Land & Water Management for Drought Proofing

K. K. SahuProfessor, Soil Science & Agril. Chem.

R. K. Sahu Dean - Faculty of Agricultural EngineeringIndira Gandhi Krishi VishwavidyalayaRaipur 492 006 (Chhattisgarh), India

for presentation in the

International Conference on “Environl. Knowledge for disaster Risk Manag (ekDRM-2011).”

New Delhi, May 10-11, 2011

Farmer's OFR Seed yield of rice (q/ha)

Without OFR With OFR

2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Mean 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Mean

OFR1 27.5 16.4 34.4 26.1 43.8 46.1 41.3 43.7

OFR2 23 15.2 31.3 23.2 56.1 47.1 43.6 48.9

OFR3 20.9 16 26.8 21.2 54.1 41.2 39.9 45.1

OFR4 27.8 16.9 30.1 24.9 41.2 36.6 33.8 37.2

OFR5 29.9 17.7 29.3 25.6 51.4 48.2 35.9 45.2

OFR6 25.9 18.9 32 25.6 43.3 38.2 41.4 41.0

OFR7 28.9 20.4 27.2 25.5 45.3 39.6 33.8 39.6

OFR8 24.9 17.7 29.7 24.1 46.2 42.3 36.5 41.7

OFR9 26.5 18.5 27.9 24.3 49.2 42.1 34.8 42.0

OFR10 - 17.1 28.3 22.7 - 44.4 36.3 40.4

OFR11 22.5 15.5 29.2 22.4 56.9 50.1 38.7 48.6

Mean 25.8 17.3 29.7 24.2 48.8 43.3 37.8 43.0

Rice yield with and without water harvesting structures

Farmer's OFR

Seed yield of rice (q/ha) Extra Income due to OFR

Without OFR With OFR

2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Mean 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Mean

OFR1 7625 3493 11420 751 3 14090 15355 12715 14053 6541

OFR2 5150 2833 9715 5899 20855 15905 13980 16913 11014

OFR3 3995 3286 7240 4840 19755 12660 11945 14787 9946

OFR4 7790 3781 9055 6875 12660 10130 8590 10460 3585

OFR5 8945 4235 8615 7265 18270 16510 9745 14842 7577

OFR6 6745 4895 10100 7247 13815 11010 12770 12532 5285

OFR7 8395 5720 7460 7192 14915 11780 8590 11762 4570

OFR8 6195 4235 8835 6422 15410 13265 10075 12917 6495

OFR9 7075 4648 7845 6523 17060 13155 9140 13118 6596

OFR 10 - 3905 8065 5985 - 14420 9965 12193 6208

OFR 11 4875 3039 8560 5491 21295 17555 11285 16712 11220

Mean 6679 4006 8810 6477 16813 13795 10800 13663 7185

Net incomes from rice grown with and without water harvesting structures

Fig.1: Temporary check dams on Jonk river

Fig.2: Temporary check dams on nala.

District Immediately

With some improvement

With some investment

Total % to NCA

% to TGA

1. Raipur 14626 11568 7866 34060 6.3 2.53

2. Mahasamund 2527 1724 1713 5964 2.2 1.20

3. Dhamtari 1063 1050 995 3108 2.3 0.76

4. Durg 9895 8415 7650 25960 4.7 2.98

5. Raj’gaon 12725 3711 2967 19403 5.5 2.42

6. Kawardha 2790 293 2 3085 1.7 0.69

7. Bilaspur 5420 4575 5602 15597 4.3 1.82

8. Janjgir 3509 3224 4033 10766 4.1 2.41

9. Korba 5492 3836 3985 13313 10.1 1.86

10. Raigarh 4210 1145 1277 6632 2.4 1.01

11. Kanker 11350 7395 4807 23552 11.1 3.66

Distribution of Culturable wastelands in Chhattisgarh – 2009+

Chhatt. Plains 73607(44.5%)*

46936(46.3%)*

40897(51.1%)*

161440(46.6%)*

4.93 2.10

1. Jashpur 6067 0 0 6067 2.4 0.94

2. Sarguja 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

3. Koriya 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

North Hill Region

6067(3.7%)*

0 0 6067(1.7%)*

0.73 0.21

1.Bastar 28156 12556 11477 52189 16.4 5.17

2. Narayanpur 3540 2598 1161 7299 22.3 1.06

3. Dantewada 36173 26585 16166 78924 41.5 8.72

4. Bijapur 17767 12672 10283 40722 60.8 6.21

Bastar Plateau 85636(51.8%)*

54411(53.7%)*

39087(48.9%)*

179134(51.7%)*

29.47 5.49

State Total 1,65,310(47.7%)**

1,01,347(29.2%)**

79,984(23.1%)**

3,46,641(100%)**

7.36 2.51

District Immediately With some improvement

With some investment

Total % to NCA

% to TGA

* % share in the state,** % share in culturable wasteland, +(Source : Chhattisgarh Govt.- Annual Agriculture Statistics, 2009. Office of the Commissioner Land Records)

Fig.3: Plant height as influenced by moisture conservation measures

Fig.4: Breast height diameter as influenced by moisture conservation measures

Fig.5: Plantations intercropped with green gram.

