Report On

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura
THE
ROLE
OF
WATERSHED
DEVELOPMENT
IN
COMMUNITIES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT A Case Study of Watershed Development Office In Shikaripura Introduction:- Land and water are the most important natural resources. These are not only precious physical resources but also eternal living components. These resources are also elastic in usage. Yet, human interventions in the guise of development have more often than not resulted in disturbing the ecological balance resulting in unsustainable exploitation of these natural resources. It is more true with the basic production sector like agriculture that primarily depends on the natural resources. The most affected are the developing countries whose economies depend heavily on the primary sector. The increasing population pressure in these countries and the compelling needs of meeting their endless demands have resulted in indiscriminate extension of cultivation to not only inhospitable marginal and sub-marginal lands but also to forests and other common property resources that are otherwise an inevitable part of the eco-systems. The emphasis of agriculture globally has now shifted to production stability and sustainability from a short-term increase in productivity. However, the task of achieving sustainability is highly improbable as long as glaring inequalities in the access to natural resources exist not only between countries but within the countries as well. In India, it has been estimated that about 228 million hectares, out of a total geographical area of 328 million hectares, has any biotic potential, of which about 57 percent area is affected by various
Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura
Page 1
degradation problem. It includes 113.3 and 38.7 million hectares affected by water and wind erosion respectively, and the rest by other factors like chemicals, water logging, shifting cultivation etc. It has also been estimated that about 5334 million tonnes of soil is eroded annually from cultivated lands in India, of which 61 percent is translocated, 29 percent is lost to sea while 10 percent is deposited in reservoirs and other surface storage structures resulting in aannual loss of 1 to 2 percent storage capacity. Concept of the Watershed Development Watershed is a geo-hydrological entity from where the excess water drain through a common outlet. In other words, a watershed is defined as the land mass and the natural resources having a common drainage point . Thus the drainage point becomes the focal reference that decides the watershed and its area that may include arable, non-arable, public and private lands. Identification and delineation of the watershed helps in understanding the geo-hydrological relationships between different land masses within the watershed and thereby facilitate scientific conservation plans to be developed. The watershed approach to land development and management is thus an integrated area approach that aims at comprehensive and need based development and management strategy what is consistent with socio-economic and environmental consideration so that the eco-system becomes sustainable, the goal of watershed development therefore is to achieve a sustainable rainfed agro-ecosystem through scientific management and optimum use of the available natural resources like land, water and vegetation keeping in view intergenerational equities.
Page 2
Meaning of watershed A watershed can be defined as an independent hydrological unit. It is a drainage basin or catchment area of a particular stream or river. In simple terms, it refers to the entire upstream topography around a defined drainage channel which feeds water to the land below. A watershed may vary from a few hectares to several thousands of hectare. A watershed can be defined as the drainage basin or catchment area of a particular stream or river. Simply but, it refers to the area from where the water to a particular drainage system, like a river or stream, comes from. Meaning of watershed Development:Man and his environment are interdependent. Any change in the surrounding environment directly affects the people living there in. A degraded environment result in a degraded quality of life for the people. Thus a programme to reduce poverty and improve the standard of living of the people must be aimed at improving the environment they live in. Environmental degradation does not recognize administrative and political boundaries. A watershed provides Scope of the study The present study is confined to the investigation of the impact of watershed development programme on the beneficiary groups offer the withdrawal of the project. Hence the nature of relationship and nonwatershed areas would help in understanding the contribution of development to change in resource use efficiency. It is expected that the findings of this study would be useful to the planners , administrators and policy makers to suggest/adopt suitable modification in the programme
Page 3
formulation of similar projects for
sustainable development. It would
also benefit the researches to refine add or delete recommended watershed technologies keeping in view the economic contribution and requirements and problems of target groups. Importance of watershed Development The watershed development programme to be successful must involve the participation of the concerned people and must be related to the environment in which they live and on which they depend for their needs. This involves the following 1. It has to be focused on the regeneration and equitable use of the resource in the particular environment on which the village depend for its needs. Watershed provides a naturally occurring hydrological unit and is also the area on which the inhabitants depends for survival. It thus becomes a common issue drawing the people together, giving rise to a common interest and fortering a common purpose.
2. The people voluntarily must become together and accept full resposbility for re generating their environment from concept to planning, implementation , supervision, maintenance of project measures and associated practices. This would imply consenses in arriving at a common understanding regarding rules and regulations and the setting up of mechanism for organization of works, sharing of benefits and resolution of conflicts
3. To make the project sustainable , it is necessary for the all the key actors , like the watershed community, NGO s , Banks,
Page 4
Government institutions and technical service organizations , to participate actively and enclose co-ordinations with each other Participatory watershed development must be implemented on a Large enough scale at different places to create many success s tories ,each of which can act as nuclei , becoming a source of inspiration and demonstration for neighboring villages. This would provide a major impeteus for the unfolding of a peoples movement for regeneration of environment. Objectives of study The specific objectives of the watershed development study in Shikaripura are as follows.
1. To study the underground water system of the watershed
plannings in shikaripura.
2. To study the soil and water protection of this planning in
Shikaripurataluk.
3. To analyze the rural area development of the watershed office in
Shikaripura.
4. To learn about the improving agriculture production of the
watershed planning in Shikaripura.

