1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

It can be defined as combination of structural & vegetative measures where contour bunds are constructed from the excavated sandy loam soil of cultivated wastelands in semi-arid climatic(?) zone with moderate slope in medium soil depth conditions in order to link with self-subsistance & market oriented production systems from private lands.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The area is located at the foot-slopes & hill slopes area where run-off is at peaks very often at the time of rainy season. Therefore, sand casting came as a first order priorities by the farmers of this patch. At the outset, a livelihood focused micro-plan had been prepared by the villagers stating the details of the base-line data along with problems & alternative solutions. The patch was identified to be the worst affected, concentraton of poor people (defined by villagers), people of this patch ready to contibute at least 20% of the cost. In the mean time project sent the PIA to BAIF, Bangalore to study the linking of farm ponds & its relevance in this context of our situation. As a demonstration, PIA & other technical team facilitated the villagers. One water harvesting structure was constructed by line deptt of soil conservation just at the down hills to harvest rain water & protect the lands below from sand casting. But there were no alternatives for the land users of that patch about the optimum utilisation recharged water. The surrounding area was totally unbunded with sandy loam soil. Therefore, land users are of opinion to go fo field bunding. Earlier the practice was to dig a trench at upper gadient & put a bund below it out of the excavated soil from trench. But the requirement of land users was to get some water in each farmers land to protect the Kharif & some early rabi crop.(june-dec). By which the lands where, farmers take up only minor millets for their subsistance, that too less production & land So the main purpose of this technology was to convert the land into bunded lands along with to fetch some water at the time of dry spell in between the monsoon period. A four days in field training was conducted by the project to community link workers(SWC), particularly on patch treatment, use of levelling instruments like A-frame, proper planning, design, lay-out of different type of structure in a map & ground. After many rounds of discussion with the land users, one of them ( rich farmers with more land) was ready to do it in his own land. But, the SWC specialist did a detail transact along with land users, although results of first round tansact was mentioned in the micro-plan. The main pupose was to looking at problems & demarkating on the map. After that estimate was prepared & lay-out of key contour was done by SWC specialist with the help of community link workers & land users. The work was implemented by by the labourers with the supervision of the respective User's group leade & monitoring was done by the SWC specialist. The prioty ranking by the land users vegetaive measures like vertiver & Sabai (grass plantation on the bund along the side of the bund. For that, the necessary requirement like nursery, seedling collection was done by agriculture specialist. Training was conducted on the probable alternatives of agronomic measures like taking of crop which is of little longer duration, intercrops & cash crops etc. The vegetaive & structructural measures are subsidised by the project & the agronomic measures was taken up on loan basis. The development fund was also generated out of contribution from the land users which was deposited in a separate account for future maintainance cost.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

A group of SWC proffessionals were sent to BAIF Karnatka to study the replication of ' Linking of farm ponds models. After a detail study we concluded that the climate in particular & rainfall in general of our area is not fit for that technolgy. When SWC specialist share their experience to land users, some of the farmers agreed to have a experimentation of the technology. Therefore, modification has been done by the SWC specialists as per the suitability & requirement of the land users.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Yes

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):

• Agro-silvopastoralism

Comments:

Major cash crop: Ground nut
Major food crop: Paddy/minormillets
Major other crop: Cotton
Major cash crop: Fruit like mango/Custard apple

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): This patch of the land is poor in the nutrient status in comparison to other lands of the village, with high concentration of marginal farmer. Heavy top soil erosion over the years yields to decreasing of productivity of land. The main requirement of water is in the dry spell in between the monsoon period.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): 1. Run-off was severe at the time of rainy season which causes heavy soil erosion. 2. Sand casting on down below lands . 3. Long duration crops is not possible, ex- Ground nut, paddy, cotton etc. 3. Lands was not levelled for smoothening of ploughing operation. 4. The uncultivated wasteland(according the record of rights) was distributed to some landless persons who are unable to take up any productive cultivation in these lands.

Ranching: Although technolgy is not directly applied, but indirect effect is there on grazing.

Grazingland comments: The major cause of loss in livestock is that there is no option for the villagers for stall feeding. Example- in summer no availability of green fodder or less availabity.

Type of cropping system and major crops comments: Minor Millets/ Paddy(june-Sept)- Black gram or pulses(Sep-Dec) or cotton as the sole crop for nine months.

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• cross-slope measure
• water harvesting

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: vegetative measures, structural measures

Secondary measures: agronomic measures, management measures

Type of agronomic measures: better crop cover, relay cropping, mixed cropping / intercropping, contour planting / strip cropping, legume inter-planting, manure / compost / residues, rotations / fallows, minimum tillage, pits

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -contour, aligned: -graded strips *³

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion, Wg: gully erosion / gullying

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wo: offsite degradation effects

Main causes of degradation: other human induced causes (specify) (agricultural causes - Suitable alternatives which will yield more benefit with less investments.), education, access to knowledge and support services (Knowledge sustainable livelihoods framework)

Secondary causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires) (Maintainance & responsibility sharing for protection), over-exploitation of vegetation for domestic use (Particularly vegetation which yields non-timber forest produce.), overgrazing (Uncontrolled & free grazing at the period Dec-June restricts the land users to go for second crop.), other natural causes (avalanches, volcanic eruptions, mud flows, highly susceptible natural resources, extreme topography, etc.) specify (Frequent drought occurs in every alternative 3rd year.), poverty / wealth (Initiation of any activities for sustainance of livelihoods need some capital)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

Comments:

Secondary goals: prevention of land degradation, mitigation / reduction of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Rupee

