Impact Assessment of ACA Watersheds Through Mid-Term Evaluation in Kalahandi District of Odisha, India

DOI : 10.17577/IJERTV3IS090509

Download Full-Text PDF Cite this Publication

Text Only Version

Impact Assessment of ACA Watersheds Through Mid-Term Evaluation in Kalahandi District of Odisha, India

A. P. Sahu1 N. Sahoo2 1 & 2Associate Professors

Department of Soil & Water Conservation Engineering College of Agricultural Engineering & Technology OUAT, Bhubaneswar, India

Abstract- The overall performance of watershed programmes has been examined for 16 nos. of micro-watersheds for the first 3 years through mid-term evaluation in the state of Odisha. The impacts of major watershed programmes have been outlined in terms of bio-physical impacts, environmental impacts, socio-economic impacts and overall economic impacts. The watershed development activities have made significant positive impacts on various bio-physical aspects like soil and water conservation, soil and water erosion in the cropped area, changes in cropping pattern, cropping intensity, rise in water table, perenniality of water in wells, water availability for livestock and other domestic purposes. The peoples participation in watershed development activities, training and capacity building of farmers has been found very effective in gaining technical knowhow. The different commercial ventures taken up by the stakeholders in the watersheds were also found to increase.

Key Words Watershed; impact; socio-economic; environmental; afforestation; water resources

  1. INTRODUCTION

    Indian agriculture is predominantly rainfed. Out of 143 million hectare of total cultivated area in the country, nearly 70 per cent areas are rainfed and about 42 per cent are dry land areas. Erratic distribution of rainfall in the country has always posed a serious threat to Indian agriculture and hence shattered the socio-economic status of Indian farmers. The reduction in productivity, deforestation and ground water depletion have also posed a serious concern to the path of agricultural development.

    In India most of the watershed projects are implemented with the twin objectives of soil and water conservation and enhancing the livelihood status of the rural poor [6]. Different types of interventions carried out in a watershed include, soil and moisture conservation measures in agricultural lands (contour/field bunding and summer ploughing), drainage line treatment (loose boulder check dam, minor and major check dam, retaining walls etc.), water resource development and management (farm pond, dug well, percolation pond and micro-irrigation), crop diversification, crop demonstration, horticultural and silvicultural plantation and afforestation [1]. The aim has been to ensure the accessibility and availability of drinking water, fuel wood and fodder and raise income and

    employment for farmers and landless labourers through improvement in agricultural production and productivity [3]. Active participation of people is a good indicator for sustainable development in a watershed [4]. The other impact indicators were far ahead in watersheds having greater peoples participation. The importance of watershed programme was recognized by the villagers through awareness created by Project Implementation Agencies (PIAs) and watershed development team members through meetings, display boards, wall painting etc. [5]. The impacts of the Integrated Watershed Management Program in selected tribal areas of Gujarat and Chhattisgarh, India was assessed and positive link between watershed management and sustainable development was found [2].

    Additional Central Assistance (ACA) watersheds under Revised Long Term Action Plan (RLTAP) is one of the major schemes launched and implemented to improve and conserve the natural resources through watershed basis. The Government of Odisha introduced this programme in all the hilly districts following the direction outlined by the Govt. of India. More than 80 per cent upland areas in all the hilly districts are mostly rainfed. In Western Undulating Zone of Odisha i.e. in Kalahandi district, the watershed development programme was implemented over geographical area of 10532 ha, from which, arable and non-arable land was 6472.5 ha and 2917.5 ha, respectively. The treatable arable area and non- arable area was to the tune of 3466.12ha and 1337.7 ha, respectively (Table 1). Thus impact assessment of those watersheds is necessary for further development.

  2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

    Mid-term evaluation of ACA watersheds was conducted in all the eight randomly selected watersheds out of the total 16 nos. of ACA watershed located in 8 blocks of the district (Table 1). The watershed evaluation team had detailed discussion with project implementation agencies and watershed committee members separately during their visit. Interactions with the beneficiary farmers, members of user groups (UGs), self-help groups (SHGs) and watershed committees were made. The factors on which the team emphasized in assessing the achievements

    were physical and financial progress, status of water harvesting structures (WHS), increase in ground water level, plantation, soil conservation measures etc., participation in project implementation and contribution, constraints in achieving the target, training and skill development, social management of resources and socio- economic development of the UGs and SHGs. For impact assessment study, emphasis was given on women and SC/ST representation in watershed committees, constitution of SHGs and UGs, conduct of training/capacity building, exposure visits to stake-holders, conduct of regular meetings of watershed committees and watershed association, preparation of micro action plan, soil and moisture conservation works executed, water harvesting structures executed, methodology adopted for afforestation and horticulture.