5. To know the forest development of the watershed planning in
Shikaripura.
6. To examine the self-help groups of this planning in Shikaripura.
Page 5
Methodology The data is collected is of two types they are primary data and the secondary data. To perceive the attitude primary data is collected by using questionnaires and based on the analysis of the answers have been drawn up. Data required for the study of service rendered by the watershed development office. It is provided by the govt. Secondary data is collected from our library, newspaper, literature, annual report of the watershed development plannings etc. which have been enumerated in the bibliography. The case study has been made in the watershed development office in Shikaripura. Limitations of the study A study of this nature which is dependent on facts and figures provided by the respondents is bound to have certain limitations. They are : 1. This study is covered to only Shikaripurataluk. 2. The study cannot cover all rural areas. 3. Because of the schedule, the office authority cannot spend more time in providing information. 4. The staff of this organization does not disclose all facts and figures.
Page 6
Chapter II Review of literature:-
1. Dr.H M Nagabhushana:Agricultural development through watershed approach. An economic analysis of kabbalanala watershed in Karnataka. Himalaya Publishing House The limitations to growth in the irrigated agriculture have forced the
country to shift its emphasis to rainfed farming through watershed approach. 2. Encyclopedia of Social Research :Irrigation is the artificial application of water to the land or soil. It is used to assist in the growing of agricultural crops. Maintenance of landscapes and revegetation of disturbed soils in dry areas and during periods of inadequate rainfall. 3. N Shivanna:Panchayats, Hariyali. Guidelines and watershed development . The institute for Social and Economic change, Bangalore. The focus of the study is to examine what is happening on the ground in terms of practices and processes and the rate of principal actors in such processes starving to implement such as the Hariyali guidelines for the effective management of watershed development more
Page 7
specifically, the study aims at assessing the extent of autonomy that the institution like gramapanchayats have in the implementation of watershed development activities. 4. Sharrma (2001):Reported that the success of the watershed development implemented by an NGO Tarun Bharat Sangha (TBS) based at kishor village of Alwar district in Rajasthan was due to effective participation of beneficiaries in the programme. The NGO formed a Jal. 5. Biradari [water work force] :The Biradarihas people from rural as well as urban areas, who work together to make community participation in watershed development programme. 6. Madhava Reddy(2001) :Reported that majority of the NGO beneficiaries had high level of participation in the watershed development programme activities like planning steps viz., collection of facts (66.70%), analyzing the situation (80%), identifying the problem (78.30%), deciding objectives (68.30%), developing a plan of work (66.80%) and execution of plan (66.80%) and medium level of participation was observed in determining the progress (63.40%) and reconsideration with evaluation (66.80%). 7. Heyd and Neef (2004) :Drawing on a study of water management in the maesa watershed, Northern Thailand, this study analyzed to what extent the constitutional right for participation has been put into practice. In conclusion, the participation of local people in development activities and in the
Page 8
conservation and management of natural resources seems to be currently at the stage of passive or, at best, consultative participation. In order to deal with the severely increasing water problems in Northern Thailand, decision makers have to recognize the value of participation and promote a change of government officers attitude towards local people through training programmes and incentives. 8. World Bank Abstract The Karnataka watershed development project aims at improving the productive potential of selected watersheds and their associated natural resource base, and strengthen community and institutional arrangements for natural resource management. The participatory watershed development and protection component well finance social mobilization and institution building activities, to facilitate planning and investment activities by local communities through an initial information. 9. Ramesh and Gowda (2001) In the study on economic analysis of watershed development programme reported that, the small and large group of farmers in kabbalanala watershed area of Karnataka obtained comparatively higher productivity out of scarce resources than their counter parts in nonwatershed areas. 10.Shanthamani (2007) Reported that the watershed programme has resulted in significant increase in socio-economic status (9.72) mean score, of land productivity increased in yield of red gram 1.20 q/acre and Jowar 1.02 and annual income of beneficiaries increased to Rs 22.950. The investigation
Page 9
identified that majority of the respondents were participated in all most all the stages of watershed programme development and implementation. 11.Nirmala (2003) In her study on impact of watershed development programme on socio-economic dimensions of beneficiaries revealed that, the
productivity obtained under watershed area was found higher as compared to those in non-watershed area in all the crops. 12.Ningareddy (2005):In the study on knowledge extent of participation and benefits derived by participant farmers of the watershed development programme reported that majority of the respondents belonged to income group of Rs.11,001 to Rs. 22,000 per annum (60%) followed by Rs. 22,001 to Rs. 33,000 (20%) & Rs.11,000 to Rs. 33,000 (10%). 13.Verma (2004) :In his study on national watershed development programme perceived that the average yields per hectare of soyabeen, maize, wheat and potato were 15.66, 14.59, 2347 and 213.45 quintals respectively in NWDPRA area as compared 10.54, 9.48, 14.76 and 153.34 quintals in non-NWDPRA area. 14.Charan(2005):In his study a profile of Sujala watershed project beneficiary farmers revealed that 18 percent of the respondent families had annual income above Rs.33,000. 48% of respondent families had annual income between Rs. 11,001 to Rs. 22,000.
Page 10
15. Sridhara (2002) :Evaluated the study on watershed programme and found that, the productivity, in the per-post project period by virtue of implementation of DWDP. It could be inferred that percentage increase in productivity obtained by the farmers was considerable higher over per project period. 43% to the respondents belonged to income group of Rs. 11,001 to Rs. 22,000 per annum. 16.. Jhon Blackmore. Land and Water Development Division, FAO.
Planning for Watershed Development. Dr.Blackmore is now Professor of Agricultural Economics,
Massachusetts State University. Amherst, Massachusetts. Planning is a process for deciding what to do and how to do it. It is particularly important in connection with Watershed improvement. The problems of a Watershed area usually so tangled and so complex it is hard to know whereto login.
Page 11
Chapter III PROFILE OF THE STUDY AREA
Shimoga District Profile The study pertained to Shikaripurataluk, Shimoga District of Karnataka State. So many types of studies are concentrated on watershed development of Shikaripurataluk. Hence an attempt is made here the watershed development are of ShikaripuraTaluk.
Historical Background :Shivamogga District is a district in the Karnataka state of India. A major part of Shivamogga district lies in the malnad region of the western ghats, a hilly area known for its green forests, plentiful rainfall and as the source of many of the areas rivers. Shivamogga city is the administrative centre of the district. Jog falls is a major tourist attraction of the district.
Page 12
Origin of Name:There are various legends of how the name Shivamogga has evolved. According to one legend, the name shivamogga is related to the hindu god Shiva. Shiva-mukha [face of shiva], Shivanamoogu [nose of shiva], shiva-mogge [flowers tobe offered to shiva] can be the origins of the name shivamogga. Another legend indicates that the name shimoga derived from the word sihimoge which means sweet pot. According to this legend, shivamogga once had the ashram of the saga Durvasa. He used to boil sweet herbs in an earthen pot. Some cowherds, found this pot and after tasting the sweet beverage named this place Sihi-Moge. Taluks of shimoga district:1. Bhadravathi 2. Sagar 3. Shikaripura 4. Hosanagar 5. Thirthahalli 6. Soraba In this project I am selected and study to the watershed development office of Shikaripurataluk. Land Holdings Sl .no 1 2 3 4 5 Year of Formation of District Geographical area Average rainfall Latitude Longitude Altitude [wit R M S L] 1950 6975.97 sq.km 769mm 14N - 15N 75 SE 76 SE 584-302
Page 13
6 7 8 9 10 11
Distance from state capital No. of taluks Hobalies No. of habitations No. of habitations No. of gramapanchayaths
260 6 24 803 1334 230
Water Resources :Before march 2009 is initiate water cell support an water issues in Bangalore they provide technical services continuous follow up on roof water harvesting and ground water recharging through individuals private sector corporations. Municipalities, industries and institutions initiate motor bike rally campaign in collaboration with rashtrabhandunero federation with financial assistance by grameenaabhivrudhi and panchayath raj G.O.K and private sector from oct 2/2005 throughout the Karnataka to save rajrwater and create awareness to stop digging deeper and new bore wells. Rivers:Shimoga is origin of rivers Kali, Gangavathi, Sharavathi, kumudvathi varada and tadadi. The other major rivers which flow through the district are Tunga, Bhadra and Varada. The rivers Tunga and Bhadra meets at a place called Koodalgi in shimoga district. Kodli located 16 km from the shimoga city, koodli is the place where two rivers, Tunga and Bhadra join and become TungaBhadra river, one of the largest tributaries of the river Krishna. Koodli also contains two temples of the Hoysala era, one dedicated to the Hindu God Rameshwar and the other to Narasimha. An inscription in the temple indicates that in the year 1313, the Hoysala king, VeeraBallala III provided grants to the temple.
Page 14
Sharavathi :- Located 10km from thithahalli on the thirthahalliHosanagar road. Ambteertha is the source of the river Sharavathi. Starting from here, sharavathi travels west wards to reach the Arabian sea near Honnavar, 132km away. Varada :- Located 6km from sagar town. Varadamula is the source of the river varada. Varada flows through the town of Banavasi before joining TungaBhadra. Climate :Shivamogga district being a part of the malnad[malenadu] region receives good mansoon rainfall; the months from june to October being the rainy season. In the years 1901-1970, it received an average rainfall of 1813.9mm with an average of 86 days in the year being rainy days. The average annual temperature of shimoga district is around 26C. The average temperature has increased substantially over the years and the trend can be viewed here. In some regions of shimoga district, the day temperature can really sour to about 40C during summers, leading to water crisis and other problems. Demographics :According to the 2012 census shimoga district has a population of 1,755,512 roughly equal to the nation of the Gambia or the U S state of Nebraska. This gives it a ranking of 275th in india [out of a total of 640 districts]. The district has a population density of 207 inhabitants per sq.km [540/sq mi]. Its population growth rate over the decade 2001-2012 was 6.88%. shimoga has asex ratio of 995 females for every 1000 males and a literacy rate of 80.5%.
Page 15
Taluk has the highest population with Hosanagartaluk having the least population. The literacy rate in the district is 74.86% [82.32% of males and 67.24% of females are literate]. Thirthahallitaluk has the highest literacy rate [78.27%] while Shikaripurataluk has the lowest literacy rate [69.59%]. The district has a sex ratio of 977 females to 1000 males. Hosanagara and thirthahallitaluks have more females than males and hence have a sex ratio greaterthan 1000. Shimogataluk having 961 females to 1000 males has the least sex ratio. Hindus constitute 85.45% of the population with muslims making up 12.25% of the population; the remaining part of the population is made up by Christians, Buddhists and other religious groups. Kannada is the dominant language in this district with urdu taking the second place. Some of the unique ethnic groups found in shimoga district are : 1. Havyaka Brahmins who speak a unique dialect of kannada called Havigannada. 2. Sanketis who are concentrated near the mattur-Hosahalli region of shimoga district and speak a unique language called as Sanketi Language.
Education:Shimoga district is a major centre for education in the state of Karnataka. A relatively high literacy rate of 74.86% is testimony to the fact. There are various institutions offering education in this district which are briefly detailed in the sections below.
Page 16
Medical Education :Shimoga institute of medical sciences, a modern medical college, was established in 2007 and located in shimoga city. There are two Ayurvedic colleges, one being BapujiAyurvedic Medical College located in shimoga city and the other being T.A.M.E societys Ayurvedic college located in Kavalgudi, Bhadravathi. Bat h offer degree courses in B.A.M.S [Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery] The Dental college, Sharavathi Dental College, is located in shimoga district. Graduate Education:There are 31 colleges in shimoga district offering graduation courses. Language spoken:Kannada is the major language spoken in shimoga, English, Hindi are spoken commonly owing to the presence of the large number of student population from across india the kannada that kannada is spoken in and around shimoga is very characteristic. It is perhaps an intermediary dialect between the southern and the northern dialects of kannada. Roads:Shimoga has a total road length of 6632 km of which 222km belong to the national highways and 402 km belong to the state highways. National Highways: shimoga has two national highway passing through it.
Page 17
NH-13 [Sholapur-Mangalore]: starting from the districts border with Davanagere, this road passes through the cities of shimoga and Thirthahalli on to the Chikkamangalore border. NH-206 [Bangalore-Honnavar]: starting from the districts border with Chikkamangalore, this road passes through the cities of Bhadravathi, Shimoga and Sagar on to the districts border with Uttara Kannada. Agriculture:Paddy, Sugarcane, Groundnut, Sunflower, Cotton, Jowar, Ragi, Mango to list few which are priority crops. Shimoga is also having growing community for change in traditional crops to medicine plants floriculture and hybrid crop regulated market located in heart of Shimoga city hosts platform for both farmer and dealer for business there are good number of farmers still run their own halinamane for jiggery there are also numerous rice mills, oil mills and agri related industries in around city Allocation of Funds for various activities The BRGF funds allocated to the fourteens of institutions would be utilized for addressing backwardness, planning capabilities and plan gaps in the following manner. 1. Activities addressing knowledge/ awareness/ skills/attitudes and practices fund is 30%. 2. Service delivery issues [non-salary, non-capital, non-reccurent expenditure] 30%. 3. Assets creation/ infrastructure/ assets related expenses/ personal related[salaries] [not of regular staff] = 20%.
Page 18
Data Base In Shivamogg Dist, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Forest area Cultivated area Follow land Rainfall average Irrigation area Expenditure area Watersheds identified 89918 408448 58805 649 141327 (317) 167.74 152
Expenditure on watershed development in lakhs 2846.28 [10years]
Major crops and other productivity
1334 179 1.96 1426/3.24 34.57 3.74 918 [100%]
10 Fertilizer consumption 11 Average size of land holdings 12 No. of BPL families 13 Agricultural labours 14 Unemployment rate 15 Number of electrified villages
450000 400000 350000 300000 250000 200000 150000 100000 50000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Page 19
Profile of Shikaripura taluk Shikaripurataluk is 53 km far from Shimoga city. The geographical area of Shikaripura lies between the dry land (Bayaluseema) and greenly of malanad.
How to reach:There are three ways from Shimoga to reach Shikaripura, the easiest one is through Savalanga. Other two ways are, a) Right turn from Aynur at Sagar road. b) Right turn from Kumsi at Sagar road. Location of Shikaripura in Karnataka and India: Coordinates Country State District Population 14161 N 750211Ecoordinates 14161 N 75021 Ecoordinates India Karnataka Shimoga
31.508
Page 20
Shikaripura is a town in Shimoga district in the Indian state of Karnataka. It is the headquarters of Shikaripurataluk. Geography:Shikaripura is located at 14.270 N 750 350 E. it has an average elevation of 603 metres [1978feet]. It lies between plain land of Bayaluseema and tropical forests of Malenadu. Demographics :As of 2010-11india censusShikaripura had a population of 31.508 males constitute 51% of the population and females 49%. Shikaripura has an average literacy rate of 71% higher than the national average of 59.5% male literacy is 75% and female literacy is 67% in Shikaripura. 12% of the population is under 6 years of age. The former chief minister of Karnataka B S Yaddyurappa has been a legislator of this town from many years. Wind mills:Just about 10km from Shimoga to Shikaripura via Savalanga. One can figure out he wind mills at the left hand side. Although the wind mills are owned by private parties and most of public dont visit this place as picnic spot, it is watchable place specially for school agers. More attractive during the sunset. Tourist place Uduthadi:Uduthadi is located 7km from Shikaripura and birth place of Akkamahadevi. Akkamahadevi was devotee of Lord Shiva /
