109

7.1 Training methodology, need assessment, gender neutrality and evaluation

Capacity building programmes for watershed management in India: Assessment and impact analysis

A. Dehradun (Bankey Bihari, B.L. Dhyani and P. Dogra)

Study was initiated during the year 2008 as core project to assess the impacts of capacity building programmes of CSWCRTI, Dehradun. Study is being conducted at Headquarters Dehradun and its research centres Bellary, Chandigarh , Da t ia , Kota , Vasad and Udhagamandalam. Questionnaire for data collection from respondents and for ground truthing of selected watersheds were finalized. State-wise list of respondents (officers undergone 5½ months training) was prepared. Since April 2000 to March 2008, total 263 officers were trained. Questionnaires were mailed to all of them and 126 responses were received and analyzed. About 49.2% respondents have rated CSWCRTI as the best training institute and 63.5% rated CSWCRTI training programme as excellent. Fifty two percent respondents reported that after attending training progamme their knowledge and competency level was increased, resulting in better quality of service and work. However, they felt that impact are not up to the mark because of various constraints, viz; frequent transfers, lack of subject matter specialists at the field level, political interference, lack of interest among farmers, no appreciation for good work, delay in release of funds, little scope for midterm correction, and lack of interest among farmers.

Additional areas for training identified were: Software for designing of engineering structures; Conflict management; Accounting and auditing; and Withdrawal strategies.

For ground truthing, four watersheds (2 each developed by officers trained at CSWCRTI and 2 each developed by officers either untrained or trained by some other agency) were selected at

each centre. Collections of secondary data from two selected watersheds (one developed by officer trained at CSWCRTI and one developed by untrained officer) have been completed. Analysis of the secondary data collected so far, shows the following trends:

Detailed Project Reports (DPR) prepared by officers trained at CSWCRTI were more descriptive and realistic.Design & site selection for the cement masonry works (tanks, guhls etc.) and gabion structures (gully plugs, retaining walls, check dams etc.) along with its success and sustainability were found to be better in the watersheds developed by officers trained at CSWCRTI. Issues related to community organization, capacity building and arrangements for maintenance of CPRs were more systematic in the watersheds developed by officers trained at CSWCRTI.

Total 389 farmers (204 from the watersheds developed by officers trained at CSWCRTI and 185 from the watersheds developed by untrained officers) were covered for field survey. Data analysis shows that:

Area under cereal crops has gone down, while area under pulses, oilseeds and cash crops (vegetables and flowers) has increased in both the cases. But the changes have been significant in the case of watersheds developed by trained officers.Dependency on forest has also come down (Trained, T - 3%, Untrained, UT - 2%) after the project.Due to employment generated in the watershed, migration status of the village labourers came down (T - 26%, UT - 19%) during the project which once again went up after the projects were over.Index values of knowledge (T - 38.1, UT - 31.2), symbolic (T - 34.2, UT - 29.8) and actual (T -17.0, UT - 14.6) adoption level were a found high in the watersheds developed by trained officers.

P-7:HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

111

implementation of soil conservation works in adopted watersheds as indicated in Table 113 a&b. CPI increase ranged from 12 to 23% and LLI increase varied from 10 to 21%. Introduction of HYV of traditional crops and some new crops in the watersheds increased CDI by 12 to 21%.

(P. Sundarambal)

During the period under report the data have been obtained from 57 trainee respondents who attended training at the Centre. For ground truth verification, selected four watersheds from Vellore district as study area. The data was collected from Elavampatt i watershed (implemented by staff trained by CSWCRTI) from 50 watershed beneficiaries and analysed.

This aspect was studied with respect to 32 topics which were covered during various training

C. Udhagamandalam

Knowledge gain/use and further training needs:

programmes. In all the topics there is considerable increase in the knowledge level after attending the training. The overall training impact as found through Training Index was 44.6%. Aquaculture in farm ponds, withdrawal strategy followed by techniques for identification and prioritization of interventions under watershed management were reported by the majority of the respondents as the most needed topics for further training.

Among the constraints lack of subject matter specialists in the project team, lack of support from subordinates, lack of sufficient time for programme planning, non-availability of required inputs, technical knowledge gained was not applicable in real field situation, factionalism and conflicts among people, legal issues related to group action, lack of release of funds, lack of credit facilities to farmers and lack of market support to the farmers were felt as the most important by majority of the respondents.