  3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

    The different interventions taken in the watersheds were contour and graded bunding, continuous and staggered contour trenches, ring ditches, vegetative barriers, rock fill dams, loose boulder structures, farm ponds, percolation tanks, sunken ponds, check dams, runoff management structures, water harvesting structures, afforestation, renovation of existing structures, vermi compost pits, agro forestry plantation, agri-horti system, silviculture, mushroom cultivation, broiler farming, goat rearing, sheep rearing, cow rearing, bee-keeping, duckery, pisci-culture and kitchen gardens.

    Table 1 Areal distribution for treatment of ACA Watershed under RLTAP of Kalahandi district

    Block

    Name of watershed

    Code No.

    Treatable area (ha)

    Area treated (ha)

    Percentage of area treated

    Bhawanipatna

    Sardhapur

    04-07-01-02-08-07-02-03

    520

    251.00

    48.27

    Dorapadar

    04-07-01-02-08-07-02-01

    506

    232.00

    45.85

    Kesinga

    Kundabandha

    04-07-01-02-08-10-01-02

    660

    246.00

    37.27

    Gaudtola

    04-07-01-02-08-11-02-01

    463

    264.00

    57.02

    Narla

    Sripali

    04-07-01-02-06-27-02-03

    700

    214.00

    30.57

    Dengsargi

    04-07-01-02-06-27-01-02

    700

    210.00

    30.00

    M. Rampur

    Podagudi

    04-07-01-02-04-04-01-1

    550

    238.00

    43.27

    Kadamdunguri

    04-07-01-02-04-04-01-02

    600

    261.00

    43.50

    Lanjigarh

    Gopalpur

    04-07-01-02-07-10-02-02

    660

    405.00

    61.36

    Sikerkupa

    04-07-01-02-07-09-01-02

    700

    372.00

    53.14

    Th. Rampur

    Raj Khandual

    04-07-01-05-03-01-01-02

    300

    278.00

    92.67

    Maa Manikeswari

    04-07-01-11-06-01-01-02

    300

    278.00

    92.67

    Koksara

    Bangomunda

    04-07-01-05-06-07-01-01

    600

    297.39

    49.57

    Badpodaguda

    04-07-01-05-06-07-01-01

    500

    303.47

    60.69

    Golamunda

    Siva Shakti

    04-07-01-05-01-03-02-04

    700

    353.96

    50.57

    Bordi Kuhura

    04-07-01-05-01-06-02-01

    650

    600.00

    92.31

    Total

    9109

    4803.82

    55.54

    Women representatives in the committee ranged from 25 to 57 per cent. Majority of the representatives of Sardapur (53%), Dorapadar (57%), Rajkhandual (30%) and Maa Manikeswari (30%) watershed committees (WCs) were actively participating and raising their voice and feelings in different watershed activities and meetings for decision making (Table 2). The SC and ST representation in the watershed committee ranged from 25 to 90 per cent in all the 16 watersheds of the district. The maximum SC/ST representation was from Raj Khandual (90%) and

    Maa Manikeswari (90%) watersheds. A total of 479 numbers of SHGs and UGs consisting of male and female were constituted in all the watersheds. Some of the women SHGs had been engaged in vegetable marketing, tailoring, preparation of spice powder, black gram products like noodles and cakes making, poultry farming, mushroom cultivation and preservation of fruits and vegetables. The SHG of Gaudtola has taken keen interest in pisciculture.

    Table 2 Peoples participation in ACA Watershed of Kalahandi district

    Name of watershed

    Women representative (%)

    SC/ST representative (%)

    Constitution of SHGs / UGs (No.)

    Sardhapur

    53

    42

    27

    Dorapadar

    57

    39

    36

    Kundabandha

    30

    30

    37

    Gaudtola

    30

    30

    35

    Sripali

    30

    30

    52

    Dengsargi

    25

    25

    43

    Podagudi

    30

    30

    33

    Kadamdunguri

    30

    40

    56

    Gopalpur

    25

    70

    12

    Sikerkupa

    25

    60

    10

    Raj Khandual

    30

    90

    10

    Maa Manikeswari

    30

    90

    13

    Bangomunda

    30

    80

    23

    Badpodaguda

    30

    70

    29

    Siva Shakti

    30

    30

    35

    Bordi Kuhura

    30

    30

    28

    Total

    515

    786

    479

    Average

    32.19

    49.13

    29.94

    1. Soil and Moisture Conservation Measures

      There were 149 earthen bunds and 281km of continuous contour trenches (CCTs) in 109.8 ha of land. Different areas of the watersheds had been treated witp03 vegetative check dams, 40 rock fill dams, 162 loose boulder structures (Table 3). These structures were found to be functioning well in Dorapoadar and Gopalpur watersheds except at few places, where the structures had been damaged/silted up or both and needed maintenance.