Channamallikarjuna and she left her husband Kousika, the local king and
Page 21
sacrified all the luxurious and became devotee of lord shiva. A ruin fort serves as the evidence of history about Akkamahadevi. Madaga-Masur tank:Also called as Bhageerathi Tank and is constructed across Kumadvathiriver which is an attractive tourist spot of Shikaripurataluk. It is 10km drive from Shikaripura town. Belligavi :Belligavi was the capital of Banavasi Nadu during 12th century and is 20km away from Shikaripura towards north after crossing shiralakoppa. Temples constructed show cases the Chalukya Hoysala style of architecture. Belligavi is also known as Belagami, Belligame etc. the famous kedareshwara temple has attracted many tourists and is constructed in Hoysala style. Belligavi was an important learning centre and contained 5 religious center besides 7 Bhramapuris connected with temple which is also known as DakshinaKedara because of religious and cultural importance. Talagunda :Talagunda is 24 km from Shikaripura and 4km away from Belligavi which was several ancient inscriptions, temples. Bandalike :Bandalike is 35 km far from Shikaripura towards North. Many writings and inscriptions of kadambas and Rashtrakutas are found here. Temples here projects the architectural marvels of 12th century. The HuchharayaSwamy Temple in Shikaripura.
Page 22
Transport :Shikaripura has good facility in road and transport services. Shikaripura is a centre place of Shimoga district. Shikaripura is connected by road facility with Davanagere, Shimoga, sagara, Haveri.. Agriculture :More than 65% people involved in agriculture sector in Shikaripura. Mainly growing crops are Paddy, Maize and other crops are also growing. WATER SHED DEVELOPMENT OFFICE PROFILE INTRODUCTION:The Watershed development planning as established on 2000 by the government. The main branches of Watershed Development planning is Shimoga and Sagara. The Watershed development Planning Office in Shikaripura is the sub-branch of Shimoga. The main intension of this planning is development of rural area. NGOs was perfectly doing this work. So the government appointed someone NGOs. The Central and State governments was give the high financial support for this planning. These Watershed planning is one of the five years planning. The main objective of this planning is the development of rural areas and also development of backward peoples. development office, development work. At present the Watershed
Shikaripura is selected a few villages for the That is, Beguru, Hosuru, Ettigehalli, Kengatte,
Muddenahalli etc., Finally, the planning give good progress in rural areas.
Page 23
OFFICERS OF WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT OFFICE: NAME` JOBS PLACE
1) Chetan
Taluk Watershed Development Officer District assistant Horticulture Officers Assistant Agriculture Officer
Shikaripura
2) Mohan Chandra
Shikaripura
3) Maheshwarappa
Shikaripura
4) Dodda Channappa
R.F.O Range Forest Shikaripura Officer Assistant Horticulture Shikaripura Officers NGOs Director Shimoga
5) Mallappa
6) Bhadrappa
WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT FUND (WDF):One of the mandatory for selection of villages for Watershed Projects is peoples contribution towards the Watershed Development Fund(WDF). The contribution to WDF shall be a minimum 10% of the cost of NRM works executed on private lands only. However, in case of SC/ST , small and marginal farmers, the minimum contribution shall be 5% of the cost of NRM works executed on their lands. However, for other cost intensive farming system activities such as Aquaculture, Horticulture, Agro-forestry, Animal Husbandry etc., on private land directly benefiting the individual farmers, the contribution of farmers will be 40% for general category and 20% for SC and ST beneficiaries and the
Page 24
remaining cost of the activities i.e., 60% for the general and 80% for SC/ST category will come from the project funds subject to a maximum limit of an amount equal to double of the standard unit cost norm for Watershed Development Planning FINANCIAL SUPPORT GOVERNEMNT:FROM CENTRAL AND STATE
The Central and State Governments was give the financial support for Watershed Development Planning. The Central government is very high amount (90%) support this planning. But State Government is very lowest financial support (10%) for this planning. Planning Government Finance
Central Government 5 years planning
90%
Statement Government 10%
Finance
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Central Government Statement Government
Central Government Statement Government
Page 25
WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT:Watershed development refers to the conservation, regeneration and the judicious use of all the resources natural(Land, water, plants, animals) and human, within a particular watershed. Watershed
management tries to bring about the best possible balance in the environment between natural resources on the one side, and human and other living beings on the other.
People and their environment are interdependent. Any change in the surrounding environment directly affects the people living therein. A degraded environment results in a degraded quality of life of the people. Thus efforts to reduce poverty and improve the standard of living of the people must aim at improving the environment they live in. The
environment does not recognize people determined administrative boundaries. A Watershed provides a natural environmental unit for
planning a developmental initiative.
Page 26
GUIDING PRINCIPLES:The common guidelines for Watershed development Project are based on the following principles. 1) EQUITY AND GENDER SENSITIVITY:Watershed Development Projects should be considered as levers of inclusiveness project implementing agencies must facilitate the equity processes such a a) enhanced livelihood opportunities for the poor through investment in their assets and improvements in productivity and income, b) improving access of the poor, especially women to the benefits, c) enhancing role of women in decision making processes and their representation in the institutional arrangements and d) ensuing access to usufruct rights from to common properly resources for the resource poor. 2) DECENTRALIZATION:Project management would improve with decentralization, delegation and professionalism. Establishing suitable institutional arrangements with in the overall framework of the pachayath raj Institutions and the operational flexibility in norms to suit varying local conditions will enhance decentralization. Empowered committees with delegation to rationalize the policies, continuity in administrative support and timely release of funds are the other instruments for effective decentralization.
Page 27
3) FACILTIY:Social mobilization, community, organization, common guidelines for Watershed Development Project building capacities of communities in planning and implementation, ensuring equity arrangements etc., need intensive facilitation. Competent
organizations including voluntary organizations with professional teams having necessary skills and expertise would be selected through a rigorous process and may be provided financial support to perform the above specific functions. 4) CENTRALITY OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION:Involvement of primary stake holders is at the centre of planning, budgeting, implementation and management of
watershed projects.
Community organizations may be closely
associated with the accountable to Gram Sabhas in Project activities. 5) CAPACITY, BUILDING AND TECHNOLOGY INPUTS:Considerable stress would be given on capacity building as a crucial component for achieving the desired results. This would be a continuous process enabling functionaries to enhance their knowledge and skills and develop the correct orientation and perspectives thereby becoming more effective in performing their roles and responsibilities. With current trends and advances in
information technology and remote sensing, it is possible to acquired detailed information about the various field level characteristics of any area or region. Thus, the Endeavour would be to build in strong technology inputs into the new vision of watershed programmes.
Page 28
6) MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING:A participatory, outcome and impact oriented and userfocused monitoring evaluation and learning system would be put in place to obtain feedback and undertake improvements in planning, project design and implementation. 7) ORGANIZATIONAL RESTRUCTURING :Establishing appropriate technical and professional support structures at national, state , district and project authorities, implementing agencies and support organization would play a vital role. COMPONENTS OF WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT:Watershed development involves conservation, regeneration and judicious utilization of natural resources. It aims to bring about an
optimum balance between the demand and use of natural resources so that they remain sustainable over time. The components of Watershed development are:1) Community development 2) Soil and land management. 3) Water management 4) Crop Management 5) Afforestation 6) Pasture/fodder development 7) Livestock management 8) Rural energy management 9) Other from and non-farm activities and development of community skills and resources. All these components are interdependent and interactive.
Page 29
WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT PLANNINGS:The specific planning to Watershed development office in study area Shikaripura. SECTORS:1) Agriculture Sectors. 2) Horticulture Sectors 3) Forestry 4) Anemology THE FUNCTIONS OF WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING: A Watershed has five main functions. These function are hydrological and ecological in nature. HYDRALOGIAL FUNCTIONS:1) Collect rainfall water. 2) Store water in various amounts and for different periods. 3) Release water as runoff. ECOLOGIAL FUNCTION:1) Provides conditions and sites for various bio-chemical reactions to take place. 2) Provide habitat to flora and fauna of various kind. THE ROLE OF A WETLAND IN A WATERSHED. Wetlands are crucial in a watershed for various reasons but the most important reason is their capability of functioning as natural water filters. Due to this quality they help improve water-quality of the water downstream. Wetlands also provide conducive atmosphere for many
Page 30
biogeochemical reactions to take place, which help in removal of nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus, by converting them from inorganic forms to organic forms. The site of a wetland in a watershed is very important. For example a riparian wetland (wetland alongside of a water body) are very important in a watershed as their ability to control and improve water quality is of great importance to the whole watershed WATERSHED PROJECT MANAGEMENT:The major activities of the Watershed Development Projects will be sequenced into 1) Preparatory 2) Works 3) Consolidation and Withdrawal phase. In view of the expanded scope and expectations under the Watershed programme. The Project duration could be in the range of four to seven years depending upon the activities and ministries/departments. The DPR should mention the details justifications for the proposed project duration. The project duration may be spread over 3 different phases as decided by the Nodal Ministry and as given below;
Phase I II III
Name Preparatory Phase Watershed Works Phase Consolidation Phanse and
Duration 1 2 years 2 3 years Withdrawn 1 2 years
Page 31
PEOPLES
PARTICIPATION
OF
WATERSHED
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING:The environment is a living space on which the human community living within that area depends on for its livelihood. When the economic condition of a community deteriorates it leads to over-exploitation and degradations of natural resource which in turn, further exacerbates poverty. It is thus necessary for people to see relationship between their poverty and the degraded environment they live in.
Thus, just as human being and their activities are the cause of environmental destruction, it is only they who can restore to health the ruined environment. Hence, there can be no sustainable nature resource management unless it involves the participation of all the inhabitants of the concerned environment/area in an active manner. PEOPLE PARTICIPATION OF THE VILLAGE LEVEL:(Watershed development planning office is have 3 types of groups in selected villages:-)
Page 32
Watershed development planning is 3 types of the groups in selected villages is there, 1) SHGs 2) UG Self Help Groups.
User Groups Watershed committee
3) WC -
SELF HELP GROUPS:- (SHGs):The Watershed development planning office shall constitute SHGs in the Watershed area with the help of WDT from amongst poor. Small and marginal farmer households, land less/ asset less poof agricultural labourers, women, shepherds and SC/ST persons.
The aim of the SHGs is woman development in rural areas This group was give a some trainings. That is Income produce activity and Firm Skill Traning. These 2 trainings are very useful to rural womans. SHGs is have main 2 types of tranings:1) Traditional activities. 2) Skill based activities.
Page 33
USER GROUP(UG):The Watershed Committee shall also constitute user groups in the Watershed area with the help of WDT. The user group is involving to 10 to 20 members of farmers. The 7 members are elected from the farmer sector and a single member is elected from the Gram panchayath. The user groups will be responsible for the operation and maintenance of all the assets created under the project in close collaboration with the gram panchayath and the grama sabha. WATERSHED COMMITTEE(WC):The Gram sabha will constitute the Watershed committee to implement the Watershed Project with the technical support of the WDT in the village. The Gramsabha may elect/ appoint any suitable person from the village as the chairman of watershed committee. The Secretary of the Watershed committee will be a paid functionary of the Watershed committee (WC). This Committee have minimum 12 to 15 members. In this
committee, 5 to 5 members are coming from Self Help Groups and 4 to 5 members selected from User Group and 2 to 3 members are came to Gram Panchyath. The Gram Panchayath Chairman is get Chairmanship in this Committee. Any one Watershed group members is get a financial management ROLE OF GRAMAPANCHAYATH :The Gram Panchayath would perform the following important functions : common guidelines for watershed development projects. i) Supervise, support and advise Watershed committee from time to time.
Page 34
ii)
Authenticate the accounts / expenditure statements of watershed committee and other institutions of watershed project.
iii)
Facilitate the convergence of various projects / schemes to institutions of watershed development project.
iv)
Maintain asset registers under watershed development projects with view to retain it after the watershed development project.
v)
Provide office accommodation and other requirements to watershed committee.
vi)
Allocate usufruct rights to deserving user groups / SHGs over the assets created.
PRINCIPLES AND CONCEPTS OF INTEGRATED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLANNING: 1) In 2009-10 the Indian Government and Karnataka Government was implementation this planning on the base of aided distribution from the Watershed Office.
2) This planning was established from Central Government with its common guidelines. . 3) Karnataka remote sensing office helps to implementation of this planning. This office was doing identification of Watershed area, information of area and the information of water and soil. . 4) Encouragement of Agriculture, Horticulture, Reforestation, Fisheries, Animalogy and protection of water and soil and increasing in productivity and community organization and create the standard of living. These are all main principal of the Integrated Watershed Management Planning.
Page 35
FUNCTIONS OF PLANNING:1) This planning select to 4000 to 5000 hectares are for the development based on Watershed. 2) This planning period is 5 years and one third organization fully concentrates this planning, like a monitoring and evaluation. 3) In this planning, per one Gram Panchyath include the one executive committee. APPROVAL AND SANCTION OF WATERSHED
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS:By the end of Februrary each year, the states will submit detailed Annual Action Plans indicating ongoing liabilities as well as new projects which they wish to take up. The Department Nodal Agency at the central level will thereafter, based on total available budget for the year and the criteria as given in allocate specific amounts for individual states from whom proposals have been received. After states have received their allocation against ongoing and new projects, they will be free to sanction their project within the state allocation. On receipt of the sanction orders for the new projects from SLNA; the Nodal Ministry would release funds directly to the district level agency. The existing release procedure of departmental Nodal agencies may however continue if release of funds to the district level agency is not feasible.
Page 36
THE
DISTRIBUTION
OF
BUDGET
FOR
SPECIFIC
