E4632 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the National Rural Livelihood Project (NRLP) Final Report February, 2011 Document of the Government of India Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 ii Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Contents Abbreviations and Acronyms .................................................................................... vii Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 7 1.1 Project Objective ............................................................................................................ 7 1.2 Project Description ......................................................................................................... 7 1.3 Project Location ............................................................................................................. 9 1.3.1 Environment Assessment Study .......................................................................... 9 1.4 Structure of the Report ................................................................................................. 10 2. Environmental Baseline at National and State Levels ............................................ 11 2.1 Administrative Divisions ............................................................................................. 11 2.2 Population ................................................................................................................... 12 2.3 Agro-climatic zones ..................................................................................................... 14 2.4 Land Use ...................................................................................................................... 23 2.5 Land Degradation ......................................................................................................... 24 2.6 Water resources ............................................................................................................ 28 2.6.1 Rainfall and Drought ........................................................................................... 28 2.6.2 Surface water....................................................................................................... 29 2.6.3 Groundwater........................................................................................................ 31 2.6.4 Water quality ....................................................................................................... 33 2.7 Agriculture ................................................................................................................... 34 2.8 Livestock and Fisheries ................................................................................................ 40 2.8.1 Livestock ............................................................................................................. 40 2.8.2 Fisheries .............................................................................................................. 43 2.9 Energy .......................................................................................................................... 43 2.10 Forests .......................................................................................................................... 44 3. Legal and Regulatory Framework for Environmental Management ................... 48 4. Environmental Management Framework .............................................................. 62 4.1 Rationale and Objectives ............................................................................................. 62 4.2 Process of Development of the EMF .......................................................................... 62 4.3 Learnings from Bank Supported Livelihood Projects .................................................. 62 4.4 Scope of Application of EMF ...................................................................................... 63 4.5 Components.................................................................................................................. 64 4.5.1 Development of State Environment Action Plans and Locally Relevant EMPs . 64 4.5.2 EMPS by SHG Federations ................................................................................. 66 4.5.3 Environmental Management Toolkit .................................................................. 70 4.5.4 Promotion of Green Opportunities (environment-friendly livelihood activities) .......................................................................... 70 4.5.5 Climate Change Management ............................................................................ 71 4.5.6 Institutional Arrangements .................................................................................. 72 4.5.7 Capacity Building................................................................................................ 76 4.5.8 Monitoring........................................................................................................... 77 4.5.9 Implementation Roll-out Strategy ....................................................................... 81 4.6 Budget .......................................................................................................................... 84 iii Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 5. Green Opportunities for Proactive Interventions for Ensuring Sustainability of Livelihoods.............................................................................................................. 85 5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 85 5.2 Methodology ................................................................................................................ 85 5.3 Integrating Green Opportunities into NRLP ................................................................ 87 5.3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 87 5.3.2 Thematic Area 1 – Agriculture............................................................................ 87 5.3.3 Thematic Area 2 – Animal Husbandry ............................................................... 88 5.3.4 Thematic Area 3 – Renewable Energy ................................................................ 88 5.4 Phasing the Way Forward ............................................................................................ 89 5.4.1 Pathways to mainstream Green Opportunities .................................................... 90 5.4.2 Integrating EMP and Green Opportunities.......................................................... 91 5.4.3 Source of Green Opportunities ............................................................................ 93 Tables Table 2.1: Administrative Divisions in Project States ........................................................... 11 Table 2.2: Population Profile of States in Project Area (2001).............................................. 12 Table 2.3: Agro-climatic Zones in the Project Area .............................................................. 14 Table 2.4: Agro-ecological Zones in the Project Area ........................................................... 15 Table 2.5: Land Use in Project States (2006-2007) (area in thousand hectares) ................... 23 Table 2.6: Wastelands in Project States (2010) ..................................................................... 25 Table 2.7: Water bodies ......................................................................................................... 30 Table 2.8: Groundwater Development in Project States (2004) ............................................ 31 Table 2.9: Net Irrigated Area and Sources of Irrigation in Project States (2008-2009) (thousand hectares) ........................................................................................... 37 Table 2.10: Livestock Population in Project States (2003) (thousands) ................................ 41 Table 2.11: Fish production in the Project States (2003-04) ................................................. 43 Table 2.12: Protected Areas in Project States ........................................................................ 46 Table 2.13: Forest Cover in Tribal Districts in the Project Area ........................................... 47 Table 3.1: Government Acts, Rules and Regulations for Environmental Management ........ 48 Table 4.1: Application of EMF to the NRLP components..................................................... 64 Table 4.2: Support for implementation of actions identified in EMP .................................... 67 Table 4.3: Mapping of the EMF interventions with the institution building and micro-credit/livelihood interventions ..................................................................................... 69 Table 4.4: Institutional arrangements in Project structure ..................................................... 73 Table 4.5: Institutional arrangements in community institutions........................................... 74 Table 4.6: Thematic areas for training of Environment Management Coordinators ............. 76 Table 4.7: Thematic areas for training of Project Facilitating Teams .................................... 77 Table 4.8: Thematic areas for training of community members ............................................ 77 Table 4.9: Thematic areas for training of SHGs .................................................................... 77 Table 4.10: Indicators for monitoring environmental status .................................................. 78 Table 4.11: Internal monitoring of implementation of EMF ................................................. 78 Table 4.12: Phasing of EMF implementation ........................................................................ 82 Table 4.13: Addressing the Bank‘s safeguards policies through the EMF in NRLP ............. 83 Table 5.1: List of Opportunity Sets Studied .......................................................................... 86 Table 5.2: Green Opportunities – Agriculture ....................................................................... 87 Table 5.3: Green Opportunities - Renewable Energy ............................................................ 88 Table 5.4: Steps in integrating Green Opportunities into NRLP ........................................... 89 iv Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Figures Figure 2.1: Population in Project States (2001) ..................................................................... 13 Figure 2.2: Irrigated Area in Project States............................................................................ 37 Figure 2.3: Pesticide Consumption in Project States ............................................................. 39 Figure 2.4: Livestock Population in Project States (2003) (thousand in Cow Units) ............ 40 Figure 4.1: Scale of application of EMF ................................................................................ 68 Figure 5.1: Pathways to Mainstream Green Opportunities .................................................... 91 Figure 5.2: Integrating Green Opportunities into EMPs ........................................................ 92 Figure 5.3: Sources of Green Opportunities .......................................................................... 93 Charts Chart 2.1: Population Density in Project States ..................................................................... 13 Chart 2.2: Land Use in Project States (2006-2007) ............................................................... 24 Chart 2.3: Types of Wastelands in Project Area (2010) ........................................................ 25 Chart 2.4: Extent and Types of Wastelands in Project States (2010) (area in square km) ..... 26 Chart 2.5: Soil erosion in Project Area (2005) (area in thousand hectares) ........................... 26 Chart 2.6: Fertility status in Project States (2010) (percentage of districts) .......................... 27 Chart 2.7: Fertility status in Project States (2010) (number of districts) ............................... 27 Chart 2.8: Normal Rainfall in the Project Area (mm) ............................................................ 28 Chart 2.9: Probability of Drought in the Project Area ........................................................... 29 Chart 2.10: Inland Water Bodies in Project States (2003-2004) (area in lakh hectares) ....... 30 Chart 2.11: Stage of Groundwater Development in the Project States (2004) ...................... 32 Chart 2.12: Categorization of Blocks as per Groundwater Status (2004) (percentage of blocks) ........................................................................................................... 32 Chart 2.13: Water Quality Affected Habitations in Project Area (2010) ............................... 33 Chart 2.14: Water Quality Affected Habitations in Project States (2010) ............................. 33 Chart 2.15: Sown Area in Project States (2006-2007) (area in thousand hectares) ............... 34 Chart 2.16: Cropping Intensity in Project States (2006-2007) ............................................... 35 Chart 2.17: Productivity of Cereals in Project States (kg/ha) (Average of 2001-02 to 2005-06) .......................................................................................... 35 Chart 2.18: Productivity of Pulses in Project States (kg/ha) (Average of 2001-02 to 2005-06) ......................................................................................... 36 Chart 2.19: Productivity of Oilseeds in Project States (kg/ha) (Average 2001-02 to 2005-06)............................................................................................... 36 Chart 2.20: Sources of Irrigation in Project States (2008-2009) (thousand hectares)............ 38 Chart 2.21: Fertilizer Consumption in Project States (2008-2009) (kg/hectare) ................... 38 Chart 2.22: Pesticide Consumption in Project States (2002-2007) (MT) .............................. 39 Chart 2.23: Sources of Fodder in Project States (2003) (thousand hectares) ......................... 41 Chart 2.24: Production of Fodder in Project States (2002-2003) (Thousand tonnes) ............ 42 Chart 2.25: Fodder Availability and Requirement in Project States (2003) (Thousand tonnes).................................................................................................................. 43 Chart 2.26: Source of Household Cooking Energy in Project States (2004-2005) (percentage of households) .................................................................................................... 44 Chart 2.27: Forest Area in Project States (2007) (Percentage of geographic area) ............... 45 Chart 2.28: Forest Cover in Project States (2007) (Square km) ............................................ 45 Chart 2.29: Degraded Scrub Forest in Project States (2007) (Square km) ............................ 46 v Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annexes Annex A Annex 1: Overview of Implementation of EMF in Recent Bank supported Livelihood Projects in India Annex 2: Template for Environment section in the State Situational Analysis Annex 3: Template for Environmental Action Plan (EAP) as part of State Perspective and Implementation Plan (SPIP) Annex 4: Inputs to Terms of Reference for Conducting Situational Analysis and for Preparation of Environmental Action Plan (EAP) as part of State Perspective and Implementation Plan (SPIP) Annex 5: Template for Environmental Management Plan (EAP) of the SHG Primary Federation or Village Organization (VO) Annex 6: Template for Code of Practice by Producer Collectives Annex 7: Regulatory Requirements List Annex 8: Classification of Activities According to Level of Environmental Impact Annex 9: Environmental Guidelines (samples) for SHGs Annex 10: Environmental Guidelines (samples) for producer collectives Annex: 11: Curriculum outline for training of Green CRPs along with initial list of resource institutions Annex: 12: Guidance on Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA) as part of External Environmental Audit Annex: 13: Inputs to the Terms of Reference for the National Capacity Building Agency on Environmental Management Annex 14: Climate Change Adaptations and Livelihoods Annex 15: Training and Capacity Building Materials: Case Studies for Green Opportunities Annex 16A: Budget for EMF implementation Annex 16B: Budget for scaling up Annex 17: National Consultation on EMF for NRLP Annex B Annex 18: Background Reading Material on Environmental Status — State Profiles vi Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Abbreviations and Acronyms AAPs Annual Action Plans CIG Common Interest Group CMSA Community Managed Sustainable Agriculture CoP Code of Practice CRP Community Resource Persons EAP Environmental Action Plan EGs environmental guidelines G-CRPs Green-CRPs EMF Environmental Management Framework MoRD Ministry of Rural Development NMMU National Mission Management Unit NRLP National Rural Livelihood Project PFTs Project Facilitating Teams SHG Self Help Group SMMU State Mission Management Unit SPIP State Perspective and Implementation Plan SRI System for Rice Intensification SRLMs State Rural Livelihood Missions VO Village Organization vii Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Executive Summary 1. The Government of India is preparing the National Rural Livelihood Project (NRLP) that is proposed to be implemented in 100 districts and 400 blocks of 12 states with an aim to increase and sustain income of the poor, especially women. The project development objective of the proposed NRLP is to establish efficient and effective institutional platforms of the rural poor that enable them to increase household income through sustainable livelihood enhancements and improved access to financial and selected public services. This will be achieved through increased membership of the rural poor in inclusive, community-managed institutions, increased amount of resources and services leveraged by the poor from financial institutions, increase in productive assets and income from various livelihoods among the rural poor, and improved access to public services related to food, nutrition and health. 2. The project has the following four components: i. Institution building and human capacity development ii. State Livelihood Support iii. Innovation and Partnership Support iv. Project Management 3. NRLP will be implemented intensively in the villages of 400 selected blocks (approx. 100 districts) of 12 priority states of the country to demonstrate the effectiveness of the comprehensive livelihood approach. Some of the 12 states have been chosen because of their past experience in implementing Bank supported livelihood projects, where they have support structures and systems already in place to expand them to new districts through the NRLP (Bihar; Madhya Pradesh; Orissa; Rajasthan). Other States to be supported by the NRLP have been identified on the basis of high incidence of poverty and large number of rural poor (Uttar Pradesh), tribal population (Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh), and pockets of acute poverty at the sub-regional level combined with a pre-existing base of substantial social capital (Karnataka, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Gujarat, Assam). 4. This report is an environmental assessment study for the proposed NRLP. The study was conducted with the objective of understanding the environmental conditions and the related legal/regulatory framework in these states. It presents an Environmental Management Framework (EMF) that provides a strategy to manage adverse environmental impacts of livelihood activities and thereby secure livelihoods for the poor. Further, it also provides details of the institutional mechanism to operationalize the EMF. Finally, it presents a set of case studies where environmental problems have been viewed as potential opportunities for providing ―Green Solutions1‖ and built the institutional mechanism to successfully implement the solutions at scale. 5. The process of development of the EMF included:  Secondary research on environmental status of the 12 states  Review of the relevant legal and regulatory provisions  Analysis of EMF performance in existing Bank supported livelihood projects 1 Environmentally-friendly solutions 1 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011  Field study in 4 states (Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Tamil Nadu) primarily to document the strategy adopted for promotion of Green Opportunities  Consultation with key stakeholders from the project states through a national workshop Review of Environmental Status 6. Based on a review of the secondary data and information from the project states and experience from existing livelihood projects, it is expected that while the project activities are likely to contribute to better environmental quality (e.g., through sustainable agriculture), improper management and poor capacities can lead to (i) land degradation including soil erosion (ii) poor water availability and quality, depletion of groundwater (iii) improper use of agro-chemicals (imbalanced use of fertilizers, unsafe use of hazardous pesticides) (iv) decreasing fodder availability and (v) degradation of forests (unsustainable extraction of forest produce, shifting agriculture, grazing). No potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts are envisaged in NRLP. Regulatory and Legal Framework 7. A majority of the relevant acts, rules, and regulations of the government of India, state governments and the safeguard policies of World Bank concerning livelihood activities that are likely to be supported under NRLP have been reviewed. The NRLP triggers the following safeguard policies of the World Bank:  Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01)  Forests (OP 4.36)  Natural habitats (OP 4.04)  Pest Management (OP4.09) 8. The necessary measures to ensure compliance with these laws, regulations, and policies are included in the regulations list and environmental guidelines (EGs)/codes of practices developed as part of the EMF. Environment Management Framework Strategy 9. The Bank has been supporting projects on poverty reduction and rural livelihoods in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Bihar and Tamil Nadu. These projects have yielded valuable experience and learnings on the implementation of environmental safeguards. 10. An analysis of the Bank supported livelihood projects shows two distinct models of implementation which have different challenges with respect to environmental safeguards. In the earlier CIGs2 model livelihoods are financed by the project through a one-time grant for a common livelihood activity. Therefore, it was simpler to screen the common livelihood activity for environmental impacts and ensure that mitigation measures were implemented. 2 CIG – Common Interest Group 2 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 11. However, now the model is based on providing loans to SHGs based on a micro- credit/investment plan which may contain multiple activities. The loan is provided by a larger SHG federation which is financed through a grant by the project. Currently, screening for environmental impacts is being done on an activity-by-activity basis by the Block PFT through a set of pre-designed instruments. This process is time consuming and often becomes merely an exercise in filling a set of formats with no clear understanding of issues and solutions by the SHG federation members. Clearly, a different approach is needed to implement an EMF to ensure that the community appreciates the issues involved and its relevance to securing their livelihoods better. 12. Therefore, the approach strategy of this EMF makes a radical departure from viewing EMF as a tool to merely safeguarding the environment to managing the environment in order to better secure the livelihoods. It also views potential environmental problems as opportunities for Green Solutions that may generate Green enterprises and jobs. 13. Further, the EMF seeks to shift the onus for environmental management from the project alone to include the community institutions. Therefore, the key is to ensure that the SHG federation has the support, capacity and systems which will ensure that environmental considerations are integrated into the process of appraisal of the SHG micro- credit/investment plans. As the nature and scale of livelihood activities undertaken by individual households is environmentally benign and small in scale, the potential impacts are also localized and manageable. Therefore, rather than place emphasis on micro- managing micro-impacts through appraisal of every individual household activity – it is more meaningful and efficient to focus on periodically monitoring cumulative impacts to provide pointers on required interventions. 14. The EMF proposes to achieve this through the means of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) that each SHG Federation would prepare. The EMP would identify resources, livelihoods and their potential environmental impacts and indicate measures to secure these livelihoods. To help the SHG Federations prepare the EMP, a cadre of Community Resource Persons (CRPs) called the Green-CRPs (G-CRPs) would be developed by the Project. The EMP would be a dynamic plan which would be reviewed and modified periodically to incorporate new livelihoods or new Green Solutions. Not all livelihood activities would have an adverse impact on the environment. The EMP would also help identify good Green Practices which could be converted into Green Opportunities for newer livelihoods, enterprises or jobs. 15. This approach would not only shift the onus to the community to manage the environment to secure their livelihoods but would also build their skills and knowledge to do so even after the project period. Thus, this strategy would result in a massive and wide-spread transfer of knowledge and skills in the area of environment management. 16. Since this approach is new and radical, it is proposed to pilot test it in 360 SHG Federations spread across 12 states during Year-2 of the NRLP and if found successful after a mid-term evaluation scale it up to eventually cover 12,000 SHG Federations by Year-5. The selection of the village federations for the pilot will be based on well-defined criteria to ensure that the pilots are not affected by implementation set-backs. These will also be clustered in a limited number of blocks to ensure that focused and intensive support is provided through TA agencies. With the cluster approach, the pilot will reach 3 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 30% of the districts (30 out of 100), blocks (120 out of 400) and federations (1,200 out of 40,000). 17. It must be emphasized, however, that EMF compliance with the regulatory requirements will apply universally to all the 40,000 federations in the project. Training of project staff and community institutions, internal monitoring and external audit systems will apply to all 40,000 federations. Therefore, the EMF has a mechanism to manage risk in federations that are not part of the pilot. Components of the Environment Management Framework 18. The Environment Management Framework (EMF) comprises a detailed strategy and procedures for preparation and implementation of an EMP at SHG primary federation or producer collective level, capacity building and monitoring to enable the adoption of mitigation measures, and the promotion of green opportunities as pilot projects. The main components of the EMF are described below: Environment Action Plan as part of State Perspective Plans 19. As a part of the rollout of NRLP, all State Rural Livelihood Missions (SRLMs) would undertake a situational analysis (poverty diagnostic study) and develop a State Perspective and Implementation Plan (SPIP) and Annual Action Plans (AAPs). An Environmental Action Plan (EAP) will be developed by each State Mission Management Unit (SMMU) as part of the SPIP. The first year EAP would identify strategically important Green Opportunities, develop and field test a process for developing EMPs at the SHG Federation level and prepare a capacity building plan for the entire implementation mechanism. Piloting of EMPs by SHG Federations and Scale-up 20. As described above, the EMP will be prepared by the VO with facilitation by the Green CRPs. It will be prepared prior to the micro-credit plan preparation process in the affiliate SHGs and will be updated annually. The executive committee of the VO will include an Environmental Management Committee. Environmental Management Toolkit 21. The experience of implementation of livelihood projects has led to the development of a comprehensive toolkit to guide identification of measures to mitigate potential negative environmental impacts in rural livelihoods. The toolkit contains the following:  A regulatory list of activities that are not to be supported  List of higher order activities that require detailed environmental appraisal by technically qualified personnel due to potential for relatively higher impacts  Environmental guidelines for managing major rural livelihoods such as agriculture, livestock, non-timber forest produce and fishery. These include a listing of the possible impacts and the relevant mitigation measures. 4 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Green Opportunities – Going beyond environmental management 22. The EMF also presents a bouquet of Green Opportunities, which describe how organizations have addressed environmental issues by developing innovative Green Solutions that have resulted in Green enterprises and Green jobs. The Green Opportunities cover the broad thematic areas of agriculture, animal husbandry and energy. It also presents pathways to integrate these Green Opportunities into the main programs of NRLP. It suggests the creation of a Green Opportunities Repository at the national and the state level. It describes the steps in integrating knowledge of Green Opportunities with the preparation of the EMPs by the G-CRP. Technical Assistance to States 23. The National Environment Management Coordinator at the NMMU would provide technical assistance for facilitating preparatory work on environment which would be include the following:  Development of operational manuals on EMF – including EMPs of primary federations, Code of Practices of producer collectives, Green CRPs, Green Opportunities  Development of a repository of Green Opportunities and Resource Institutions  Exposure visits to SRLM teams to best practices in facilitating environment-friendly livelihoods other states  Recruiting, if required, the services of a consultant firm to undertake Situation Analysis and assist in development of the EAP for inclusion in the SPIP  National workshop/s to facilitate cross-learning/exchange that will contribute to development of robust EAPs  Stakeholders‘ consultations in each state including meetings, workshops, focus group discussions  Induction and capacity building of key staff at the SMMUs  Appraisal and approval of the EAP in the SPIP Institutional Arrangements to Support the EMF 24. Institutional arrangements for the EMF are detailed both in the project structure as well as in the community institutions. The effective implementation of the EMF will require relevant institutional arrangements at the national, state, district and sub-district levels. The roles and responsibilities of the key staff at the national, state, district and sub-district levels and key individuals/entities in the SHG federations and producer collectives are provided in the Report. However, the staffing costs are not included in the budget of this EMF. The costs of the staffing for the state, district and sub-district levels will be included in the overall project management costs of the NRLP. Training and Capacity Building 25. The orientation of this EMF is to strengthen the capacity for environmental management in NRLP institutional structures at the national and states levels, and especially, in the G- CRPs and community institutions such as SHGs, SHG federations and producer collectives. A detailed training and capacity building plan is provided in the Report. 5 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Monitoring and Audit 26. The focus of monitoring is three fold: (a) the implementation of the EMF, (b) the adoption of environmental management in livelihood activities, (c) the environmental status. Monitoring is planned at 3 levels: community monitoring, internal monitoring and external audit. An external audit of the environmental performance of the NRLP will include a cumulative impact assessment and be undertaken annually during the project period – in years 2, 3, 4 and 5. An external agency will be hired by the NMMU for the purpose. Performance Indicators 27. The Report provides a list of suggested performance indicators for environment and sector-specific outcomes, institutional arrangements, capacity building and process- related. Budget 28. The estimated budget for the EMF implementation is $ 7.0 million. Implementation Roll-Out Strategy 29. The EMF of the NRLP builds on the experience of existing livelihoods projects in the country. However, it has certain elements that are novel – for example, the SHG federation EMPs and the CoPs of the producer collectives. It is necessary to phase out the implementation of the EMF in the NRLP to ensure that innovative elements are put on trial before they are scaled up. 30. The first year outputs would include a cadre of trained G-CRPs in 6 states, a field-tested methodology for preparation of EMPs, an EAP which is integrated into the SPIPs and also a candidate list of strategically important Green Opportunities for piloting or scaled- up implementation. EMP implementation will be scaled up to reach 12,000 federations by the end of the fifth year. 6 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 1. Introduction 1.1 Project Objective 1. The project development objective of the proposed NRLP is to establish efficient and effective institutional platforms of the rural poor that enable them to increase household income through sustainable livelihood enhancements and improved access to financial and selected public services. This will be achieved through increased membership of the rural poor in inclusive, community-managed institutions, increased amount of resources and services leveraged by the poor from financial institutions, increase in productive assets and income from various livelihoods among the rural poor, and improved access to public services related to food, nutrition and health. 