      There were 102 farm ponds, 29 percolation tanks, 42 drought/sunken ponds, 33 check dams, 38 nala bunding structures and 101 other structures like runoff storage structures/ water harvesting structures/ runoff management structures and ring wells (Table 4). Maximum 85 water harvesting structures including different types of water storage bodies had been constructed in Kadamdunguri watershed, which indicated the active participation the people.

      Table 3 Conservation measures taken in ACA watersheds

      41

      Name of watershed

      Bunding

      (m)

      Area coverage under CCT (ha)

      Vegetative checks

      (Nos.)

      Earthen bunds

      (Nos.)

      LBS

      (Nos.)

      Rock filled dams (Nos.)

      Sardhapur

      1664

      55

      32

      63

      3

      2

      Dorapadar

      2551

      47

      38

      72

      12

      10

      Kundabandha

      200

      49

      10

      0

      0

      8

      Gaudtola

      250

      53

      15

      0

      8

      0

      Sripali

      524

      43

      03

      2

      2

      2

      Dengsargi

      618

      42

      04

      5

      12

      3

      Podagudi

      201

      48

      02

      3

      2

      0

      Kadamdunguri

      1012

      52

      02

      4

      10

      0

      Gopalpur

      805

      81

      03

      0

      40

      0

      Sikerkupa

      328

      74

      04

      0

      13

      0

      Raj Khandual

      258

      56

      03

      0

      10

      10

      Maa Manikeswari

      277

      55

      05

      0

      20

      0

      Bangomunda

      481

      59

      15

      0

      10

      5

      Badpodaguda

      251

      61

      08

      0

      8

      0

      Siva Shakti

      286

      71

      0

      12

      0

      Bordi Kuhura

      249

      120

      0

      0

      1

      Total

      9955

      966

      144

      149

      162

      Average

      622.19

      60.38

      10.29

      9.31

      10.13

      2.56

      Table 4 Water harvesting measures taken in ACA watersheds

      Name of watershed

      Farm ponds

      (Nos)

      Percolation tanks (Nos)

      Drought/Sunken ponds

      (Nos)

      Check dams (Nos)

      Nala bunding structures (Nos)

      Ring wells

      (Nos)

      Sardhapur

      13

      2

      4

      5

      1

      15

      Dorapadar

      22

      2

      5

      7

      0

      23

      Kundabandha

      0

      3

      0

      2

      0

      6

      Gaudtola

      1

      1

      16

      0

      0

      7

      Sripali

      1

      2

      2

      5

      2

      0

      Dengsargi

      4

      2

      1

      3

      3

      0

      Podagudi

      20

      6

      3

      0

      7

      5

      Kadamdunguri

      40

      5

      4

      11

      25

      0

      Gopalpur

      0

      0

      0

      0

      0

      9

      Sikerkupa

      0

      0

      0

      0

      0

      6

      Raj Khandual

      0

      0

      0

      0

      0

      1

      Maa Manikeswari

      0

      0

      0

      0

      0

      1

      Bangomunda

      1

      3

      1

      0

      0

      3

      Badpodaguda

      0

      1

      6

      0

      0

      4

      Siva Shakti

      0

      2

      0

      0

      0

      8

      Bordi Kuhura

      0

      0

      0

      0

      0

      13

      Total

      102

      29

      42

      33

      38

      101

      Average

      6.38

      1.81

      2.63

      2.06

      2.38

      6.31

      Afforestation was done in private and common lands separately over an area of 303.45 ha with 2,60,520 numbers of seedlings like teak, cashew, mango, acacia, amla, gamhari, bamboo, subabul, chakunda, karanja, simaruba and golmohur plants. Major plantations of acacia, amla, gamhari, bamboo, subabul, chakunda, karanja,

      simaruba and teak had been taken up in community lands and fruit plants like mango, cashew and some forest species in private lands. It was found that around 153.55 ha of private and community land was under fruit tree plantation. The survival rate of the horticultural plantation varied from 50 to 60 per cent (Table 5).