WATERSHED PROJECTS FOR THE VARIOUS COMPONENTS THEREIN IS GIVEN BELOW:Budget Component or Unit Adminstrative costs Monitoring Evaluation Preparatory Stages Entrance activities Institutional land capacity building Detailed Project Report(DPR) Watershed working stages Watershed development works Non-property persons standard of living activities. Production systems and small firms Consolidation phase TOTAL 13 05 100 50 10 04 05 01 Budget of the percentage (%) quantity 10 01 01
WATERSHED AREA WORK PLANS: For purpose of this paper a watershed area work plan can defined as one covering a catchment area which is to be the scene of a program of work. There is no useful measure of the size of such a watershed area. It can only be usefully defined as the area covered by a project workplan. In some cases where a very large project is envisaged the area may be several thousand hectares, in other cases it may be a watershed of very
Page 37
few hectares, perhaps only a half dozen farms.
In any event, the
significant feature of the area is that is the subject of comprehensive planning, with the aim of indicating all the various things to be done to achieve an improvement in the behavior of the stream that drains the area. The important part of the planning reportis the section on estimated costs. One purpose of the planning operation is to develop work. In the course of the planning work various schemes may be planned and costed before is selected as being most desirable from the point of view of technical feasibility and also relative costs. The reported cost estimates are useful in guiding decision as to whether the planned work should be approved and also in planning the financing of the scheme as between the Government and the land users most directly benefited.
Page 38
CHAPTETR IV THE ROLE OF WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:INTRODUCTION:The Watershed development planning is very important role of the economic development. The increase in agricultural production and
productivity depends, to the large extent, on the availability of Water. Hence, the importance of irrigation. However the availability of
irrigation. However, the availability of irrigation facilities in highly inadequate in India. WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT PLANNING IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: The following reasons explain the Watershed development planning in economic development in India. 1) HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY IN IRRIGATED LAND:Productivity on irrigated land is considerable more than the productivity on unirrigated land. For instance, C.H.Hanumantha Rao has argued that in India in the late 1980s, the per hectare yield of foodgrants on irrigated land was two to six times higher that the yields on unirrigated land. Moreover, yields of food grains under irrigation grew at an annual rate of 1.6 percent to 2.6 percent per annum in certain states, whereas the annual yield growth rate of food grains on unirrigated land areas either negligible or barely 1 percent. According to one recent estimate, nearly three-fourths of the increment in total crop output between the early 1970s and early 1990s came from expansion of irrigated area and increase in
Page 39
per hectare yields on irrigated land. This shows that production and productivity in agriculture can be increased considerably by extending irrigation facilities. 2) MULTIPLE CROPPING POSSIBLE:Since India has a tropical and sub-tropical climate. It has potentialities to grow crops on a year round basis. However, since 80 percent of the annual rainfall is received in less than four months, multiple cropping is generally not possible. Provision of irrigation facilities can make possible the growing of two or three crops in a year in most areas of the country. This will considerably enhance agricultural production and productivity. 3) ROLE IN NEW AGRICULTURAL STRATEGY:The successful implementation of the High-yielding varieties programme depends to a large extent, on the timely availability of ample water supply. The high-yielding varieties of seeds and
chemical fertilizers require substantial water at regular intervals of time. 4) BRINGING MORE LAND UNDER CULTIVATION:The total reporting area for land utilization statistics was 305.51 million hectares in 2006-07. Of this, 17.44 million hectares was barren and uncultivable land, 10.48 million hectares follow land other than current follows. Cultivation on all such lands in impossible in some while in others it requires substantial capital investment to make land fit for cultivation.
Page 40
5) INDIRECT BENEFITS OF IRRIGATION:Irrigation confers indirect benefits through increased agricultural production. Employment potential of irrigated land increases, increased production helps in developing allied activities means of water transport are improved, income of government from agriculture increases. Availability of regular water supply increases the income of formers imparting a sense of security and stability in agriculture. 6) CROPPING INTENSITY:Although irrigation facilities have expanded in recent decades, the level of crop intensity continues to be very low in most of the states. In Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamilnadu, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Gujarath and Rajasthan more than one crop is taken on less than 30 percent of area under cultivation. This shows that there is considerable scope to raise output through an expansion of area under double cropping. 7) BETTER MANAGEMENT:Just as industry needs skilled management for increased productivity, agriculture also requires better management for raising the level of productivity. For this purpose farmers have to be education in more efficient use of their resources particularly land irrigation facilities and agricultural implements. This can be accomplished only if there is a vast network of managerial staff engaged in disseminating information about new agriculture techniques and methods of production.
Page 41
8) PLANT PROTECTION:Around 10 30 percent of the farm production in India is lost every year due to pests, weeds and diseases. The crop care foundation of India has placed with loss in agricultural production due to damage from weeds and plant diseases at almost Rs.1.5 lakh crore each year. COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:A common definition of community development is not simple to attain, nor is universally agreed upon. Part of the confusion rests with the fact that community development is both process and product. The
practice of community development is not one focused solely on material resource development, nor is it devoted exclusively to systems for addressing community needs. Jones and Silva(1991) exclusively to
systems for addressing community development that includes problem solving, community building and systems interaction, stated another way, they posit that a truly integrated approach assesses the problem, goes on the build community capacity and importantly addresses the problem. The interests served by rural economic development projects are determined by those who sponsor, lead and participate in them, unfortunately, many small rural communities oftn lack the organizational resources or skill to pursue even the most basic economic assessment and planning project. People with disabilities and the programs that provide disability service represent an untapped resource for such community projects. Rehabilitation service providers and the persons they serve might be interested in taking leadership roles in their communities because their economic interests are more likely to be served by sponsoring, leading or participating in such projects.
People with
Page 42
disabilities may increase their chances of achieving their personal goals through participating in such activities. Finally, by taking a lead in economic development, provider agencies can fill an important community need. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANS Watershed improvement work is usually difficult because people live in the watershed area. It is not very difficult to plan and take action on the problems of a forested watershed where the land is all owned and controlled by the state and private persons neither live there nor have any rights to the use of the land. On the other hand, when private persons have rights to the use of watershed lands, their private interests as well as the public interest must always be taken into account. A most effective way of dealing with such problems is through community development schemes. Here the primary social groupings of people, the village or neighborhood, is used as the basis for some system of social or political organization. The objective of such work is to promote self-help on problems of land and water use and on other problems related to these. It is not often that the boundaries of a watershed coincide with that of a rural community grouping of people and thus the area for watershed planning and the area for community development planning are most often different. It is usually the case, however, that watershed areas selected for improvement projects cover the area of several rural communities, villages, or neighborhoods and thus there is often a possibility of encouraging the development of community improvement plans as a means for promoting land use and related improvements in a part of a catchment project area.
Page 43
The planning of community development is primarily a means for organizing the action of private persons to make their contributions to the improvement of their community and the larger watershed area. The plan itself most often emphasises action on local problems, both community problems and individual farm problems. For example, a community improvement plan may include provisions for work on road improvement and on crop yield improvement. The road work may be planned as a cooperative undertaking in which every family provides labor or equipment. The crop improvement work may be strictly a matter for individual action. Such community improvement work carried on as part of a watershed development project would of course place relatively heavy stress upon land use changes with desirable hydrologic consequences. These would include afforestation of privately-owned woodlands, control of grazing and fire in private or village forests, terracing and related water disposal systems, gully stabilization and other types of erosion control, improvement of vegetative cover on pastures, and other changes in land use that would have the effect of reducing soil losses and surface runoff. Watershed Development Projects In India :In recent years india has looked to Watershed Development as a way to realize its hopes for agricultural development in rainfed, semi-arid areas. These areas were bypassed by the green revolution and have experienced little or no growth in agricultural production for several decades. By capturing scarce water resources and improving the management of soil and vegetation. Watershed Development has the potential to create conditions conductive to higher agricultural productivity, while conserving natural
Page 44
resources. This case study of Watershed projects In Andra Pradesh and Maharashtra. India, fits squarely into IFPRIs work on development strategies for less-favoured lands areas where agro-climatic conditions are difficult or infrastructure and support services have been neglected. It offers important insights for IFPRIs research in other parts of the world, including work under way in the East African highlands, the hiilsides of central America, and the west Asia and North Africa regions. While much has been written about Watershed Development, there have been few efforts to systematically evaluate it. By doing so, John kerr and his colleagues Ganesh Pangare and VasudhaLokurPangare contribute immensely to our understanding of the promise and challenges of Watershed Development. The authors conclude that while most of the projects they surveyed havs had relatively little impact those that take a more participatory approach and are managed by NGOs have infact performed better in conserving natural resources and raising agricultural productivity. But such success may come at the expense of the poorest people in watershed areas because improving the management of a watershed usually requires restricting access to the natural resource base on which they depend. Many Watershed Development projects donot work because those who interests are harmed refuse to go along with the effort. The authors argue that for Watershed Development to succeed on a large scale, projects must find a way for all affected parties to share in the net gains generated.
Page 45
Importance of the Watershed Development in Karnataka The land resources of Karnataka especially its dry drought prone lands, which comprise more than 79% of the total arable area, have been poorly managed by the resource poor farmers of the state. Soil loss due to erosion coupled with deduced water resourced water resources has led to a situation of rapid soil fertility deterioration, declining / stagnating crop yields, depletion of underground water sources, deforestation,
denudation, destruction of natural pasture and diminishing biomass production. Exploring the full potential of rained agriculture to meet the food, fodder and fuel requirement of the state population is the only alternative however, this will require investing in suitable soil and water conservation technologies, crop breeding targeted to rain fed
environments, agricultural extension services, and access to markets, credit and input supplies in rain fed areas. The potential for increasing the irrigable area and enhancing productivity from irrigated lands has its limitations. The total irrigation potential from all sources, including inter basin transfers, is estimated at around 50% of the total cropped area of 104.89 lakh hectares by the Karnataka state land use board. The remaining land has to depend on rain fed farming forever. Therefore if the state has to conserve and develop natural resources in rain fed areas to improve their production and productivity, their development on watershed basis in inevitable. Development of rain fed areas is important because more than 44% of its agricultural production comes from dry lands. Karnataka has the highest proportion (79%) of drought prone area among all major states in
Page 46
the country and in absolute terms it has second largest area of dry land in the country after Rajasthan. In addition, Karnataka also has the second lowest (154.2m.ha) replenish able ground water resources among major states after Rajasthan.
Karnataka Watershed Development Programme Karnataka Watershed Development Project [DANiDA]:The second phase of DANiDA funded Karnataka Watershed Development project has been in operation in the state since June 1997, in three districts namely Bijapur, Bagalkot and Gulbarga. The project was designed for a period of 7 years from 1997 and this was closed on 31 st May 2004. The project covered an area of about 28,000 ha in Northern dry and North Eastern dry zones of Karnataka spread over in 46 villages of 12 watersheds. Bijapur, indi, Muddebihal, Sindagitaluks of Bijapurdistrict, Hunagundtaluk of Bagalkot district and Chittapur, Chincholi, Afzalpur, Alanda, Jevargi, Shahapur, Surpurtaluks of Gulbarga district. As per the primary agreement the project was in operation till 31/05/2004 with the total project outlay of Rs. 2100.52 lakhs, out of which Rs. 1772.325 lakhs was allocated to implement the various activities (works). Out of the assistanceextended for works for works by the and of the project period an amount of Rs. 1769.00 lakhs was expended to execute the various activities in the project. The consolidation phase of the project was under completed with the assistance of Government of Karnataka till November 2005. During 2005-06 it was planned to spend Rs. 20-60 lakhs, as on data Rs. 18.82 lakhs has been spent.
Page 47
District Watershed Development Unit [DWDU] In districts, where the area under the Watershed Development projects is common guidelines for Watershed Development projects about 25,000 hectares, a separated dedicated unit, called the district watershed development unit will be established at the district level, which will oversee the implementation of Watershed programme in each district and will have separate independent account for this purpose. Where the area under Watershed development projects is lessthan approximately 25,000 hectares, the projects will be implemented in accordance with the existing arrangements. However, in such cases one officer shall be exclusively appointed with in the DRDA either on contract or on deputation to co-ordinate watershed projects at the district level. DWDU will function in close co-ordination with the district planning committee. There will also be a representation in DWDU for NREGA, BRGF implementing agencies at the district level.
Alternatively, the mechanism of approval and implementation of project by the district level Committer/Collector may continue to prevail.
Page 48
CHAPTER V INTRODUCTION:In this chapter and attempt has been made to understand survey, analysis and interpretation. It covers information of respondents and their activities in Watershed Development Office. 1) Table.1 Group Sl.No. Age group 18 25 25 -30 30 40 40 50 50- 60 TOTAL Source :- Field Survey No.of respondents 1 2 3 4 5 3 8 10 12 7 40 7.5 20 25 30 17.5 100 Percentage Classification of The Respondents Based on Age
Shows the classification of the respondents in age wise. According to the data in the table the age group between 40 and 50 constitute more that is more than 30% in using the latest facilities given by the Watershed development office. Very less percentage of respondents that is above age 18-25 is users of the modern facilities given by the Watershed development office.
Page 49
Chart 1
The Respondents Based on Age Group