1.2 Project Description 2. The proposed project will support the following four components: i. Component 1. Institutional and Human Capacity Development ($ 61.3 million): The objective of this component is to transform the role of MoRD into a provider of high quality technical assistance in the field of rural livelihoods promotion. To achieve the objective of this component, the proposed project intends to support the following activities: a. Human resource development — establish a team of high quality professionals to provide technical assistance to the states in various thematic areas such as community mobilization, livelihood promotion, financial inclusion, human resource management, monitoring and evaluation, environment management, and fiduciary management, among others. This team will provide continuous and year-round support to state governments in the implementation of the NRLM and related activities in the rural development sector. b. Training and capacity building — support development of partnerships with well established training and research institutions in the field of rural development throughout India that can deliver focused training programs for successful implementation of the NRLM and related activities in the rural development sector. The activities supported will include curriculum development, design and conduct of training programs including e-learning and distance learning. Under this feasibility of establishment of a National Center for Rural Livelihoods will be explored. ii. Component 2. State Livelihood Support ($ 793.7 million): The objective of this component is to support state governments in the establishment of the necessary institutional architecture for the implementation of NRLM activities from the state to the block level, including support to the formation of institutions of the poor. To achieve the objective of this component, the proposed project intends to support the following activities: c. State Rural Livelihoods Missions (SRLM) — support the formation of an autonomous and professionally managed mission at the state-level for the implementation of the NRLM comprising of a multi-disciplinary team with 7 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 expertise in themes like social mobilization, institution building, capacity building, microfinance, farm and non-farm livelihoods, and job employment, among others. In addition, the SRLM would establish implementing entities at the district and block levels comprising of multidisciplinary teams to further facilitate implementation of NRLM financed activities. d. Institution Building and Capacity Building — support the identification, selection, and mobilization of poor rural households into self-managed institutions, such as Self Help Groups (SHGs) and their federations. This would also include providing capacity building and training activities for SHG members and federations in livelihood activities, bookkeeping, financial literacy, and business education, among others. e. Community Investment Support — provide livelihood grants to the institutions of the poor to enable them to undertake productive livelihood enhancing initiatives. f. Special Programs — support for pilot activities that have potential for scaling-up and replication such as last mile delivery of public services including health and nutrition, implementing activities in high-conflict areas in partnership with civil society organizations, value-chain development, using new technologies for financial inclusion, among others. iv. Component 3. Innovation and Partnership Support ($ 45 million): The objective of this component is to create an institutional mechanism to identify, nurture and support innovative ideas from across the country to address the livelihood needs of the rural poor To achieve the objective of this component, the proposed project intends to support the following activities: a. Innovation Forums and Action Pilots — support selected innovations identified through development marketplace-type forums that have the potential to be scaled- up in a viable manner in partnership with development foundations b. Social Entrepreneurship Development — support the development of a network of grassroots innovators and social entrepreneurs, identified through a competitive process, at state and national level. c. Public-Private-Community-Partnership — develop and support effective partnerships with the private sector, foundations public corporations, and civil society organizations on livelihoods development for the rural poor throughout India. These could include ICT, agribusiness, financial inclusion, and youth employment, among others. v. Component 4. Project Implementation Support ($ 100 million): The objective of component is to establish an effective project management unit at the national level that develops key systems and processes for coordination and management of the proposed project and the NRLM. Given that the NRLP, and more importantly the NRLM, will be implemented across India, there are substantial managerial requirements which are critical to ensure the satisfactory implementation of both the NRLP and NRLM. In this regard, a dedicated National Mission Management Unit (NMMU) has been established under the MoRD. To achieve the objective of this component, the proposed project intends to support the following activities: 8 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 a. National Mission Management Unit (NMMU) — strengthen the various functions of the NMMU to be able to manage, deliver and support all aspects of not only the NRLP, but also the NRLM. b. Monitoring and Evaluation — given the geographic scale and magnitude of the resources and activities to be supported by the NRLP/NRLM, a very comprehensive and robust monitoring and evaluation system will be established to not only track implementation progress but also to provide meaningful reports on household level impacts and implementation experiences so as to enable MoRD and state governments to take corrective actions, if necessary. This would include the development of an integrated management information system (MIS) that would collect data from the village to the national level in a systematic and timely manner for not only the NRLM, but also other public services provided to rural households throughout India. c. Governance and Accountability Framework — the NRLP would support the development and roll-out of a user friendly and highly responsive governance and accountability mechanism by which to ensure that all aspects of the proposed project are being implemented in accordance with agreed principles and procedures. d. Knowledge Management and Communication — incorporating lessons from experience and communicating consistent and significant messages at both a policy and operational level, is critical for the overall success of the NRLP/NRLM. In this regard, the project will invest in a variety of products and services to enhance the generation and use of knowledge and communications as a key tool for enhancing the quality of the program. 1.3 Project Location 3. NRLP will be implemented intensively in the villages of 500 selected blocks of 12 priority states of the country to demonstrate the effectiveness of the comprehensive livelihood approach. Some of the 12 states have been chosen because of their past experience in implementing Bank supported livelihood projects, where they have support structures and systems already in place to expand them to new districts through the NRLP (Bihar; Madhya Pradesh; Orissa; Rajasthan). Other States to be supported by the NRLP have been identified on the basis of high incidence of poverty and large number of rural poor (Uttar Pradesh), tribal population (Jharkhand, Chattisgarh), and pockets of acute poverty at the sub-regional level combined with a pre-base of substantial social capital (Karnataka, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Gujarat, Assam). 1.3.1 Environment Assessment Study 4. An Environmental Assessment study was undertaken and an Environment Management Framework (EMF) has been developed for the NRLP to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations of the Government of India, the 12 state Governments and triggered safeguard policies of the World Bank. This is the first draft of the report of the Environmental Assessment study. 9 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 1.4 Structure of the Report 5. This report is structured as follows. Chapter 1 provides an overview of the objectives and components of NRLP. Chapter 2 provides a consolidated overview of the environmental status at the national and state levels that could have a bearing on community-oriented rural projects. Chapter 3 summarizes the legal and regulatory framework that is relevant to environmental management in NRLM. Chapter 4 presents an integrated Environment Management Framework which is the backbone of the report. It provides a technical and institutional strategy and procedures for environment management planning for activities supported by NRLP at the national, state and village community levels. The EMF includes a strategy for identifying and facilitating green opportunities that can bring aggregate community co-benefits in terms of a sustainable environment and income generation through innovative methodologies and technologies that have worked in India through community-driven or entrepreneur based approaches. This strategy is presented in Chapter 5. The report has a number of Annexes that provide details of the content in each of the chapters. 10 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 2. Environmental Baseline at National and State Levels 1. The NRLP involves intensive investment in selected districts and sub-districts of 12 high- priority states and will also demonstrate a model for expansion of NRLM throughout the country. The 12 states are: Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Orissa, Maharashtra, Gujarat, West Bengal and Assam. 2. This chapter provides a brief overview of the environmental status and issues in the 12 states. This is the output of a secondary research exercise aimed at understanding the environmental context of the project area. The chapter is organized thematically and contains the following sections:  Administrative divisions  Population  Agro-climatic zones  Land use  Land degradation  Soils  Water  Agriculture  Livestock  Forests  Summary of key environmental issues 2.1 Administrative Divisions 3. The 12 project states are organized into 387 districts and 3724 blocks. Of these, the project will reach 400 blocks. The average number of villages 3per block is 128 and the average number of habitations per block is 356. The project outreach will hence be in the range of 40,000 villages. Table 2.1: Administrative Divisions in Project States State Districts Blocks Villages Habitations Assam 27 219 Blocks 25,124 86976 Bihar 38 534 Blocks 39,015 107642 Chhattisgarh 16 146 Blocks 19,744 72329 Gujarat 25 170 Blocks 18,066 34415 Jharkhand 24 211 Blocks 29,354 120061 Karnataka 27 176 Talukas 27,481 59203 Madhya Pradesh 48 313 Blocks 52,117 127197 Maharashtra 35 353 Tehsils 41,095 98098 Orissa 24 211 Blocks 47,529 141928 Rajasthan 33 237 Blocks 39,752 121133 Uttar Pradesh 71 813 Blocks 97,942 260110 West Bengal 19 341 Blocks 37,945 95394 3 Inhabited, revenue villages 11 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Implications for Environmental Management The massive outreach of the project emphasizes the need for (a) a robust, yet simple management system for environmental safeguards that can be implemented across 12 states, 400 blocks and 40,000 villages (b) a decentralized, self-managing system that does not rely on top-down monitoring alone, but emphasizes local responsibility and action. 2.2 Population 4. The 12 project states account for 74% of the country‘s population on 67% of its geographical area. Rajasthan is the largest state with 10% of the country‘s area, while Assam occupies just 2% of the area. Uttar Pradesh is the most populous state with 16% of the country‘s population, while Chhattisgarh accounts for just about 2%. Table 2.2: Population Profile of States in Project Area4 (2001) Population Population as % of Area (sq Area as % of Population State (million) India’s population km) India’s area density Assam 26.66 3% 78,438 2% 339 Bihar 82.8 8% 94,163 3% 880 Chhattisgarh 20.8 2% 1,35,191 4% 154 Gujarat 50.05 5% 1,95,984 6% 258 Jharkhand 26.9 3% 79,714 2% 338 Karnataka 52.8 5% 1,91,791 6% 275 Madhya Pradesh 60.3 6% 3,08,245 9% 196 Maharashtra 96.7 9% 3,07,713 9% 314 Orissa 36.81 4% 1,55,707 5% 236 Rajasthan 56.5 5% 3,42,239 10% 165 Uttar Pradesh 166.2 16% 2,36,286 7% 690 West Bengal 80.22 8% 88,752 3% 904 India 1028.7 74% 32,87,263 67% 335 5. The most densely populated states are West Bengal, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh are the most sparsely populated of the project states. 4 Census of India, 2001. http://www.censusindia.gov.in 12 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Figure 2.1: Population in Project States (2001)5 Chart 2.1: Population Density in Project States6 Implications for Environmental Management High population density implies greater pressure on the limited land resource for various uses – agriculture, livestock, etc. Such states have limited availability of common property resources such as pastures and grazing lands (also see sections on Land use and Livestock). Considering that animal husbandry is an important livelihood activity of the rural poor, there is a need for facilitating local action on fodder management, especially in states with little availability of commons. 5 Map preparation (figures 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4): Frank van Cappelle (2010). StatPlanet: Interactive Data Visualization and Mapping Software. http://www.sacmeq.org/statplanet 6 Census of India, 2001. 13 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 2.3 Agro-climatic zones 6. The country has been broadly divided into fifteen agricultural regions based on agro- climatic features, particularly soil type, climate including temperature and rainfall, and water resources availability. The 12 project states fall in 13 of the 15 agro-climatic zones in India. Table 2.3 provides details of the agro-climatic zones that the project states fall in. Table 2.3: Agro-climatic Zones in the Project Area Uttar Pradesh Chhattisgarh Maharashtra West Bengal Jharkhand Karnataka Rajasthan Madhya Pradesh Gujarat Assam Orissa Bihar II Eastern Himalayan Region   III Lower Gangetic Plain Region  IV Middle Gangetic Plain Region   V Upper Gangetic Plain Region  VI Trans Gangetic Plain Region  VII Eastern Plateau and Hills Region       VIII Central Plateau and Hills Region    IX Western Plateau and Hills Region   X Southern Plateau and Hills Region  XI East Coast Plains and Hills Region  XII West Coast Plains and Ghat Region   XIII Gujarat Plains and Hills Region  XIV Western Dry Region  7. The state profiles provided in Annex 18 give further details on the features of the agro- climatic zones in each state. Implications for Environmental Management The agro-climatic diversity of the project area emphasizes the need for locale-specific environmental management. The Environmental Action Plans (EAPs) developed need to be specific to the diverse agro-climatic contexts within the states (for example, the states of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal have three agro-climatic zones each). 8. Agro-ecological regions are regions that are homogenous in terms of soil, climate and physiography and conducive moisture availability periods i.e., length of growing period (LGP). They are land units carved out of agro-climatic zones superimposed on landform which acts as modifier to climate and length of growing period. The country has been grouped into 20 agro-ecological regions (AER).The 12 project states fall in 15 AERs. Table 2.4 provides details of the agro-climatic zones that the project states fall in along with information on the main features and constraints in each AER 7. 7 K.S.Gajbhiye, C. Mandal. Agro-Ecological Zones, their Soil Resource and Cropping Systems. National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning, Nagpur. http://agricoop.nic.in/Farm%20Mech.%20PDF/05024-01.pdf 14 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table 2.4: Agro-ecological Zones in the Project Area Agro- Location in Project Agro-climate Soils Land use Constraints ecological Area Region 2 Hot Arid Rajasthan: Bikaner, Typical hot summer and Soils are gently to very The area is under rainfed Erratic and scanty rainfall Ecoregion Jaisalmer, Barmer, cool winter (arid). Mean gently sloping grey mono-cropping (traditional) leading to high water with Desert Jodhpur, Ganganagar, annual precipitation is brown soils and desert agriculture. The resistant and deficit; Soil salinity and Saline Churu, Jhunjhunu, less than 400 mm. It is soils, interspersed with short duration rainy season leading to frequent Soils Sirohi, Jalore just adequate to cover level to very gently crops, such as pearl millet, physiological droughts; Gujarat: Lakhpat, 15-20 per cent of annual sloping saline and alkali ‗chari‘ (fodder), and pulses are Acute droughtiness at the Banni, Great Rann of PET demand (1500 and soils. The sandy soils are grown in non-saline areas. The time of grain formation; Kutch, Banaskantha, 2000 mm). This results moderately calcareous yields are low. In areas with Nutrient imbalance, Bhuj, Jamnagar in large deficit of water and alkaline in reaction. irrigation cotton, sugarcane, especially for N, P, Zn and (Northern part) (1500-1800 mm) mustard, gram and wheat are Fe. throughout the year. grown. The natural vegetation LGP is of less than 90 comprises sparse, sporadic days. tropical thorn forest. Forest area in the region is drastically reduced. 3 Hot Arid Karnataka: Bellary, Hot and dry summer and Soils are gently sloping The traditional practice is High runoff and erosion Ecoregion Southern Raichur, mild winter. Rainfall is shallow and medium red rainfed farming which hazard during stormy with Red and Bijapur, Northern erratic and ranges from loamy, and, level to very includes fallowing the land in cloud bursts; Prolonged Black Soils Chitradurga, Tumkur 400 to 500 mm. It covers gently sloping deep rainy season and growing of dry spells during crop about 20 to 25 per cent clayey black soils. The crops in the post-rainy season growing period resulting of the annual PET dominant red (loamy) on residual soil moisture. The in occasional crop failure; demand of 1800 to 1900 soils are slightly acidic common post-rainy season Narrow range of workable mm. The region and non-calcareous. The crops are sorghum and soil moisture in black experiences severe subdominant deep, safflower. The yields are very soils; Subsoil sodicity drought conditions clayey black soils are low. Groundnut, sunflower, affecting soil structure, almost throughout the slightly alkaline and sugarcane and cotton are drainage and oxygen year with gross annual calcareous in nature. intensively grown under availability, especially in water deficit of 1500- irrigated conditions. The subdominant black soils; 1600 mm. The LGP is of natural vegetation of the area High subsoil density in red less than 90 days. comprises tropical thorn forest. loamy soils limiting effective rooting depth. 4 Hot Semi- Uttar Pradesh: (Western Hot and dry summer and The soils are moderately Almost 65 per cent of the Coarser soil texture and arid part), Ghaziabad, cool winter. Annual to very gently sloping, region is under irrigated low plant available water 15 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Ecoregion Bulandshahr, Aligarh, precipitation ranges from coarse to fine loamy and agriculture. The remaining part capacity (AWC); Over with Mathura, Etah, Agra, 500 to 1000 mm with an include highly sodic is under traditional rainfed exploitation of Alluvium Mainpuri, Moradabad increasing trend from soils. In the northern part agriculture. In the northern groundwater, resulting in Derived Soils (Southern Part), west to east. It covers 35 of the region, the terrain plain, the droughty climate is lowering of groundwater Bandaun, Shahjahanpur to 42 per cent of the is frequently interrupted overcome by tubewell table in some areas; At (Southern part), mean annual PET by stable sand dunes. irrigation and the area is places, imperfect drainage Fatehgarh, Hardoi, demand (1400 and 1900 intensively cultivated for both conditions lead to spread Unnao, Etawah, mm). Annual water kharif and rabi crops, such as of surface and subsurface Kanpur, Rai Bareily, deficit is 700-1000 mm. rice, millets, maize, pulses, soil salinity and/or Fatehpur, Bela, Jaunpur, The LGP ranges between berseem, wheat, mustard and sodicity. Allahabad, Western part 90 and 150 days. sugarcane. The moderately of Varanasi, Lalitpur high yields of wheat and Rajasthan: Alwar, paddy are obtained with Bharatpur, Jaipur, irrigation. In some parts of Sawai-Madhopur, central highlands, like Dhaulpur, Ajmer, Tonk, Bundelkhand, less than 25 per Bhilwara, Udaipur, cent of the net cropped area is Dungarpur under irrigation, while the rest Gujarat: Sabarkantha, is under rainfed agriculture. Mehsana, Ahmedabad, The predominant kharif crops Surendranagar, part of grown under rainfed Bhuj agriculture are jowar, Madhya Pradesh: piegeonpea and soybean, while Bhind, Morena, rabi crops, such as pulses Gwalior, Datia, (gram), lentil and wheat are Shivpuri grown on residual moisture with one or two protective irrigations at critical stages of crop growth. In Chambal catchment, the cropping pattern has undergone drastic change replacing millets by wheat, cotton and sugarcane after the introduction of irrigation. The natural vegetation comprises tropical dry deciduous and thorn forests. 5 Hot Semi- Gujarat: Junagarh, The climate of the region Soils are nearly level to Dryland farming is the The intermittent dry spell arid Amreli, Rajkot, is characterized by hot gently sloping deep, common practice in the region. periods; Imperfect 16 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Ecoregion Bhavnagar, Panch and wet summer and dry loamy to clayey black The Kharif crops usually drainage limits optimum with Medium Mahal, Kheda, winter. The annual soils. The Kathiawar cultivated in the area are root ramification and and Deep Vadodara, Bharauch, precipitation in the peninsula and the coastal sorghum, pearlmillet, oxygen availability in low- Black Soils Surat region ranges from 500 areas have saline and pigeonpea, groundnut, lying areas; Salinity and Rajasthan: Bundi, to 1000 mm. It covers 40 alkali soils. Soils of the soybean, maize and pulses. alkalinity hazards under Chittorgarh, Banswara, to 50 per cent of the Malwa plateau are The common Rabi crops are irrigated agriculture; Kota, Jhalawar annual PET demand clayey, slightly alkaline, sorghum, safflower, sunflower Severe salinity and Madhya Pradesh: (1600 to 2000 mm) calcareous with and gram. seasonal inundation by sea Ujjain, Ratlam, Jhabua, resulting in gross annual characteristic swell- Wheat is grown under irrigated water in the Kathiawar Indore, Dhar, Dewas, water deficit of 800 to shrink properties. conditions. The natural coast resulting in crop Khandwa, Khargone, 1200 mm. The LGP vegetation comprises dry failure. Mandsaur ranges from 90 to 150 deciduous forest. days in a year. 6 Hot Semi- Maharashtra: Pune, Hot and humid summer The soils are moderately The traditional practice is Prolonged dry spells arid Satara, Sangli, Solapur, and mild and dry winter. to gently sloping shallow rainfed agriculture. Sorghum, adversely affect the crop Ecoregion Osmanabad, Bid, Mean annual black soils, grading to pigeonpea and pearl millet are growth and lead to crop with Shallow Ahmadnagar, Dhule, precipitation, ranging level to very gently major kharif season crops. The failure in some years; and Medium Nasik, Jalgaon, between 600 and 1000 sloping medium and drought-prone districts of the High runoff during stormy (Dominant) Aurangabad, mm, covers about 40 per deep black soils in region have bimodal rainfall cloud bursts in the rainy Black Soils Ahmadnagar, Jalna, cent of annual PET valleys. They include distribution. Therefore, crops season result in heavy soil Parbhani, Nanded, demand (1600 and 1800 shallow, loamy skeletal are grown during loss; Deficiency of N, P Latur, Jabalpur, mm). This results in and highly calcareous September/October on stored and Zn leads to nutrient Buldhana, Akola, gross annual deficit of soil, and, clayey, residual soil moisture since imbalance. Amravati, Yavatmal, 800 to 1000 mm of calcareous and there is a significantly long dry Kolhapur (Eastern part) water. The LGP ranges moderately alkaline soils period during the first phase of Karnataka: Bijapur, from 90 to showing marked swell- the rains. The post-rainy Raichur, Dharwad, 150 days. shrink properties. season crops grown on Belgaum, Uttar Kannad residual soil moisture are (Eastern part), Gadag mainly sorghum, safflower and sunflower. Cotton and groundnut are grown under irrigated conditions. The natural vegetation in the region comprises tropical, dry deciduous and thorn forests. 8 Hot Semi- Karnataka: Eastern part Hot and dry summer and Soils are moderate to Rainfed agriculture is the High runoff that results in arid of Shimoga and mild winter. Annual gently sloping shallow traditional practice in the severe soil erosion; Coarse Ecoregion Chikmangalur, Hassan, rainfall of 600 to 1000 black soils, grading to region. The millets, pulses, soil texture and low to with Red Mysore, Mandya, mm. The western parts gently to very gently and groundnut are cultivated in medium PAWC (Plant Loamy Soils Bangalore, Chitradurga of the region falling in sloping red loamy soils. kharif season, while sorghum Available Water 17 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 (Southern part), Kolar, Karnataka receive about They include soils that and safflower are grown in Capacity), resulting in Tumkur 70 per cent of the rainfall are non-calcareous and rabi season. Rice is cultivated severe droughtiness during during June to slightly acidic in nature, under irrigation. At places the crop growing period; September. The area and, soils that are sugarcane and cotton are also Nutrient imbalance, experiences the annual calcareous and grown under irrigated resulting from deficiency water deficit of 400 to moderately alkaline in conditions. The natural of N, P and Zn. 700 mm. The LGP reaction. vegetation comprises tropical, ranges from 90 to 150 dry deciduous and thorn days. forests. 9 Hot Uttar Pradesh: Hot summer and cool The soils of the region Traditionally rainfed and Injudicious use of Subhumid Saharanpur, Bijnor, winter. Annual rainfall are generally deep and irrigated agriculture is irrigation water may lead (Dry) Moradabad (Northern of 1000 to 1200 mm, 70 loamy. The dominant common. The crops grown are to waterlogging and Ecoregion part), Muzaffarnagar per cent of which is soilscapes constitute rice, maize, barley, pigeonpea salinity hazards. with (Eastern part), Rampur, received during July to gently to moderately and jute in kharif season and Alluvium- Bareily, Pilibhit, September. The rainfall sloping alluvium soils. In wheat, mustard and lentil in Derived Soils Shajahanpur (Northern covers about 70 per cent general, they are neutral rabi season. Sugarcane and part), Lakhimpur of the annual PET in reaction and have cotton are grown at places (Southern part), Sitapur, demand of 1400 to 1800 moderate clay and low under irrigated conditions. The Lucknow, Barabanki, mm and leaves an annual organic carbon content. natural vegetation comprises Faizabad, Sultanpur, water deficit of 500 to Itwa soils are sodic in tropical dry deciduous forests. Azamgarh, Balia, 700 mm. The region has their subsurface. Ghazipur, Varanasi LGP of 150 to 180 days. (Eastern part) Bihar: Bhojpur, Rohtas, Jahanabad, Patna, Bihar-Sariff, Aurangabad, Gaya, Nawada 10 Hot Sub- Madhya Pradesh: Guna, Hot summer and mild The soils are largely Rainfed agriculture is the Cracking clayey soils humid Sagar, Bhopal, Damoh, winter. The precipitation medium, deep black soils common practice. Rice, having narrow workable Ecoregion Vidisha, Rajgarh, shows an increasing interspersed with patches sorghum, pigeonpea and moisture conditions; Dry with Red and Shajapur, Sehore, trend towards east. The of red soils. Gently soybean are commonly grown tillage and inter tillage Black Soils Raisen, Jabalpur mean annual rainfall sloping shallow black kharif crops. Gram, wheat and practices are difficult to (Western part), ranges between 1000 and soils, gently to very vegetables are common rabi perform; Risk of Narsimpur, 1500 mm covering about gently sloping red loamy season crops. Kharif cropping inundation of the cropped Hoshangabad, Betul, 80 per cent of the mean soil, and very gently is totally rainfed, whereas Rabi areas during rainy season Tikamgarh, annual PET (1300-1600 sloping to nearly level cropping is partly irrigated at and risk of acute Chhattarpur, Panna, mm). The LGP ranges medium black soils. The critical stages of growth. The droughtiness due to Satna, Rewa, Sidhi, from 150-180 days. dominant deep black natural vegetation comprises prolonged dry spells in 18 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Shahdol, Chhindwara, soils are calcareous, tropical moist deciduous Kharif season leading to Seoni, Mandla, slightly alkaline and forest. crop failure at places; Soil Balaghat, Jabalpur have high swell-shrink loss due to heavy runoff (Eastern part), potential. The red soils during rainy season Narsimpur, generally occur on ridges resulting in stagnation of Hishangabad. and on pediment water and poor Maharashtra: Wardha, surfaces. They are germination; Deficiency of Nagpur, Bhandara shallow to moderately N, P and Zn resulting in deep, clayey, neutral to nutrient imbalances. slightly acidic in nature occurring on gently to very gently sloping pediment surface in Bundelkhand region. 11 Hot Sub- Uttar Pradesh: Mirzapur Hot summers and cool The dominant soils in the Rainfed agriculture is the The soils are susceptible to humid Bihar: Palamu, winters. Annual rainfall area are moderately to traditional farming with severe water erosion; Ecoregion Hazaribag, Gumla, is 1200 to 1600 mm; of gently sloping red and cultivation of rice, millets, Partial waterlogging in with Red and Lohardaga which 70-80 per cent is yellow soils and red pigeonpea, moong and early stages of crop Yellow Soils Madhya Pradesh: received between July to loamy soils. They are blackgram in kharif season. At growth and seasonal Ambikapur, Bilaspur, September. It meets deep, loamy, non places, wheat and rice are droughtiness during Raigarh, Raipur, about 60 per cent of calcareous and neutral to cultivated under irrigated advanced stage of crop Rajnangaon, Durg annual PET demand slightly acidic. conditions during rabi season. growth; Subsoil (1400 to 1500 mm). PET The natural vegetation gravelliness and coarse exceeds the precipitation comprises tropical moist texture, at places, reduce from October to June. deciduous forest. AWC; Deficiency in N, P The LGP ranges between and micronutrients, such 150 and 180 days in a as Zn and B, causes year. nutrient imbalances. 12 Hot Sub- Maharashtra: Hot summers and cool The dominant soils of the Rainfed farming is the The soils are susceptible to humid Chandrapur, Gadchiroli winters. The area area are represented by traditional practice with severe erosion hazard; Ecoregion Madhya Pradesh: Bastar receives an annual gently to very gently cultivation of rice, pulses Seasonal droughtiness with Red and Orissa: Koraput, rainfall of 1000-1600 sloping red loamy soils, (moong, blackgram and limits optimum crop Lateritic Soils Kalhandi, Phulbani, mm which covers about red and yellow soils. pigeonpea) and groundnut. In yields; Subsoil graveliness Bolangir, Sambalpur, 80 per cent of the PET They are fine loamy to rabi season, rice (at places) and coarse soil texture Sundergarh, Dhenkanal, leaving deficit of 500 to clayey, non-calcareous, and wheat are cultivated results in low AWC; Mayurbhanj, Ganjam 700 mm of water per slightly to moderately mostly under irrigated Deficiency of N, P and (Western part), Puri, year. Prolonged dry acidic. The soils are condition. The natural some micronutrients, such Cuttack, Baleshwar, period from December to generally shallow on the vegetation comprises tropical as Zn and B causes Kendujhargarh May (more than 90 days ridges and plateaus and dry and moist deciduous nutrient imbalances; The Bihar: Dumka, in a year). The LGP are under forest cover. forests. soils are subject to 19 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Devghar, Giridih, varies from 150 to 180 The soils in valleys are moderate to high P Dhanbad, Ranchi, days and at places it is deep and are generally fixation (especially the Singbhum 180 to 210 days. cultivated. Red and Lateritic soils). West Bengal: Birbhum (Western part) 13 Hot Uttar Pradesh: Hot, wet summer and The soils in the area are Rainfed agriculture with Flooding and imperfect Subhumid Bahraich, Gonda, cool, dry winter. The represented by level to cultivation of rice, maize, drainage conditions limit (Moist) Gorakhpur, Deoria, area receives an annual very gently sloping pigeonpea, moong are soil aeration; Salinity Ecoregion Kheri, Bahraich, rainfall of 1400-1800 alluvium-derived soils. common in kharif season. In and/or sodicity, occurring with Pilibhit, Gonda, Basti, mm which exceeds the These occur in post-rainy (rabi) season, in patches, affect crop Alluvium – Gorakhpur mean annual PET association with level to wheat, lentil, pea, sesamum, yields; Deficiency of N, P derived Soils Bihar: Paschim demand (1300 and 1500 very gently sloping, and at places, groundnut is and Zn results in nutrient Champaran, Purab mm). The area imperfectly drained soils. grown on residual soil imbalances. Champaran, Gopalganj, experiences a small The soils are calcareous moisture with one or two Siwan, Sitamarhi, seasonal water deficit of and moderately alkaline protective irrigations at critical Muzaffarpur, Chhapra, 400 to 500 mm during in reaction. They show stages. The important cash Madhubani, Darbhanga, February to May. The different degrees of crops such as sugarcane, Samastipur, Saharsa, LGP ranges from 180 to profile development. The tobacco, chillies, turmeric, Begusarai, Munger, 210 days in a year. Tarai soils at the foothills coriander and potato are Khagaria, Sahibganj, of central Himalayas are usually grown with Bhagalpur, Katihar, deep, loamy and high in supplemental irrigation. The Madhepura, Purnia, organic matter content. natural vegetation comprises Hazipur, Godda tropical moist deciduous and dry deciduous forests. 