Food Security Mission

NGO Non- Government Organization

NIN National Institute of Nutrition

No. Number

NRAA National Rainfed Agriculture Authority

NWDPRA National Watershed Development Project for Rainfed Areas

OBC Other Backward Class

OC Organic Carbon

P Precipitation or Rainfall

PET Potential Evapotranspiration

PH Plant Height

PIA Project Implementing Agency

PME Prioritization, Monitoring and Evaluation

PP Percolation Pond

PPI People Participation Index

PPR Peste des Petits Ruminants

PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal

PSB Phosphorus Solubilising Bacteria

PSER Potential Soil Erosion Rate

PWD Public Works Department

q Quintal

QRT Quinquennial Review Team

` Rupees (Indian)

RAC Research Advisory Committee

RC Research Centre

RCC Reinforced Cement Concrete

RDF Recommended Dose of Fertilizer

Rej Rejuvenate

RFS Rainfed Farming System

RKVY Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana

rm Running meter

RR Random Rubble

RS Remote Sensing

RWUE Rain Water Use Efficiency

SAT Semi Arid Tracts

SBI State Bank of India

SC Schedule Caste

SCB Staggered Contour Bund

107

Abbreviation & Acronyms

SGSY Swarnajayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojna

SHG Self Help Group

SLU Standard Livestock Unit

SMI Soil Moisture index

SMS Silt Monitoring Station

SOP Silt Observation Post

ST Schedule Tribe

SW Surplus Weir

SWCE Soil and Water Conservation Engineering

t Tonne

TAN Tax Account deduction Number

TANUVAS Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences

TNAU Tamil Nadu Agriculture University

TNWDA Tamil Nadu Watershed Development Agency

TV Tele Vision

UG User Group

UMMB Urea Molasses Mineral Block

UP or U.P. Uttar Pradesh

US$ United States Dollar

UT Union Territory

VAM Vesicular-Arbuscular Mycorrhizas

VRMC Village Resource Management Committee

WC Watershed Committee

WDF Watershed Development Fund

WDS Watershed Development Society

WDT Watershed Development Team

WE Wheat Equivalent

WHS Water Harvesting Structure

WP Watershed Productivity

WUA Water User Association

WUE Water Use Efficiency

yr Year

ZARC Zonal Agricultural Research Centre

Zn Zinc

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

108

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Annexure-1

109

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

110

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines

Annexure-2

111

Annexure-3

Concise Report On Development And Management Of Model Watersheds Through Participatory Approach

112

Development and Management of Model Watersheds under New Guidelines