35 30
25 18 25 20 25 -30 30 40 15 40 50 50- 60 10
0 18 25 25 -30 30 40 40 50 50- 60
Page 50
Table.2 - Classification of the respondents based on Profession:Sl.No. Profession No. of respondents 1 2 3 Wage Agriculture Others TOTAL Source :- Field Survey Shows the classification of the respondents based on profession. Most of the respondents based on profession. Most of the respondents, that means 75% respondents involved in agriculture. Otherwise 10% respondents involved in other profession like a wage etc., 4 30 6 40 10 75 15 100 Percentage
Classification of the respondents based on Profession

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Wage Agriculture Others Wage Agriculture Others
Page 51
Table3
- Classification of the respondents based on Education
qualifications:Sl.No. 1 2 3 4 5 Qualification Primary S.S.L.C. P.U.C. Degree Technical Course TOTAL Source :- Field Survey From the field survey, it was observed that education of respondents includes Primary, S.S.L.C., PUC, Degrees, Technical Courses. From the table it is clear that 35% of the respondents are having education upto Primary and 2.5% are S.S.L.C. 17.5% of the respondents have education of PUC. 7.5% of the respondents have education degree and lastly 15% of the respondents have education technical courses. No. of respondents 14 10 7 3 6 40 Percentage 35 25 17.5 7.5 5 100
Classification of the respondents based on Education qualifications:35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Primary S.S.L.C. P.U.C. Degree Technical Course
Page 52
Table 4 - Classification of the respondents based on Sex ratio:Sl.No. Sex No. of respondents 1 2 Male Female TOTAL Source:- Field Survey 20 20 40 50 50 100 Percentage
An analysis of contents of above table shows Sex Ratio is equal. 50% of the number of the respondents are male group and 50% of the respondents are female group. So this table shows male and female group is very deeply involved in Watershed Development activities.
Classification of the respondents based on Sex ratio