Fig.6: View of developed plantations in wasteland.

SMW Barren land

Plantations

Khamar Sissoo Aonla Kalasiris Jetropha Average

25 186.3 65.7 57.8 56.0 57.6 100.4 67.5

26 2217.8 651.3 588.2 574.6 552.1 1023.8 678.0

27 897.5 252.9 232.8 232.4 243.0 437.9 279.8

28 726.6 178.5 149.9 149.4 151.3 281.7 182.1

29 1140.3 340.0 322.3 327.5 324.4 587.8 380.4

30 2195.5 502.6 390.9 387.0 380.5 728.0 477.8

31 2297.0 513.2 366.9 357.6 349.9 636.3 444.8

32 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

33 6426.6 2019.0 1950.3 1937.0 1945.4 3394.3 2249.2

34 1094.8 244.8 192.1 186.8 187.2 359.6 234.1

35 1486.3 413.5 398.7 404.0 403.9 719.5 467.9

36 1205.5 341.5 338.2 326.4 317.7 548.7 374.5

37 2402.3 716.1 671.8 659.4 649.3 1182.8 775.9

38 0.0 17.3 17.3 16.7 17.2 34.5 20.6

39 228.9 77.0 75.4 77.3 76.9 138.9 89.1

Total 22505.3 6333.4 5752.8 5692.2 5656.4 10174.3 33,609.1

Av. m3/ha 4379.7 3072.4 2790.7 2761.3 2744.0 2860.8 2845.8

The WHP of the sub micro-watershed under different land uses

S.N.

Plant Species Water application, lpd % saving in water Over basin

Pitcher Drip Basin Pitcher Drip

Plantations

1 Albizia lebbeck (Kala Siris)

4.40 5.10 9.00 51.1 43.3

2 Emblica officinalis (Aonla)

4.00 4.80 8.20 51.2 41.5

3 Gmelina arborea (Khamar)

4.60 5.20 9.40 51.1 44.7

4 Delbergia sissoo (Sissoo)

4.80 5.30 10.00 52.0 47.0

Average 4.45 5.10 9.15 51.4 44.3

Vegetables

1 Bottle gourd 276.0 290.9 229.2 20.4 26.9

2 Bitter gourd 139.6 144.0 119.3 17.0 20.8

3 Cucumber 143.2 148.1 119.8 19.6 23.7

Average 186.3 194.4 156.1 21.2 25.7

CD: Irrigation – 12.97 q/ha, Crop – 12.97 q/ha, Interaction – 22.47 q/ha

Evaluation of micro irrigation in plantations and vegetables

ConclusionThe rice productivity in OFR increased by one and half times to that

without OFR. Rice yield in OFR supported area during drought year was equivalent to those obtained in normal rainfall years.

The income from OFR based farming was 2.1 times higher than without OFR.

The innovative technique of constructing temporary check dams increases the area under double crop, in the surrounding area of rivulets and rivers.

Stylo scabra and Anjan was found suitable for Entisols under rainfed condition (biomass productivity: Stylo-25.75 q/ha, Anjan-12.43q/ha). The tree species namely Emblica officinalis, Albizia lebbeck, Dalberzia sissoo and the Stylo scabra as intercrop performed well in comparison to others.

Share of runoff (24.1%) from plantations + grasses/crops + conservation measures as compared to barren land (37.1%) signifies their role in in-situ moisture conservation, necessary for biomass production.

The staggered trenches were found effective in trapping sediments and supplying moisture to young plantations.

Vegetables and fish rearing were found remunerative. Grasses were cut by local villagers and used for animals.

The silvipasture treated land progressively improved the soil health. Tree plantation in wastelands can be made economically

attractive and socially acceptable by intercropping of legumes, grasses, fodder and vegetables with fish in ponds. In order to promote vegetables, micro irrigation can be used.

Central Chronical, Raipur27 March 2011