Constraints in knowledge use/application:

Green fodder 3750 85.8 14.2 4453 95.5 4.5Dry fodder 4589 69.7 30.3 7855 85.9 14.1 Fuel 765 73.5 26.5 919 88.1 11.9

Indices Mansali (Ropar), Punjab

Sabeelpur (Panchkula),Haryana

Sultanpur (Panchkula), Haryana

IWEI 0.108 0.321 0.206Overall Knowledge Index 0.516 0.658 0.461 Overall Adoption Index 0.667 0.730 0.517People Participation Index (%) 64 86 72Livestock Value Index(%) 211.2 163.1 147.6Training Index (%) 63.2 74.3 64.9BCR 1.49 2.02 1.61

Indices Mansali (Ropar), Punjab Sabeelpur (Panchkula), Haryana Sultanpur (Panchkula), Haryana

Rabi Kharif 0.48

0.69

CDI 0.190 0.575 0.816 0.281 0.618CLUI 0.321 0.249 0.312 0.169 0.296CPI 0.413

0.314 0.338 0.531

0.431 0.234 0.565 0.726

0.420 0.226 0.545

0.597 0.353 0.769

0.604 0.242 0.517 0.741 0.460

0.429 0.255 0.623

0.5530.2110.354 0.580

Rabi Kharif0.52 0.62 0.45 0.60

Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif

Before After Before After Before After

LLI

110

B. Chandigarh

People's participation index value in all three phases, viz; planning (T - 15.8, UT - 11.7), implementation (T - 26.3, UT - 20.6) and maintenance (T - 10.2, UT - 8.9) were found to be higher in comparison to the watersheds developed by trained officers.

(S.L. Arya)

Total area of Sultanpur, surrounded by Shivalik foothills under Raipur Rani block in Panchkula (Haryana), is 191.41 ha inhabited by 96 numbers of households (total population of 523) with 179 ha under cultivation. The whole area was rainfed before the S&WC work started during 1997-2001 (Table 110). Whole agricultural land used to be barren and erosive in nature having gullies, nalas, and choe and undulated and fragmented without irrigation facilities. Data was collected from 42 beneficiaries from Sultanpur watershed where following soil conservation work were done under NWDPRA project.

capacities reduced to 392 and 290 cu-m, respectively due to siltation. 59 ha of agricultural area were treated with various improved agronomical measures. Average land holding size was 2.9 ha. Area under irrigation was 68%, which has increased from 54 to 83 ha after the soil conservation works. By introducing improved crop production technologies, area under vegetable cultivation and cash crops like sugarcane and onion increased from 1.3 to 10.8 ha. Yield of wheat increased by 29%, paddy 24%, pulses by and fodder crops by 93% (Table 111).

The income sources had undergone a transformation and the farm income and income from sale of milk increased by 44 and 46%, respectively. Increased engagement of labour in agriculture and animal husbandry activities, emigration of labour in search of job declined. Thereby reduction in emigrant labour income was 42%. Eucalyptus plantation was done in arable and non-arable land with survival rate of 67%. Sale of Eucalyptus on individual farms fetched ̀ 16 lakhs on maturity.

Implementation of soil conservation work, farmers of the watershed increased fodder production from their agriculture fields. Their dependence on forest for both green and dry fodder reduced after the project as a result of increased fodder from agricultural fields (Table 112).

Various indices were worked out to measure the impact of watershed development projects like Crop Diversification Index (CDI), Cultivated Land Utilization Index (CLUI), Crop Productivity Index (CPI) and Land Levelling Index (LLI). The results revealed remarkable improvement in all the indices after the

Impact indices:

Works Numbers Unit cost of structure

Earthen gully plugs 10 20,000 - 30,000Earthen structures 1 4500

Small sunken pond 10 2000 Runoff management pond 2 3000

Dugout pond 2 25000Dry stone structures 25 4000

Kharif crops Yield (q ha-1) % increase Rabi crops Yield (q ha-1) % increaseBefore After Before After