15 Hot Sub- West Bengal: West Hot summer and mild to The soils are represented Due to the high rainfall, rice Flooding and humid (Moist) Dinajpur, Maldah, moderately cool winter. by level to very gently based cropping system is waterlogging; Excessive to Humid Murshidabad, The intensity of sloping alluvial soils. common in the Brahmaputra, leaching of bases and (inclusion of Krishnanagar, Hoogli, precipitation increases in The soils are slight to Teesta and Ganga Plains. Rice nutrients, resulting in low Per-humid) North 24 Parganas, northern and eastern strongly acidic and and jute are main crops in base status soils, Ecoregion Howrah, Calcutta, parts (Bengal basin and generally have low to rainy season under rainfed especially in the with Mednipur (Eastern Teesta-Bramhaputra moderate base saturation. condition. In northern foothills Bramhaputra (Assam) Alluvium- part), Bankura, Plain) as compared with of eastern Himalayas (Teesta Plain; Soil acidity (results derived Soils Bardhaman, Birbhum, the southern parts and Bramhaputra regions), in plant nutrient fixation, Jalpaiguri, Koch Bihar (Ganga Plain). The plantation crops, such as tea especially P) leads to Assam: Barpeta, rainfall in Ganga Plain and horticultural crops like nutrient imbalances. Kamrup, Nalbari ranges between 1400 and pineapple, citrus and banana (Southern part), 1600 mm; in Teesta- are grown. Rice, jute, pulses, Darrang, Sonipur, Brahmaputra Plains from oilseeds (mustard) are grown Nagaur, Goalpara, 1800 to 2000 mm. The on residual soil moisture in Dhubri, Kokrajhar, precipitation exceeds rabi season. Considerable 20 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Silchar, Karimgunj, PET in most of the areas in Ganga and Teesta Jorhat, Golaghat, months in a year. The Plains have been brought Sibsagar, Dibrugarh, LGP is more than 210 under irrigation to cultivate Kabir Anglong days in a year. rice, wheat, and sugarcane (Northern part), during the rabi season. The Lakhimpur (Northern natural vegetation comprises part). tropical moist and dry deciduous forests. 16 Warm Per- West Bengal: Siliguri, Warm summer and cool The dominant soils in the Jhum cultivation is the Severe climatic conditions humid Jalpaiguri, Darjiling winter. The annual region vary from shallow traditional farming. It is restrict the choice of Ecoregion Assam: Kokrajhar, rainfall is 2000 mm. The to moderately shallow, practiced with mixed cropping crops; Steeply sloping with Brown Barpeta, Nalbari, area experiences short loamy, brown forest to on the steep slopes under landforms encourage and Red Hill Darrang period of water stress deep, organic matter rich rainfed condition at an interval heavy runoff resulting in Soils during post-rainy period soils with moderate to of 3-4 years. Another severe erosion hazards; because of seasonal low base status. They traditional practice is the Deforestation for shifting water deficit. The water include moderately cultivation of millets on cultivation leads to severe balance shows the acidic soils. upland terraces and potato, soil degradation problem; longest LGP (more than maize, millets and paddy in High rainfall leading to 270 days) in a year. valleys. In the lower valleys, intense leaching results in rice, maize, millets, potato, soils with poor base status; sweet potato, mustard, Excessive moisture sesamum and pulses are grown leading to water stagnation under rainfed as well as in valleys during (post) irrigated conditions. At places monsoon period limits the cotton, mesta and sugarcane choice of crop; Low are also grown both under temperature during post- rainfed and irrigated monsoon period limits the conditions. In the hilly areas, cultivation of second vegetables and plantation arable crops. crops like tea, medicinal Monocropping is therefore plants, and horticultural crops commonly practiced in like pineapple, citrus, apple, these regions. peer, peach, banana are grown on terraces. The natural vegetation comprises subtropical pine forest and temperate wet evergreen forests, subalpine forest, etc. 18 Hot Sub- Orissa: Ganjam, Puri, The north-western part The coastal alluvial soils Both rainfed and irrigated Imperfect to poor drainage humid to Cuttack, Baleshwar of coastal strip, occur on level to very agriculture are practiced in the conditions and limited 21 Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Semi-arid (Coastal plain) including Orissa and gently sloping region. The main crop oxygen availability Ecoregion West Bengal: West Bengal, receives topography and are slight cultivated in the area, both in adversely affect crop with Coastal Medinipur, South 24 1200 to 1600 mm of to moderately sodic. kharif and rabi season, is rice. yield; Soil salinity (and Alluvium- Parganas rainfall of which 80 They are clayey in nature Coconut is a dominant sodicity at places) derived Soils percent is during June to and have high swell- plantation crop of the region. resulting from poor September. The PET shrink potential. In some parts, pulses, such as drainage conditions varies between 1400 to blackgram and lentil, and adversely affect crop 1700 mm. The annual oilseed crops, such as production; The area is deficit of water is 600 to sunflower and groundnut are prone to cyclones during 800 mm. The LGP varies cultivated after rice (on monsoon and retreating from 150 to 210 days or residual moisture). Besides monsoon periods. more in a year. agriculture, coastal and brackish water fisheries are important economic activities. 19 Hot Humid Gujarat: Surat Hot and humid summer The major soils of the The area is intensively Excessive leaching that Per-humid (Southern part), Dang, and warm winter. The region include red and cultivated for rice, tapioca, leads to depletion of plant Ecoregion Valsad mean annual rainfall laterite soils along the coconut and spices. The nutrients and bases; with Red, Maharashtra: Thane, exceeds 2000 mm in leeward flank of natural vegetation comprises Waterlogging, resulting Lateritic and Bombay, Alibagh, most of the areas. The Sahyadris and the tropical moist deciduous from imperfect drainage Alluvium Ratnagiri, Sindhudurg, water balance shows that alluvium-derived soils in forests. conditions affects crop derived Soils Dang, Kolhapur rainfall exceeds PET the coastal plains. They growth in the coastal Karnataka: Uttar demand (1400-1600 include soils that are plains; Steep slopes, Kannad (Western part), mm) in most of the very deep, clayey, causing runoff, leads to Shimoga, Dakshim months. The region is strongly to moderately severe soil erosion; Kannad, Chikmangalore represented by a longer acidic in nature and poor Inundation of land area (Western part), LGP ranging between in base saturation. results in localised saline Kadagul, Karwar, 150 and 210 days. Because of the marshes. Mangalore dominance of Kaolinite clay mineral, the soils are low in retentive capacity, suggesting poor inherent fertility. 22 2.4 Land use8 9. Agriculture constitutes the major land use (with the largest proportion of land being sown) in all states except Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Orissa. In these three states the dominant land use is forests. The states with the largest extent of land under forests are Madhya Pradesh (8699 thousand hectares), Chhattisgarh (6355), Orissa (5813) and Maharashtra (5214). As seen in Chart 2.2, the states with the largest proportion of land being cropped (net sown area) are Uttar Pradesh (69%), West Bengal (61%) and Bihar (59%). The largest extent of land under fallows is in the states of Rajasthan (4204 thousand hectares), Maharashtra (2524), Karnataka (2080) and Jharkhand (2027) – while Assam, West Bengal, Chhattisgarh and Gujarat have the least area under fallows. The largest extent of pastures and grazing lands are found in Rajasthan (1706 thousand hectares), Madhya Pradesh (1348) and Maharashtra (1252). West Bengal, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand have less than 1% of the area under pastures and grazing lands. Table 2.5: Land Use in Project States (2006-2007) (area in thousand hectares) Not available for Pastures & Tree Culturable Net sown Forests cultivation grazing lands crops wasteland Fallows area Assam 1954 2512 160 209 77 186 2753 Bihar 622 2083 17 240 46 796 5556 Chhattisgarh 6355 996 857 1 350 509 4722 Gujarat 1854 3753 850 4 1977 579 9852 Jharkhand 2333 1366 88 113 274 2027 1769 Karnataka 3072 2151 934 292 416 2080 10105 Madhya Pradesh 8699 3397 1348 19 1177 1381 14735 Maharashtra 5214 3131 1252 249 914 2524 17475 Orissa 5813 1842 443 482 392 860 5739 Rajasthan 2698 4262 1706 20 4611 4204 16764 Uttar Pradesh 1654 3215 65 376 439 1820 16633 West Bengal 1174 1754 5 58 34 363 5296 10. There are significant variations in the land use patterns within states. Annex 18 presents state profiles which include district-level details of the land use for each of the project states. 8 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/eands/LUS_2000_2005.htm 23 Chart 2.2: Land Use in Project States (2006-2007) Implications for Environmental Management The land use pattern is closely associated with the livelihoods in an area. The overview of land use in the project states points to the need for encouraging local interventions in: sustaining forest based livelihoods in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Orissa and Maharashtra; fodder cultivation and management in view of the limited fodder resources from pastures and grazing lands in West Bengal, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand; the need for water management as one of the critical inputs for reviving agriculture in states such as Jharkhand with large extent of fallow lands. 2.5 Land Degradation 9 11. Land is central to all primary production systems. A variety of biotic and abiotic pressures cause degradation of land. About 12.5% (276522 sq km) of the 2218892 sq km area of the 12 project states is classified as wasteland. More than a quarter of Rajasthan is wasteland (and as Rajasthan is the largest state in India, this is a substantial extent as seen in Chart 2.1). Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra come next with more than 35,000 sq km of wastelands. 12. As seen in Chart 2.3, about half the wastelands are lands with dense and open scrub. About a quarter of the wastelands constitute degraded forests. 9 Wastelands Atlas of India 2010. Department of Land Resources. Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. http://dolr.nic.in 24 Table 2.6: Wastelands in Project States (2010) Wasteland as % of State Geographic area (sq km) Wasteland (sq km) geographic area Assam 78438 8778.02 11.19 Bihar 94171 6841.09 7.26 Chhattisgarh 135194 11817.82 8.74 Gujarat 196024 21350.38 10.89 Jharkhand 79706 11670.14 14.64 Karnataka 191791 14438.12 7.53 Madhya Pradesh 308252 40042.98 12.99 Maharashtra 307690 38262.81 12.44 Orissa 155707 16648.27 10.69 Rajasthan 342239 93689.47 27.38 Uttar Pradesh 240928 10988.59 4.56 West Bengal 88752 1994.41 2.25 Chart 2.3: Types of Wastelands in Project Area (2010) 13. While land with scrub and degraded forest land are the dominant wasteland types in all the project states, there are other types of wastelands, as seen in Chart 2.4, which are specific to certain states. Assam, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Orissa have significant extent of area under seasonal or permanent water logging. Shifting cultivation has degraded land in Orissa and to a lesser extent in Assam. Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh have severely eroded land indicated by presence of ravines and gullies. Land affected by salinity is found in Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Rajasthan and Karnataka. Barren and rocky wastelands occur in Rajasthan, Maharashtra and Karnataka. Annex 18 has state profiles with district-level details on the types of wastelands in each of the project states. 14. Soil is the most basic input for agriculture. The loss of soil by erosion reduces the productive capacity of land. Soil erosion affects about 31% of the project area. Of this the area affected by water erosion accounts for about 28% and the rest 3% is due to wind erosion (in Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat). 25 Chart 2.4: Extent and Types of Wastelands in Project States (2010) (area in square km) Chart 2.5: Soil erosion in Project Area (2005) (area in thousand hectares) 26 Implications for Environmental Management Interventions that support livelihoods while rehabilitating degraded lands (e.g. soil and moisture conservation works, bio-energy plantations, etc.) may be promoted as part of the Green Opportunities. Demonstration of the involvement of SHG federations in rehabilitation of degraded lands10 can open up possibilities for scaling up in convergence with existing Government programmes such as IWMP, MNREGS, etc. 15. The majority of districts in the project area are categorized as having low Nitrogen and Phosphorus status. This is especially the case in Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and Rajasthan. Chart 2.6: Fertility status in Project States (2010) (percentage of districts)11 Chart 2.7: Fertility status in Project States (2010) (number of districts)12 10 For example, in Andhra Pradesh SHG federations (Mandal Mahila Samakhya – MMS) have been involved as Project Implementing Agencies (PIA) in watershed programs – these include Kosgi MMS and Dowlathabad MMS in Mahabubnagar district, Orvakal MMS and Midthur MMS in Kurnool district, Gandeed MMS in Ranga Reddy district. 11 Indian Institute of Soil Science. http://www.iiss.nic.in 12 Indian Institute of Soil Science. http://www.iiss.nic.in 27 Implications for Environmental Management Soil testing to identify the soil nutrient status (on the basis of which fertilizer inputs can be planned) is a critical service needed by farmers – however, access to this is currently constrained by poor servicing by Government soil testing labs, low awareness on need for soil testing and poor skills in sample collection. SHG federations can play an important role in facilitating soil testing by (a) liaison with soil testing labs for organizing systematic collection of samples, timely delivery of results and their interpretation, etc. (b) management of trained paraworkers (Green CRPs) who use soil testing kits to deliver basic soil testing services to farmers13. 2.6 Water resources 2.6.1 Rainfall and Drought 16. As seen in Chart 2.8, the annual (normal) rainfall in the project area ranges from 297 mm in West Rajasthan to 3613 mm in Coastal Karnataka. Most of this occurs during the South West monsoon (June – September). Chart 2.8: Normal Rainfall in the Project Area14 (mm) 17. When the rainfall deficiency is between 26 to 50%, droughts are categorized as moderate drought. When the rainfall deficiency exceeds 50%, it is a severe drought. Severe droughts are more common in Rajasthan, Gujarat and Maharashtra (except Konkan).West Rajasthan and the whole of Gujarat are chronically drought15 prone (probability of 13 For example, in the IFAD supported Uttarakhand Livelihood Improvement Project for the Himalayas, soil testing service is provided to farmers by Community Resource Persons through the SHG Federation. www.ajeevika.org.in 14 Indian Meteorological Division. http://www.imd.gov.in 15 The India Meteorological Department (IMD) defines drought in any area when the rainfall deficiency in that area is ≥26% of its long term normal. It is further classified into moderate and severe drought depending upon whether the deficiency is between 26 to 50% and more than 50% respectively. 28 drought exceeds 20% or a drought can be expected at least once in 5 or 4 years 16). Areas having drought probability between 10% and 20% are categorized as frequently drought prone. These areas can expect drought once in 6 to 10 years and include east Uttar Pradesh, east Rajasthan, West Madhya Pradesh, Marathwada, Vidarbha. The rest of the project area has a drought probability of less than 10% and belongs to the category of least drought affected area. Chart 2.9: Probability of Drought in the Project Area17 Implications for Environmental Management The concentration of rainfall during the South-West monsoon emphasizes the need for promoting rainwater harvesting. The chronically drought prone areas of West Rajasthan and Gujarat experience drought once every 5 or 4 years. These regions need interventions focused on drought adaptation that can be promoted as part of the Environmental Management Plans (EMPs) of the SHG federations – participatory varietal selection of crop varieties resistant to water shortages for a prolonged period, water management (e.g. building check-dams), land management (e.g. contour bunding), fodder management, etc. 2.6.2 Surface water 18. Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra have over 10,000 km of rivers and canals. Karnataka comes next with about 9,000 km. The rest of the project states have under 5,000 km of rivers and canals. 16 In the 130 years from 1875 to 2004. 17 M.P.Shewale, Shravan Kumar, 2010. Climatological Features of Drought Incidences in India. National Climate Centre. Climatology No. 21/2005. India Meteorological Department, Pune 29 Table 2.7 Water bodies (area in lakh ha) Rivers & Canals Tanks, Lakes, Floodplain Lakes, Brackish Total Water States (length in km) Reservoirs Ponds Derelict Water water Bodies Assam 4820 0.02 0.23 1.1 0 1.35 Bihar 3200 0.6 0.95 0.05 0 1.6 Jharkhand 4200 0.94 0.29 0 0 1.23 Gujarat 3865 2.43 0.71 0.12 1 4.26 Karnataka 9000 4.4 2.9 0 0.1 7.4 Madhya Pradesh 17088 2.27 0.6 0 0 2.87 Chhattisgarh 3573 0.84 0.63 0 0 1.47 Maharashtra 16000 2.79 0.59 0 0.1 3.48 Orissa 4500 2.56 1.14 1.8 4.3 9.8 Rajasthan 5290 1.2 1.8 0 0 3 Uttar Pradesh 28500 1.38 1.61 1.33 0 4.32 West Bengal 2526 0.17 2.76 0.42 2.1 5.45 Chart 2.10: Inland Water Bodies in Project States (2003-2004) (area in lakh hectares) Implications for Environmental Management Inland water bodies support several livelihoods – most directly – agriculture and fisheries. The large extent of area under inland water bodies in Orissa, Karnataka, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat indicates the potential of fisheries as a livelihood in these states. While reservoir fisheries are more organized, those in the other water bodies (tanks, lakes and ponds; floodplain lakes; brackish water) are mostly unorganized – indicating scope for livelihood intervention in this area. Organized fishery provides opportunity for regulation and extension support that can make fishing practices sustainable. 30 2.6.3 Groundwater18 19. The stage of groundwater development in the project states ranges from 18% in Orissa to 125% in Rajasthan19. Table 2.8: Groundwater Development in Project States (2004) Net annual Annual Stage of groundwater groundwater groundwater availability (BCM) draft (BCM) development (%) Assam 24.89 5.44 22 Bihar 27.42 10.77 39 Chhattisgarh 13.68 2.8 20 Gujarat 15.02 11.49 76 Jharkhand 5.25 1.09 21 Karnataka 15.3 10.71 70 Madhya Pradesh 35.33 17.12 48 Maharashtra 31.21 15.09 48 Orissa 21.01 3.85 18 Rajasthan 10.38 12.99 125 Uttar Pradesh 70.18 48.78 70 West Bengal 27.46 11.65 42 20. Overall, the status of groundwater development in the states of Rajasthan and Gujarat is not in the safe category, while Karnataka and Uttar Pradesh are close behind. The states of Orissa, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Assam have the stage of development at or under 20% - indicating scope for further resource extraction. Bihar, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra are at the rage 40-50% - indicating that while there is scope for further development, wise use of the resource is necessary. 21. As seen in Chart 2.12, the states with blocks classified as having over-exploited groundwater status are Rajasthan (140 blocks), Karnataka (65), Uttar Pradesh (37), Gujarat (31), Madhya Pradesh (24) and Maharashtra (7). Rajasthan also has 50 blocks classified as critical, followed by Uttar Pradesh with 13 and Gujarat with 12 blocks. Eight of the project states have blocks with semi-critical status. 18 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Groundwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 19 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category 31 Chart 2.11: Stage of Groundwater Development in the Project States (2004) Chart 2.12: Categorization of Blocks as per Groundwater Status (2004) (percentage of blocks) Implications for Environmental Management The irrigation sector accounts for about 92% of the groundwater draft in the country. Irrigation tubewells are one of the main investments that poor households make with micro-credit support. It is important to regulate the use of credit for digging of irrigation tubewells – to ensure that the investment is in a sustainable resource. In blocks that have been classified as over-exploited, micro-credit support for irrigation tubewells must not be made available. In blocks that have been classified as critical and semi-critical, support may be provided on integration of required mitigation measures into the Federation’s Environmental Management Plans (EMPs). Micro-level information on the groundwater status is important for planning mitigation action at the farmer and village levels. The importance and feasibility of community based groundwater 32 management (involving participatory monitoring of groundwater status, crop water budgeting, etc) has been successfully demonstrated20. The project can use these experiences to build the capacity of Green CRPs in facilitating community based groundwater management. 2.6.4 Water quality21 22. About 10% of the habitations in the project states have water quality issues (133582 out of the total of 1324486 habitations). The quality of drinking water in these habitations is affected by Iron (71088 habitations), Salinity (27627), Flouride (25350), Arsenic (6545) and Nitrate (2972). Chart 2.13: Water Quality Affected Habitations in Project Area (2010) Chart 2.14: Water Quality Affected Habitations in Project States (2010) 20 The FAO supported Andhra Pradesh Farmer Managed Groundwater Systems Project and the World Bank supported Andhra Pradesh Community Based Tank Management Project and the Andhra Pradesh Drought Adaptation Initiative. Deep Wells and Prudence: Towards Pragmatic Action for Addressing Groundwater Over-exploitation in India. The World Bank. 2010. 21 National Rural Drinking Water Programme, Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. Quality Affected Habitations as on 1 April 2010. http://indiawater.nic.in 33 Implications for Environmental Management Poor water quality affects livelihoods by impacting health (reduced opportunity to work, cost of treatment, etc.) – and the poor are most vulnerable. While bacteriological contamination of drinking water is a widespread problem and can be addressed through better sanitation, hygiene and disinfection, chemical contamination (Iron, Flouride, Arsenic, etc.) needs specialized treatment. One of the Green Opportunities for the project to explore and pilot could be on water quality management. 2.7 Agriculture 23. The contribution of agriculture to the State Net Domestic Product ranges from 11% (Maharashtra) to 39% (Bihar) for the project states22 (2004-05)23. The states with the largest proportion of land being cropped (net sown area) are Uttar Pradesh (69%), West Bengal (61%) and Bihar (59%). In terms of the extent of gross cropped area (net sown are and area sown more than once), Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh lead with more than 20,000 thousand hectares followed by Karnataka and Gujarat with a little over 12,000 thousand hectares. Jharkhand and Assam have the least gross cropped area among the project states (under 5,000 thousand hectares)24. Chart 2.15: Sown Area in Project States (2006-2007) (area in thousand hectares)25 24. Most of the project states have cropping intensity ranging from 1.25 to 1.5. West Bengal and Uttar Pradesh have the highest cropping intensity – 1.82 and 1.55 respectively. 22 Water Sector at a Glance. 2007. Central Water Commission. Government of India. 23 Assam 29%, Bihar 39%, Jharkhand 23%, Gujarat 17%, Karnataka 18%, Madhya Pradesh 29%, Chhattisgarh 15%, Maharashtra 11%, Orissa 24%, Rajasthan 25%, Uttar Pradesh 33% and West Bengal 20%. 24 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/eands/LUS_2000_2005.htm 25 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/eands/LUS_2000_2005.htm 34 Chart 2.16: Cropping Intensity in Project States (2006-2007)26 25. As seen in Chart 2.17, the productivity of cereals in most of the project states is below the Indian average. Only two states – West Bengal and Uttar Pradesh have higher productivity levels. The productivity of pulses is higher than the average for the country for half the project states. Gujarat, Rajasthan and Maharashtra have the highest productivity rates for oil seeds27. Chart 2.17: Productivity of Cereals in Project States (kg/ha) (Average of 2001-02 to 2005- 06) 26 ASM – Assam, BHR – Bihar, CHT – Chhattisgarh, GUJ – Gujarat, JHK – Jharkhand, KNT – Karnataka, MP – Madhya Pradesh, MH – Maharashtra, OR – Orissa, RAJ – Rajasthan, UP – Uttar Pradesh, WB – West Bengal 27 Average of 2001-02 to 2005-06. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/eands 35 Chart 2.18: Productivity of Pulses in Project States (kg/ha) (Average of 2001-02 to 2005-06) Chart 2.19: Productivity of Oilseeds in Project States (kg/ha) (Average 2001-02 to 2005-06) 26. The percentage of net sown area that is irrigated ranges from 5% in Assam and 7% in Jharkhand to 80% in Uttar Pradesh, 62% in Bihar and 55% in West Bengal. There is a heavy reliance on tubewells for irrigation in the states of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and West Bengal – with tubewells contributing to 50-70% of the net irrigated area. Tanks play a significant role in irrigation in Jharkhand, West Bengal and Karnataka. Implications for Environmental Management The predominance of tubewells as a source of irrigation in the project area stresses the need for promoting efficient irrigation practices (drip and sprinkler irrigation, bucket drip kits, etc.) through the Self Help Groups. The project needs to pilot a Green Opportunity intervention on efficient irrigation management involving Self Help Groups both as beneficiaries as well as promoters of drip irrigation. 36 Figure 2.2: Irrigated Area in Project States Table 2.9: Net Irrigated Area and Sources of Irrigation in Project States (2008-2009) (thousand hectares)28 Net Net Other Other irrigated sown % of Net sown Canals Tanks Tubewells wells sources area area area irrigated Assam 33 3 0 2 101 140 2753 5% Bihar 971 155 2264 7 132 3529 5662 62% Chhattisgarh 887 51 288 28 84 1339 4710 28% Gujarat 789 40 1133 2174 102 4238 9852 43% Jharkhand 8 21 17 46 17 110 1504 7% Karnataka 1061 206 1140 406 424 3238 10174 32% Madhya Pradesh 1066 130 1985 2385 941 6506 14941 44% Maharashtra 1002 0 0 2171 0 3173 17426 18% Orissa 1418 0 331 101 341 2192 5604 39% Rajasthan 1583 31 2437 2122 73 6245 17551 36% Uttar Pradesh 2358 105 9576 1004 41 13085 16417 80% West Bengal 672 289 1684 43 319 3006 5428 55% 28 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/eands 37 Chart 2.20: Sources of Irrigation in Project States (2008-2009) (thousand hectares) 27. The consumption of fertilizers in Gujarat, Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Bihar is higher than the national average. The use of chemical fertilizers in Rajasthan and Jharkhand is less than half of the country average. Chart 2.21: Fertilizer Consumption in Project States (2008-2009) (kg/hectare) 28. The use of chemical pesticides in Gujarat, Karnataka and Rajasthan shows a clear declining trend. In the other states, the use of pesticides is either more or less the same or is increasing (Chhattisgarh). 38 Figure 2.3: Pesticide Consumption in Project States Chart 2.22: Pesticide Consumption in Project States (2002-2007) (MT) Implications for Environmental Management As seen in section 2.5, poor soil nutrient status – especially of the macronutrients N and P – is a concern across the project states. There is a need to promote (a) fertilizer scheduling based on soil testing (b) use of organic inputs both in states with high use of chemical fertilizers and in those that are yet to ‘catch up’ on their use. While pesticide consumption is on the decline in some states, it is steady or increasing in others. There is thus a need to promote non-chemical, integrated pest management in all states. The promotion of non-chemical pest and nutrient management through Self Help Groups has been successfully demonstrated by initiatives such as the Community Managed Sustainable Agriculture in Andhra Pradesh and System for Root Intensification in Bihar29. These need to be scaled up through the project. 29 Andhra Pradesh Rural Poverty Reduction Project and Bihar Rural Livelihoods Project. 39 2.8 Livestock and Fisheries 2.8.1 Livestock 29. Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh account for 10% of the country‘s cattle population followed by Maharashtra with 9%, and, Bihar and Rajasthan with 6%. Uttar Pradesh also leads in the buffalo population, accounting for 23%, followed by Rajasthan with 11% of the country‘s population. The highest sheep population is in Rajasthan (16% of the country‘s population) and Karnataka (12%) while the goat population is the highest in West Bengal (15%) and Rajasthan (14%). West Bengal has 12% and Maharashtra has 8% of the poultry population in the country. 30. The main sources of fodder are crop residues (dry fodder), cultivated fodder, pastures and grazing lands and forests30 (green fodder). Fallows and wastelands are also important for grazing. The states of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Rajasthan have a greater extent of land under fodder sources – primarily due to large extent of land under food grain crops. 31. As seen in Charts 2.23 and 2.24, Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat lead in the production of fodder. However, there is a substantial deficit between the demand and supply of fodder in all the states (except Maharashtra) as indicated in Chart 2.25. The states of Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan have the widest gap between fodder demand and supply. This indicates that the current demand is being met by fodder imports (for example, from Punjab and Haryana to Rajasthan), from other crop residues (for example, use of vegetable crop residues in Bihar), from overgrazing in forests (for example, in Madhya Pradesh). Figure 2.4: Livestock Population in Project States (2003) (thousand in Cow Units31) 30 Forests are open to grazing in some states while in others permission from the Forest Department is required. Grazing in Reserve Forests and Wildlife Sanctuaries requires permission from the Forest Department. Grazing in National Parks is not permitted. 31 Includes population of cattle, buffaloes, sheep and goats converted to Cow Units. 1 Cow Unit = 1 cattle / 0.5 buffalo / 4 sheep / 4 goat. 40 Table 2.10: Livestock Population in Project States (2003) (thousands)32 States Cattle Buffaloes Sheep Goats Pigs Camel Poultry Assam 8440 678 170 2987 1543 0 21664 Bihar 10729 5743 382 9490 672 1 13911 Chhattisgarh 8882 1598 121 2336 552 0 8181 Gujarat 7424 7140 2062 4541 351 53 8153 Jharkhand 7659 1343 680 5031 1108 0.03 14429 Karnataka 9539 3991 7256 4484 312 0.04 25593 Madhya Pradesh 18913 7575 546 8142 358 8 11705 Maharashtra 16303 6145 3094 10684 439 0.32 37968 Orissa 13903 1394 1620 5803 662 0 17611 Rajasthan 10854 10414 10054 16809 338 498 6192 Uttar Pradesh 18551 22914 1437 12941 2284 16 11718 West Bengal 18913 1086 1525 18774 1301 0 60656 All India 185181 97922 61469 124358 13519 632 489012 Chart 2.23: Sources of Fodder in Project States33 (2003) (thousand hectares) 32 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Ministry of Agriculture. Government of India. 33 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/eands; Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics, 2008, Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. 41 Chart 2.24: Production of Fodder in Project States34 (2002-2003) (Thousand tonnes) Chart 2.25: Fodder Availability and Requirement in Project States 35 (2003) (Thousand tonnes) 34 Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics, 2004, Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. 35 Fodder availability from: Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics, 2004, Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. Fodder requirement computed as 1.8 tonnes per Cow Unit based on livestock population figures from: 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Ministry of Agriculture. Government of India. 42 2.8.2 Fisheries 32. The utilization of ponds for fish culture makes West Bengal the leading fish producing state – accounting for about 30% of the country‘s total inland fish production (2004-05). On the other hand, other states are heavily dependent on rivers and reservoirs for their fish catch. Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Orissa are the other major producers of inland fish36. Table 2.11: Fish production in the Project States (2003-04)37 Fish production ('000 State Water bodies ('000 ha) tonnes) Yield (Tonnes/Ha) Assam 135 181 1.34 Bihar 160 266.49 1.67 Chhattisgarh 147 111.05 0.76 Gujarat 426 45.48 0.11 Jharkhand 123 75.38 0.61 Karnataka 740 70 0.09 Madhya Pradesh 287 50.82 0.18 Maharashtra 348 125.12 0.36 Orissa 980 190.02 0.19 Rajasthan 300 14.3 0.05 Uttar Pradesh 432 267 0.62 West Bengal 545 988 1.81 Implications for Environmental Management Experience from the Bank supported livelihood projects indicates that livestock (purchase of milch animals, sheep and goats) will feature as a significant reason for which Self Help Group members take micro-credit loans. In fodder scare conditions, the anticipated returns from the enterprise will be affected, besides degrading an already scarce resource. It is important that all micro-credit support for livestock in the project is released as part of a package that also includes fodder cultivation and/or better fodder management practices – both at the individual household as well as at the group/federation levels. It is also necessary for periodic monitoring of cumulative impacts to ensure that the growth in the livestock population does not happen without appropriate fodder management. 2.9 Energy 33. The dominant source of rural household energy for meeting cooking requirements is firewood followed by dung cake. The use of firewood ranges from 94% in Rajasthan to 49% in Bihar. The use of dung cake as the primary cooking fuel is the highest in Bihar (33% households) and in Uttar Pradesh. 34. The use of cleaner fuels such as LPG and kerosene is extremely limited – 14.9% of the rural households in Maharashtra and 10.5% of rural households in Gujarat use LPG, 36 Water Sector at a Glance. 2007. Central Water Commission. Government of India. 37 Water Sector at a Glance. 2007. Central Water Commission. Government of India. 43 10.2% households in Gujarat and 1.9% in Maharashtra use kerosene (the other states have much lesser %). Chart 2.26: Source of Household Cooking Energy in Project States (2004-2005)38 (percentage of households) Implications for Environmental Management The high use of fuel wood and dung cake has serious implications on human health (53% of tuberculosis prevalence in India is a result of exposure to cooking smoke39) apart from causing environmental degradation (loss of tree cover, loss of organic manure). Considering that rural households spend a significant proportion of their income on meeting cooking energy requirements, improving access to fuel efficient cooking devices, helping households with credit support and market linkages to make the switch to cleaner energy, etc., will be an important Green Opportunity for the project to explore. 