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

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

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)

Stakeholders participation in the project activities [India]

SWC approach is a participatory methodology to empower the community to plan, implement, monitor, evaluate and manage the SWC technology to bring about sustainability

• Compiler: Pranesh Jahagirdar
• 01/21/2009 midnight

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

A sunken structure (12 x 12 x 3 m, more suiable), constructed by escavation in arable land with a view of temporary runoff storage tapped for protective irrigation, and to increase percolation for recharge of ground water (to convert surface to subsurface flow)

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

A farm pond comprises of excavated portions of 12 x 12 x 3 m with the steps at 0.6m depth each. The excavated earth is deposited all around the structure as a bund, with a burm space of 1m. An inlet cum outlet provided in the course of flow of rain water to collect and dispose the excess runoff.

Purpose of the Technology: (1). For storage of exess runoff. (2) to increase percolation for ground water recharge, (3). To use for protective irrigation during dry period, (4). To stop further deepening of watercourse in arable lands

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Selection of beneficiary is by the community and site selection, Design/ layout and excavation by the project staff with participation of the beneficiary. Desilting of the structure is by the beneficiary

Natural / human environment: surrounding lands are more slopy and with exposed rocks, most of the surrounding area is left for grazing

2.3 Photos of the Technology

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

Country:

India

Region/ State/ Province:

Karnataka

Further specification of location:

Bijapur district, Hadalsang village

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• evenly spread over an area

If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, specify area covered (in km2):

0.028

If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:

• < 0.1 km2 (10 ha)

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 0.028 km2.

The technology area comprising of 2.8 ha within the overall watershed area of 2458 ha. The technology is useful in harvesting the excess rainwater in the arable land and re-use the for protective irigation after the rainy period.

Map

×

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.):

Department of Agriculture, Govet. Of Karnataka

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• conserve ecosystem
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts

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

Cropland

• Annual cropping

Annual cropping - Specify crops:

• cereals - sorghum
• legumes and pulses - other
• oilseed crops - castor

• Chili, brinjal (eggplants), lady's finger (okra, kind of peas)

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 2

Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 120 Longest growing period from month to month: Sep - Dec Second longest growing period in days: 90 Second longest growing period from month to month: Jul - Sep

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): The lands are very undulating (Class-V as per the Land Capability Classification), with very shallow soils, feasible for only one rainfed crops.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Poor yields due to shallow soils that too only one crop in one season, undulating lands leading to more runoff.

Type of cropping system and major crops comments: minor pulses - cereals (green gram-jowar)

Constraints of wastelands / deserts / glaciers / swamps: Highly eroded, unsuitable for any production purposes.

3.4 Water supply

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

• rainfed

Comments:

Water supply: Also mixed rainfed - irrigated (ranked 2)

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• water harvesting
• irrigation management (incl. water supply, drainage)

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

• Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
• Wg: gully erosion/ gullying
• Wo: offsite degradation effects

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wg: gully erosion / gullying, Wo: offsite degradation effects

Main causes of degradation: other natural causes (avalanches, volcanic eruptions, mud flows, highly susceptible natural resources, extreme topography, etc.) specify, poverty / wealth (lack of captial)

Secondary causes of degradation: other human induced causes (specify) (other (migration)), labour availability (lack of labour, cost of labour), education, access to knowledge and support services (lack of knowledge)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• prevent land degradation
• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

Secondary goals: prevention of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

The drawing showing the details of the farm pond. 12 x 12 x 3 m dimension. Five steps cutting on each side with 1:1 side slope. 1m birm (space) between the earthen bund. 1m wide spilway inlet cum outlet at suitable place of the site.

Location: Kallahalla nala watershed, Indi Taluk. Bijapur district of Karnataka state

Date: 20.4.2004

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate

Technical knowledge required for land users: high

Main technical functions: water harvesting / increase water supply

Secondary technical functions: increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil

Structural measure: sediment sand / trap
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 3
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 15
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 15
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 1
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 15

Construction material (earth): soil excavated from the pond is used to for bunds all around the structure with 1 m birm space.

Construction material (stone): The spillway Inlet cum Outlet is constructed using stones

For water harvesting: the ratio between the area where the harvested water is applied and the total area from which water is collected is: 1:7

Vegetation is used for stabilisation of structures.

Author:

C.G Metri, JPO, KWDP Danida Bi

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Ruppes

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

46.0

4.3 Establishment activities

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 0 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

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

Comments:

12 m x 12 m x 3 m size with all side slope of 1:1 (five steps of 0.6 m deep), Inlet cum outlet spilway constructed with stones. This indicates only the actual cost of construction. (excavation / earth wotk and stone work for inlet/outlet)

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

If the implementation site is having the hard strata, then the cost will be more.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Altitudinal zone: 501-1000 m a.s.l. (594 m a.s.l.)
Slopes on average: Gentle (ridge and valley portion)

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 (30 cm)
Soil texture: Medium (medium in valley portion)
Soil fertility: Low (along the slope of the ridge, ranked 1) and medium (valley portion, ranked 2)
Topsoil organic matter: Low (in valley portion)
Soil water storage capacity: Low (hill portion, ranked 1) and medium (valley portion, ranked 2)

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 100-200 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 3% - 4%
15% of the land users are very rich and own 5% of the land.
25% of the land users are rich and own 20% of the land.
50% of the land users are average wealthy and own 50% of the land.
10% of the land users are poor and own 15% of the land.
and own 10% of the land.
Off-farm income specification: Through sheep and goat rearing
Level of mechanization: Animal traction, (ranked 1, for ploughing, seed sowing harrowing), manual work (ranked 2, clod crushing, harvesting, threashing) and mechanised (ranked 3, Deep ploughing, levelling)

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:

• individual

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Water availability and quality

Income and costs

Other socio-economic impacts

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

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

Comments:

There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: The community is motivated with the benefits from this SWC structure. Some of them have already deepened the farmponds to increase its storage capacity.However, since most of the farmers are having very small land holdings and there was continous dry season from last three years, even if the farmers are motivated and aware of the technology of farmpond, they could not take up on their own (without financial assistance from the project.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

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

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Department Guidelines,Project Implementation plan, UAS Dharwad

Available from where? Costs?

In the office, personal contact

Title, author, year, ISBN:

PIP

Available from where? Costs?

in the office

Title, author, year, ISBN:

University of Agril. Sciences Dharwad

Available from where? Costs?

personal contact