Paddy 28.9 35.7 23.5 Wheat (Irrig.) 25.6 33.1 29.3 Maize 14.8 21.5 45.3 Wheat (Rainfed) 8.6 13.5 57.0 Chari 89.9 118.5 31.8 Taramira 2.0 2.0 0.0Urd 12.0 20.0 66.7 Berseam Nil 334.7Bajra 8.7 16.8 93.1 onion Nil 102.5 Sugarcane Nil 290.6 Masari 5.4 6.9 27.8

Toria 12.5

Designed capacity of both the runoff management ponds was 318 cu-m. Present

ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12

111

implementation of soil conservation works in adopted watersheds as indicated in Table 113 a&b. CPI increase ranged from 12 to 23% and LLI increase varied from 10 to 21%. Introduction of HYV of traditional crops and some new crops in the watersheds increased CDI by 12 to 21%.

(P. Sundarambal)

During the period under report the data have been obtained from 57 trainee respondents who attended training at the Centre. For ground truth verification, selected four watersheds from Vellore district as study area. The data was collected from Elavampatt i watershed (implemented by staff trained by CSWCRTI) from 50 watershed beneficiaries and analysed.

This aspect was studied with respect to 32 topics which were covered during various training

C. Udhagamandalam

Knowledge gain/use and further training needs:

programmes. In all the topics there is considerable increase in the knowledge level after attending the training. The overall training impact as found through Training Index was 44.6%. Aquaculture in farm ponds, withdrawal strategy followed by techniques for identification and prioritization of interventions under watershed management were reported by the majority of the respondents as the most needed topics for further training.

Among the constraints lack of subject matter specialists in the project team, lack of support from subordinates, lack of sufficient time for programme planning, non-availability of required inputs, technical knowledge gained was not applicable in real field situation, factionalism and conflicts among people, legal issues related to group action, lack of release of funds, lack of credit facilities to farmers and lack of market support to the farmers were felt as the most important by majority of the respondents.

Constraints in knowledge use/application:

Green fodder 3750 85.8 14.2 4453 95.5 4.5Dry fodder 4589 69.7 30.3 7855 85.9 14.1 Fuel 765 73.5 26.5 919 88.1 11.9

Indices Mansali (Ropar), Punjab

Sabeelpur (Panchkula),Haryana

Sultanpur (Panchkula), Haryana

IWEI 0.108 0.321 0.206Overall Knowledge Index 0.516 0.658 0.461 Overall Adoption Index 0.667 0.730 0.517People Participation Index (%) 64 86 72Livestock Value Index(%) 211.2 163.1 147.6Training Index (%) 63.2 74.3 64.9BCR 1.49 2.02 1.61

Indices Mansali (Ropar), Punjab Sabeelpur (Panchkula), Haryana Sultanpur (Panchkula), Haryana

Rabi Kharif 0.48

0.69

CDI 0.190 0.575 0.816 0.281 0.618CLUI 0.321 0.249 0.312 0.169 0.296CPI 0.413

0.314 0.338 0.531

0.431 0.234 0.565 0.726

0.420 0.226 0.545

0.597 0.353 0.769

0.604 0.242 0.517 0.741 0.460

0.429 0.255 0.623

0.5530.2110.354 0.580

Rabi Kharif0.52 0.62 0.45 0.60

Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif

Before After Before After Before After

LLI

110

B. Chandigarh

People's participation index value in all three phases, viz; planning (T - 15.8, UT - 11.7), implementation (T - 26.3, UT - 20.6) and maintenance (T - 10.2, UT - 8.9) were found to be higher in comparison to the watersheds developed by trained officers.

(S.L. Arya)

Total area of Sultanpur, surrounded by Shivalik foothills under Raipur Rani block in Panchkula (Haryana), is 191.41 ha inhabited by 96 numbers of households (total population of 523) with 179 ha under cultivation. The whole area was rainfed before the S&WC work started during 1997-2001 (Table 110). Whole agricultural land used to be barren and erosive in nature having gullies, nalas, and choe and undulated and fragmented without irrigation facilities. Data was collected from 42 beneficiaries from Sultanpur watershed where following soil conservation work were done under NWDPRA project.

capacities reduced to 392 and 290 cu-m, respectively due to siltation. 59 ha of agricultural area were treated with various improved agronomical measures. Average land holding size was 2.9 ha. Area under irrigation was 68%, which has increased from 54 to 83 ha after the soil conservation works. By introducing improved crop production technologies, area under vegetable cultivation and cash crops like sugarcane and onion increased from 1.3 to 10.8 ha. Yield of wheat increased by 29%, paddy 24%, pulses by and fodder crops by 93% (Table 111).