      Table 5 Afforestation in ACA watersheds of Kalahandi district

      Name of watershed

      Area covered (ha)

      No of seedlings planted

      Survival percentage (%)

      Private land

      Common land

      Private land

      Common land

      Private land

      Common land

      Sardhapur

      26

      15

      41600

      24000

      80

      75

      Dorapadar

      18

      12

      18800

      15360

      95

      82

      Kundabandha

      2.5

      4500

      4500

      60

      Gaudtola

      2.5

      30

      50000

      50000

      70

      72

      Sripali

      20

      32000

      71

      Dengsargi

      20

      34000

      50

      Podagudi

      41

      10000

      65

      Kadamdunguri

      48

      10500

      70

      Gopalpur

      10

      16000

      95

      Sikerkupa

      Raj Khandual

      10

      16000

      82

      Maa Manikeswari

      15

      24500

      85

      Bangomunda

      16

      21000

      83

      Badpodaguda

      10

      20

      15350

      33240

      90

      81

      Siva Shakti

      16

      22

      23500

      35600

      75

      71

      Bordi Kuhura

      8

      12

      11400

      17350

      65

      76

      Total

      134

      240

      242650

      266550

      880

      713

      Average

      12.18

      24.00

      22059.09

      24231.82

      80.00

      71.30

    2. Impact Assessment

    Different watershed activities were taken up to conserve soil and moisture, develop water resources and increase green cover in the watershed area so as to maintain the ecological balance. From the ground water study it was revealed that the water level in the watershed area increased by 0.15 to 3.0 m after the developmental activities taken up in the watersheds. As evidence to ground water rise, 100 dug wells had been rejuvenated in the watershed area as per the observation of evaluation

    experts. In addition to this 101 additional dug wells were also constructed in the watersheds during the programme. An additional area of 1497.8 ha had been brought under cultivation with rehabilitation of gullied lands and bunding of uplands, which helped to increase the infiltration opportunity time of runoff water in the watershed. Then the above area was brought under irrigation due to development of water resources in the boundary of watersheds (Table 6).

    Table 6 Impact assessment of ACA watersheds of Kalahandi district with respect to water resources development

    Name of watershed

    Increase in water levels

    (m)

    Dug wells rejuvenated (nos.)

    Additional dug wells (nos.)

    Average soil depth deposited across check dams*

    (cm)

    Percentage of runoff loss

    (%)

    Sardhapur

    1.5

    17

    15

    12.0

    25.5

    Dorapadar

    1.8

    38

    23

    15.0

    18.0

    Kundabandha

    1.0

    5

    11.5

    28.3

    Gaudtola

    0.9

    10

    5

    12.5

    27.5

    Sripali

    0.15

    6

    13.6

    24.0

    Dengsargi

    0.20

    2

    14.1

    24.5

    Podagudi

    2.1

    2

    10

    11.6

    31.5

    Kadamdunguri

    2.6

    6

    11

    9.8

    33.2

    Gopalpur

    1.0

    2

    10.9

    27.0

    Sikerkupa

    1.0

    2

    13.3

    21.0

    Raj Khandual

    1.2

    1

    2

    12.6

    25.3

    Maa Manikeswari

    3.0

    5

    10

    9.8

    32.0

    Bangomunda

    1.6

    2

    4

    12.7

    22.1

    Badpodaguda

    1.8

    3

    13.2

    28.0

    Siva Shakti

    2.2

    6

    6

    12.8

    26.5

    Bordi Kuhura

    2.1

    3

    5

    11.7

    16.5

    Total

    24.15

    100

    101

    197.1

    410.9

    Average

    1.51

    7.69

    7.77

    12.32

    25.68

    *After 2 years of construction

    The average cropping intensity increased from 80 to 166 per cent after 75 per cent treatment of the watersheds in 3 years (Table 7). Most of the user groups / beneficiaries were growing vegetables and other commercial crops like cotton, sunflower, spices crop like onion, chilly in the catchment areas. The high intense rains in monsoon period damaged the paddy crop in the watersheds. Due to creation of series of water harvesting structures/dug wells/farm ponds/percolation ponds/sunken ponds etc., the excess runoff resulting from high intensity rainfalls were successively stored and the same were used effectively during winter season for vegetable cultivation. The farmers of the catchments area not only saved their paddy in principal growing season (June October) during initial dry spells by providing supplemental irrigation but also grew vegetables as their second crop.