2.10 Forests 35. Five of the project states have forest cover ranging from 25% to more than 40% of their geographic area. These are Chhattisgarh, Assam, Orissa, Jharkhand and Madhya Pradesh. In terms of the actual extent of forest area, the leading states are Madhya Pradesh (77700 sq km), Chhattisgarh (55810 sq km) and Maharashtra (50650 sq km). 36. As seen in Chart 2.28, the maximum extent of very dense forest40 is in the states of Maharashtra, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Large extent of degraded forest (scrub) is present in the states of Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan, Maharashtra and Karnataka – indicating high biotic pressure on forests in these states. 38 National Sample Survey Report No. 511. Energy Survey of Households for Cooking and Lighting. 2004-2005. 39 Vinod Mishra, et al. Effects of Cooking Smoke on Prevalence of Tuberculosis in India. No. 92, October 1997. Population Series. East West Center Working Papers. http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/Pnack106.pdf 40 Very dense forest – canopy density above 70%, Moderately dense forest – canopy density 40-70%, Open forest – canopy density 10-40%, Scrub – degraded forest with canopy density less than 10%. 44 Chart 2.27: Forest Area in Project States (2007) (Percentage of geographic area)41 Chart 2.28: Forest Cover in Project States (2007) (Square km)42 41 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 42 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 45 Chart 2.29: Degraded Scrub Forest in Project States (2007) (Square km)43 37. The 12 project states house 237 Wildlife Sanctuaries and 47 National Parks. These protected areas constitute between 3.31% (Karnataka) and 8.84% (Gujarat) of the geographic area of the project states. Table 2.12: Protected Areas in Project States States Wildlife Sanctuaries National Parks Bihar 11 1 West Bengal 15 5 Uttar Pradesh 23 1 Gujarat 24 4 Rajasthan 25 5 Jharkhand 11 1 Assam 18 5 Karnataka 21 5 Orissa 18 2 Maharashtra 35 6 Chhattisgarh 11 3 Madhya Pradesh 25 9 Total 237 47 38. Forests are central to the livelihoods of tribal communities. As seen in Table 2.13, all the project states, except Bihar, have tribal districts with significant area under forests. 43 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 46 Table 2.13: Forest Cover in Tribal Districts in the Project Area State Number of % of geographical area of tribal districts tribal districts under forest Assam 16 23.95 Chhattisgarh 9 43.40 Gujarat 8 13.98 Jharkhand 8 31.27 Karnataka 5 49.02 Madhya Pradesh 18 30.34 Maharashtra 11 21.34 Orissa 12 38.66 Rajasthan 5 16.61 Uttar Pradesh 1 17.19 West Bengal 11 17.72 Implications for Environmental Management The forested areas in the project states (especially the 104 tribal districts) are areas with close links between livelihoods and forests. It is necessary to have a clear strategy for these areas for promoting community based forest resource management – and include it in each state’s Environmental Action Plan (EAP). Training on sustainable extraction of non-timber forest produce, community norms for rotational grazing and stall feeding, sustainable management of shifting cultivation44, etc., need to be part of this strategy. The Environmental Management Plans (EMPs) of the SHG federations in these areas need to reflect this strategy. 44 Vincent Darlong. 2008. Harmonizing Jhum (Shifting Cultivation) with PGS Organic Standards in Northeast India: Key features and characteristics of Jhum for process harmonization. 16th IFOAM Organic World Congress, Modena, Italy, June 16- 20, 2008. Accessed at http://orgprints.org/view/projects/conference.html 47 3. Legal and Regulatory Framework for Environmental Management 1. It is important that the livelihood activities of the Self Help Groups and the activities of the federations and Producer Organizations are in tune with the laws and regulations of the country and the states. Compliance rather than being restrictive provides an opportunity to align the investments with sound and sustainable management of resources. This section presents a brief listing of the various Acts, Rules and Regulations of the Government of India, the state Governments (the current draft includes details from Bihar, Rajasthan, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal) as well as the safe guard policies of the World Bank. 2. On the basis of the alignment of the proposed NRLP interventions with respect to these laws and regulations, a Regulatory Requirements List has been developed. This is provided as Annex 7. Table 3.1: Act, Policy or Government Relevant to NRLP Status Order NATIONAL REGULATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA Environment (Protection) Emission or discharge of pollutants beyond the specified Act, 1986 and EIA standards is not permissible. (Environmental impact assessment Notification, 2006 (EIA) is required for specified categories of industry. Amended: 1991 To provide for the protection and improvement of the environment. It empowers the Central Government to establish authorities {under section 3(3)} charged with the mandate of preventing environmental pollution in all its forms and to tackle specific environmental problems that are peculiar to different parts of the country. Wildlife (Protection) Act, Destruction, exploitation or removal of any wild life including 1972 forest produce from a sanctuary of the destruction or diversification of habitat of any wild animal, or the diversion, Amended: 1993 and No.16 of stoppage or enhancement of the flow of water into or outside the 2003, (17/1/2003) – The Wild sanctuary is prohibited without a permit granted by the Chief Life (Protection) Wildlife Warden. Amendment Act, 2002 The Act provides for protection to listed species of flora and fauna and establishes a network of ecologically-important protected areas (Pas) Forest (Conservation) Act, The NRLP is unlikely to involve diversion of forest land for 1980 non-forest purposes. However, while supporting activities related to mining (Stone quarrying) or brick making, it is necessary to ensure that that land is not forest land Insecticides Act, 1968 A license is required for the sale, stock or exhibition of sale or distribution of any insecticide. The use of certain insecticides Amendment: Insecticides are prohibited or restricted under this Act 110. (Amendment) Act, 1977 (24 To regulate the import, manufacture, sale, transport, distribution of 1977) and use of insecticides with a view to prevent risk to human beings or animals, and for matters connected therewith. The Fertilizer (Control) Registration is required for selling fertilizer at any place as Order, 1985 wholesale dealer or retail dealer 48 The Seed Act, 1966 Selling, bartering or otherwise supplying any seed of any notified kind or variety, requires that – a) Such seed is identifiable as to its kind or variety; b) Such seed conforms to the minimum limits of germination and purity specified c) The container of such seed bears in the prescribed manner, the mark or label containing the correct particulars. To provide for regulating the quality of certain seeds for sale, and for related matter The Air (Prevention and To provide for the prevention, control and abatement of air Control of Pollution) Act, pollution in India 1981 Amended: 1987, 1992 and 2003 Public Liability Insurance To provide for public liability- insurance for the purpose of Act, 1991 providing immediate relief to the person affected by accident Amended: 1992 occurring while handling any hazardous substance and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. Noise Pollution (Regulation To regulate and control noise producing and generating sources & Control) Rules, 2000 with the objective of maintaining the ambient air quality standards in respect of noise. Scheduled Tribes and other The Act recognizes the rights of forest-dwelling Scheduled Traditional Forest Dwellers Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers over the forest areas (Recognition of Forest inhabited by them, and provides a framework for recording the Rights) Act, 2006 same. The Act can be summarized as:  Title rights - i.e. ownership - to land that is being farmed by tribals or forest dwellers as on December 13, 2005, subject to a maximum of 4 hectares; ownership is only for land that is actually being cultivated by the concerned family as on that date, meaning that no new lands are granted;  Use rights - to minor forest produce (also including ownership), to grazing areas, to pastoralist routes, etc.;  Relief and development rights - to rehabilitation in case of illegal eviction or forced displacement and to basic amenities, subject to restrictions for forest protection;  Forest management rights - to protect forests and wildlife. Indian Forest Act, 1927 To consolidate the law relating to forests, the transit of forest- produce and the duty leviable on timber and other forest- produce The Water (Prevention and To provide for the prevention and control of water pollution, Control of Pollution) Act and for the maintaining or restoring of wholesomeness of water 1974 in the country Amended: 1988 The Biological Diversity Act, To provide for conservation of biological diversity, sustainable 2002 use of its components and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the use of biological resources, knowledge and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The National Green The National Green Tribunal Act 2010 approved by the Tribunal Act, 2010 President of India on June 2, 2010. It provides for establishment 49 of National Green Tribunal- a special fast-track court for speedy disposal of environment-related civil cases. Coastal Regulation Zone The new notification replaces CRZ 1991.The Government of Notification 2011, and Island India declares the coastal stretches of seas, bays, estuaries, Protection Zone Notification creeks, rivers and backwaters which are influenced by tidal 2011 action up to 500 metres from the High Tide Line (HTL) and the land between the Low Tide Line (LTL) and the HTL as Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) and imposes restrictions on the setting up and expansion of industries, operations or processes, etc., in the CRZ. In the latest notification the ‗no development zone' is being reduced from 200 meters from the high-tide line to 100 meters only to meet the increased demands of housing of fishing and other traditional coastal communities. OTHERS The Mahatma Gandhi To enhance the livelihood security of people in rural areas by National Rural Employment guaranteeing 100 days of wage-employment in a financial year Guarantee Act, 2005 to a rural household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work Right to Information Act, To provide right to information for citizens to secure access to 2005 information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority The Disaster Management An Act to provide for the effective management of disasters Act, 2005 NATIONAL POLICIES National Forest Policy 1988 To ensure environmental stability and maintenance of ecological balance (direct economic benefits being considered)  Area under forests  Afforestation, social forestry, and farm forestry  Management of state forests  Rights and concessions  Diversion of forest lands for non-forest purposes  Wildlife conservation  Tribal people and forests  Shifting cultivation  Damage to forests from encroachments, fires and grazing  Forest-based industries  Forest extension  Forestry education  Forest survey and database  Legal support and infrastructure development  Financial support for forestry National Water Policy, 1987 To ensure that planning, development and management of water and 202 resources are governed by national perspectives ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARD POLICIES OF THE WORLD BANK Environmental Assessment The Bank requires environmental assessment (EA) of projects Triggered (OP 4.01) proposed for Bank financing to ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable, and thus to improve decision making. Natural Habitats (OP 4.04) The Bank does not support projects that, in the Bank‘s opinion, Triggered involve the significant conversion or degradation of critical 50 natural habitats. Pest Management (OP 4.09) In Bank-financed agriculture operations, pest populations are Triggered normally controlled through integrated pest management approaches, such as biological control, cultural practices, and the development and use of crop varieties that are resistant or tolerant to the pest. The Bank does not finance formulated products that fall in WHO classes IA and IB, or formulations of products in Class II 111, if (a) the country lacks restrictions on their distribution and use; or (b) they are likely to be used by, or be accessible to, lay personnel, farmers, or others without training, equipment, and facilities to handle, store, and apply these products properly. Cultural Property (OP 4.11) The Bank does not finance projects that will significantly Not Triggered (Physical Cultural damage non-replicable cultural property, and will assist only Resources) those projects that are sited or designed so as to prevent such damage. The project areas do not involve sites having archeological (prehistoric), paleontological, historical, religious, and unique natural values. Indigenous Peoples (OP The objective at the centre of this directive is to ensure that Triggered 4.10) indigenous peoples do not suffer adverse effects during the development process, particularly from Bank-financed projects, and that they receive culturally compatible social and economic benefits. For an investment project that affects indigenous peoples, the borrower should prepare in indigenous peoples development plan that is consistent with the Bank‘s policy. Any project that affects indigenous peoples is expected to include components or provisions that incorporate such a plan. Involuntary Resettlement The objective of the Bank‘s resettlement policy is to ensure that Not Triggered (OP 4.12) the population displaced by a project receives benefits from it. There is no likelihood of any displacement happening as part of the project activities. Forests (OP 4.36) The Bank distinguishes investment projects that are exclusively Triggered environmentally protective (e.g., management of protected areas or reforestation of degraded watersheds) or supportive of small farmers (e.g., farm and community forestry) from all other forestry operations. Projects in this limited group may be appraised on the basis of their own social, economic, and environmental merits. The Bank finances plantations only on non forested areas (including previously planted areas) or on heavily degraded forestland. Safety of Dams (OP 4.37) Construction of any dams may not be part of the project. Small Not Triggered dams are normally less than 15 meters in height. This category includes farm ponds, local silt retention dams, and low embankment tanks. For small dams, generic dam safety measures designed by qualified engineers are adequate. Projects on International International waterways are not part of the project area. Not Triggered Waterways (OP 7.50) Projects in Disputed Areas Disputed areas are not part of the project area. Not Triggered (OP 7.60) STATE REGULATIONS BIHAR 51 Indian Forest (Bihar Forest land is any area recorded as forest in the Government Amendment) Act, 1989 records, irrespective of ownership. Forest produce includes the following whether found in or brought from a forest: timber, charcoal, caouthouc, catechu, wood-oil, resin, natural varnish, bark, lac, mahua flowers, mahua seeds, kuthi and myrabolams. It also includes all trees and leaves, flowers and fruits, and all other parts or produce of trees; plants that are not trees (including grass, creepers, reeds and moss) and all parts or produce of such plants; palms, bamboos, stumps, brush-wood and canes; wild animals and all parts and produce of animals; peat, surface soil, rock and minerals (including limestone, laterite, mineral oils, and all products of mines or quarries). Articles prepared from bamboo chips are not forest produce. Veneer is a forest produce. Quicklime is a forest produce. Cane baskets prepared from cane trees growing in forests is also forest produce. The following acts are prohibited in reserved and protected forests: Clearing, kindling fire, trespassing cattle, damaging trees (feeling, girdling, lopping, topping, burning, stripping bark and leaves), Quarrying stone, burning lime or charcoal, collecting any forest produce, clearing or breaking land for cultivation, hunting, shooting, fishing, poisoning water, setting traps or snares, etc. The districts of Gaya and Nalanda include Wild Life Sanctuaries may be considered critical natural habitats. Bihar Ground Water Any user of ground water desiring to sink as well either on (Regulation and Control of personal or community basis in the notified area (not specified Development and so far), needs to apply to the Ground Water Authority for grant Management) Bill, 2006 of a permit. This is not applicable in the case of wells that are fitted with hand operated pumps or water is proposed to be withdrawn by manual devices. Existing users of ground water are also required to register themselves with the Ground Water Authority. The Bihar Fish Jalkar Fishing in rivers is prohibited from 15th June to 15th August. Management Bill, 2006 Fishing net or Gill net with less than 4 cm mesh size shall be prohibited in rivers Fishing of fingerlings of culturable fishes of any species shall be prohibited in rivers and reservoirs. Use of dynamite or explosives, poison and poisonous chemicals for fishing shall be prohibited. Drawing of water from tanks, reservoirs and mauns for irrigation shall be prohibited. The District Fisheries Officer may order for drawing of water for irrigation when the water level is averages a minimum of five feet in these Jalkars. Intentional water pollution, encroachment in Jalkars and disfiguration of the structure of Jalkars is prohibited Bihar Irrigation Act, 1997 No well exclusively for domestic use, either on personal or community basis can be excavated within the distance specified by the State Government from time to time from the boundaries of an irrigation work without previous sanction by their State Government. No person has a right to fish or ply any vessel in a reservoir, pond or tank or along a canal or channel maintained or controlled by the Government without written permission of 52 the State Government. No person can extract water for any purpose by the installation of pump sets or any other electrical or mechanical devices for pumping water from an irrigation work except with the permission of the Divisional Canal Officer. No person shall deposit any produce of mines or earth or any other material in or near any channel or field drain or other work, whether natural or artificial through which rain or other water flows into any irrigation work. No person shall pollute, or discharge sewage effluent or trade effluent in the water of any irrigation work which may cause injury to the irrigation work or may deteriorate the quality of water of the irrigation work or may give rise to any growth of weeds in the irrigation work. The Bihar Restoration and The State Government has the power to levy, assess and collect Improvement of Degraded a tax called the Bihar Restoration and Improvement of Degraded Forest Land Taxation Act, Forest Land Tax for reclamation and rehabilitation of forest land 1992 from the user using forest land for non-forest purpose or indulging in developmental activities including mining. The Bihar Forest Produce The purchase, transport, import or export of specified forest (Regulation of Trade) Act, produce in a notified area can only be done by the Government 1984 or by an appointed agent. The primary collector of a specified produce may transport his specified forest produce 112 within the unit. Retail sale of a specified forest produce is permitted only under a license. Eucalyptus trees grown on land owned by farmers is not considered forest produce. Bihar Rules for the Permission from the Divisional Forest Officer is required for Establishment of Saw Pits establishing, maintaining or running a saw pit or depot. These and Establishment and rules are applicable in the BRLP districts OF Gaya, Nalanda, Regulation of Depots, 1983 Purnea. Saw pit means machine operated saws meant to cut, fashion or saw timber or poles. Depot is a place where timber more than 100 cft in quantity and poles more than 50 in number stored. Bihar Saw Mils (Regulation) No person shall establish, operate a saw mill or saw pit except Act, 1990 under license. Saw mill refers to sawing with the aid of Bihar Saw Mill (Regulation) electrical mechanical power. It also includes veneer plywood (Amendment) Act, 2002 manufacturing units. Saw pit refers to the use of manually operated saws. No saw mil can exist within 15 km from a notified forest area. Bihar State Water Policy The Government of Bihar will adopt a radical shift from 2010 predominantly engineering-based solutions to local community- based water and sanitation management solutions. That is, a shift towards community-level empowerment and responsibility for their own water and sanitation management .This involves a combination of ‗bottom-up‘ decision-making and ‗top-down‘ technical support within a much more holistic conceptual framework. Government authorities will operate as multi- disciplinary ‗technical service providers‘ and facilitator rather than central control organizations. Many of the policy issues herein are intended to function from this new perspective. Bihar Kendu Leaves No person other than the Government or an appointed agent can (Control of Trade) Act, 1973 purchase or transport kendu leaves. RAJASTHAN Rajasthan Regulation and This bill deals with establishment of State Ground Water 53 Control of the Development Authority with the powers to notify areas and uses for regulation and Management of Ground and control of the development and management of ground Water Bill, 2006 (Draft) water Rajasthan State Water The policy intends to function from the new perspective of Policy, 2010 Integrated Water Resources Management, which is holistic and includes a bottom up approach. The new policy document addresses issues related to:  Water supply and development  Integrated Water Resource Management  Irrigation  Water resources infrastructure  Water conservation  Water quality  Environmental management  Water pricing  Legal enablement  Capacity building  Research  Monitoring and evaluation of water policy and action plans Rajasthan Forest Produce Regulate the transit of forest produce into, from or within any (Transit) Rules 1957 area in the state of Rajasthan. Forest produce includes timber, lac, resin, mahua flower and seed, whether found in or brought from a forest. It applies to forest produce produced on private lands Rajasthan Forest Policy, The forest cover of Rajasthan is only 9.56% of the total 2010 geographical area of the state. The principal aim of the forest policy is ensuring environmental stability and ecological security through increase in vegetal cover, which will lead to reduction in soil erosion, and consequently, dust particles in the upper stratosphere. The reduction in stratospheric temperature is likely to increase the possibility of rains Breeding Policy in The Policy is aimed to help improve the cattle and buffalo Rajasthan for wealth of the state and socio-economic status of the farmers Cattle and Buffalo, 2006, through increased productivity of their animals. 2007 ORISSA The Orissa Forest Act, 1972 To protect and manage forests in the state. To consolidate and amend laws relating to the protection and management of forests in the state The Ancient Monuments  Provide for the preservation of ancient and historical and Archaeological sites and monuments and archaeological sites and remains of remains Act, 1958 national importance, for the regulation of archaeological excavations and for the protection of sculptures, carvings and other like objects.  To restore the damaged monuments and materials and areas of archaeological importance.  Supreme Court  Prevention of environmental sound pollution directions for Noise  Creating general awareness towards the hazardous effects Control 2005 of noise pollution  Motivating young children of impressionable age to  Orissa fire crackers desist from playing with fire crackers, use of high sound and loud speakers producing equipments and instruments on festival, 54 Act 1958 and the religious and social function, family get-together and Noise pollution celebrations etc. (regulation and  Restricting use of loud speakers and amplifiers etc. control) Rules 2000 Govt. of Orissa Notification  To prevent and control pollution arising out of stone No. 8775 26th Oct. 1987 (for crushing, brick kilns, lime kilns and coal brequetting siting criteria for establishment of stone crusher and brick kilns, lime kilns and coal briquetting) Orissa Resettlement and  To ensure sustained development through a participatory Rehabilitation Policy 2006 and transparent process The Orissa Marine Fishing Regulates and restricts fishing by fishing vessels along with regulation Act 1982 coastline of the state and lakes connected to the sea. TAMIL NADU Tamil Nadu Town and This act appoints and empowers local planning authorities to plan Country Planning Act 1971 for an urban area and/or designated areas. This involves preparation/implementation of Master Plans specifying land use. The plan delineates land for residential, industrial, commercial, agriculture, recreation, forests and mineral exploitation; demarcates objects and boundaries of archaeological/historical interest; and identifies new town/cities, transportation and communication facilities, water supply, drainage, sewerage, sewage disposal and other public utilities and amenities. This act also empowers local planning authorities to assess, levy and recover development charges for the land. At an organization level, the act envisages three classes of authorities: regional planning authorities; local planning authorities; new town development authorities and the constitution of a Town and Country Planning Board. Coastal Regulation Zone This notification under Environment (Protection) Act 1986 (CRZ) Notification, 1990 supplements the law on site clearance by declaring certain zones as CRZ. It also regulates activities in these zones. Further, GoTN has also issued orders regulating development within 500 m from the high tide level. Under the proposed activities, if there is occurrence of effluent discharges within 500m from the high tide line and other declared sensitive areas implementation of mitigation measures is required before the commencement of operation of such activities. Under this act, Tamil Nadu State Coastal Zone Management Authority came into existence in 1998. Tamil Nadu Water These rules seek to control pollution of water and enhance the (Prevention and Control of quality of water. Pollution) Rules, 1974 Under these rules, it is mandatory to obtain consent for discharge of effluents and pay consent fees to Tamil Nadu State Pollution Control Board (TNSPCB) for any projects causing water pollution within the jurisdiction of the TNSPCB operations. The Water (Prevention and This Act provides for levy and collection of a cess by local Control of Pollution) Cess authorities on water consumed by persons or industries to augment 55 Act, 1977/Amended 2003 resources for Pollution Control Boards. Air (Prevention and Control These rules address the prevention and control of air pollution. of Pollution) Act 1981 and Under these rules it is mandatory to obtain consent for discharging Tamil Nadu Air (Prevention emissions and pay consent fees to TNPCB for any projects of Control of Pollution) causing air pollution. Rules 1983 Hazardous Waste These rules address handling of hazardous substances that fall (Management and Handling) under specified schedules. Proposed activities may require Rules, 1989/2000/2003 handling of specified substances wherein plans/ measures for safe handling and emergency preparedness shall be prepared for safe operations. Solid Waste (Management These rules address management and handling of municipal solid and Handling) Rules, wastes. The proposed activities may require handling of specified 1989/2000 substances wherein plans/ measures for safe handling and emergency preparedness shall be prepared for safe operation. Other Regulations Other regulations, which may be applicable, are given below. * The Batteries (Management and Handling) Rules, 2001 * The Recycled Plastics Manufacture and Usage Rules, 1999/ Amendment 2003 * Prohibition on the handling of Azo dyes * The Bio-Medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998/ 2003 * The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991, amended 1992 * The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960/ The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Establishment and Regulation of Societies for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) Rules, 2001 * The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Slaughter House) Rules, 2001 Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) looks after compliance to various environmental regulations in the state. TNPCB was constituted to enforce 8 key legislations relating to the control of pollution. The major functions of TNPCB with respect to all kinds of industrial units is to sanction, consent to establish and consent to operate: Different activities have been classified under "RED", "ORANGE" and "GREEN" categories by TNPCB. "RED" and "ORANGE categories imply that mitigation measures shall be planned to control pollution. Activities qualifying under the following criteria are labeled as "GREEN" industries. All non-obnoxious and non-hazardous industries, All such industries which do not discharge industrial effluent, All such industries which do not use fuel in their manufacturing process or in any subsidiary process and which do not emit fugitive emissions. ANDHRA PRADESH Coastal Regulation Zone The Government of India declares the coastal stretches of seas, Notification, 1991 bays, estuaries, creeks, rivers and backwaters which are influenced by tidal action up to 500 metres from the High Tide Line (HTL) and the land between the Low Tide Line (LTL) and the HTL as Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) and imposes restrictions on the setting up and expansion of industries, operations or processes, 56 etc., in the CRZ. The Andhra Pradesh Forest The Government may constitute any land as reserved forest by Act 1967 publishing a notification in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette and in the District Gazette concerned specifying the details of the land, declaring the proposal to make it reserved forest, and appointing a Forest Settlement Officer to consider the objections against the declaration and to determine and settle the rights claimed to the land or to any forest produce of that land. During the interval between the publication of a notification in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette and the date fixed in the notification, without the written permission from the Forest Settlement Officer, in the land specified: • No right shall be acquired by any person in or over the land except by succession or under a grant or contract by the Government or any person who had such a right before the publication of the notification of the land to be Reserved. • No new house shall be built or plantation formed, no fresh clearing for cultivation or for any other purpose shall be made, and no trees shall be cut for the purpose of trade or manufacture. Also, No person shall set fire or kindle or leave burning any fire in such manner as to endanger or damage such land or forest produce. No patta in such land shall be granted by the Government. If the claim relates to a right of way, right to watercourse or to use of water, right of pasture, or a right to forest produce1, the Forest Settlement Officer may admit or reject the claim. If the claim is admitted, the Forest Settlement Officer may ensure the continued exercise of the rights subject to certain conditions agreed upon with due regard to the maintenance of the reserved forest. The following are prohibited in reserved forest (except if the act is done with the written permission of the Divisional Forest Officer or if it is done as part of the exercise of rights ensured by the Forest Settlement Officer):  Set fire, kindle fire or leave any fire burning in such manner as to endanger such forest  Kindle, keep or carry any fire except at seasons and conditions specified by the Divisional Forest Officer  Trespass, pasture cattle or allow cattle to trespass  Cause any damage, either willfully or negligently in felling or cutting any trees or dragging any timber  Fell, girdle, lop, tap or burn any tree or strip off the bark or leaves from or otherwise damage the same  Quarry stone, burn lime or charcoal  Collect or subject to any manufacturing process, any forest produce  Clear or break up or plough any land for cultivation or for any other purpose  Hunt, shoot, fish, poison water or set traps or snares  Damage, alter or remove any wall, ditch embankment, fence, hedge, or railing, or  Remove any forest produce Andhra Pradesh Protected The following are prohibited in a protected forest (except when Forest Rules, 1970 the act is done in accordance with any Government order or with 57 permission of the Chief Conservator of Forests, Conservator or Forests or Divisional Forest Officer):  Clearing, ploughing or breaking up of land for cultivation or any other purpose  Kindling of fire  Cutting, sawing, conversion and removal of trees and timber and collection and removal of natural produce  Quarrying of stone, the boiling of catechu or the burning of lime or charcoal  Cutting of grass, or the pasturing of cattle, and  Hunting, shooting, fishing, poisoning of water and setting of traps or snares Persons belonging to scheduled tribes are eligible for the following concessions: The removal of timber, bamboos, and forest produce from the protected forests for domestic and agricultural purposes on payment of the fee fixed for the purpose Agricultural purposes includes the use of:  Timber for agricultural implements  Poles and thorns for hedges  Bamboo for fencing and roofing of huts and sheds in fields, and  Leaves for green manure Domestic purposes includes the use of:  Fuel for heating and cooking  Timber and other forest produce for the erection and repair of permanent and temporary dwellings, cattle sheds, pandals and fencing of compounds and fields The Andhra Pradesh Water, The Andhra Pradesh Land, Water and Trees Act and Rules, 2002 Land and Trees Act, 2002 are to promote water conservation and tree cover and to regulate and the Andhra Pradesh the exploitation and use of ground and surface water for protection Water, Land and Trees and conservation of water sources and land. Rules, 2002 State, District and Mandal authorities are constituted under these rules. The Ex-Officio Chairman of the District Authority is the District Collector and the Ex-Officio Member Secretary is the Project Director, Drought Prone Area Programme / District Water Management Agency. The Ex-Officio Chairman of the Mandal Authority is the Mandal Revenue Officer and the Ex-Officio Member Secretary is the Assistant Executive Engineer, Rural Water Supply. Ground Water Protection Owners of all wells (including those which are not fitted with Measures power driven pumps) and water bodies in the State shall register their wells/water bodies with the Village Secretaries of the Gram Panchayats. No person shall sink any well in the vicinity of a public drinking water source within a distance of 250 metres, without permission from the Authority, and if the well is to be used with a power driven pump, without permission from APTRANSCO. Sinking of any well for public drinking purpose and hand pump for public or private drinking water purpose is exempted from this. In areas declared as overexploited by the Authority, no person shall sink a well without the permission of the Authority. Every rig owner shall register his machinery with the Authority. Land and Soil No brick manufacturing shall be taken up in areas where the soil is prone to erosion and depletion. 