The income sources had undergone a transformation and the farm income and income from sale of milk increased by 44 and 46%, respectively. Increased engagement of labour in agriculture and animal husbandry activities, emigration of labour in search of job declined. Thereby reduction in emigrant labour income was 42%. Eucalyptus plantation was done in arable and non-arable land with survival rate of 67%. Sale of Eucalyptus on individual farms fetched ̀ 16 lakhs on maturity.

Implementation of soil conservation work, farmers of the watershed increased fodder production from their agriculture fields. Their dependence on forest for both green and dry fodder reduced after the project as a result of increased fodder from agricultural fields (Table 112).

Various indices were worked out to measure the impact of watershed development projects like Crop Diversification Index (CDI), Cultivated Land Utilization Index (CLUI), Crop Productivity Index (CPI) and Land Levelling Index (LLI). The results revealed remarkable improvement in all the indices after the

Impact indices:

Works Numbers Unit cost of structure

Earthen gully plugs 10 20,000 - 30,000Earthen structures 1 4500

Small sunken pond 10 2000 Runoff management pond 2 3000

Dugout pond 2 25000Dry stone structures 25 4000

Kharif crops Yield (q ha-1) % increase Rabi crops Yield (q ha-1) % increaseBefore After Before After

Paddy 28.9 35.7 23.5 Wheat (Irrig.) 25.6 33.1 29.3 Maize 14.8 21.5 45.3 Wheat (Rainfed) 8.6 13.5 57.0 Chari 89.9 118.5 31.8 Taramira 2.0 2.0 0.0Urd 12.0 20.0 66.7 Berseam Nil 334.7Bajra 8.7 16.8 93.1 onion Nil 102.5 Sugarcane Nil 290.6 Masari 5.4 6.9 27.8

Toria 12.5

Designed capacity of both the runoff management ponds was 318 cu-m. Present

ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12

113

F. Datia (Om Prakash)

The watershed namely, Kalipahari developed and managed by the trained officers/assistants and another watershed namely, Agora-Rawatpura developed and managed by the untrained officers/assistants were selected for the purpose of the study. Different watershed interventions like, check dam, percolation tank, land levelling/ bunding, plantation of forest and horticultural plants, ber budding and demonstrations of different kharif and rabi crops etc. were taken up in arable and non-arable lands of the selected watersheds. Total funds utilized in the watershed managed by trained officers/staff were about 74% as compared to 43% in the watershed managed by untrained officers/staff. Further, the data collected from 100 farmers (50 farmers in each watershed) in both the watersheds. The results showed that the level of knowledge of farmers about SWC technologies (73%), adoption (55%), people's participation (61%) and women's participation in decision making (46%) were more in the watershed developed by trained officers/staff as compared to untrained officers/staff. Further, different indices were also worked out in both the selected watersheds.

The results indicated that the values of CDI, CLUI, CPI, IWEI, KI, SAI, AAI and PPI were more (0.417, 0.144, 0.39, 0.04, 0.53, 0.56, 0.52 and 0.63) in the Kalipahari watershed developed

Dagarwaha. The yield increase ranged from 40-112% in maize and urd in Sizawaha as well as in Dagarwaha was observed though increase in area under irrigation and use of high yielding variety seeds of maize and pulses and use of harvested water during dry spells by the farmers. Different indices calculated for both the watersheds is given in Table 115.

(G.L. Bagdi and V.C. Pande)

Two watersheds were selected during the year 2011-12, one watershed Dethli from the Gujarat State Land Development Corporation (GSLDC) because the staff of GSLDC was trained CSWCRTI, RC, Vasad and another watershed in Dholka taluka (Naniboru) developed by other organizations.

The data analysis revealed that due to adoption of soil and water conservation technologies the water table in the watershed area was increased and the farmers were able to irrigate their crops in rabi season also. The agricultural production was also increased due to more availability of water.