    The quick growing forest species like chakunda, subabul, simaruba ensured the availability of fuel wood as well as fodders for the goats and sheep. The availability of timber wood would take time as most of the forest species

    like teak, gamhari, acacia plants were only of 2 to 3 years old. The average bio-mass production was increased by

    24.73 per cent in case of timber and non-timber products (Table 7).

    The labour migration was reduced to 7 per cent from maximum of 50 per cent due to successful implementation of watershed activities (Table 7). Most of the labourers were getting enough wage employment due to different watershed activities, facilities created for growing second crop and other allied agricultural activities during the project period. However, the stake holders were apprehending that after completion of project the labour employment might be reduced.

    In Sardhapur and Dorapadar watershed the number of milch cows increased from 100 to 290 and 80 to 200 respectively. In other watersheds the increase in milch cows was not so much encouraging but there was enough scope for enhancing the number of milch cows in the treated areas.

    There was considerable improvement in drinking water facility in all the watersheds due to enhancement in ground water recharge either naturally or artificially or both. Now, good quantity drinking water is made available to all the watershed dwellers in the project area.

    Around 2790 nos of families had been found to be benefited directly and/or indirectly through watershed development activities, crop production, live stock production and management, fuel wood collection and other forest products, marketing of agricultural produce and value added products by SHGs and also through employment generation. From a sample estimate it was found that the annual income of stakeholders was increased from 50 to 60 per cent after 3 years of implementation of watershed programmes.

    Some commercial interventions like vermi compost pits, mushroom cultivation, broiler farming, goat and sheep rearing, bee keeping, pisciculture and duckery, agri-horticultural system and kitchen garden were taken up in most of the watersheds. The average percentage increase of above interventions in sequence per watershed was found 38.46, 24.31, 37.86, 11.60, 9.60, 19.68, 30.80, 36.79

    and 24.20 respectively (Table 8). The stakeholders were getting higher returns from the above commercial ventures through watershed development programme as per the discussions made with them.

    The user groups and SHGs were in opinion that they would look into the post project maintenance of the structures created, continue growing water efficient crops following improved cropping pattern and modern agricultural practices based on the capabilities of lands. The officials of the bank and co-operative societies were also in agreement of providing adequate loan facilities for post project maintenance activities.

  4. CONCLUSION

    Impact assessment of ACA watersheds indicated that women representation and their empowerment were very encouraging. The SC and ST representation in the watershed committee was also quite impressive. The SHGs and UGs were strengthened technically through training and exposure visits and financially through banks and co- operatives. Construction of water harvesting structures, dug wells construction and renovation, afforestation, horticultural and silvicultural development were quite impressive in terms of quality and quantity. It was realized from the study that there was considerable development of water resources due to construction of water harvesting structures, dug wells and rise in ground water table from 0.15m to 3.0m. There was also enhancement in cropping intensity from 80 to 166% due to adoption of improved cropping pattern and modern agricultural practices. Promising developments were also found in the improvement of drinking water facilities, reduction in labour migration, increase in milching cows and other animal resources like sheep, goat and poultry birds etc. In a nutshell, 174 farm families per watershed had been found to be benefited from the project. The commercial ventures taken up by the stakeholders were found to be very remunerative. The assessed programmes were economically efficient, technically feasible and socially acceptable while emphasizing on equity. Regular monitoring of environmental parameters is important for sustainable development as environmental enhancement increases the credibility and acceptability of the watershed programme.

    Table 7 Impact assessment of ACA watersheds of Kalahandi district with respect to socio-economic values

    Name of watershed

    Additional area under cultivation

    (ha)

    Cropping intensity increase

    (%)

    Increase in bio-mass, timber and non-timber (%)

    Improvement of pasture land for fodder

    (ha)

    Labour migration

    (%)

    Increase of milch cow

    (No.)

    Families benefited

    (No.)