100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Male Female Male Female
Page 53
Table .5 - Classification of the respondents based on Marital Status:Sl.No. Marital Status No. of respondents 1 2 Married Unmarried TOTAL Source:-Field Survey The above table shows that classification of the respondents based on their marital status. 85% of respondents are already married. 15% of respondents are already married. 15% of respondents are unmarried.. So most of the married respondents are using Watershed Development Planning facilities. 34 6 40 85% 15 100 Percentage
Classification of the respondents based on Marital Status

1500% 1000% 500% 0% Married Unmarried Classification of the respondents based on Married Unmarried
Page 54
Table 6 - Classification of the respondents based on Annual Income:Sl.No. Annual Income 10 20 thousand 20 30 thousand 30 40 thousand Above 40 TOTAL Source:-Field Survey No. of respondents 1 2 3 4 16 15 4 5 40 40 37.5 10 12.5 100 Percentage
From the above table shows that 40% of the respondents annual income of Rs.10,000 to 20,000. 37.5% of the respondents annual income of Rs.20,000 to 30,000. 10% of the respondents annual income of
Rs.30,000 to 40,000 and the 12.5% of the respondents annual income is above 40,000.
Classification of the respondents based on Annual Income

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 10 20 thousand 20 30 thousand 30 40 thousand Above 40
10 20 thousand 20 30 thousand 30 40 thousand Above 40
Page 55
Table 7 Classification of the respondents based on Development of Agriculture. Sl.No. Development of Agriculture 1 2 Yes No TOTAL Source:-Field Survey From the field survey the table shows classification of the respondents based on development of agriculture 87.5% of the respondents using the Watershed development Plannings. 12.5% of the respondent based on Watershed Development Plan. 12.5% of the respondent based on No.of respondents 35 5 40 87.5 12.5 100 Percentage
Watershed Development Planning for the not using this planning.
Classification of the respondents based on Development of Agriculture.