In the Naniboru watershed developed by Mahiti Development Centre (MDC), the data showed that due to rainwater harvesting and storage through farm ponds and check dams the wheat production increased more than 50% due to availability of irrigation water in rabi season especially in the Bhal region.

E. Vasad

Indices Sizawaha Watershed (implemented by CSWCRTI trainee)

Dagarwaha Watershed(Non CSWCRTI trainee)

Before project After project BP AP Crop Diversification Index (CDI)

0.548 0.476

0.561 0.417

0.619 0.441

0.587 0.475

Cultivated land utilization index (CLUI) -- 0.665 -- 0.562 Crop Productivity Index (CPI) 0.71 0.94 0.70 0.74

Induced Watershed Eco Index (IWEI) -- 0.025 -- 0.034 Overall knowledge Index of watershed farmers -- 60.82 -- 59.52

Overall symbolic Adoption Index -- 47.18 -- 44.87 Overall Actual Adoption Index -- 29.62 -- 22.5Group Attitude Index -- 61.94 -- 57.69

People’s Participation Index -- 53.06 -- 50.73 Livestock Value Index -- 144 -- 114

Ratio of Improved to Local Animals -- 0.9 -- 0.17

112

implementation of watershed technologies and impact of training on various aspects of watershed implementation. Two watersheds Sizawaha and Dagarwaha (one each executed by officers/ assistants trained at CSWCRTI and one developed by officers/assistants non-CSWCRTI trained) executed during 2003-2006 and 2001 to 2006, respectively were selected in Babina block of Jhansi district (U.P.). Following random sampling method, 50 farmers were selected from each watershed. Per hectare cost of Sizawaha watershed execution was higher (` 6,935) as compared to Dagarwaha (` 5,915). More emphasis was given by NABARD to create WHS while Dagarwaha executed under NWDPRA, which have diversified activities (Table 114). Irrigated area increased by 58% in Sizawaha in comparison of Dagarwaha 47% after the project implementation. Cropping intensity in Sizawaha increased by 41% point while 32% points in

Selected watershed details:

Impact indicators:

D. Kota

Elavampatti watershed was implemented by JDA, Vellore under DPAP programme during 2001 to 2006 with a unit

-1cost norm of ̀ 4,000 ha in 500 ha which treated. The natural resource management work are village pond construction and renovation, construction of cattle pond, masonry check dam, sunken pond, retaining wall, desilting of supply channel, contour bunding, dry land horticulture, agroforestry, gypsum application, summer ploughing, tank silt application, crop demonstration, Jatropha cultivation, fodder development etc.

There is an increase in irrigated area (24.2%) and decrease in rainfed area (14.8%) after the project in the watershed. Due to the watershed interventions like construction of check dams, percolation ponds, increase in groundwater table and water availability in the wells more area might have been brought under irrigation.

To know the impact of the watershed programme on various aspects different indices were worked as CLUI - 0.461, CDI - 0.977 and CPI - 0.986 compared to 0.423, 0.971 and 0.892, respectively before project implementation. Increase in all the indicators after the project implying that there is an increase in usage of available area and/or duration of crop cultivation period, better crop diversification to sugarcane/horticulture crops (Photo 43) and increased yield closure to the maximum.

(Ashok Kumar)

The present study was initiated in 2008-09 to assess the training needs, constraints in

Intervention Nos. Unit Area overed

(ha) Investment

(` )

Sizawaha/AthodanaContour bund 13 RM 46.162 0.624Marginal bund 16 RM 56.458 2.173S. bund 38 RM 113.398 5.236W.H. bund 12 RM 113.824 12.077Masonry structures 31 Nos 129.586 11.754

Dagarwaha Contour bund 0 RM 0 0Marginal bund 12 RM 26.115 1.175S. bund 26 RM 91.385 4.11W.H. bund 4 RM 44.82 3.43Earthen check dams 13 RM 76.23 2.175Masonry structures 6 Nos. --- 2.605Others 0.615