58 Wherever coal based thermal power plants are in operation, all constructions within a radius of 10 kilometres shall be taken up with bricks made only of fly ash. Sand mining shall not be permitted in I, II and III order streams except for local use in villages or towns bordering the stream. Transportation of sand from these notified I, II and III order streams through mechanical means out of the local jurisdiction shall be banned. In IV order streams, sand mining shall be restricted to specified areas. In V order and above rivers (eg: Godavari, Krishna, Pennar) sand mining may be permitted without affecting existing irrigation, drinking water or industrial uses. Sand mining shall not be carried out within 500 metres of any existing structure (such as bridges, dams, weirs, or any other cross drainage structure) and within 500 metres of any groundwater extraction structures (either for irrigation or drinking water purposes). Sand mining shall not be permitted within 15 metres or 1/5th of the width of the stream bed from the bank, whichever is more. In streams and rivers where the thickness of sand is quite good (more than 8 metres), the depth of removal may be extended up to 2 metres. Sand mining shall not be permitted in streams where the thickness of sand deposition is less than 2 metres. In minor streams, where the thickness of sand deposition is more than 3 metres and less than 8 metres, the depth of removal of sand shall be restricted to one metre. Sand mining shall be restricted to depths above the water table recorded during monsoon and in no case shall effect/disturb the water table. Surface Water No undesirable wastes including liquid wastes shall be allowed to be dumped in the water bodies by any person or organization Trees Tree plantation and landscaping shall be adopted in all public and private premises. No felling of the trees or branches is permitted without prior permission of the Authority. Compulsory planting in residential areas, commercial/institutional areas and industrial areas as per the following details is to be taken up: For residential areas with an area of: Below 100 sq. metres 3 trees 101 to 200 sq. metres 5 trees 201 to 300 sq. metres 10 trees More than 301 sq. metres 10 trees, plus 5 trees for every increase of 100 sq. metres For commercial and institutional areas with an area of: Below 200 sq. metres 2 trees 201 to 500 sq. metres 4 trees 501 to 1000 sq. metres 6 trees, plus 2 trees for every increase of 100 sq. metres The Andhra Pradesh Saw Saw mill means a mechanical contrivance for sawing, cutting or Mills (Regulation) Rules, conversion of timber with the aid of electrical or mechanical 1969 power but does not include a contrivance operated solely by manual power. No person shall install, erect or operate a Saw Mill for cutting, converting or sawing of timber without obtaining a licence for such installation from the Divisional Forest Officer. 59 No licence for setting up fresh saw mills within a distance of 5 km. from the boundary of any Forest under the control of the Forest Department shall be granted. Andhra Pradesh Forest No forest produce shall be moved into or from or within the State Produce Transit Rules, 1970 by land or water unless such produce is accompanied by a permit. Timber exceeding 25 cms in girth at its thickest part and one metre in length, except timber sawn into sizes shall not be moved into or from or within the State of Andhra Pradesh, unless such timber bears a distinguishable Government transit mark authorizing the transit. (Firewood means all timber below 25 cms in girth at it thickest end and one metre in length.) The Andhra Pradesh Minor Minor Forest Produce means any forest produce other than timber, Forest Produce (Regulation trees (excluding bamboos) and charcoal. of Trade) Act, 1971 No person other than the Government, or an authorized officer of the Government or an agent appointed by the Government shall sell or purchase or cure or otherwise process or collect or store or transport any minor forest produce. Any sale to or purchase from the Government, the authorized officer or the agent appointed by the Government of a minor forest produce is permitted. Every grower3, other than the Government, shall, if the quantity of the minor forest produce grown by him during a year is likely to exceed such quantity as may be prescribed, get himself registered with the Divisional Forest Officer. A registered grower may collect any minor forest produce from any land belonging to him on which such produce is grown and may transport the minor forest produce to the nearest depot. No grower shall carry on any trade or business in or any industry with the use of the minor forest produce except in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder. Every manufacturer of finished goods using minor forest produce, and every exporter of minor forest produce shall get himself registered. The Andhra Pradesh The object and purpose of the Regulation was to create a State Scheduled Areas Minor monopoly in the trade of Forest Produce (Regulation minor forest produce in Scheduled Areas through Andhra Pradesh. of Trade) Regulation, 1979 No person other than the Girijan Cooperative Corporation, Ltd., shall sell or purchase or cure or otherwise process or collect or store or transport any minor forest produce. Any sale to or purchase from the Corporation of a minor forest produce is permitted. The Andhra Pradesh The Forest area situated in Patta land is a Private Forest. Preservation of Private No permission to fell the following ‗prohibited trees‘ is granted: Forest Rules, 1978 1. Vepa (Azadirachta indica) 2. Ippa (Madhuka latifolia) 3. Mamidi (Mangifera indica) 4. Kunkudu (Sapindus emarginatus) 5. Mushti (Strychnos nuxvomica) 6. Chinta (Tamarindus indica) 7. Panasa (Artocarpus integrifolia and Artocarpus hirsuta) 8. Karaka (Termalia chebula) 9. Tuniki (Diospyros malonaxylon) 10. Kaniga (Pongamia glabra) Permission to cut the following reserved trees shall not be granted unless the trees exceed 120 cms. in girth at 1.3 mtrs. height from 60 ground level (Also, the felling should be as close to the ground as possible): 1. Bandaru (Adina cordifolia) 2. Billudu (Chloroxylon swietenia) 3. Jittegi (Dalbergia latifolia) 4. Yepi (Hardwickia binata) 5. Raktachandanam (Pterocarpus santalinus) 6. Yegisa (Pterocarpus marsupium) 7. Chandanam (Santalum album) 8. Salwa (Shorea robusta) 9. Kusum (Schleichera trijuga) 10. Teku (Tectona grandis) 11. Maddi (Terminalia tomentosa) 12. Konda Tangedu (Xylya dolabriformis) Andhra Pradesh (Protection Public premises means any area under the control of Government of Trees and Timber in Department and includes road sides; premises of institutions and Public Premises) Rules, 1989 public buildings, public gardens, porambokes, beroon lands, Panchayat lands, irrigation project sites and canal banks, tank bunds, tank spread and foreshores, etc. Unless it is in accordance with any order issued by the Government or with prior written permission of the Forest Officer, the following is not allowed in public premises:  Felling, girdling, lopping, tapping or burning of any trees  Stripping off the bark or collecting leaves or otherwise damaging a tree  Removing any produce from such trees existing in public premises  Damaging, altering, removing any fence or live hedge fence The Andhra Pradesh No person shall make charcoal, or cut or cause to cut trees for the Charcoal (Production and purposes of making charcoal, without the previous written Transport) Rules, 1992 permission of the Divisional Forest Officer concerned. MADHYA PRADESH Water (Prevention and The rule states any person who is discharging sewage or trade Control of Pollution) effluent in to stream or well or sewer or on land shall apply in the Madhya Pradesh Rules, form appended to these rules to the Member Secretary, Madhya 1975 Pradesh Pollution Control Board. Lok Vaniki Act 2001 This act is to give a boost to scientific management of privately owned ‘forests‘ and other ‘tree clad areas‘ in the state. The Act provides an opportunity to the willing landholders to take up management of their tree-clad holdings for optimizing economic returns to themselves and simultaneously ensuring environmental benefits to the society. The Act is voluntary in it‘s‘ application. 61 4. Environmental Management Framework 1. The EMF for the NRLP describes the strategy and plan for implementing environmental safeguards in the project. 4.1 Rationale and Objectives 2. The development objective of the proposed NRLP project is to establish efficient and effective institutional platforms of the rural poor that enable them to increase household incomes through livelihood enhancements and improved access to financial and public services. The focus of the EMF will be to introduce and strengthen environmental management by the institutions of the rural poor so as to contribute to the sustainability of the livelihood enhancements undertaken. 3. The objectives of the EMF:  contribute to livelihood security through better of management of natural resources  facilitate compliance with Bank‘s environmental safeguard policies and with laws/regulations of the Government of India and state Governments  facilitate adoption of environment-friendly livelihood activities  institutionalize environmental management in the community institutions supported by the NRLP 4.2 Process of Development of the EMF 4. The process of development of the EMF included:  Secondary research on environmental status of the 12 states  Review of the relevant legal and regulatory provisions  Review of EMFs and other relevant documents from existing Bank supported livelihood projects  Field study in 4 states (Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Tamil Nadu) primarily to document strategy for promotion of environment-friendly livelihood activities  Consultation with key stakeholders from all 12 states through a national workshop. 4.3 Learnings from Bank Supported Livelihood Projects 5. The Bank has been supporting projects on poverty reduction and rural livelihoods in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Bihar and Tamil Nadu. These projects have yielded valuable experience and learnings on the implementation of environmental safeguards. These include:  The two models in the Bank livelihood projects – the earlier CIGs45 and the later SHGs46 – are unique with respect to their implications on environmental safeguards. CIGs are financed by the project through a one-time grant for a common livelihood activity. SHGs are provided a loan, based on the micro-credit/investment plan which 45 CIG – Common Interest Group 46 SHG – Self Help Group 62 may contain multiple activities, by a larger SHG federation which is financed through a grant by the project. The challenge in the CIG model was to ensure that the CIG activities undergo screening for potential environmental impacts and that required mitigation measures are implemented. The challenge in the SHG model is to institutionalize in the SHG federation, the systems which will ensure that environmental considerations are integral to the process of appraisal of the SHG micro-credit/investment plans. This also expands the responsibility of environmental safeguards from the project alone to include the community institutions. Another key difference in the CIG and SHG models pertains to the financing of mitigation measures. In the CIG model, the cost of the mitigation measures is built into the sub- project budget. In the SHG model, doing so will increase the 'loan burden' on the SHG member – and this has often been a road block to implementation of mitigation measures in livelihood projects. Thus, a different strategy is needed to ensure implementation of the required measures for mitigation of negative environmental impacts.  As the nature and scale of livelihood activities undertaken by individual households is environmentally benign and small in scale, the potential impacts are also localized and manageable. Therefore, rather than place emphasis on micro-managing micro- impacts through appraisal of every individual household activity – it is more meaningful and efficient to (a) focus on introducing/improving the systems in community institutions for environmental management (b) periodically monitor cumulative impacts to provide pointers on required interventions.  The livelihood projects are unique in two ways: (a) they have limited negative environmental consequences (b) they have immense, demonstrated potential for interventions that can lead to positive environmental impacts. Thus, the EMF for these projects cannot limit its scope to the mitigation of negative impacts alone. It needs to spell out a strategy for pro-active interventions that will promote environment-friendly livelihoods.  Role of external agencies: Internalization of EMF in the project is better achieved when the responsibility for regular supervision rests with project staff as compared to a situation where it is outsourced to an external agency. External agencies can provide invaluable technical support for promoting environment-friendly livelihoods and for capacity building. 6. Annex 1 gives an overview of EMF implementation in recent Bank supported livelihood projects. 4.4 Scope of Application of EMF 7. The EMF applies across the board to all components under the project. The following table presents the mapping of its various elements to the project components. 63 Table 4.1: Application of EMF to the NRLP components Component Activities Relevant provisions in EMF Component 1: Human resource development National Environmental Management Coordinator in the NMMU Institutional and Technical assistance on developing Environment Action Plans as Human Capacity part of the State Perspective and Implementation Plans and Development Annual Action Plans Capacity-building of state teams (training, exposure visits) on environmental management Training and capacity building Development of operational manuals and training modules for state teams and community professionals on environmental management Component 2: State State Rural Livelihood Missions Institutions arrangements for EMF implementation at state, Livelihood Support district and block levels Institution building and capacity building Capacity building of community institutions including Green Community Resource Persons (Green CRPs) Community investment support Environmental Management Plan by SHG federations Special programs Component 3: Innovation Forums and Action Pilots Inclusion of Green Innovations in Innovation Forums Innovation and Social Entrepreneurship Development Partnership Support Public-Private Community Partnership Component 4: National Mission Management Unit Management of EMF implementation Project Monitoring and Evaluation Implementation Support Governance and accountability framework Knowledge management and communication 4.5 Components 4.5.1 Development of State Environment Action Plans and Locally Relevant EMPs 4.5.1.1 Environment Action Plan in the State Perspective and Implementation Plans and Annual Action Plans 8. The sub-component 1.1 of the NRLP is Technical Assistance to all states for rolling out and implementing the NRLM. Under this subcomponent, technical assistance will be provided to the State Rural Livelihood Missions (SRLMs) of 25 states to undertake a situational analysis (poverty diagnostic study) and to develop State Perspective and Implementation Plan (SPIP) and Annual Action Plans (AAPs). An Environmental Action Plan (EAP) will be developed by each State Mission Management Unit (SMMU) as part of the SPIP. Technical Assistance to States 9. The Technical Assistance from NRLM/NMMU for facilitating preparatory work on environment would be for:  Development of operational manuals on EMF – including EMPs of primary 64 federations, CoPs of producer collectives, Green CRPs, Green Opportunities  Development of a repository of Green Opportunities and Resource Institutions  Exposure visits to SRLM teams to best practices in facilitating environment-friendly livelihoods other states  Recruiting, if required, the services of a consultant firm to undertake Situation Analysis and assist in development of the EAP for inclusion in the SPIP  National workshop/s to facilitate cross-learning/exchange that will contribute to development of robust EAPs  Stakeholders‘ consultations in each state including meetings, workshops, focus group discussions  Induction and capacity building of key staff at the SMMUs  Integration of EMF requirements into the Initial Action Plan  Appraisal and approval of the EAP in the SPIP and AAPs 10. The Environmental Management Coordinator in the NMMU will be responsible for providing the required technical assistance. Each of the spearhead teams will have an Environment Specialist who will provide technical assistance for formulation and implementation of the EAPs. The Bank environment team will provide guidance and oversight. The EAP will be developed by each SMMU through a participatory process that will include secondary research, field data collection, consultations with key stakeholders (including NGOs, line departments, and community institutions), consultation on the draft EAP, finalization of the draft EAP and its integration into the SPIP. The plan for the implementation in the first year will include field testing of the process of development and implementation of the Federation EMPs in at least 5 existing federations per state. 11. A template for the Environment section of the Situational Analysis is provided in Annex 2. A template for the EAP that is part of the SPIP is provided in Annex 3. Indicative terms of reference for the consultant firm that will prepare the EAP are provided in Annex 4. Readiness filter for SPIP with respect to Environmental Safeguards 12. The NRLM/NMMU, on receipt of SPIP, will screen the SPIP through a desk-appraisal for compliance and readiness. This screening process will include checking if:  The SPIP includes an EAP developed through the process described in this section.  The state has an Environmental Management Coordinator as part of the core team supporting the preparatory work for transiting to NRLM. 13. After clearing screening, NRLM would field a multidisciplinary Joint Appraisal Mission. This Appraisal Mission will include an expert on environmental management who will use a range of methodologies including field visits, meetings and discussions with key stakeholders to review and refine the EAP. Based on the agreed actions with the Appraisal Mission, SRLM would submit its revised EAP (as part of the SPIP). For the subsequent years, the appraisal of the EAPs in the Annual Action Plans will be based on the feedback provided by supervision missions, monitoring reports, external audit reports, etc. The EAPs will be disclosed by each state on the Government website as well as through circulation to the project districts. 65 4.5.2 EMPs by SHG Federations 14. The NRLP seeks to build institutional platforms for livelihood enhancement and improved access to services. In tune with this purpose, the orientation of the EMF is on infusing the environmental management agenda into these platforms. The SHG Federation EMPs are a tool to enable this. The SHG primary federation (village organization or VO) is the channel for routing and monitoring project funds to SHGs. Its role is to perform functions that an individual SHG cannot – environmental management is such a higher order function. 15. The approach of having an EMP will enable the following:  Making the EMF locale-specific – relevant to the issues and actions needed in the specific village.  Giving the EMF continued relevance – beyond the 2 tranches of the start-up and Livelihood Investment Fund loans to SHGs (micro-credit is an on-going activity).  Provide opportunity for village level norms on resource use to emerge and/or be strengthened.  Provide opportunity for the SHG federation to take up environmental management (in the context of the livelihoods and well-being of its members) as one of its core functions.  Function as a ‗bottom-up‘ process for generating demand on Green Opportunities. 16. The EMP will be a simple 2-page document containing:  Actions required at individual household level, SHG level, primary federation level including community norms on use of the natural resources and environmental management  Plan for implementation of required actions including awareness building, training and extension support activities that will be facilitated by the federation  Institutional arrangements in the federations and SHGs for implementation of the EMP  Plan for monitoring implementation of the EMP  Sources of support for implementation of the EMP (these include convergence with existing Government schemes such as MNREGS as well as support from the NRLP). 17. A template for the EMP is provided in Annex 5. The EMP will be prepared by the VO with facilitation by the PFTs. It will be prepared prior to the micro-credit plan preparation process in the affiliate SHGs and will be updated annually. The executive committee of the VO will include an Environmental Management Committee. Process of EMP Green CRP facilitates development of EMP by Federation  Sources of support for implementation of actions in EMP are identified (e.g., MNREGS, IWMP, line department schemes, NRLP, etc.)  Green CRP provides/facilitates required support to the Federation for implementation of the EMP  EMP is reviewed annually and updated 66 Application of EMP to SHG M/LPs Federation communicates on EMP to all affiliate SHGs  SHGs prepare micro-investment / livelihood plans (M/LP)  SHGs ensure that the activities included in the M/LP are in compliance with the ‗regulatory requirements list‘ and are in accordance with the EMP  Primary federation (VO) checks and confirms that the SHG M/LP is in compliance with the ‗regulatory requirements list‘ and EMP before release of funds to the SHG. The Green CRP facilitates this process and seeks any required guidance from Block PFT  SHG implements the M/LP; Primary federation provides/facilitates required support to the SHGs for implementation  18. Any activity/business plans that the primary federation undertakes will also follow the same process to ensure compliance with the ‗regulatory requirements list‘ and with the EMP. Support for implementation of actions identified in EMP: Table 4.2: Support for implementation of actions identified in EMP Support required for implementation of Implementing entity identified actions Individual SHG Primary federation Technical support (training, extension) 1 2 3 Management support (community norms) E.g. Improved E.g. Preparation of E.g. Community method of botanical extracts norms for rotational composting for pest control grazing, sustainable (maintaining NTFP harvesting, moisture, periodic etc. turning, etc.) Technical support (training, extension) A B C Management support (community norms) E.g. Drip irrigation E.g. Hiring centre E.g. Fodder bank Financial support equipment of efficient spraying equipment and safety kit  For actions in categories 1, 2 and 3: No financial support is required. Technical support (training, exposure visit, extension service) is provided on basis of the requirements outlined in the EMP.  For actions in category A: Financial support (loan) to SHG member on the basis of SHG MIP.  For actions in category B: Financial support (loan) to SHG from VO on the basis of SHG MIP.  For actions in category C: Financial support to VO that can be sourced from existing Government schemes such as MNREGS, IWMP, line department schemes or from the NRLP. 19. The DMMU Environment Management Coordinator will review the EMPs of the VOs. The purpose of the review is two-fold: (a) to ensure quality in the development of the EMPs (b) to identify and provide support for the EMP operationalization. 67 20. In order to ensure the quality of the EMPs, the review will use the following criteria: a. Adherence to the regulatory requirements list b. Comprehensiveness and relevance of the livelihoods, issues and actions identified c. Implementable plan for identified actions d. Clear institutional arrangements in VO for EMP implementation e. Detailed plan for monitoring f. Identification of relevant indicators 21. In case the EMP is not of satisfactory quality, the DMMU will ensure that it is appropriately revised by the primary federation through a process facilitated by the Green CRP/Block team. 22. The DMMU Environment Management Coordinator will identify the nature of the support required for the implementation of the mitigation measures, identify possible sources for meeting the technical support requirements (line departments, Krishi Vignan Kendras, NGOs, etc.) and the financial support requirements (for example, MNREGS), and identify the residual financial support requirements that need to be supported through the NRLP. A primary focus of this review will be on identification of Green Opportunities (need and scope for environment-friendly interventions). 23. The application of EMP as a tool for decentralized environmental management is innovative. Hence, this approach will be implemented as a pilot that reaches 30% of the primary federations in the project in a phased manner. The section 4.5.9 describes the implementation roll out strategy. The NMMU and SMMU Environment Management Coordinators will closely monitor the implementation of this tool and devise an appropriate strategy for scaling it up to all primary federations involved in the project in year 3. Figure 4.1: Scale of application of EMF 24. The purpose of the pilot is ‗learning by doing‘. The pilot experience will help in shaping the strategy for rolling out the EMPs, and, the capacity building program for the Green CRPs and primary federations. Technical support agencies will be hired to provide on- 68 going support to the Green CRPs. The selection of the village federations for the pilot will be based on well-defined criteria to ensure that the pilots are not affected by implementation set-backs. These will also be clustered in a limited number of blocks to ensure that focused and intensive support is provided through TA agencies where needed. With the cluster approach, the pilot will reach 30% of the districts (30 out of 100), blocks (120 out of 400) and federations (1,200 out of 40,000). 4.5.2.1 Code of Practice by Producer Collectives 25. The NRLP under the State Livelihood Support component will support producer collectives. These collectives of primary producers may be formed on agriculture, dairy, non-timber forest produce, etc. and will consist of SHG members involved in that particular livelihood activity. The producer collectives typically engage in activities such as procurement and retail of inputs, processing, marketing, technical support, etc. The producer collectives supported through the NRLP will be facilitated (by the DMMU Environment Management Coordinator) to develop and implement a Code of Practice (CoP) for environmental management. The CoP will be based on the EMF but will incorporate locally relevant and activity specific codes. The CoP will be evolved through a participatory process and will be on the lines of the Participatory Guarantee System for Organic Produce or the Responsible Soya programmes. The approach of having a CoP will enable the EMF to have continued relevance – beyond the 2 tranches of sectoral funds to POs. A template for the CoP is provided in Annex 6. Application of CoP: Producer Collective prepares its CoP. DMMU Environment Management Coordinator facilitates the process and ensures that the CoP is in compliance with the ‗regulatory requirements list‘  Producer Collective prepares activity/business plan (A/BP)  Producer Collective ensures that the activities included in the A/BP are in accordance with the CoP  DMMU Environment Management Coordinator checks and confirms that the Producer Collective A/BP is in compliance with the CoP before release of funds to the Producer Collective; arranges for technical support on environmental management by technically qualified personnel for activities requiring the same  Producer Collective monitors implementation of the CoP practices by its members  DMMU provides/facilitates required support to the Producer Collective for implementation of the CoP 4.5.2.2 Mapping of the EMF interventions with the institution building and micro- credit/livelihood interventions 26. The following table provides a mapping of the EMF interventions with the institution building and micro-credit/livelihood interventions. Table 4.3: Mapping of the EMF interventions with the institution building and micro- 69 credit/livelihood interventions Phase A B C D E Institution Village  SHG  SHG strengthening  SHG strengthening  SHG strengthening building entry formation  Primary Federation  Primary Federation  Primary Federation (VO) formation (VO) strengthening (VO) strengthening  Producer Collective  Producer collective formation strengthening EMF  Preparation and  Implementation of VO  Implementation of intervention implementation of EMP VO EMP VO EMP  Preparation and  Implementation of implementation of Code of Practice for Code of Practice for producer collective producer collective Micro-credit /  On-going  On-going micro-  On-going micro-credit  On-going micro- Livelihood micro- credit lending in lending in SHGs and credit lending in intervention credit SHGs Federation SHGs and lending  Preparation of  Release of Livelihood Federation in SHGs Micro-investment / Support Fund  Release of Sector  Release of Livelihood Plans  Preparation of Business Support Fund Seed of SHGs Plans of Producer Grant  Release of Collectives Livelihood Support  Release of Sector Fund Support Fund 4.5.2 Environmental Management Toolkit 23. The experience of implementation of livelihood projects has led to the development of a comprehensive toolkit to guide identification of measures to mitigate potential negative environmental impacts in rural livelihoods. 4.5.3.1 Contents of the toolkit 24. The toolkit contains the following:  A ‗regulatory requirements list‘: This list is drawn up on the basis of a review of the existing law and regulations of the Government of India, the 12 state Governments and the safeguard policies of the World Bank. The list is provided at Annex 7. This initial list needs to be validated by each of the 12 SMMUs in consultation with the respective line departments. State specific regulations that are relevant to the environment-rural livelihood context need to be added to this list.  Activities that require detailed environmental appraisal by technically qualified personnel: This list has been drawn up on the basis on implementation experience in the Bank's existing livelihood projects. The list along with a recommendation on the technical qualifications of the personnel who will undertake the detailed environmental appraisal is provided at Annex 8.  Environmental guidelines for rural livelihoods: Guidelines are provided for four major livelihoods – agriculture, livestock, non-timber forest produce and fishery. These include a listing of the possible impacts and the relevant mitigation measures. The guidelines are provided at Annex 14. 70 4.5.3.2 Further action required to make the toolkit usable: 25. The toolkit provided in this EMF (Annexes 7, 8, 9 and 10) will be used as basic reference material by SMMU Environment Management Coordinator to validate the regulatory requirements list and the environmental guidelines in consultation with the relevant line departments and technical support institutions (Krishi Vignan Kendras, NGOs, etc.). These will subsequently be translated into the local language and made available to all the sub-district Project Facilitating Teams and SHG primary federations in an appropriate form (simple language, illustrations, flipchart format, etc.). 4.5.3.3 Use of toolkit: 26. The ‗regulatory requirements list‘ will need to be complied with by all the SHG primary federations, SHGs and producer collectives in the project. It will be part of the Community Operational Manual and relevant project communications to the state, district, block teams and community institutions. The toolkit will be used by the Green CRPs as basic reference material in facilitating development of EMPs by SHG primary federations. 4.5.4 Promotion of Green Opportunities (environment-friendly livelihood activities) 27. The experience from the Bank's livelihood projects has been that promulgation of good environmental management in livelihoods is best achieved through demonstration of eco- friendly practices – initially through pilots followed by scaled-up interventions. Examples on this include the Community Managed Sustainable Agriculture (CMSA) in Andhra Pradesh, the System for Rice Intensification (SRI) in Bihar, and the Responsible Soya initiative in Madhya Pradesh. The strategy for promotion of Green Opportunities in the NRLP is described in Chapter 5. 