100 80 60 40 20 0 Yes No Yes No
Page 56
Table 8 - Classification of the respondents based on Agriculture production:Sl.No. Agriculture production:No. of respondents 1 2 Yes No TOTAL Source:-Field Survey The table shows classification of the respondents based on agriculture production of Watershed Development Planning the 87.5% of the respondents benefited from this planning. 12.5% of the respondents of agriculture development is not benefited from the Watershed Development Planning. 35 5 40 87.5 12.5 100 Percentage
Classification of the respondents based on Agriculture production:100 80 60 40 20 0 Yes No Yes No
Page 57
Table .9 - Classification of the respondents based on Increase in Income level of people:Sl.No. Increase in Income level of people 1 2 3 4 10 20 thousand 20 40 thousand 40 60 thousand Above 1,00,000 TOTAL Source:-Field Survey From the above table shows that 15% of the respondents increase in income level of the people 10,000 to 20,000. 22.5% of the respondents increase in income level of the people 20,000 to 40,000. 45% of the respondents increase in income level of the people 40,000 to 60,000 and lastly 17.5% of the respondents increase in income level of the people. No. of respondents 6 9 18 7 40 15 22.5 45 17.5 100 Percentage
Classification of the respondents based on Increase in Income level of people:50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 20 40 40 60 Above thousand thousand thousand 1,00,000 10 20 thousand 20 40 thousand 40 60 thousand Above 1,00,000
Page 58
Table 10 - Classification of the respondents based on poverty remedial:Sl.No. Poverty remedial No. of respondents 1 2 Yes No TOTAL Source:-Field Survey Analysis of the above table shows that classification of the respondents based on poverty remedial given by the Watershed Development Planning. 87.5% of the respondents very clear the poverty remedial but 12.5% of the respondents not clear the poverty remedial this planning. 35 5 40 87.5 12.5 100 Percentage
Classification of the respondents based on poverty remedial