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

50.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Survey & alignment of key Contour & lay-out of tanks	Beginning of rainy season
2.	Digging of pits for grass, fruit plants & timber	June
3.	Collection of Vertiver & Sabai grass from external source	july
4.	Collection of seedling of Trees/Plants	July
5.	Survey & contour demarkation	April-May
6.	Demarkation on map	April-May
7.	Estimate & lay-Out	April-May
8.	Implementation of work	June
9.	Survey & Key Contour line demarkation at 75 ft interval	June
10.	Digging of Sunken ponds	July
11.	Top level dressing of bund	July
12.	Water-way with connection Dug-out sunken ponds	August

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Labour	ha	1.0	90.0	90.0	20.0
Equipment	Animal traction	ha	1.0	5.0	5.0	20.0
Plant material	Seedlings	ha	1.0	25.0	25.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					120.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					2.4

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 12 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Ploughing	April-May / annual
2.	Intercultural operation with manure application	June / annual
3.	Sowing	July & sep for two crops / each cropping season
4.	weeding & intercultural operation, if required.	July / annual
5.	Harvesting of paddy or minor millets or ground nut	Aug-sep / annual
6.	Sowing of pulses as relay crop	Aug-sep / each cropping season
7.	Harvesting of pulses	Nov-Dec / each cropping season
8.	Collapsing of bunds may damage th evegetation	Rainy Season /annual
9.	Checking against free grazing	Jan-June /
10.	Watering to plants	Dec-May /annual
11.	Management of surplus water	Rainy Season/Once in Year
12.	Collapsing of bund
13.	Tanks must be desilted	Dry season/Once in Year
14.	Control of surplus water-flow	Rainy season / once a year
15.	Stabilisation of bund at weak points	August / once a year
16.	Desiltation of ponds

4.6 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Labour	ha	1.0	4.0	4.0	100.0
Plant material	Seedlings	ha	1.0	3.0	3.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					7.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					0.14

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: in a typical area of 5 hac, around 30,000 has been spent in which 20% of the establishment cost is borned by the land users.

There are two types of dug-out sunken pits of specifications. The sunken pit was dug & the earth from the sunken pit was put on a contour bund. So the earth-work was calculated as per cubic ft. The seedlings were bought from nursery & planted with 20% contribution of labour.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Soil depth is very less, hard soil with slope variation because of undulating lands. The labour was also not sufficiently available at the time of establishment, because the work was implemented at time of main growing season. At that time land users are busy in their own field because of cultivation work.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Altitudinal zone: 101-500 m a.s.l. (as per the record in the topo-sheet No-64 P/1 with scale1:50,000)
Slopes on average: Gentle (As the stretch of land is at the hill slopes. The slope firstly from 5-8% where as the land where dug-out sunken ponds were dug is of slope 2-5%, ranked 1) and moderate (ranked 2)

5.3 Soils

If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Soil depth on average: Shallow (ranked 1, due to continuos soil erosion the topsoil eroded completely which resulted into varied soil depth where only deep rooted crops & plants are possible) and moderately deep
Soil texture: Coarse/light (Ranked 1, the soil is basically reddish in colour with sandy loam texture) and medium (ranked 2)
Soil fertility: Low (ranked 1, the soil fertility of uplands is very low where the said technology is established. But the lands near to it some what medium land with medium soil fertility) and medium (ranked 2)
Soil drainage/infiltration: Good (the watershed map from the topo-sheet shows that there only one drainage line where two contributaries are there. That is the perinneal stream where water from the lands drain out to main drainage lei, ranked 1) and poor (ranked 2)
Soil water storage capacity: Low (the soil texture being the sandy loam category, the storage capacity is very low. Therefore, after monsoon rainfall the soil is unable to maintain the water requirement at the dry spell to high percol, ranked 1) and medium (ranked 2)

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: > 500 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 0.5% - 1%
20% of the land users are very rich (1-2 farmers having more than 10-15 acre of land).
30% of the land users are average wealthy (land users having upto 5 acres(Little less in comparison to first categ).
50% of the land users are poor (land users having only0-2 acres(more in No. in this patch)).
Off-farm income specification: Others have also activities like NTFP collection, keeping small ruminants like goats, chicks etc.
Level of mechanization: Animal traction (ranked 1, wooden plough) and manual labour (ranked 2)
Market orientation cropland: subsistence (self-supply, minor millets/paddy/pulses, ranked 1) and mixed (ground nut & vegetables, ranked 2)

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:

• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)
• individual

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Other socio-economic impacts

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Other ecological impacts

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

19

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 0-10%

Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

19 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: survey results

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: Many farmers & SWC specialists visited the spot for the learning purpose. All we cannot say that it is a spontaneous adoption, but they have started taking up this technology in their own area.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Maintainance is very less How can they be sustained / enhanced? Only timely care is needed.
Land users can have water in their field other than rain water to be used for different purpose. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Some demos agriculture was done in this patch which has to be repeated for the second year for confidence building of the land users.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Water availability in the dry spell How can they be sustained / enhanced? If the land users will desilt the pond timely & care to plants grass on the bund.
The land where only one crop is possible, vegetable & pulse crop can be taken up as second crop How can they be sustained / enhanced? Some methodology is to be applied to keep water in the pond for longer duration.

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
Ploughing operation will be difficult.	This is although difficult but th benefit is more, therefore land users will compromise with this type of difficulty.
Water availability in dry period & desiltaion process.	This can be overcomed by planting vertiver on the sides of the pond & low cost polythene can be used for prolonging percolation rate of water in sandy loam soil.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
The farmers started taking up cotton & paddy in stead of minor millets	Improved variety of minor millets is supplied to farmers for better yield in comparison to country variety.
Diversion of surplus water	The land users have to dig atleast one more feet & earthen pipes will be used for the diversion of surplus water.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information