4.5.5 Climate Change Management 4.5.5.1 Climate change & adaptation 28. Climate change impacts livelihoods, often by making it more risky. The EMP and especially Green Opportunities address these risks. For example, increased incidence of drought leading to loss of crops and thereby loss of income is a likely scenario in many parts of India. Green Opportunities such as CMSA (Community Managed Sustainable Agriculture) by reducing the cost of cultivation and TBFS (Tree-based Farming Systems) by diversifying cropping portfolio47 and spreading the risk of crop loss help the marginal farmers adapt better to drought conditions. Floods are a recurring problem in some of the NRLP states (Bihar, West Bengal) and the severity and frequency of these events is likely to get accentuated with Climate Change. The process of developing the EAP for the SPIPs will involve identification of relevant interventions for drought and flood adaptation (those with livelihood benefits and without negative environmental impacts) that may be considered through the channel of innovation fund or as part of mainstream livelihood programme. Annex 14 gives details of climate change and adaptation strategies. 4.5.5.2 Clean Development Mechanism 29. Many of the Green Opportunities result in reduction of Greenhouse Gas emissions, which 47 Annual crops & trees are grown together. Trees are more tolerant of droughts than annual crops and thus an income is guaranteed to the farmer even during droughts. 71 can be claimed as CERs48 (Certified Emission Reduction Units) under the Clean Development Mechanism. Funds from the sale of these CERs can be used to part-finance the interventions or the benefits may be channelized to the Green enterprises. The chapter on Green Opportunities highlights one such programme where CERs/VERs have been sold to part-finance the capital cost of biogas plants as well as the associated cost of delivering the programme. 30. However, there is a need to systematically pursue the CDM potential of interventions made in the NRLP, which need not be restricted to Green Opportunities alone. Every component of the NRLP should be scanned for CDM potential, the CERs quantified and a system instituted to claim them and channelize the benefits. The NEMC and the SEMCs should be entrusted with this task. 31. During the first year of the NRLP, the NEMC should organize trainings to all SEMCs and thematic heads at the NMMU and the SMMU on CDM. Special focus should be given to the SEMCs and those that would be managing the Innovative Projects. Curriculum for the training should be developed from an analysis of existing livelihood projects as well as the bouquet of Green Opportunities presented in this report. The NEMC may hire a consultant to carry out this initial analysis and prepare a training module. Wide-spread awareness of the CMD potential would help the entire implementation mechanism to be tuned to this opportunity better. 32. Simultaneously, efforts should be made to devise a system for quantifying, claiming and channelizing the benefits. The NMMU should collaborate with the CDM wings of the World Bank such as Community Development Carbon Fund (CDCF), Bio Carbon Fund (BCF), etc., to tap their expertise for assessing the CDM potential of NRLP. 33. Thus, by the end of the first year, key personnel in the NMMU and the SMMU should have a clear understanding of the potential and the process of CDM and its applicability to projects being supported by the NRLP. In addition, the NMMU should be able to institute a system of implementing CDM in its projects. 34. During the 2nd year the aim should be to pilot these systems and ensure that some interventions result in CERs claims. The NMMU should also establish links with CER/VER buyers during the 2nd year to organize sale of the carbon credits. 4.5.6 Institutional Arrangements 35. Institutional arrangements for the EMF are detailed both in the project structure as well as in the community institutions. 4.5.6.1 Institutional Arrangements in the Project Structure at National, State, District and Sub-district levels 36. The effective implementation of the EMF will require relevant institutional arrangements at the national, state, district and sub-district levels. The roles and responsibilities of the key staff at the national, state, district and sub-district levels are spelt out in this section. The roles and responsibilities of the key staff at the national, state, district and sub-district levels are as follows (Table 4.4). 48 They may also be claimed as Verified Emission Reduction Units (VERs) outside the CDM. 72 37. The overall responsibility for EMF implementation in the NRLP lies with the CEO in the NMMU. The CEO will ensure that the processes, institutional arrangements, procurement requirements, etc., as detailed in this EMF are met with on a timely basis and are executed with quality. 4.5.6.2 Institutional Arrangements in the Community Institutions 38. As mentioned earlier, the EMF focuses on infusing environmental management as a core responsibility of the institutions of the rural poor – with an understanding that sustaining the quality and quantity of local natural resources sustains the productivity of existing livelihoods as well as the range of livelihood options available to the poor. Identifying relevant institutional arrangements in the community institutions supported by the NRLP is a part of this. The roles and responsibilities of the key individuals/entities in the SHG federations and producer collectives are spelt out in this section. The roles and responsibilities are as follows (Table 4.5). 39. In about 50% of the districts in each state, the Livelihoods Coordinator will also function as the District Environment Coordinator (in the other 50% districts, this will be an exclusive position). This arrangement will be reviewed at the MTR (mid-term review) of the project when the decision on having the District Environment Coordinator position as exclusive or as an additional function of the Livelihood Coordinator will be taken. Table 4.4 Institutional arrangements in Project structure Level Post Responsibilities Profile National National Provide strategic guidance to NRLM in the 10-15 years of experience in Environment area of environmental management (including environmental/NRM management Management scouting and operationalizing Green in the rural context (or in a related Coordinator Opportunities) including identification of: field). focus areas for intervention, needs emerging Post-graduate qualification in from EMPs, technical and capacity building Natural Resources Management, requirements, etc. Agriculture, Environmental Provide technical assistance to states in Science, Forest Management, Rural preparatory work on environment for Management or a relevant transiting to NRLP (preparation of SPIPs and discipline. AAPs) Coordinate closely with relevant thematic counterparts in the NMMU team (livelihoods, capacity building, etc.) for mainstreaming of environmental management (including Green Opportunities) Environment Assist in providing technical assistance to 7-10 years of experience in Management states in preparatory work on environment for environmental/NRM management Associate transiting to NRLP (preparation of SPIPs and in the rural context (or in a related AAPs) field). Coordinate with capacity building resource Post-graduate qualification in agency to ensure timely delivery of quality Natural Resources Management, capacity building services to SRLM/SMMU Agriculture, Environmental teams in environmental management Science, Forest Management, Rural (including Green Opportunities) Management or a relevant Undertake monitoring visits to states to get discipline. feedback and provide support on EMF 73 implementation Coordinate with external audit agency to ensure quality outputs Dissemination of best practices and cross learning across states Assist the National Environment Management Coordinator in all responsibilities State State Environment Ensure quality outputs for the Situational 7-10 years of experience in Management Analysis and EAP preparation and its environmental/NRM management Coordinator integration into the SPIP and AAPs in the rural context (or in a related Validate the approach to development of the field). Federation EMPs (through field testing) Post-graduate qualification in Validate the EMF toolkit (regulatory Natural Resources Management, requirements list, environmental guidelines) in Agriculture, Environmental consultation with the relevant line departments Science, Forest Management, Rural and technical support institutions (academic Management or a relevant institutions, NGOs, etc.) in the state discipline. Ensure quality in implementation of the EMF in the state Coordinate closely with relevant thematic counterparts in the SMMU team (livelihoods, capacity building, etc.) for mainstreaming of environmental management (including Green Opportunities) Commission and ensure quality outputs from state capacity building resource agency. Commission and ensure quality outputs from technical support institutions for pilots on Green Opportunities Undertake monitoring visits to districts to get feedback and provide support on EMF implementation Ensure regular district level monitoring of EMF implementation Dissemination of best practices and cross learning across districts District District Environment Ensure quality in implementation of the EMF 5-7 years of experience in Management in the district environmental/NRM management Coordinator Facilitation of detailed environmental in the rural context (or in a related appraisal by technically qualified personnel field). for activities requiring the same (as indicated Post-graduate qualification in in Annex 8) Natural Resources Management, Coordinate with state capacity building Agriculture, Environmental Science resource agency/agencies to ensure timely or a relevant discipline. delivery of quality capacity building services to district/block teams, Green CRPs and SHG federations/producer collectives Coordinate with technical support institutions for quality and timeliness in implementation of pilots on Green Opportunities Undertake regular district level monitoring of EMF implementation Dissemination of best practices and cross learning across the district 74 Sub- Project Facilitating Ensure quality in implementation of the EMF district Team (all members) at the sub-district level Support all SHG federations in adhering to the ‗regulatory requirements list‘ Support SHG federations and producer collectives in development and implementation of EMPs and Codes of Practice Dissemination of best practices and cross learning across the SHGs and SHG federations Table 4.5: Institutional arrangements in community institutions Level Key persons Responsibilities Profile Sub- Green Community Build capacity of SHG members in Members of the community who District / Resource Person environmental management in the context have: Block (Green CRPs) of the key livelihoods identified in the sub-  eco-friendly practices in district (block/mandal) their own livelihoods Dissemination of best practices and cross  potential to be change- learning across the SHGs in the sub-district makers in the community (block/mandal)  willingness to spend at least Facilitate the development of the EMP for 150 days annually visiting the federations (with the support of the sub- villages in the block and district PFT) providing on-site support to Assist the federations in liaison with the federations and SHGs village institutions (Gram Panchayat, user  willingness to invest time groups such as Joint Forest Management and effort in their initial and Committee, fisheries and dairy on-going training cooperatives, Watershed Committee, etc.)  high school education for developing and implementing village- level norms on resource management Assist in identification of best-practitioners on environmental management among SHG members Organize technical support and training for SHG members (with the support of the sub- district PFT) Sub- Community Support all SHG federations in adhering to District / Resource Person the ‗regulatory requirements list‘ through Block (CRPs) facilitating building awareness, facilitation for any M/LI Plans required permissions, etc. Build capacity of SHG members in environmental management in the context of the key livelihoods identified in the sub- district (block/mandal) in coordination with the Green CRP Dissemination of best practices and cross learning across the SHGs in the sub-district (block/mandal) Organize technical support and training for SHG members (with the support of the sub- district PFT and Green CRP) SHG Environment Develop and implement the EMP for the Members of the Executive 75 primary Management federation Committee of the primary SHG federation Committee (with Liaison with the village institutions (Gram federation who have demonstrated (VO) the facilitation of Panchayat, user groups such as Joint Forest good practices and/or recognize the the sub-district Management Committee, fisheries and dairy value of natural resource Project cooperatives, Watershed Committee, etc.) management in their livelihoods. Facilitating Team) for developing and implementing village- level norms on resource management Organize technical support and training for SHG members Undertake monitoring of implementation of EMP and any emerging cumulative environmental impact on a regular basis Producer Environment Develop and implement the CoP for the Members of the Executive collective Management producer collective Committee of the producer collective Committee (with Organize technical support and training for who have demonstrated good the facilitation of members of the producer collective (with practices and/or recognize the value the DMMU/sub- the facilitation of the sub-district SRLM of natural resource management in district Project team) the activity. Facilitating Team) Undertake monitoring of implementation of the CoP by its members 4.5.7 Capacity Building 40. The orientation of this EMF is to strengthen the capacity for environmental management in (a) the independent institutional structures at the national level and at the 12 states, and (b) the community institutions – SHGs, SHG federations, producer collectives. This will be achieved through:  Training of livelihood professionals in state, district and block teams  Training of community members. Annex 13 gives the Terms of Reference for the National Capacity Building Agency on Environmental Management. 4.5.7.1 Training of livelihood professionals in state, district and block teams 41. The strategy for this will include: (a) Integration of environmental management into induction training programmes for SRLM staff (SMMU, DMMU and block levels): a sub-module on ‗environmental management in rural livelihoods‘ will be included as part of the module on livelihoods in all the training programmes for the SRLM staff. This sub- module will be part of the MDP for the SMMU staff. The sub-module will cover the following themes:  Opportunities for better environmental management in existing livelihoods  Green Opportunities for new environment-friendly rural livelihoods  Key provisions of the EMF of the NRLP – including the ‗regulatory requirements list‘ (b) Specialized training on environmental management for Environment Management Coordinators at State and District levels. The details of these training programmes are as follows: Table 4.6: Thematic areas for training of Environment Management Coordinators Course Level Thematic areas for training Methodology Duration 76 T1 State Environmental issues in the rural livelihood activities Field exposure 2 weeks (initial Promotion of better environmental management in existing visits training, livelihoods (including climate change management) Case studies exposure visits) Promotion of Green Opportunities (new environment- Class room Annual friendly livelihoods) sessions refresher Key provisions of the EMF of the NRLP training/review Preparatory work on environment for development of EAP for inclusion in the SPIP and AAPs T2 District Environmental issues in the rural livelihood activities Class room 2 weeks (initial Promotion of better environmental management in existing sessions training, livelihoods (including climate change management) Field exposure exposure visits) Promotion of Green Opportunities (new environment- visits Annual friendly livelihoods) Field exercises refresher Key provisions of the EMF of the NRLP training/review Facilitating adherence to ‗regulatory requirements list‘ by all SHG federations and producer collectives Facilitating development and implementation of EMPs by SHG federations and CoPs by producer collectives (c) Training to sub-district (block) level Project Facilitating Teams (PFTs): Table 4.7: Thematic areas for training of Project Facilitating Teams Course Level Thematic areas for training Methodology Duration T3 Sub-district Environmental issues in the rural livelihood activities Class room 3-4 days (initial Promotion of better environmental management in existing sessions training) livelihoods (including climate change management) Field exposure Annual Promotion of Green Opportunities (new environment- visits refresher friendly livelihoods) training/review Key provisions of the EMF of the NRLP Facilitating adherence to ‗regulatory requirements list‘ by all SHG federations Facilitating development and implementation of EMPs by SHG federations 4.5.7.2 Training of community members 42. Specialized training on environmental management for a cadre of Community Resource Persons specializing on environmental management in rural livelihoods referred to as 'Green CRPs' in this document. The details of this training are as follows: Table 4.8: Thematic areas for training of community members Course Level Thematic areas for training Methodology Duration T4 District Environmental issues in the key rural livelihood activities Class room 8 weeks (initial Facilitating development of EMPs by SHG federations sessions training, Promotion of environment-friendly practices in the key Field exposure exposure visits) livelihood activities (agriculture, livestock, NTFP, fisheries) visits Ongoing Monitoring of environmental status and of adoption of Field exercises refresher environment-friendly practices in the key livelihood training/review activities (agriculture, livestock, NTFP) by the SHG members 77 43. Over the NRLP duration, the Green CRPs will receive multiple doses of skill-building training and will organize both formal training sessions as well as provide on-the site training to SHG members to transfer their skills. Table 4.9: Thematic areas for training of SHGs Course Level Thematic areas for training Methodology Duration T5 SHG Environment-friendly practices in the key livelihood Demonstrations 2-3 days initial primary activities (agriculture, livestock, NTFP) Participatory training federation New environment-friendly livelihood opportunities discussions followed by on- Development and implementation of EMP Exposure visits going support Periodic monitoring of implementation of EMP by Green CRP T6 Producer Environment-friendly practices in the key livelihood Demonstrations 2-3 days initial collective activity (agriculture, livestock, NTFP) Participatory training Development and implementation of CoP for producer discussions followed by on- collective Exposure visits going support Periodic monitoring of implementation of CoP 4.5.8 Monitoring 44. The focus of monitoring is three fold: (a) the implementation of the EMF, (b) the adoption of environmental management in livelihood activities, (c) the environmental status. Monitoring is planned at 3 levels: community monitoring, internal monitoring and external audit. 4.5.8.1 Community Monitoring 45. The Green CRPs will monitor the implementation of the EMPs and CoPs. The monitoring will be done bi-annually through a participatory mode involving the members of the primary federation / producer collective based on indicators identified during the preparation of the EMPs/CoPs. These may include: Table 4.10: Indicators for monitoring environmental status Indicators of environmental status Indicators of adoption of environmental management in livelihood activities Soil nutrient status Ratio of N:P:K use Visible signs of soil erosion Amount of organic manure used Groundwater level Number of improved compost units (pit, vermicompost, NADEP, etc.) Availability of green and dry fodder Area treated with green manure Livestock density Area under crop rotation NTFP yield Area under intercrops Expenditure on chemical pesticides Amount of pesticides in classes Ia, Ib, II (WHO classification) used Area under drip or sprinkler irrigation Area treated with soil moisture conservation practices Number of percolation/recharge pits Number of water harvesting structures Percentage of livestock that is stall-fed Number of chaff-cutters Area under fodder cultivation Area under pasture development/protection Visible signs of unsustainable NTFP extraction 78 4.5.8.2 Internal monitoring 46. The environmental specialists at the national, state and district levels will conduct internal monitoring of the implementation of the EMF. The details of this monitoring are provided here: Table 4.11: Internal monitoring of implementation of EMF Level Key Aspects covered under monitoring Sample to be responsibility covered annually for monitoring District Environment Desk and field review of quality of EMPs of SHG federations 20% primary Management Review of Green Opportunities emerging from EMPs of SHG federations Coordinator in federations 100% producer DMMU Desk and field review of quality of CoP of producer collectives collectives Desk and field review of compliance with the regulatory requirements list Desk and field review of outputs from community monitoring State Environment Desk review of outputs of district monitoring 2% primary Management Desk and field review of quality of EMPs of SHG federations federations Coordinator in Review of Green Opportunities emerging from EMPs of SHG 10% producer SMMU federations collectives Desk and field review of quality of CoP of producer collectives 100% pilots on Desk and field review of outputs from community monitoring eco-friendly Desk and field review of compliance with the regulatory activities requirements list of activities that are not to be supported Desk review to check if environmental appraisal by technically qualified personnel is being done for activities identified in the EMF as requiring the same Desk and field review of implementation of pilots and scale-up on Green Opportunities (eco-friendly livelihood activities) National Environment Desk review of outputs of state monitoring 100% states Management Desk review of outputs of external environmental audit 30% districts Coordinator in Desk and field review of quality of EMPs of SHG federations and NMMU CoP of producer collectives, and, their implementation Desk and field review of implementation of pilots and scale-up on Green Opportunities (eco-friendly livelihood activities) 4.5.8.3 External Environmental Audit (including cumulative impact assessment) 47. An external audit of the environmental performance of the NRLP will be undertaken annually during the project period – in years 2, 3, 4 and 5. An external agency will be hired by the NMMU for the purpose. The objectives of the audits are:  To assess the overall effectiveness of the design and implementation of the EMF  To assess the adverse environmental impacts of the project-supported activities (individual, as well as cumulative)  To provide practical recommends for strengthening the EMF. 48. The scope of the audit will include:  Quality of the EAPs of the states and their integration into the SPIPs and AAPs.  Effectiveness of implementation of the EMF at the state level.  Quality of the SHG federation EMPs and the CoPs of producer collectives.  Effectiveness of implementation of the SHG federation EMPs and the CoPs of 79 producer collectives.  Cumulative impacts of the livelihood activities supported by the NRLP (in key sectors such as agriculture, livestock, fisheries, NTFP, etc.)  Promotion of eco-friendly livelihood activities.  Adequacy of institutional arrangements in the project structure and in the community institutions.  Capacity of the project staff for implementation of the EMF.  Capacity of the community institutions for environmental management of livelihoods.  Effectiveness of community monitoring and internal monitoring. 49. The sample will cover about 30% of the districts in all the 12 states (about 24 districts). In each district, the sample covered will include 5% of the primary federations. At least 2-3 producer collectives per state will be covered. All the pilots being implemented in the states on Green Opportunities (eco-friendly livelihood activities) will be covered in the sample. 50. The sample will cover both the SHG federations that receive support for development of EMPs as well as other SHG federations in the project (which will be treated as control). A comparative analysis of these with respect to environmental outcomes will help to understand the value-addition achieved by the EMP approach. The methodology of the audit will include both desk reviews and field visits. Annex 12 provides guidance on the cumulative impact assessment.  Desk review: The desk review will include a review of the state EMPs, SHG federation EMPs and the CoPs of producer collectives, the internal monitoring reports, the training reports, reports on detailed environmental assessment undertaken by technical experts, the micro/livelihood investment plans of the SHGs, etc.  Field visits: In each state, the sample of SHG primary federations and producer collectives will be covered through field visits. The visits are meant to be site visits to the locations where the activities are undertaken.  Consultations: Focussed discussions will be held with members of SHGs, SHG federations, representatives of Gram Panchayat and user groups, relevant line departments, and, project staff at sub-district, district and state levels. The findings of the audit will be discussed with the NMMU and SMMUs.  Disclosure: The findings of each annual audit will be disclosed through the SMMU website and by circulation to all the project districts. The DMMUs will ensure that the feedback from the audits is shared with the SHG federations and producer collectives through the Block teams and the Green CRPs. 51. As a follow-up to the audit report, and especially in cases where the audit indicates that the implementation of the EMF is weak and/or that there are significant environmental impacts of the project-supported activities, the following actions will be taken by the NMMU:  Identify appropriate actions to be taken by the NMMU and the SMMUs to address the concerns raised in the audit  Ensure that the AAPs of the 12 project states clearly mention the actions that will be taken in view of the audit findings of the preceding year  Strengthen training and other capacity building efforts to ensure that adequate 80 capacity is built at all levels for effective implementation of the EMF  Strengthen internal monitoring at all levels to follow-up on implementation of the identified actions 4.5.8.4 Performance indicators 52. This section provides indicative performance indicators that are to be used during the external environmental audits. The indicators are as follows: Environmental outcomes  Number of SHGs and SHG members who have adopted environment-friendly livelihood practices  Percentage of producer collective members in compliance with the CoP of their collective  Number of SHGs and SHG members undertaking activities that are not in compliance with the regulatory requirements list Thematic performance indicators Agriculture:  Number of SHG members implementing sustainable agriculture practices as a percentage of the total members in the sampled SHGs  Extent of area under sustainable agriculture practices supported by the project as a percentage of all agricultural area supported by the project in the sample villages  Increase in expenditure on agro-chemicals by households supported by the project (as compared to the pre-project situation and as compared to a control group) Water resources:  Number of SHG members undertaking water conservation measures as a percentage of the total members in the sampled SHGs  Extent of area under water conservation (recharge, harvesting, drip/sprinkler irrigation, etc.) as a percentage of all area that has been brought under tube well irrigation through the project support in the sample villages  Percentage increase in number of tubewells (in sample villages) as a result of the tubewells funded through the project support. Livestock:  Number of SHG members undertaking better fodder management as a percentage of the total members in the sampled SHGs  Percentage increase in number of livestock (in sample villages) as a result of the livestock funded through the project support. Occupational health and safety:  Number of enterprises with adoption of relevant occupational safety measures. Institutional arrangements and capacity building  Percentage of project staff trained in EMF (to total staff).  Percentage of primary federations that have received the training on environmental management of livelihoods.  Percentage of producer collectives that have received the training on environmental 81 management of livelihoods. Processes  Percentage of primary federations with EMPs  Percentage of producer collectives with CoPs  Number of activities requiring detailed environmental appraisal by qualified technical expert having gone through such appraisal  Percentage of indicated samples covered as part of the internal monitoring 4.5.9 Implementation roll-out strategy 53. The EMF of the NRLP builds on the experience of existing livelihoods projects in the country. However, it has certain elements that are novel – for example, the SHG federation EMPs and the CoPs of the producer collectives. It is necessary to phase out the implementation of the federation EMPs in the NRLP to ensure that innovative elements are put on trial before they are scaled up. The roll out of the federation EMPs is planned as follows: Table 4.12: Phasing of EMF implementation Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Establishing Identification Training of national System capacity building support agency (for training SRLM/SMMU state staff) Development of operational manuals and training modules TA to states 12 states Roll out of National/regional National/regional National/regional National/regional training to and state level and state level and state level and state level NMMU staff experience experience experience experience and SRLMs sharing workshop sharing workshop sharing workshop sharing workshop National level Development and experience appraisal of state sharing EAPs and their workshops integration into (two the SPIPs and workshops – AAPs pre and post EAP development) Development and appraisal of state EAPs and their integration into the SPIPs and AAPs 82 Setting up 6 states 12 states SMMU SMMU SMMU Environment Environment Specialist in Specialist in each each of 6 states of 12 states Training of 6 states 12 states staff at state Training to 6 Training to 12 level SMMU SMMU Environment Environment Specialists Specialists Identification Identification of of state state technical technical support agency support agency Training for Training for DMMU staff, DMMU staff, Block teams, Block teams, Green CRPs Green CRPs Universal 33 districts 77 districts 100 districts 100 districts 100 districts implementation District level District level District level District level District level Environment Environment Environment Environment Environment Specialist in Specialist in each Specialist in each Specialist in each Specialist in each each of the of the districts of the districts of the districts of the districts districts Training to Training to Universal Universal Roll out of DMMU staff and DMMU staff and application of application of training Block teams Block teams regulatory regulatory programs to Universal Universal requirements requirements DMMU staff application of application of Pilots on eco- Pilots on eco- and Block regulatory regulatory friendly friendly teams requirements requirements livelihood livelihood Pilots on eco- Pilots on eco- activities activities friendly friendly Internal Internal livelihood livelihood monitoring monitoring activities activities External audit External audit Internal Internal monitoring monitoring External audit External audit Pilot 6 districts 18 districts 30 districts 30 districts 30 districts implementation 12 blocks 36 blocks 120 blocks 120 blocks 120 blocks of EMP 72 Green CRPs 216 Green CRPs 1200 Green 1200 Green 1200 Green 360 SHG CRPs CRPs CRPs federations 1440 SHG 7080 SHG 12000 SHG federations federations federations 4.6 Budget 54. The estimated budget for the EMF implementation is $ 7 million. The detailed budget is presented in Annex 16. 83 Table 4.13: Addressing the Bank’s safeguards policies through the EMF in NRLP Safeguards How EMF addresses the Bank’s safeguards policy policy Environment The project addresses critical environmental issues such as water scarcity, depletion of ground Assessment water, salinity of ground water, poor soil fertility, poor forest cover; and air pollution from small OP 4.01 mining activities. However, at an individual level these will not be major concerns. Only if there is a large aggregation of such activities, concerns could magnify, especially on water and livestock To address the above, the EMF has relevant thematic indicators of performance that are reflective of these environmental concerns. In addition, (a) the EMP is an integral part of the livelihood plan development process (b) proactive or green opportunities will be identified and demonstrated in each project district. The annual external environment audit, which includes a cumulative impact assessment will assess project performance, particularly on livestock and water related subprojects. Forests and Negative pressures on the forests and wildlife as a result of these community driven activities is not Natural expected. The regulatory requirements list and the mitigation measures included in the EGs - Habitats OP (especially those relating to fodder management and to activities in forest areas) - will contribute to 4.36, OP 4.04 wildlife conservation. In addition, periodic assessment of cumulative impacts will help to take any required corrective measures from time to time. Pest Use of (a) banned/non-permissible pesticides and (b) pesticides in classes Ia, Ib, II (WHO) is not Management permitted in the project and included in the regulatory requirements list. Also, training on safe use OP 4.09 of pesticides and convergence with Government schemes on IPM is included in the EGs. Low external input sustainable agriculture based on non pesticide management is the flagship program of NRLP. Therefore the project will address OP 4.09 adequately and proactively. 84 5. Green Opportunities for Proactive Interventions for Ensuring Sustainability of Livelihoods 5.1 Introduction 1. The Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD), Government of India, set up the National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) in June 2010. The Mission‘s primary objective is to reduce poverty by promoting diversified and gainful self-employment and wage employment opportunities for sustainable income increases. The proposed World Bank- supported National Rural Livelihoods Project (NRLP) is a part of the NRLM and will be implemented in 150 selected districts of 12 high priority states of India. 