    Before project

    After project

    Sardhapur

    18.6

    70

    150

    22

    25

    10

    290

    172

    Dorapadar

    20.6

    85

    160

    29

    15

    10

    200

    180

    Kundabandha

    104

    75

    140

    18

    10

    0

    50

    411

    Gaudtola

    85.4

    55

    150

    20

    13

    0

    30

    402

    Sripali

    10.5

    80

    150

    15

    12

    1

    10

    100

    Dengsargi

    12.2

    90

    175

    27

    15

    1

    20

    120

    Podagudi

    91.2

    85

    150

    25

    10

    0

    0

    210

    Kadamdunguri

    97.6

    90

    175

    35

    15

    0

    20

    215

    Gopalpur

    285.0

    82

    200

    40

    21

    0

    40

    20

    Sikerkupa

    270.0

    75

    150

    35

    12

    12

    45

    25

    Raj Khandual

    90.6

    80

    160

    18

    25

    0

    68

    100

    Maa Manikeswari

    101.5

    90

    170

    32

    24

    0

    20

    41

    Bangomunda

    85.5

    75

    120

    12

    2

    50

    23

    252

    Badpodaguda

    88.5

    70

    150

    14

    1

    50

    5

    175

    Siva Shakti

    106.4

    95

    250

    33

    1

    3

    5

    180

    Bordi Kuhura

    30.2

    90

    200

    18

    14

    3

    12

    187

    Total

    1497.8

    1287

    2650

    393

    215

    140

    838

    2790

    Average

    93.61

    80.44

    165.63

    24.56

    13.44

    8.75

    52.38

    174.38

    Table 8 Percentage increase in different commercial activities in ACA watersheds of Kalahandi district

    Name of watershed

    Vermi compost pits

    Mushroom cultivation

    Broiler farming

    Goat rearing

    Sheep rearing

    Bee- keeping

    Pisci-culture and duckery

    Stake holders in agri-horti system

    Kitchen garden

    Sardhapur

    100

    30.2

    52.0

    15.1

    13.2

    15.2

    50.0

    48.5

    22.5

    Dorapadar

    30

    20.2

    44.2

    13.5

    11.1

    40.0

    33.4

    23.6

    Kundabandha

    35

    22.5

    42.3

    12.6

    12.0

    30.2

    30.4

    Gaudtola

    30

    24.7

    45.6

    13.4

    9.7

    7.5

    32.2

    28.8

    Sripali

    20

    15.2

    41.7

    11.2

    15.5

    40.5

    Dengsargi

    20

    40.8

    13.6

    17.5

    42.5

    18.8

    Podagudi

    30

    50.5

    10.3

    20.0

    30.3

    50.0

    24.0

    Kadamdunguri

    45.4

    9.5

    7.8

    31.5

    35.0

    Gopalpur

    25.0

    35.0

    15.0

    25.4

    30.5

    Sikerkupa

    20

    30.3

    30.5

    14.2

    6.6

    22.5

    26.5

    Raj Khandual

    30

    22.2

    15.8

    8.6

    34.0

    27.2

    Maa

    Manikeswari

    100

    25.4

    9.0

    25.0

    19.0

    Bangomunda

    14.0

    12.4

    20.0

    Badpodaguda

    20

    12.6

    3.5

    22.6

    Siva Shakti

    50

    50.5

    46.5

    30.0

    45.0

    21.2

    Bordi Kuhura

    15

    14.4

    3.3

    60.0

    Total

    85

    63.1

    60.9

    3.5

    3.3

    30

    0

    127.6

    21.2

    Average

    38.46

    24.31

    37.86

    11.6

    9.6

    19.68

    30.8

    36.79

    24.2

  5. REFERENCES

  1. Palanisami, K. and Suresh Kumar, D. 2002. Partiipatory watershed development programmes: Institutional and policy issues, Paper presented at the Workshop on Rainfed Agriculture in Asia: Targeting Research for Development, 2-4 December, ICRISAT, Patancheru, India.

  2. Paul Bhaskar J., Pankaj, L. and Pankaj, Y.2014. Impacts of integrated watershed management program in some tribal areas of India, J. Environ. Res. Develop., Vol. 8 (04): 1005-1015.

  3. Rao, C.H. 2000. Watershed development in India: Recent experiences and emerging issues, Economic and Political Weekly, 35(45): 3943-3947.

  4. Sahu, A. P. and Pattnaik, A. K. 2009. Mid-term evaluation report of ACA watersheds of Kalahandi, Odisha, India.

  5. Sasikala, R., Thangaraja, K. and Rajasekaran, R. 2013. Mid-term evaluation of IWDP-III batch watersheds in Dharampur district, Tamilnadu, India. International Jr. of Science, Environment and Technology, Vol.2 (6): 1107-1115.

  6. Sharma, B.R. and Scott, C.A. 2005. Watershed management challenges: Introduction and overview, In: Watershed Management Challenges:Improving Productivity, Resources and Livelihoods. Eds: B.R. Sharma, J.S. Samra, C.A. Scott and S.P. Wani, International Water Management Institute (IWMI) and International Crop Research Institute for Semiarid Tropics (ICRISAT) publication. Malhotra Publishing House, New Delhi: 245-257.

Leave a Reply