Dryland Horticulture - GuavaSugarcane

ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12

113

F. Datia (Om Prakash)

The watershed namely, Kalipahari developed and managed by the trained officers/assistants and another watershed namely, Agora-Rawatpura developed and managed by the untrained officers/assistants were selected for the purpose of the study. Different watershed interventions like, check dam, percolation tank, land levelling/ bunding, plantation of forest and horticultural plants, ber budding and demonstrations of different kharif and rabi crops etc. were taken up in arable and non-arable lands of the selected watersheds. Total funds utilized in the watershed managed by trained officers/staff were about 74% as compared to 43% in the watershed managed by untrained officers/staff. Further, the data collected from 100 farmers (50 farmers in each watershed) in both the watersheds. The results showed that the level of knowledge of farmers about SWC technologies (73%), adoption (55%), people's participation (61%) and women's participation in decision making (46%) were more in the watershed developed by trained officers/staff as compared to untrained officers/staff. Further, different indices were also worked out in both the selected watersheds.

The results indicated that the values of CDI, CLUI, CPI, IWEI, KI, SAI, AAI and PPI were more (0.417, 0.144, 0.39, 0.04, 0.53, 0.56, 0.52 and 0.63) in the Kalipahari watershed developed

Dagarwaha. The yield increase ranged from 40-112% in maize and urd in Sizawaha as well as in Dagarwaha was observed though increase in area under irrigation and use of high yielding variety seeds of maize and pulses and use of harvested water during dry spells by the farmers. Different indices calculated for both the watersheds is given in Table 115.

(G.L. Bagdi and V.C. Pande)

Two watersheds were selected during the year 2011-12, one watershed Dethli from the Gujarat State Land Development Corporation (GSLDC) because the staff of GSLDC was trained CSWCRTI, RC, Vasad and another watershed in Dholka taluka (Naniboru) developed by other organizations.

The data analysis revealed that due to adoption of soil and water conservation technologies the water table in the watershed area was increased and the farmers were able to irrigate their crops in rabi season also. The agricultural production was also increased due to more availability of water.

In the Naniboru watershed developed by Mahiti Development Centre (MDC), the data showed that due to rainwater harvesting and storage through farm ponds and check dams the wheat production increased more than 50% due to availability of irrigation water in rabi season especially in the Bhal region.

E. Vasad

Indices Sizawaha Watershed (implemented by CSWCRTI trainee)

Dagarwaha Watershed(Non CSWCRTI trainee)

Before project After project BP AP Crop Diversification Index (CDI)

0.548 0.476

0.561 0.417

0.619 0.441

0.587 0.475

Cultivated land utilization index (CLUI) -- 0.665 -- 0.562 Crop Productivity Index (CPI) 0.71 0.94 0.70 0.74

Induced Watershed Eco Index (IWEI) -- 0.025 -- 0.034 Overall knowledge Index of watershed farmers -- 60.82 -- 59.52

Overall symbolic Adoption Index -- 47.18 -- 44.87 Overall Actual Adoption Index -- 29.62 -- 22.5Group Attitude Index -- 61.94 -- 57.69

People’s Participation Index -- 53.06 -- 50.73 Livestock Value Index -- 144 -- 114

Ratio of Improved to Local Animals -- 0.9 -- 0.17

112

implementation of watershed technologies and impact of training on various aspects of watershed implementation. Two watersheds Sizawaha and Dagarwaha (one each executed by officers/ assistants trained at CSWCRTI and one developed by officers/assistants non-CSWCRTI trained) executed during 2003-2006 and 2001 to 2006, respectively were selected in Babina block of Jhansi district (U.P.). Following random sampling method, 50 farmers were selected from each watershed. Per hectare cost of Sizawaha watershed execution was higher (` 6,935) as compared to Dagarwaha (` 5,915). More emphasis was given by NABARD to create WHS while Dagarwaha executed under NWDPRA, which have diversified activities (Table 114). Irrigated area increased by 58% in Sizawaha in comparison of Dagarwaha 47% after the project implementation. Cropping intensity in Sizawaha increased by 41% point while 32% points in

Selected watershed details:

Impact indicators:

D. Kota

Elavampatti watershed was implemented by JDA, Vellore under DPAP programme during 2001 to 2006 with a unit

-1cost norm of ̀ 4,000 ha in 500 ha which treated. The natural resource management work are village pond construction and renovation, construction of cattle pond, masonry check dam, sunken pond, retaining wall, desilting of supply channel, contour bunding, dry land horticulture, agroforestry, gypsum application, summer ploughing, tank silt application, crop demonstration, Jatropha cultivation, fodder development etc.