2. As part of the preparatory phase of the NRLP, it is mandatory to prepare an Environmental Management Framework (EMF) for assessing and managing the impact of the proposed livelihood activities of the NRLP. However, the World Bank wishes to go beyond the mere preparation of an EMF. It proposes to identify opportunity sets that are based on sound environmental practices/technologies and proactively promote them to ensure the environmental sustainability of livelihood activities. In addition, it also seeks to identify and promote livelihood opportunities that are based on such sound environmental practices /technologies. 5.2 Methodology 3. This section presents a set of ―Green Opportunities‖ that have been identified in the area of sustainable agriculture, irrigation and renewable energy. 4. Based on a desk review and discussions with the World Bank Team working on the environmental management and safeguards support to the NRLP, the following projects/organizations were identified for further study: 5. These projects were chosen so as to cover the major livelihood options of agriculture (of which irrigation and non-chemical fertilizers and pesticides are vital components) and animal husbandry. Further, energy was also included since it is a key factor in improving livelihood options in rural areas. Often, the choice of energy (especially for lighting) in rural areas is diesel or kerosene, both of which are polluting sources of energy. Hence, renewable energy was included in the opportunity sets. 6. Of these projects studied, field visits were made to the CSMA, SRI/SWI, CER/VER Financed Biogas+ and the Affordable Drip Irrigation Technology Intervention. The rest are based on desk review and the author‘s knowledge from previous visits to and/or association with those projects. 85 Table 5.1: List of Opportunity Sets Studied Name of Project / Name of Description of Project / Livelihood Coverage Intervention / Organization Intervention / Technology Area Area Technology Community Society for Low external input, low cost Agriculture Several Managed Eradication of and non-pesticide based crop districts of Sustainable Poverty (SERP) management for higher profits Andhra Agriculture to farmers Pradesh (CSMA) Tree-based Bharatiya Innovative use of land to Agriculture Several Farming Agroindustries ensure multiple crops in states Foundation (BAIF) & rainfed conditions that meet BAIF Institute of food, fuel and fodder Rural Development – requirements of a small farmer Karnataka (BIRD-K) System of Rice & Bihar Rural Innovative paddy and wheat Agriculture Several Wheat Livelihoods Project cultivation practices for districts of Intensification substantially higher yields Bihar (SRI & SWI) Affordable Drip International Low cost alternatives to high Agriculture - Several Irrigation Development cost conventional drip Irrigation states Technology Enterprises, India technology Intervention (IDE-I) (ADITI) Eco-tech based JRD TATA Eco- Demystification of bio- Agriculture- Madurai & community technology Centre, technology, its adaptation for Chemical- Dindigul enterprise MS Swaminathan manufacture and marketing by free inputs districts of Research Foundation, women SHGs, leading to Tamil Nadu Chennai formation of a community- based eco-enterprise Parampara Herbal Foundation for Use of low cost local Animal Udupi & Producer‘s Revitalization of veterinary medical knowledge husbandry Dakshina Company Local Health to identify, test and market Kannada Tradition (FRLHT) products to treat diseases of districts of dairy animals Karnataka CER/VER SKG Sangha Innovative use of CDM to part Renewable Karnataka Financed Biogas+ finance promotion, installation Energy Projects and maintenance of biogas+ vermicompost plants Light A Billion The Energy & A Fee-for-Service model to Renewable Several Lights (LABL) Resources Institute provide SPV-based lighting Energy states solutions to rural India Rural electricity Husk Power Systems Generating renewable power Renewable Bihar & supply service from rice gasifiers coupled to energy Uttar producer gas engines and Pradesh supplying to villages in Bihar 86 5.3 Integrating Green Opportunities into NRLP 5.3.1 Introduction 7. Nine different ―Green Opportunities‖ based on 3 broad thematic areas have been described in this report. Detail case studies on these Green Opportunities are presented in Annex 15. These Green Opportunities not only help better sustain existing livelihoods but also create new ―Green Enterprises‖ and ―Green Jobs‖. For example, KB Drip (low cost drip from IDE-India) not only helps conserve water at the farm level thereby making farming more secure, but also creates Green Enterprises in the form of KB Dealers and Green Jobs in the form of BAs employed by IDE-India and Fitters & Helpers employed by the KB Dealer. 5.3.2 Thematic Area 1 – Agriculture 8. Agriculture is the primary livelihood for a vast majority of rural Indians, either as farming households (if they have land) or as agricultural laborers. Therefore, any intervention in this thematic area that helps improve productivity, net returns, cost reduction or diversification of risk would help sustain and secure the livelihood for a vast majority of the rural poor. 9. The Green Opportunities presented in this thematic area cover the following: Table 5.2: Green Opportunities - Agriculture Sub-theme Green Opportunity Description Cropping System CMSA Low external input, low cost and non- pesticide based crop management for higher profits to farmers Farming Systems Tree Based Farming Innovative use of land to ensure multiple crops in rainfed conditions that meet food, fuel and fodder requirements of a small farmer Crop Production Technology SRI /SWI Innovative paddy and wheat cultivation practices for substantially higher yields Efficient Irrigation Affordable Drip Technology Low cost alternatives to high cost Intervention (ADITI) conventional drip technology Eco-inputs for agriculture Eco-enterprises based on Demystification of bio-technology, its biofertilizers & biopesticides adaptation for manufacture and marketing by women SHGs, leading to formation of a community-based eco-enterprise 10. CMSA, as already mentioned in the NRLM Implementation Framework is the flagship intervention in the area of agriculture. It forms the backbone on which the rest of the Green Opportunities in this thematic area can be pegged. For example, in dry land areas, while the approach would be based on CMSA principles, the farming system would be based on trees as an integral component of farming. Similarly, in areas where ground water is being used for irrigation, ADITI would be an integral component of CMSA. 11. However, unless CMSA is integrated with dairying, it is unlike to be successful, since it demands a constant supply of cow dung and urine. Therefore, incorporating a fodder component in farming systems as TBFS does is vital to ensuring sustainability of both 87 CMSA (cropping) as well as dairying. 5.3.3 Thematic Area 2 – Animal Husbandry 12. After agriculture, animal husbandry is the most sought after livelihood option. Often, loans are taken for costly crossbreed cows without providing for adequate vetcare. The result is either poor performance of the cow or loss of the asset (cow) itself. Even where vetcare is available, it is unaffordable and often not available in time. 13. Use of local remedies (ethno-veterinary remedies) based on a careful appraisal and clinical trial process, can reduce the cost of vetcare and more importantly, reduce the dependence on outside expertise. The Parampara Herbal Producers‘ Company is a successful example of mass producing and marketing ethno-veterinary remedies for common cattle diseases. 14. Integrating ethno-remedies into animal husbandry after careful trial and selection as is detailed in the case study, would go a long way in securing this livelihood. Further, if the remedies are mass produced and marketed, a new Green Enterprise could be set up. Needless to say, if home herbal gardens are set up to supply the raw materials for the remedies, Green livelihood opportunities would open up. 5.3.4 Thematic Area 3 – Renewable Energy 15. Energy, especially, electricity is driver of modern civilization. Lack of access to energy can stunt development and growth of a whole community. With more than 400 million Indians, mainly the rural poor, having little or no access to electricity, this thematic area assumes strategic importance in alleviating poverty. 16. Three Green Opportunities are covered in this thematic area: Table 5.3: Green Opportunities - Renewable Energy Sub-theme Green Opportunity Description Cooking energy CER/VER financed Innovative use of CDM to part finance promotion, biogas-cum- installation and maintenance of biogas+ vermicomposting vermicompost plants Lighting Lighting a Billion Lives A Fee-for-Service model to provide SPV-based lighting solutions to rural India Grid quality electricity Rice husk powered mini Generating renewable power from rice gasifiers powergrids coupled to producer gas engines and supplying to villages in Bihar 17. While energy per se can be provided from multiple sources, providing it from renewable energy sources calls for a great deal of technical, financial and organizational innovations. The three case studies present various aspects of innovations in these areas. 18. All of them apart from benefiting the end-users also create jobs and enterprises. For example, LaBL delivers its solar lighting solutions through LaBL Entrepreneurs who are local unemployed youth. Similarly, Husk Power Systems provides direct employment to local youth, apart from creating small-time service providers who supply rice husk to the power plants. 19. Unlike the other two thematic areas, Green Opportunities in this thematic area may not 88 find universal application. They would be more suitable where lighting /electricity services do not exist. 20. However, the biogas-cum-vermicompost Green Opportunity would be feasible wherever dairying is taken up and should be integrated with it to make it more economically and environmentally sustainable. If a 1000 biogas plants are done in a district, then seeking CDM financing would be feasible. 5.4 Phasing the Way Forward 21. In the preceding section (also see each individual case study) the relevance and ways of integrating the Green Opportunities into livelihood interventions has been presented. However, the challenge is to integrate its implementation with the NRLP Implementation Mechanism. This section presents a way forward in this direction. Table 5.4: Steps in integrating Green Opportunities into NRLP Step Action Details Timeframe from inception of NRLP Step Sensitizing NMMU to  Presenting the bouquet of Green Opportunities 0-3 months 1 Green Opportunities to the NMMU through a workshop  Preferably, the proponents of these opportunities should be invited to present to the NMMU Step Creating awareness about  Presenting the bouquet of Green Opportunities 0-3 months 2 Green Opportunities among through a series of regional/state workshops SMMUs Step NMMU to identify and  CMSA+dairying would be such a Green 4 months 3 delineate, Green Opportunity of nation-wide importance. Opportunities of nation- Integrating ethno-vetcare would enhance its wide application and sustainability strategic importance Step NMMU to collaborate with 6 months 4 proponents of such Green Opportunities to build knowledge among its staff and prepare for launching it Step SMMUs to look for  For example, lighting could be a need in many 8-12 months 5 application of Green areas of Jharkhand. Therefore Green Opportunities during Opportunities from the Energy Thematic Area preparation of SPIPs may be explored in preparation of the SPIP Step SMMUS to collaborate with  Prepare and/or revise Green Opportunities 12-16 months 6 proponents of Green section in the SPIP based on the guidance Opportunities chosen by received by collaborating with the Green them in the SPIP to build Opportunities proponents knowledge among its staff  Build capacity of the district and block level staff before launching the programme Step Build a national repository  Use all sources to build a repository of Green Continuous 7 of Green Opportunities. Opportunities and constantly communicate to the SMMUs and encourage them to have their own repositories. 22. Overall the strategy would be to use the first 12 months to educate the NMMU and the SMMU, collaborate with proponents of Green Opportunities, and integrate strategic ones into the SPIPs or the national program. During this period, when the states are preparing 89 their SPIPs, they should be supported and guided to look for potential to Green Opportunities not only from the bouquet presented here but from other sources as well. 23. Having chosen the Green Opportunities, capacity building should be carried out in preparation of the launch of a pilot (in case the Green Opportunity has not been tried before) or scale-up or introduction in a new area. 24. Thus, at the end of the first year, the NRLP should be in a position to launch at least TBFS, ethno-vetcare along with CMSA+dairying and SRI/SWI. Other Green Opportunities may be explored in the subsequent years, unless they feature as high priorities in the SPIPs. 5.4.1 Pathways to mainstream Green Opportunities 25. The following schematic (Fig 5.1), which is self-explanatory, tries to depict based on the NRLM Implementation Framework, as to how the Green opportunities could be mainstreamed. 26. The focus would be to mainstream and scale-up Green Opportunities rather than continue doing them as stand-alone projects of interest. It is only by mainstreaming that the Green Opportunity would get the benefit of the entire implementation mechanism‘s focus and resources. 90 Figure 5.1: Pathways to Mainstream Green Opportunities National Environment State environment Management Management Coordinator Shortlist based on Coordinator consultations & strategic importance Green Opportunities Repository Selected Green Opportunities SPIP Innovative Projects Pilot Integrate into main programme 5.4.2 Integrating EMP and Green Opportunities 27. The Environmental Management Framework has made a radical change in how environmental management is secured in the NRLP. Each Village Organization with the help of G-CRPs (Green Community Resource Persons) would prepare an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) based on the livelihood activities that their members propose to pursue. 28. Figure 5.2 presents a pathway for building the capacity of the G-CRP so that s/he can help the VO prepare an EMP which also takes into account the Green Opportunities that might make the basic livelihood more secure. 91 Figure 5.2: Integrating Green Opportunities into EMPs 29. It is quite likely, though that the Green Opportunity might not be feasible at the level of aggregation of a VO. In such a case, the Block Level Managers should explore the feasibility at block level of aggregation. 30. Needless to say, scouring through EMPs to identify problems and likely solutions should be a key task of the Environment Management team at all levels. 92 5.4.3 Source of Green Opportunities 31. The bouquet of Green Opportunities presented in this report is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. It must be the constant endeavor of the Environmental Management team at both the NMMU and the SMMU to build up the Green Opportunities Repository. 32. Figure 5.3 shows possible ways of filling up the Green Opportunities Repository. Specifically, to enable wide-spread contribution and create visibility and awareness about the Green Opportunities Repository, a national Green Opportunities Marketplace should be organized annually on the lines of the Development Marketplace of the World Bank. Figure 5.3: Sources of Green Opportunities 33. Thus, we envisage a National Environment Management Coordinator who is not only well-aware of environmental issues but views problems as potential opportunities to present Green Solutions which make economic sense. Indeed, we would strongly urge that one of the key metrics to measure the performance of the NEMC and SEMC should be to linked to no. of Green Opportunities that have either been piloted or mainstreamed. We are confident that a strong focus on the performance in this area would go a long way in ensuring that environmental management functions do not merely become monitoring of environmental check-lists. 93 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annexes Annex A Annex 1: Overview of Implementation of EMF in Recent Bank supported Livelihood Projects in India...........................................................................................A-2 Annex 2: Template for Environment section in the State Situational Analysis ............................A-4 Annex 3: Template for Environmental Action Plan (EAP) as part of State Perspective and Implementation Plan (SPIP)...........................................................................................A-5 Annex 4: Inputs to Terms of Reference for Conducting Situational Analysis and for Preparation of Environmental Action Plan (EAP) as part of State Perspective and Implementation Plan (SPIP)...........................................................................................A-6 Annex 5: Template for Environmental Management Plan (EAP) of the SHG Primary Federation or Village Organization (VO) ......................................................................A-8 Annex 6: Template for Code of Practice by Producer Collectives .............................................A-10 Annex 7: Regulatory Requirements List .....................................................................................A-11 Annex 8: Classification of Activities According to Level of Environmental Impact .................A-13 Annex 9: Environmental Guidelines (samples) for SHGs...........................................................A-14 Annex 10: Environmental Guidelines (samples) for producer collectives ....................................A-20 Annex: 11: Curriculum outline for training of Green CRPs along with initial list of resource institutions....................................................................................................................A-22 Annex: 12: Guidance on Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA) as part of External Environmental Audit....................................................................................................A-23 Annex: 13: Inputs to the Terms of Reference for the National Capacity Building Agency on Environmental Management ........................................................................................A-25 Annex 14: Climate Change Adaptations and Livelihoods.............................................................A-29 Annex 15: Training and Capacity Building Materials: Case Studies for Green Opportunities.....................................................................................................A-34 Annex 16A: Budget for EMF implementation ..............................................................................A-81 Annex 16B: Plan for scaling up .....................................................................................................A-82 Annex 17: National Consultation on EMF for NRLP....................................................................A-83 Annex B Annex 18: Background Reading Material on Environmental Status — State Profiles .......................................................................................Annex File B-A-106 A-1 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex 1 Overview of Implementation of EMF in Recent Bank supported Livelihood Projects in India Project EMF components Institutional External support Implementation outcomes arrangements organizations Andhra Pradesh Environmental Environment Centre for Community managed Rural Poverty appraisal of SHG Coordinator at Sustainable sustainable agriculture – with Reduction micro-credit plans; SPMU (within Agriculture (for an outreach to 4114 villages Project Proactive livelihoods unit) technical support and (about 4.5 lakh farmers and environmental Environment capacity building on 18.15 lakh acres). interventions Coordinators at community managed DPMU (within sustainable livelihoods unit) agriculture) Centre for Environment Education (for environmental appraisal, capacity building and monitoring) Madhya Pradesh Environmental State Environment Independent external audit District Poverty appraisal of SHG Environment Protection findings are that 66% of the Initiatives micro-credit plans Coordinator Coordination CIGs covered in the audit are Project (Phase I) District Organization (for implementing required Environment environmental mitigation measures. Coordinator appraisal, capacity ‘Code of Practice’ by Producer building and Companies through monitoring) Responsible Soya programme. Proactive environmental interventions undertaken include – biogas, NADEP composting, etc. Rajasthan Environmental State Malaviya National Independent external District Poverty appraisal of SHG Environment Institute of supervision findings are that Initiatives micro-credit plans Coordinator Technology (for 70% of the CIG proposals have Project District environmental gone through environmental Environment appraisal, capacity screening procedures (however, Coordinator building and no information on monitoring) implementation of required mitigation measures). Proactive environmental interventions undertaken include – 381 traditional rainwater harvesting structures for irrigation, 8000 ha of degraded land under community forest management, deflouridation filters to 60 CIGs, etc. Chhattisgarh Environmental State Chhattisgarh Independent external audit District Poverty appraisal of SHG Environment Environment findings are that 51% of the Reduction micro-credit plans Coordinator Conservation Board CIGs covered in the audit are Project (for environmental implementing required appraisal, capacity mitigation measures. building and Proactive environmental A-2 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 monitoring) interventions undertaken include – System for Rice Intensification in an estimated 1500 ha. Bihar Rural Environmental State Project PRADAN (for SRI, System for Rice Intensification Livelihoods appraisal of SHG Manager SWI interventions) – with an outreach to 388 VOs Project micro-credit plans; (Livelihoods) (3540 ha in 6 districts). Proactive System for Wheat environmental Intensification – with an interventions outreach to 184 VOs (1200 ha in 8 districts). Tamil Nadu Environmental State Centre for Internal audit findings are that District Poverty appraisal of SHG Environment Environment 52% of the SHGs covered in Initiatives micro-credit plans; Coordinator Education (for the audit have been through Project Proactive (Livelihoods) environmental environmental appraisal environmental District appraisal, capacity procedures and 57% are interventions Environment building and implementing required Coordinator monitoring) mitigation measures. (Livelihoods) Proactive environmental interventions (2 SHGs/ federations per district) undertaken include – vermicomposting, Vertical Shaft Brick Kilns, organic farming, etc. Rajasthan Rural Environmental State Technical support NA Poverty appraisal of SHG Environment agencies for proactive Reduction micro-credit plans; Coordinator environmental Project Proactive District interventions (approved in environmental Environment January 2011) interventions Coordinator A-3 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex 2 Template for Environment section in the State Situational Analysis Environmental context: • Main concerns with respect to environmental sustainability of the key rural livelihoods in the State (including agriculture, livestock, forest-based livelihoods, coastal and inland fisheries, etc.). Environmental management opportunities: • A profile of existing interventions (Government and non-Government schemes, projects, etc.) that have demonstrated potential for environment-friendly livelihoods. • An analysis of the State capacity (technical, financial, capacity building, etc.) to undertake/facilitate the identified interventions through the community institutions. • A profile of institutions that provide training and technical support to community institutions (SHGs, SHG federations, producer organizations, etc.) on the identified interventions. Legal and regulatory requirements: • A listing of the legal and regulatory requirements concerning environmental safeguards in the context of rural livelihoods. A-4 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex 3 Template for Environmental Action Plan (EAP) as part of State Perspective and Implementation Plan (SPIP) 1. Summary of Situational Analysis on Environment 2. Opportunities for environment-friendly livelihoods: • An analysis of the State capacity (technical, financial, capacity building, etc.) to undertake/facilitate the identified interventions through the community institutions. • A plan of action for pilots on environment-friendly livelihoods (including details of scale of the pilot intervention, strategy to be adopted, specific activities to be undertaken, external technical support, capacity building, baseline and impact assessment studies). • A plan of action for scaling up the intervention/s identified (including details of phase-wise scaling up, phasing out of external technical support, potential for convergence with other Government schemes). 3. Legal and regulatory requirements: • Systems to ensure compliance with the legal and regulatory requirements by the community institutions (including details of awareness building, monitoring of compliance by state and district MMUs, self-declaration by community institutions). 4. Environmental Management Plans by Federations: • Plan for piloting and scale up of EMPs by primary federations. • Details of technical support (through technical support agencies) to Green CRPs for facilitating development and implementation of the EMPs 5. Capacity building: • Plan for capacity building of state, district and sub-district teams on environmental management • Plan for capacity building of Green CRPs • Plan for capacity building and facilitation of SHG federations for development and implementation of Environmental Management Plan • Plan for capacity building and facilitation of producer collectives for development and implementation of Codes of Practice on environmental management 6. Monitoring arrangements: • Systems to monitor implementation of the EMP (including details of systems to capture and disseminate learnings/good practices in implementation of environment-friendly livelihoods, community monitoring of compliance with legal, regulatory and community agreed norms). • Indicators for measuring performance of the EMP. A-5 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex 4 Inputs to Terms of Reference 1 for Conducting Situational Analysis and for Preparation of Environmental Action Plan (EAP) as part of State Perspective and Implementation Plan (SPIP) Process The EAP will be developed by each SRLM/SMMU through a participatory process that will include the following activities: • Secondary research on the environmental context and on existing environment-friendly livelihood opportunities • Field visits to substantiate the information from the secondary research • Consultations with key stakeholders including SHGs and SHG federations, NGOs, line departments, etc. • Development of the draft EAP • Consultation on the draft EAP through a state level workshop that has participation from SHG federations, NGOs, line departments, etc. • Finalization of the draft EAP and its integration into the SPIP The SRLM/SMMU will need to deploy a dedicated task team for the purpose 2. The details of the team composition are given later in this annex. Output Situational Analysis: Environmental context: • Main concerns with respect to environmental sustainability of the key rural livelihoods in the State (including agriculture, livestock, forest-based livelihoods, coastal and inland fisheries, etc.). Environmental management opportunities: • A profile of existing interventions (Government and non-Government schemes, projects, etc.) that have demonstrated potential for environment-friendly livelihoods. • An analysis of the State capacity (technical, financial, capacity building, etc.) to undertake/facilitate the identified interventions through the community institutions. • A profile of institutions that provide training and technical support to community institutions (SHGs, SHG federations, producer organizations, etc.) on the identified interventions. Legal and regulatory requirements: • A listing of the legal and regulatory requirements concerning environmental safeguards in the context of rural livelihoods. Environmental Action Plan: Opportunities for environment-friendly livelihoods: • An analysis of the State capacity (technical, financial, capacity building, etc.) to undertake/facilitate the identified interventions through the community institutions. • A plan of action for pilots on environment-friendly livelihoods (including details of scale of 1 This annex is not the complete terms of reference (ToR). It contains the some of the key inputs to developing a full ToR. 2 In case the SMMU hires a consultant for the purpose, the consultant must be an agency – preferably an NGO – that has recognized field experience in working with SHGs and their federations on natural resource management – preferably in the same state. This is necessary as the desired output is not an academic report – but an implementable action plan that can fit into the SPIP. A-6 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 the pilot intervention, strategy to be adopted, specific activities to be undertaken, external technical support, capacity building, baseline and impact assessment studies). • A plan of action for scaling up the intervention/s identified (including details of phase-wise scaling up, phasing out of external technical support, potential for convergence with other Government schemes). Legal and regulatory requirements: • Systems to ensure compliance with the legal and regulatory requirements by the community institutions (including details of awareness building, monitoring of compliance by state and district MMUs, self-declaration by community institutions). Environmental Management Plans by Federations: • Plan for piloting and scale up of EMPs by primary federations. • Details of technical support (through technical support agencies) to Green CRPs for facilitating development and implementation of the EMPs Capacity building: • Plan for capacity building of state, district and sub-district teams on environmental management • Plan for capacity building of Green CRPs • Plan for capacity building and facilitation of SHG federations for development and implementation of Environmental Management Plan • Plan for capacity building and facilitation of producer collectives for development and implementation of Codes of Practice on environmental management Monitoring arrangements: • Systems to monitor implementation of the EMP (including details of systems to capture and disseminate learnings/good practices in implementation of environment-friendly livelihoods, community monitoring of compliance with legal, regulatory and community agreed norms). • Indicators for measuring performance of the EMP. Time-frame It is estimated that the situational analysis and development of the EAP will take about 6 months time. Team composition (skills, qualifications, experience): A three member dedicated task team (including a task manager) is required to work on the Situational Analysis and development of the EAP. Other members may be utilized on a part-time basis as per the need for additional expertise. The team must comprise of individuals with experience of at least 5 years including field and programme management experience and a master’s degree in the following fields: Agriculture, Horticulture, Forest Management, Natural Resource Management, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries. Reporting The task manager will coordinate closely with the SMMU and with the Environment Specialist in the NMMU. In addition, the task team will participate in mission meetings with the SMMU. The following reports will be submitted by the task team on a timely basis to the SMMU (these will also be shared by the SMMU with the Environment Specialist in the NMMU): Report of Situational Analysis: By end of 2nd month Draft EAP: By end of 4th month State consultation workshop report: By end of 5th month Final EAP for inclusion into SPIP: By end of 6th month A-7 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex: 5 Template for Environmental Management Plan (EMP) of the SHG Primary Federation or Village Organization (VO) 1. Profile of VO (location, number of affiliate SHGs and SHG members, year of formation, etc.) 2. Status and issues with respect to the natural resources of the village: Resource Availability Uses No. of families Issues (number, extent) dependant Agricultural land Wasteland Grazing land Forest Water bodies Groundwater Livestock 3. Details of any Protected Areas (Wildlife Sanctuaries, National Parks) in the vicinity of the village: 4. Details of the groundwater zone that the village is in: Safe / Semi-critical / Critical / Over- exploited 5. Key livelihoods of the poor in the village and issues with environmental sustainability: Livelihood Issues related to environmental sustainability Agriculture Livestock Fisheries Forest-based livelihoods Others 6. Measures required at individual household level, SHG level, primary federation level to promote sustainability: Measures to be implemented by - Livelihood Individual SHG SHG VO Gram Panchayat members or others 3 Agriculture Livestock Fisheries Forest-based livelihoods Others 7. Plan for implementation of identified measures: Sub-plans Activities Sub-plan for facilitating measures to be Training programmes: implemented by individual SHG Exposure visits: members and SHGs Extension support: Credit support: Sub-plan for measures to be implemented Community norms: by VO Activities / Works: 3 Others may include Watershed Committees, Forest Management Committees, etc. The mitigation measures may be implemented with support from MNREGS, IWMP or other schemes. The VO needs to engage with these bodies to influence the nature of works undertaken – so that they include works that contribute to environmental sustainability of livelihoods of the poor. A-8 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 8. Support required by VO for implementation of the EMP: Activities Details of technical Details of financial support Source of support support required required (convergence scheme, line department, NRLP, etc.) 9. Institutional arrangements in the federation for implementation of the EMP: Names of EMP sub- Key responsibilities committee members 10. Monitoring plan Frequency of review meetings by EMP sub-committee: Frequency of site visits by EMP sub-committee: Indicators for monitoring by Green CRP / EMP sub-committee: A-9 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex: 6 Template for Code of Practice by Producer Collectives The Code of Practice is a concise document with the following: 1. Profile of the Producer Collective (location, profile of members, year of formation, etc.) 2. Environmental Guidelines for the Producer Collective 3. Environmental Guidelines for the individual members of the Producer Collective 4. Individual members’ pledge 5. Peer inspection/appraisal worksheet 6. Catalogue of ‘sanctions’ for non-compliance of individual members The sections 2-6 will have to be developed through a participatory process involving the individual members of the Produce Collective through the facilitation of the DMMU team and technical experts. The Participatory Organic Guarantee System for India 4 is a useful reference for developing the sections 2-6 of the Code of Practice. The Environmental Guidelines provided in this EMF (annex ___ and ___) may be referred to for developing the sections 2 and 3. 