100 Axis Title 50 0 Yes No Classification of the respondents based on poverty remedial
Page 59
Table 11 - Classification of the respondents based on Standard of living:Sl.No. Standard of living No. of respondents 1 2 Yes No TOTAL Source:-Field Survey From the above table shows that classification of the respondents based on standard of living given by the Watershed development planning. 87.5% of the respondents high standard of living but 12.5% of the respondents low standard of living of this planning. 35 5 40 87.5 12.5 100 Percentage
Classification of the respondents based on Standard of living:-
Yes No
Page 60
Table .12 - Classification of the respondents based on basic facilities :Sl.No. Basic facilities No. of respondents 1 2 Yes No TOTAL Source:-Field Survey Analysis of the above table shows that classification of the respondents based on basic facilities given by the Watershed development office given by the Watershed development office. 87.5% of the respondents satisfied about Shikaripura Watershed development office. But the 12.5% of the respondents not satisfied from this planning. 35 5 40 87.5 12.5 100 Percentage
Yes
No. of respondents Percentage
Page 61
Table 13 - Classification of the respondents based on Self Help Groups in one village:Sl.No. Self help Groups in one village 1 2 3 4 3 Groups 4 Groups 5 Groups 6 groups TOTAL Source:-Field Survey From the field survey, the table shows classification of the respondents based on Self Help groups in one village. 12.5% of the respondent SHGs in 3 groups. 65% of the respondents in 4 groups. 17.5% of the respondent in 5 groups. 5% of the respondents is 6 groups. No. of respondents 5 26 7 2 40 12.5 65 17.5 5 100 Percentage
No. of respondents
3 Groups 4 Groups 5 Groups 6 groups
Page 62
Table 14 - Classification of the respondents based on User Groups in one village:Sl.No. User Groups in one village No. of respondents 1 2 3 4 3 Groups 4 Groups 5 Groups 6 groups TOTAL Source:-Field Survey From the field survey the table shows classification of the respondents based on User groups in one village. 2.5% of the respondent of the 3 user groups. 45% of the respondents 4 User groups.45% of the respondent 4 User groups. 50% of the respondent 5 User groups and lastly 2.5% of the respondent 6 groups. 1 18 20 1 40 2.5 45 50 2.5 100 Percentage
No. of respondents
3 Groups 4 Groups 5 Groups 6 groups
Page 63
Table 15 - Classification of the respondents based on members of the user groups:Sl.No. Members of the User groups 1 2 3 4 10 members 20 members 30 members 50 members TOTAL Source:-Field Survey From the field survey, the table shows, classification of the respondents based on member of the User groups. 10 members are not respondent in User groups. 37.5% of the respondents 20 members of the User Group. 32.5% of the respondent 30 members of the User Groups. 30% of the respondent so members of the User groups. No. of respondents -15 13 12 40 -37.5 32.5 30 100 Percentage
No. of respondents -20 members 30 members 50 members
33%
30%
30%
37%
Page 64
CHAPTER-VI FINDINGS, AND CONCLUSION:FINDINGS:1) Majority of the respondents belonged to the age groups between 40 50- years. 2) Most of the respondents have education upto Primary. 3) Majority of the respondents to the agriculture work group in 30 people. 4) Equal participation of the respondents belong to male group and female groups. 5) Mostly annual income of the majority of respondents falls below as 10-20 thousand. 6) Majority of the respondents belong to the agricultural development of the 35 people. 7) Majority of the respondents belongs to the agricultural produce of the 35 people. 8) Majority of the respondents belongs to poverty remedial of the 35 people. 9) Majority of the respondent have increase in income level of the people 40-60 thousnad. 10) Most of the respondents are self help groups for 4 groups in
one village. 11) Majority of the have between 50 members of the user
groups. 12) Most of the respondents in SHG the interest rate is charged
in low.
Page 65
CONCULSTION:The green revolution that transformed agriculture elsewhere in India had little impact on rainfed agriculture in the semi-arid tropical regions, where agricultural productivity is low, natural resources are degraded and the people are poof. In the 1980s and 1990s, agriculture scients and planners aimed to promote rainfed agriculture through Watershed development. A Watershed is an area from which all water drains to a common poion making it an attractive unit for technical efforts to manage water and soil resources for production and conservation. Watershed management is complicated, however, by the fact that watersheds rarely correspond to human defined boundaries. Also,
Watershed Projects often distribute cost and benefits unevenly, with cast incurred disproportionately upstream typically among the poorer residents and benefits realized disproportionately downstream, where irrigation is concentrated and the wealthiest farmers own most of the land. Watershed Project strategies range from those that are more technocratic to those that pay more attention to social organization. By the late 1990s annual expenditure on Watershed development in India exceeded US $ 500 million, but relatively little information was available on the success of this planning or projects.The issues involved after the Project or Planning implementation is timely maintenance of physical structures, judicious use of funds provided for maintenance of these structures and economic use of natural resources generated of the project. It is equally essential to monitor the working of SHGs and the composition of the members so that the desired results are derived from the Project activities.
Page 66
Finally the Watershed development Office is very important role of the Shikaripura Taluk. The good improvement of the rural area
development in Watershed development planning. NGOs was perfectly doing in this work. So the government appointed the NGOs groups. The Central and State governments was given the high financial support for the Watershed development planning. The planning is give very good progress in the Shikaripura taluk in rural areas.
Page 67
GOVT FIRST GRADE COLLEGE, SHIKARIPURA PROJECT WORK FOR THE POST GRADUATE STUDIES IN ECONOMICS
NAME OF THE STUDENT:
ASHA. B. P. RESPONDENT NO
1. Name:________________ 2. Age: a) 18-25 b) 25-30 c) 30-40 d) 40-50
3. Residing at: ____________ 4. Profession:
Wage
Agriculture
Others
5. Qualification: Primary S.S.L.C P.U.C degree Technical course
6. Sex: Male Female
Page 68
7. Marital status: Married (
) Unmarried ( )
8. Annual Income : Rs___________ 9. Is there any change in village of under ground water system from watershed development planning ? Yes ( ) No ( )
10. Is there any development in rural area from watershed development planning ? Yes ( ) No ( )
11. Is there any development in agriculture from watershed development planning? Yes( ) No( )
12.Is there any changes in agriculture production ? Yes ( ) No ( )
13. Is there any increase in income level of people ? Yes ( ) No ( )
If Yes , how much __________
14. Is there any poverty remedial work ? Yes ( ) No ( )
15.Is there any changes in standard of living of the people ? Yes ( ) No ( )
16. Did you get basic facilities from watershed development office ? Yes ( ) No ( )
Page 69
17. Is there established any self help groups in rural area from watershed development planning ? Yes ( ) No ( )
18. a) How many self help groups where in made in town or village ? a) 3 c) 5 b) 4 d) 6
19. How much take member self help groups ? a) 10-20 c) 20-25 b) 15-20 d) 25-30
20.Is there any participation of women in the self help groups ? Yes ( ) No ( )
21. Is there any training facilities in self help groups ? Yes ( ) No ( )
22. Is there any loan lending facility from watershed development office ? Yes ( ) No ( )
23. What is the rate of intrest Rs: _____________________
24. When is the repayment period ? a) 3-6 Months b) 6-12 Months
c) 12-18 Months d) 18-24 Months
Page 70
25. Do you know about participation of NGOs in watershed development planning ? Yes ( ) No ( )
26. Did you get the knowledge of people participation in watershed development planning ? Yes ( ) No ( )
27. Is there any forest development activity from watershed development planning ? Yes ( ) No ( )
28. Will they provide samplings for forestation? Yes ( ) No ( )
29. Is there any soil and water protection function in rural area from the help of watershed planning? Yes ( ) No ( )
30. how many user groups where made in one or village ? a) 3 c) 5 b) 4 d) 6
31. How many are the members of the user groups ? a) 10 c) 30 b) 20 d) 50
32. How much of women participation ? a) 0-1 c) 0-5 b) 0-4 d) No
Page 71
33. Is ther any helps in horticulture function from the watershed development office ? Yes ( ) No ( )
34. Do you get the plants for horticulture from watershed development ? Yes ( ) No ( )
35 . Is there any main role of Grama Panchayath in watershed development planning ? Yes ( ) No ( )
Signature of the beneficiary Place : Date :
Page 72
BIBLIOGRAPHY 1) Arunkumar Y.S.(1998):Economic evaluation of Watershed Development A case of study of Kuthangere Micro Watershed in Karnataka, Ph.D., Thesis University, Agriculture Science. Bangalore, Karnataka, India. 2) Chandregowds M.J. and Jayaramaiah K.M.(1990) Impact of Watershed Development Programme on SocioEconomic Status, Land productivity and Income of Small and Marginal Farmers. Ind.J.Extn.Edn, 25(3 & 4) ; 44-47.
3) Charan C.V(2005):0 Profile of Sujala Watershed Project beneficiary farmers in Dharwad district. M.Sc.,(Agri), Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, Karnataka, India.
4) Golya Naik R.(2008):Peoples Participation in Watershed Development
Programme and its Impact. Ph.d., Thesis, University of Agri.Sci., Bangalore, Karnataka, India.
5) Heyd, H and Neef.A(2004):Participation of Local People in Water Management: Evidence from the Mae Sa Watershed, Northern Thailand, Environment and Production Technology Division, EPTD
Discussion Paper, WO 128.
Page 73
6) Madhavareddy K.V(2001):People Participation in Watershed Development Programme Implemented by Government and Non-Government organization. A Comparative analysis. M.Sc.,(Agri.) Thesis. Agriculture Sciences, Bangalore. University of
7) Nirmala B.(2003):Impact of Watershed Development Programme on SocioEconomic Dimensions of Beneficiaries on Rangareddy district of Andra Pradesh published M.Sc.,(Agri) Thesis, University of Agriculture Sciences, Dharwad.
8) Rama Mohanrao M.S.(1996):Soil and Water conservation through Watershed
Management in the Semi-arid Region of South India in Watershed Development. Proceedings of Paridas Int. Workshop on W.D,
WDVC, New Delhi.
9) Ramesh R.S. and Srinivasa Gowda, M.V.2001:Economic Analysis of Watershed Development Programme Finance Agriculture 33(1) 22-24.
10)
Singh J.P. (2000):Economic evaluation of Manchal Watershed, MANAGE, Hyderabad.
Page 74
11)
Sridhara K. (2002):An Evaluation Study of Watershed Programme in Pavagada
Taluk of Tumkur District in Karnataka, M.Sc.,(Agri) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, Karnataka, India.
12)
Krishnappa A.M., Arunkumar Y.S. Reddy, T.G. and Watershed Approach A Boon for dry Land farming: The
Nagaraju, (1994):-
Experience of Operational Research Project in Kabbalanala ORP. KWMS, UAS. Bangalore.
13)
Kumar S.C.R., (1993):Risk Efficient Farming Systems for Eastern Dry Zone: A
Comparative Study of Watershed and Non-watershed area in Karnataka, Ph.D., Thesis submitted to UAS. Bangalore.
14)
Kallur M.S(1991):Social-economic impact of Muchkullanala Watershed development project, Gulbarga district(Karnataka) A case study of pattern village, Ind. J.Agriculture Economics, 46(3):314.
15)
Jensen J.R. (1996):Watershed development, concept and issues, Watershed
development: Proceedings of Danidas International Workshop on Watershed Development WDCU, New Delhi, 43-46.
Page 75
16)
Jyothi G.V(1991):Agricultural Development through Watershed Management
Approach: A Case study of Maheswara Watershed, M.Sc.,(Ag) Thesis submitted to APAU, Hyderabad.
17)
Narasamma P.L., Reddy, Y.V.R. Krishnaiah, J. and Raju
K.S., (1991):Watershed Programme An Economic analysis, Ind J.Agriculture Economics., 46(3):317. 18) Ananymous (1981):Status of Soil and Water Conservation Activities in River Valley Project Catchment Area under Centrally Sponsored Programme of Watershed Management In India.
19)
Dr.H.M.Nagabhushana:-
Agricultural Development through Watershed Approach An Economic Analysis of Kabbanala Watershed in Karnataka. Himala Publishing House.
20)
Misra and Puri:Himalaya Publishing
Indian Economy, 28th Revised Edition. House.
21)
Singh K.(1991):Dry land Watershed Development and Management: A case
study in Karnataka. Ind J.Agricultural Economics 46(2): 121-132.
Page 76
22)
Atheeq L.K. and Venkataram J.V 1989:Optimum land use pattern of a Watershed A study of
Kabbanala Watershed Project, Karnataka, Ind. J. Agril, Econ., 44(3): 268-269.
23)
Verma A.R- Rajpu A.M. and Srivastava(2004):-
Economic evaluation of National Watershed Development Programme for rainfed agriculture in Indore District of Madhyra Prades.
24)
Yoganand B. and Gebremedhin T.G.(2006):Watershed Management of sustainable rural
Participatory
livelihoods in India, Research paper-2, West Virginia University, Orlando, Florida, February 5-8, 2006.
25)
Batia S.-1991:-
Labour Absorption through integrated Watershed development. Ind.J.Agril.Econ.46(3): 306-307.
26)
WWW.Watershed development in India.
Page 77
Page 78

Report On

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Report On

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

formulation of similar projects for

sustainable development. It would

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

watershed planning in Shikaripura.

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Chapter II Review of literature:-

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Planning for Watershed Development. Dr.Blackmore is now Professor of Agricultural Economics,

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Chapter III PROFILE OF THE STUDY AREA

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

260 6 24 803 1334 230

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Expenditure on watershed development in lakhs 2846.28 [10years]

Major crops and other productivity

1334 179 1.96 1426/3.24 34.57 3.74 918 [100%]

450000 400000 350000 300000 250000 200000 150000 100000 50000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

OFFICERS OF WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT OFFICE: NAME` JOBS PLACE

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Central Government 5 years planning

Statement Government 10%

Central Government Statement Government

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

planning a developmental initiative.

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura

A Case Study of Watershed Development Offices In Shikaripura

Department of Economics and P G Center Shikaripura