There is an increase in irrigated area (24.2%) and decrease in rainfed area (14.8%) after the project in the watershed. Due to the watershed interventions like construction of check dams, percolation ponds, increase in groundwater table and water availability in the wells more area might have been brought under irrigation.

To know the impact of the watershed programme on various aspects different indices were worked as CLUI - 0.461, CDI - 0.977 and CPI - 0.986 compared to 0.423, 0.971 and 0.892, respectively before project implementation. Increase in all the indicators after the project implying that there is an increase in usage of available area and/or duration of crop cultivation period, better crop diversification to sugarcane/horticulture crops (Photo 43) and increased yield closure to the maximum.

(Ashok Kumar)

The present study was initiated in 2008-09 to assess the training needs, constraints in

Intervention Nos. Unit Area overed

(ha) Investment

(` )

Sizawaha/AthodanaContour bund 13 RM 46.162 0.624Marginal bund 16 RM 56.458 2.173S. bund 38 RM 113.398 5.236W.H. bund 12 RM 113.824 12.077Masonry structures 31 Nos 129.586 11.754

Dagarwaha Contour bund 0 RM 0 0Marginal bund 12 RM 26.115 1.175S. bund 26 RM 91.385 4.11W.H. bund 4 RM 44.82 3.43Earthen check dams 13 RM 76.23 2.175Masonry structures 6 Nos. --- 2.605Others 0.615

Dryland Horticulture - GuavaSugarcane

ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12

114

by trained officers as compared to (0.262, 0.116, 0.28, 0.02, 0.42, 0.38, 0.33 and 0.46) in the watershed developed by un-trained officers Agora-Rawatpura. This is because of the fact that the farmers of watershed managed by trained officers could get more exposure and training.

(N. Loganandhan)

Four watersheds were selected, two each managed by the officers untrained and trained by this centre. During 2010-11, details of two watersheds were presented, viz; Mangampalli (developed by trained officers) and Mallapuram

G. Bellary

(developed by untrained officers) with reference to the second objective of the project (i.e. to evaluate the training modules and impact on implementation of watershed management programmes). In this reporting period, additional two watersheds - Appenahalli watershed from Kudiligi taluk of Bellary district (Karnataka) managed by the state department staff that were not trained by the centre and Godasalapalli watershed of Raidurga taluk of Anantapur district which were managed by the state department staff trained by this centre were selected. Details of these watersheds are depicted in the Tables 116 to 118.

Particulars Appenahalli Godasalapalli Total geographical area (ha) 557.87 500 Year of start 2006-07 2001-02 Year of completion 2010-11 2006-07 Implementing Agency Taluka Watershed Development Agency District Water Management AgencyScheme DDP-XII (Hariyali - IV) DDP-VIBunding (Area covered in ha) 42 28Waterways / Disposal drains (Area covered in ha) 24.15 --Revetment (Area covered in ha) 9.20 --Checkdam (Nos./Area covered in ha) 4 / 129.35 10 / 300 Gully checks (Area covered in ha) 9 --Nala bund 71.7 -- Farm pond -- 30 Inter or mixed cropping 9 20 Crop rotation 15 20Plantation (No. of survived trees) 6953 1900Afforestation (Area covered in ha) 17.34 8Pasture development (Area covered in ha) 10.15 --

Meeting conducted 30 25

Trainings organized 30 10Exposure visits 1 2

UGs 4 15 SHGs 4 10

Subjects Percentage response (Most needed)

Rank

Engineering 60 I Financial 50 II

Soil 40 III Perennial vegetation 40 III

Social 40 IIIField crops 30 IV

Topics Response %Participatory programme execution & 70 conflict management Tools and techniques for data collection 60Structural measures for S&W conservation 60in non-arable lands Agronomic practices for erosion control 60Design, costing & execution of soil fertility measures 60Design, costing & execution of agronomical measures 60Economic evaluation of watershed 60management programme

ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12ds-e`-t-la-vuq-iz-la- okf"kZd izfrosnu 2011&12