Presentation on theme: "Land & Water Management for Drought Proofing K. K. Sahu Professor, Soil Science & Agril. Chem. R. K. Sahu Dean - Faculty of Agricultural Engineering Indira."— Presentation transcript:
Land & Water Management for Drought Proofing K. K. Sahu Professor, Soil Science & Agril. Chem. R. K. Sahu Dean - Faculty of Agricultural Engineering Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya Raipur 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 OFRSeed yield of rice (q/ha) Without OFRWith OFR 2001-022002-032003-04Mean2001-022002-032003-04Mean OFR127.516.434.426.143.846.141.343.7 OFR22315.231.323.218.104.22.1688.9 OFR320.91626.822.214.171.124.945.1 OFR427.816.930.124.941.236.633.837.2 OFR529.917.729.325.651.448.235.945.2 OFR625.918.93225.643.338.241.441.0 OFR728.920.427.225.545.339.633.839.6 OFR824.917.729.7126.96.36.1996.541.7 OFR926.518.527.924.3188.8.131.522.0 OFR10-17.128.322.7-44.436.340.4 OFR1122.515.529.222.456.950.138.748.6 Mean25.817.329.724.248.843.337.843.0 Rice yield with and without water harvesting structures
Farmer' s OFR Seed yield of rice (q/ha) Extra Income due to OFR Without OFRWith OFR 2001-022002-032003-04Mean2001-022002-032003-04Mean OFR17625349311420751 3140901535512715140536541 OFR251502833971558992085515905139801691311014 OFR33995328672404840197551266011945147879946 OFR4779037819055687512660101308590104603585 OFR5894542358615726518270165109745148427577 OFR667454895101007247138151101012770125325285 OFR7839557207460719214915117808590117624570 OFR86195423588356422154101326510075129176495 OFR9707546487845652317060131559140131186596 OFR 10-390580655985-144209965121936208 OFR 1148753039856054912129517555112851671211220 Mean6679400688106477168131379510800136637185 Net incomes from rice grown with and without water harvesting structures
DistrictImmediately With some improvement With some investment Total % to NCA % to TGA 1. Raipur14626115687866340606.32.53 2. Mahasamund25271724171359642.21.20 3. Dhamtari1063105099531082.30.76 4. Durg989584157650259604.72.98 5. Raj’gaon1272537112967194035.52.42 6. Kawardha2790293230851.70.69 7. Bilaspur542045755602155974.31.82 8. Janjgir350932244033107664.12.41 9. Korba5492383639851331310.11.86 10. Raigarh42101145127766322.41.01 11. Kanker11350739548072355211.13.66 Distribution of Culturable wastelands in Chhattisgarh – 2009+
Chhatt. Plains 73607 (44.5%)* 46936 (46.3%)* 40897 (51.1%)* 161440 (46.6%)* 4.932.10 1. Jashpur606700 2.40.94 2. Sarguja000000.0 3. Koriya000000.0 North Hill Region 6067 (3.7%)* 00 6067 (1.7%)* 0.730.21 1.Bastar2815612556114775218916.45.17 2. Narayanpur354025981161729922.31.06 3. Dantewada3617326585161667892441.58.72 4. Bijapur1776712672102834072260.86.21 Bastar Plateau 85636 (51.8%)* 54411 (53.7%)* 39087 (48.9%)* 179134 (51.7%)* 29.475.49 State Total1,65,310 (47.7%)** 1,01,347 (29.2%)** 79,984 (23.1%)** 3,46,641 (100%)** 7.362.51 DistrictImmediatelyWith 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.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 KhamarSissooAonlaKalasirisJetrophaAverage 25186.365.757.856.057.6100.467.5 262217.8651.3588.2574.6552.11023.8678.0 27897.5252.9232.8232.4243.0437.9279.8 28726.6178.5149.9149.4151.3281.7182.1 291140.3340.0322.3327.5324.4587.8380.4 302195.5502.6390.9387.0380.5728.0477.8 312297.0513.2366.9357.6349.9636.3444.8 320.0 336426.62019.01950.31937.01945.43394.32249.2 341094.8244.8192.1186.8187.2359.6234.1 351486.3413.5398.7404.0403.9719.5467.9 361205.5341.5338.2326.4317.7548.7374.5 372402.3716.1671.8659.4649.31182.8775.9 380.017.3 16.717.234.520.6 39228.977.075.477.376.9138.989.1 Total22505.36333.45752.85692.25656.410174.333,609.1 Av. m 3 /ha4379.73072.42790.72761.32744.02860.82845.8 The WHP of the sub micro-watershed under different land uses
S. N. Plant SpeciesWater application, lpd% saving in water Over basin PitcherDripBasinPitcherDrip Plantations 1 Albizia lebbeck (Kala Siris) 4.405.109.0051.143.3 2 Emblica officinalis (Aonla) 4.004.808.2051.241.5 3 Gmelina arborea (Khamar) 4.605.209.4051.144.7 4 Delbergia sissoo (Sissoo) 4.805.3010.0052.047.0 Average 4.455.109.1551.444.3 Vegetables 1Bottle gourd 276.0290.9229.220.426.9 2Bitter gourd 139.6144.0119.317.020.8 3Cucumber 143.2148.1119.819.623.7 Average 186.3194.4184.108.40.206 CD: Irrigation – 12.97 q/ha, Crop – 12.97 q/ha, Interaction – 22.47 q/ha Evaluation of micro irrigation in plantations and vegetables
Conclusion The 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.