4 A Participatory Organic Guarantee System for India. Final Report. October 2006. Ron Khosla, FAO International Consultant. Organic Certification Systems. A-10 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex: 7 Regulatory Requirements List 5 There are certain kinds of activities which, if taken up, would contravene the laws and regulations of the State Government, Government of India as well as Safeguard Polices of the World Bank. Such activities will not be supported under the NRLP. Given below is a list of attributes that would disqualify an activity from being supported under NRLP. This list shall be treated as the screening tool for the activities planned to be taken up by SHGs, SHG federations, and producer collectives. Agriculture • Digging of irrigation tubewell without taking required6 permission from the relevant authority will not be supported. • Digging of tubewell (except for public drinking purpose) in an area identified as an ‘over- exploited groundwater basin’ will not be supported. • Digging of irrigation tubewell within a distance of 250 meters from the nearest tubewell will not be supported. • Purchase, stock, sale, distribution or exhibition of the following pesticides will not be supported: • pesticides classified in Class Ia, Ib and II of WHO classification; • pesticides banned by the Government of India; • pesticides banned by the State Government. • Purchase, stock, sale, distribution or exhibition of pesticides and chemical fertilizers will not be supported without the requisite licenses. Livestock • Grazing of livestock in forest areas without taking required 7 permission from the Forest Department will not be supported. • Grazing of livestock that have not been vaccinated in forest areas will not be supported. Forests and Wildlife • Activities that involve use of forest land for non-forest purposes without the permission of the Forest Department will not be supported. • Extraction, transport, processing, sale of forest produce including non timber forest produce without taking required 8 permission from the Forest Department will not be supported. • Felling of trees without taking required 9 permission from the Forest Department will not be supported. 5 This initial list needs to be validated by each of the 12 SMMUs in consultation with the respective line departments and technical support agencies (Krishi Vignan Kendras, NGOs, etc.). State specific regulations that are relevant to the environment-rural livelihood context need to be added to this list. 6 Applicable in all cases except in states/locations where such permission is not required to be taken. 7 Applicable in all cases (a) except those that are in accordance with the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (b) except in states/locations where such permission is not required to be taken from the Forest Department. 8 Applicable in all cases (a) except those that are in accordance with the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (b) except in states/locations where such permission is not required to be taken from the Forest Department. 9 Applicable in all cases (a) except those that are in accordance with the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (b) except in states/locations where such permission is not required to be taken from the Forest Department (c) except for species for which such permission is not required to be taken from the Forest Department. A-11 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 • Setting up of saw mills or any other timber processing mills without the permission of the Forest Department will not be supported. • Activities that involve destruction of wildlife or of wildlife habitat will not be supported. • Clearing, kindling fire, damaging trees (felling, girdling, lopping, topping, burning, stripping bark and leaves), quarrying stone, etc., in reserved and protected forests will not be supported. Fisheries • Fishing in the Government declared prohibited/closed season will not be supported. • Fishing using nets with mesh size smaller than the permissible size will not be supported. • Fishing using destructive fishing practices (use of poison, explosives, etc.) will not be supported. • Culture of invasive species (e.g., African Catfish) will not be supported. Infrastructure • Construction of roads, buildings, check dams, embankments, etc., will not be supported without prior approval of the design by a qualified Engineer. • Embankment / check dam exceeding 3 meters in height will not be supported. • Activities involving discharge into any water body any industrial waste, sewerage or other polluting substance will not be supported. • Any industrial activity will not be supported without requisite permission from the Government (Pollution Control Board). • Brick making activity using soil from agricultural fields will not be supported. • Mining activities will not be supported. • The following activities in the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) will not be supported: o discharge of untreated wastes and effluents, o withdrawal of ground water unless when done manually through ordinary wells for drinking, horticulture, agriculture and fisheries, o mining of sands, rocks and other substrata materials, o construction activity between the Low Tide Line and High Tide Line in the CRZ-I and III without requisite permission10. • Activities with Significant Adverse Environmental Impact All activities likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts that are irreversible, diverse, or unprecedented, with impacts that may affect an area broader than the site of the activity are not to be supported. 10 CRZ I: Includes (i) Areas that are ecologically sensitive and important, such as national parks/marine parks, sanctuaries, reserve forests, wildlife habitats, mangroves, corals/coral reefs, areas close to breeding and spawning grounds of fish and other marine life, areas of outstanding natural beauty/historically/heritage areas, areas rich in genetic diversity (ii) Area between Low Tide Line and the high Tide Line; CRZ III: Areas that are relatively undisturbed and include coastal zone in the rural areas (developed and undeveloped). A-12 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex: 8 Classification of Activities According to Level of Environmental Impact Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Activities All activities that All sub-projects that are All sub-projects that are likely are likely to have only short likely to have long term to have significant term negative or positive negative environmental environmental impacts that environmental impact and that impacts and that are taken require specific technical are taken up at the SHG up at the SHG member inputs for proper planning member level: level: and/or mitigation: • Agriculture • Brick kiln 1. Sale, distribution of • Horticulture • Irrigation tube well agro-chemicals by • Livestock SHG Federations/ • Fishery Producer Organizations • Non-timber Forest 2. Check dams, Produce embankments, etc. Implications for Identification by VO (with facilitation by PFT) as part of Technical appraisal and identification of preparation of Environmental Management Plan. identification of mitigation mitigation measures measures by: For 1 by District level officer of the Department of Agriculture For 2 by qualified civil engineer – preferably from a District level officer of the Department of Minor Irrigation / Watershed Development Implications for Limited sample coverage Intensive coverage during Intensive coverage during monitoring during monitoring by monitoring by DMMU monitoring by DMMU and DMMU SMMU A-13 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex: 9 Environmental Guidelines (samples) for SHGs EG No. ___ IRRIGATION TUBEWELL Possible Issues Compulsory actions Good practices at Good practices at VO Level individual level Over extraction will deplete Check the regulatory Use efficient ways of Organize training on ground water. requirements list and ensure irrigation like drip and rainwater harvesting, compliance, especially with sprinkler irrigation. efficient irrigation methods Unprotected / abandoned regards to the following: (drip and sprinkler irrigation bore holes are a safety Use pipes for conveying including the low-cost hazard for small children. In over-exploited basins, do water to avoid seepage and bucket drip system) and not support irrigation tube evaporation losses. water conservation wells. practices. If field channels are used to Maintain minimum distance convey water, keep them Facilitate access to of 250 m between two free from weeds to avoid Government schemes such adjacent tubewells. water loss (in arid and semi- as subsidy on drip and arid areas line channels with sprinkler irrigation, farm Take required permission plastic sheets to avoid ponds under MNREGS, etc. from relevant authority for seepage loss). digging of tubewell. Periodic review to assess Dig percolation pit. any emerging cumulative impact. Plug / cover boreholes that are open / abandoned. Use of hazardous pesticides Do not use (a) banned Follow sustainable Para-extension worker/s to harms human, livestock and pesticides (b) pesticides that agriculture practices (see provide extension support to environmental health. are extremely hazardous or below) farmers, procure quality highly hazardous or inputs, facilitate soil testing, Excessive use of chemical moderately hazardous Use pesticides only with etc. fertilizers leads to pollution. (Check Annex ___ for list recommendation of the of banned pesticides, Agriculture Extension Establish agriculture tool extremely hazardous Personnel as part of an hiring centre with pesticides, highly hazardous integrated pest management equipment such as efficient pesticides, moderately approach. sprayers, safety gear, hazardous pesticides). weeder, etc. Use the prescribed mask, Do not dispose used gloves and goggles to Support enterprises such as pesticide containers in the protect the body while shops for selling botanical open (fields, near water handling pesticides. pesticidal extracts, bodies, etc.) – dispose by pheromone traps, sealing and burial. Use efficient spraying vermicompost, etc. equipment to prevent leakage. Organize awareness programs on safe use of Always wash with soap pesticides, fertilizer after spraying. scheduling, benefits of organic manures, etc. Use chemical fertilizers only on the basis of Facilitate access to recommendations given Government schemes such after soil testing. as subsidy for vermicompost units, training on integrated pest management, etc. A-14 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Section 1.01 Sustainable Agriculture Practices (Extracted from Guidelines of the Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana (MKSP), Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India) (a) Pest Management: • Deep summer ploughing: Summer ploughing exposes the pupae surviving inside the soil. Depth of ploughing should be more than 6 inches. • Exposed pupae will die due to excess heat (or) eaten away by birds • Seed treatment with non-chemical components • Clipping of the tips in case of Paddy: Cut seedling tips while transplanting into the main field. This will prevent Stem borer attack as Stem borer lays eggs on the tips of the leaves. • Alleys in Paddy: Leaving 1 feet path at every 3 metres interval in East –West direction will avoid attack of Hoppers. • White and Yellow sticky traps: Arrange 15-20 Yellow and White sticky traps per acre. Green leaf hoppers and thrips stick to these traps. Clean these traps once in two days and add sticky material to traps for effective trapping. Height of these traps should be the same with the plant height. • Bird perches: Arrange 10-15 bird perches per acre immediately after transplanting and remove these at grain filling stage (60 days after transplanting). Bird perches will attract birds and birds will eat pests. Broad costing of yellow rice will attract more birds. Height of bird perches should be more than the height of plants. • Pheromone traps: Keeping 5-10 Pheromone traps in zigzag way to mass trapping of pests. Lure has to be changed once in a month or after the expiry date • Growing of trap crops: Grow yellow flower Marigold (tall growing plants are preferred) and Castor around field, ensure flowering before main crop completes vegetative stage • Border crop: Sow 3 rows of tall growing Jowar or Bajra or Maize (without any gap in the row). This will provide enabling environment for friendly insects and it also prevents • Application of Botanical extracts: If all the above mentioned principles are followed religiously, there will not be any need to apply botanical extracts. However list of pests and botanical extracts (b) Disease Management: • Selection of Seed: Seed should be free from diseases and should select resistant varieties • Incorporating weeds: Weeds and other voluntary plants should incorporate into soil • Reduce/no chemical fertilizer usage: Reduce (or) avoid chemical fertilizers to prevent diseases • Crop rotation: Rotate crops particularly with pulses to prevent disease spread • Avoid application of Nitrogenous fertilizer during cloudy days • Alleys: Alleys provide enough sunlight and wind flow and prevent disease spread (c) Rodent control: • Use Rodent traps – 5-10 per acre • Keep Papaya peaces all-around the field – four Papayas are sufficient for one acre • Rodent repellent crops such as Calotropis, Turmeric, Castor plants which are rodent repellants • Keep mix of Cement and Wheat or any other flour at rat holes A-15 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 (d) Nutrient Management: • Penning with Sheep (or) Cattle: Penning sheep or cattle will improve soil fertility. During Summer, penning of sheep and cattle in the whole night is a general practice • Tank silt application: Application of tank silt will improve soil fertility and water holding capacity • Application Farm Yard Manure (FYM): Application of 6 tonnes/acre of completely decomposed FYM per acre will improve soil fertility. • Green manure crops: Green manure crops will improve soil structure and organic matter content. After reaching flowering stage incorporate green manure crops into soil. • Application of Azolla: Add Azolla to paddy field it fixes atmospheric nitrogen, an average half of the nitrogen fertilizer application can be reduced • Micronutrient deficiency: For nutrient deficiency (Iron, Zinc and Potash) in nursery and in main field spray cow urine and cow dung and Asafoetida solution. • Green leaf manure: Green leaf manuring with Pongamia, neem etc will improve soil fertility • Efficient composting methods like NADEP composting • Intercropping of monocots and dicots • Crop rotation with pulse crops • Mulching with green leaf and crop residues (e) Soil and moisture conservation in Rainfed areas: • Conservation furrows for every four meters • Trenches all-around farm • Farm ponds (f) Cropping pattern in rain fed areas: • Trees all around trench on farm boundary. • Cropping pattern with red gram in between the conservation furrows in 2:1 and 5:1 with millets and groundnut respectively A-16 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 EG No. ___ LIVESTOCK Possible Issues Compulsory actions Good practices at individual Good practices at SHG/VO level Level Degradation of pasture Do not graze animals in Practice stall feeding – wholly Operate chaff cutter on pay- lands and forests. forest land without taking or partially (if possible, and-use basis for benefit of requisite permit from the cultivate fodder). all members. Fodder scarcity. forest department. Chop fodder and use feed Establish a system for bulk Water scarcity. trough to prevent wastage of purchase, storage and fodder. supply of fodder (fodder Poor hygiene leading to bank) for use in periods of spread of disease. Always store fodder in clean scarcity. and dry place. Undertake pastureland Use supplementary animal feed development (soil (crop residues, non- conservation, seeding, conventional feed, etc.) after protection, rotational technical consultation with the harvesting). Agriculture Extension Personnel. Facilitate access to Government schemes such Practice fodder treatment (with as subsidy for chaff-cutters, urea, molasses, mineral mixture, distribution of fodder seed, etc.) after technical consultation training on fodder with the Agriculture Extension management, etc. Personnel. In water-scarce areas, invest in rooftop rain water harvesting to meet water requirement of the livestock. Cattle must be housed outside the living area – preferably in a separate shed. The shed should be at least 15 meter away from drinking water source (hand pump) and should be kept clean. Collect dung and urine for use as manure (compost, liquid manure, etc.). Dispose animal carcasses by burning/burial at least 500 meter away from habitations/water bodies. In case of diseased animals seek technical advice on safe disposal from a qualified Veterinary Doctor. A-17 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 EG No. ___ NTFP Possible Issues Compulsory actions Good practices at individual Good practices at SHG/VO level Level Illegal harvesting of Take required permission Community norms on rotational Coordinate with Forest NTFP from Forest Department for harvesting must be respected. Department (and other collection, storage, technical support Unsustainable transport, sale, processing Method of NTFP collection institutions) for harvesting of NTFP of NTFP. should be non-destructive. It technical support and should be as per the training on sustainable prescriptions of the working NTFP harvesting plan of the forest division. If there is no working plan for Certain area or trees should the particular species: be earmarked for closure for NTFP collection on For leaf (Tendu, Sal, Neem, rotational basis. etc.): Tree or branches should not be felled / cut; New leaves should not be plucked; Reasonable amount of leaf should be left for plant’s survival and health. For fruit (Aonla, Sal, Bel, Neem, etc.): Only ripe fruit should be collected; Felling or lopping of trees should not be done; certain amount (about 25%) of fruit should be left for wild animal species and for regeneration. For flower (Mahua, Palas, etc.): Flower should be collected at the end of the flowering season; felling or lopping of trees should not be done; about 25 % of the flowers shall be left without collection. For bark (Terminalia arjuna, Acacia sp, Neem, etc.): The tree for bark collection should be above 60- 90 cm girth (check with Forest Department for girth specification). For gum (Guggle, Salai, Kullu, etc.): Only mature trees should be selected for tapping (check with Forest Department for girth specification); The tapping should not be done on the same tree every year; Depending on the species tapping regime of 3-4 years should be followed; The blaze should not be deep enough to cause injury to the stem of the A-18 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 tree. For root (Chlorophytum, Satawar, etc.): Only mature rhizome should be collected; 1/3 rd of the rhizome shall be left for regeneration; The seed clad species shall be uprooted only after falling of seeds; Species such as Rauwolfia serpentina that are rare/threatened should not be harvested (take guidance on rare and threatened species from the Forest Department). For all species: No fire should be ignited for ground clearing; Total removal of commodity should not be practiced; Rare and endangered species should not be collected. EG No. ___ FISHERIES Possible Issues Compulsory actions Good practices at individual Good practices at SHG/VO level Level Unsustainable fishing Do not fish in the season Coordinate with Fisheries practices leading to declared as Department (and other stock depletion and prohibited/closed by the technical support biodiversity loss Government. institutions) for technical Do not use nets with mesh support and training on size smaller than the sustainable fishing including permissible size prescribed proper stocking density, by the Government. feed/fertilizer scheduling, Do not fish using etc. destructive fishing practices (use of poison, explosives, etc.). Do not culture invasive species (e.g., African Catfish). Do not fish in coastal waters with mechanized and motorized trawlers within the prescribed distance/depth specifications of the Government. A-19 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex: 10 Environmental Guidelines (samples) for producer collectives AGRICULTURE Compulsory actions • Take license to sell, stock, exhibit and distribute pesticides from the competent authority. • If pesticides are to be sold or stocked at more than one place, take separate licenses for every such place. • Display the license in a prominent part of the premises that is open to public. • Do not sell pesticides in classes Ia, Ib, and II (WHO Classification of Pesticides by Hazard) (see Annex 11). • Do not sell pesticides without ISI Mark Certification. • Do not stock or sell any insecticide unless it is: properly packed, properly labelled (including name of active ingredient, expiry date, toxicity level, etc.) and the package includes information leaflet (including safety guidelines). • Do not change or remove any inscription or mark made by the manufacturer on the container, label or wrapper of any pesticide. • For sale of the insecticide Sulphur and its formulations, maintain a separate register showing names and addresses of all the persons to whom it has been sold or distributed and the quantities to be sold or distributed. • Do not sell or store pesticide in the same building where any articles consumable by human beings or animals are manufactured, stored or exposed for sale. Store in a separate room which is well built, dry, well-lit and ventilated and of sufficient size. • Immediately after the date of expiry segregate and stamp all such stocks as ’not for sale’ and keep in a separate place with clear sign displaying that it is date-expired pesticide. Dispose these stocks in an environment friendly manner taking advice from the Pollution Control Board. • Take license to sell fertilizers from the competent authority (Dy. Director, Agriculture). • Do not sell fertilizers without ISI Mark Certification. • For seed production obtain license from the competent authority. Good practices • Maintain proper records of procurement and sale of pesticides specifying the brand name and name of active ingredients. • Stock and promote sale of safety gear to be used while handling pesticides (for example, hand gloves, plastic masks, etc.). • Stock and sell inputs/equipment for non-chemical pest management (neem oil, pheromone traps, etc.). • Stock and sell bio fertilizers and organic manures such as neem seed cake, vermicompost, etc. • Provide soil testing and fertilizer recommendation services to member farmers. • Coordinate with Department of Agriculture and Krishi Vigyan Kendra to provide training to farmers on integrated pest and nutrient management suitable for the region. A-20 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 DAIRY Compulsory actions • Take required permission from Pollution Control Board to establish and operate a milk processing unit. • Coordinate with Forest Department for permission to member farmers for grazing of livestock in forest area 11. Good practices • Encourage fodder management practices among member farmers including – fodder cultivation, rotational grazing, fodder enrichment, etc. • Encourage composting by member farmers. • Ensure hygiene in the milk cooling / processing unit premises. • Dispose waste water from the milk cooling / processing unit premises into a soak pit located at least 15 metres away from any drinking water hand pump or tubewell. • Coordinate with Department of Agriculture/Animal Husbandry for training/technical support to member farmers on fodder management and composting. NTFP Compulsory actions • Take required permission from Forest Department for collection, storage, transport, sale, processing of forest produce including NTFP. • Coordinate with Forest Department for permission to members for collection of NTFP 12. Good practices • Ensure proper storage of NTFP (ventilation, humidity control, etc.) to prevent wastage of produce and to avoid health risk. • Encourage sustainable NTFP harvesting practices among members. • Coordinate with Forest Department or other technical support agencies (NGOs) for training/technical support to members on sustainable NTFP harvesting. 11 Relevant in case of locations where there is use of forest areas for grazing and where such permission is required. 12 Relevant in cases where such permission is required. A-21 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex: 11 Curriculum outline for training of Green CRPs along with initial list of resource institutions (Agriculture and Livestock would be the generic module to all Green CRPs. NTFP and Fisheries would be locale-specific modules). Livelihoods Thematic areas Skills Resource institutions Agriculture Community Managed Pest management Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty, Andhra Pradesh Sustainable Nutrient management Centre for Sustainable Agriculture, Andhra Pradesh Agriculture Soil moisture conservation System for Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society, Bihar Rice/Wheat PRADAN, Bihar Intensification Codes of Practice for Participatory Guarantee System PGS Organic India Council and its Facilitation Councils - Producer Collectives Institute for Integrated Rural Development, Maharashtra; Timbaktu Collective, Andhra Pradesh; Deccan Development Society, Andhra Pradesh; Chetana Vikas, Maharashtra; GREEN Foundation, Karnataka Responsible Soya Programme, India Soy Forum, Madhya Pradesh Producer Companies, MPDPIP Water Management PRADAN, Bihar, Jharkhand, West Bengal, Orissa Samaj Pragati Sahayog, Dewas WASSAN, Andhra Pradesh IDE, Delhi and Regional Offices in Uttar Pradesh, Assam, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Orissa. Groundwater Groundwater monitoring Andhra Pradesh Community Based Tank Management Project, Andhra Pradesh Management Crop water budgeting Livestock Fodder management Fodder treatment Anthra, Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra Fodder cultivation BAIF and Associate Organizations in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Karnataka, Rajasthan, Madhya Non-conventional feed Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Jharkhand Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Uttar Pradesh and Regional Stations in Rajasthan and Karnataka NTFP Sustainable NTFP extraction Indian Institute of Natural Resins and Gums, Jharkhand Chhattisgarh Minor Forest Produce Cooperative Federation, Chhattisgarh Kovel Foundation, Andhra Pradesh Manav Vikas, Orissa Madhya Pradesh Vigyan Sabha, Madhya Pradesh Astha, Rajasthan Fisheries Sustainable fishing NETFISH – Network for Fish Quality Management and Sustainable Fishing, MPEDA A-22 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex: 12 Guidance on Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA) as part of External Environmental Audit (This guidance will assist in the development of a ToR for the external environmental audit of which the CIA is a part. It will need to be developed further, in consultation with key stakeholders – including the Bank Environment team – working on livelihood-natural resource management issues, during the course of project implementation.) Introduction: The Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA) study will be undertaken as part of the annual external environmental audit. Cumulative impacts are the combined, incremental effects of human activity that may pose a threat to the environment. Cumulative impacts result when the effects of an action are added to or interact with other effects in a particular place and within a particular time. It is the combination of these effects, and any resulting environmental degradation, that should be the focus of cumulative impact assessment 13. Purpose: The purpose of the CIA is to capture the cumulative impact of the livelihood activities supported by the project on the local natural resource base. Scope: Cumulative impacts refer to the total effects (positive and negative) on the resource of an action and all other activities affecting that resource no matter what entity is taking the actions. Hence the scope will include both project as well as relevant non-project activities that affect the local natural resources. The livelihoods to be covered by the study are: Livestock: The full range of livestock activities including purchase of new livestock, fodder management/production/banks, pasture land management, provision of extension support and training, etc. will be covered. All livestock including small and large ruminants will be within the purview of the study. Natural resources – The local natural resource base implies biomass (fodder, trees), biodiversity (flora and fauna), land (soil erosion, compaction, fertility), water (availability, quality), etc. Level at which the impact will be assessed – The focus will be on village (habitation) level impacts. However, as livestock – especially small ruminants – use pasture/grazing lands that may overlap with neighbouring villages, the cumulative impact on such lands may be assessed at the level of the resource. Agriculture: The full range of agriculture activities including purchase of agriculture inputs, irrigation, provision of extension support and training, etc. will be covered. Environment-friendly interventions such as Community Managed Sustainable Agriculture, System for Rice Intensification, etc., undertaken under the NRLP will be within the purview of the study. Natural resources – The local natural resource base implies land (soil fertility, soil microorganisms), biodiversity (flora and fauna), surface and groundwater (availability, quality), human and livestock health, etc. Level at which the impact will be assessed – The focus will be on village (habitation) level impacts. NTFP: The full range of NTFP activities including collection/harvesting, storage, processing, training and technical support, etc., will be covered. Natural resources – The local natural resource base implies biodiversity (flora and fauna). Level at which the impact will be assessed – The focus will be on ecosystem (forest) level impacts. 13 Consideration Of Cumulative Impacts In EPA Review of NEPA Documents. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Federal Activities (2252A) EPA 315-R-99-002/May 1999. http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/nepa/cumulative.pdf A-23 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Fisheries: The full range of fishery activities including capture and culture, marine and freshwater, training and technical support, etc., will be covered. Natural resources – The local natural resource base implies biodiversity (flora and fauna) and water (availability, quality). Level at which the impact will be assessed – The focus will be on ecosystem level impacts. Sample: The sample for the CIA will cover 1 representative district in each of the agro-ecological zones in the project area every year. In each district 1 village will be selected. Thus, a total of 12 project villages will be studied each year. Within this, all the key livelihood areas – agriculture, livestock and NTFP/Fisheries will be covered by the study. Another 12 villages in the same zone will be taken as the control. Methodology: The methodology will involve: • Desk review: Review of project documents to understand the project supported livestock interventions will be undertaken. The Panchayat and other relevant records on livestock population, pasture land, crops cultivated, etc., will be reviewed to understand the current and pre-project situation with respect to livestock and the fodder resources in the village. • Stakeholder consultations: Consultations will be held with the self-help groups, other user groups, Panchayat representatives, the extension staff of the animal husbandry department, project team, and any significant other stakeholders. The purpose of the consultations will be to obtain qualitative and quantitiative information on the cumulative impact of the livestock interventions in the village on the local natural resource base. • Field studies: Field studies will be undertaken to get quantitative details on the livestock population, biomass production, fodder consumption, fodder availability, fodder conservation and management, manure production and utilization, soil fertility, water consumption by livestock, etc. Output: A report on CIA documenting the methodology, key findings and practical recommendations for promoting better environmental management of livelihoods will be prepared as part of the audit report. A-24 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex: 13 Inputs to the Terms of Reference 14 for the National Capacity Building Agency on Environmental Management Scope: The purpose of this assignment is two-fold: (a) design of an MDP to SRLM/SMMUs and model training modules for DMMU, Block teams and community institutions (b) detailed guidance in the form of operational manuals on the key elements of the Environmental Management Framework. Output: I. TRAINING MODULES: 1. MDP for SMMUs on environmental management: A management development programme on environmental management focussing on the following key themes will be developed: • Opportunities for better environmental management in existing livelihoods of the rural poor (including climate change adaptation and carbon finance opportunities) • Green Opportunities for new environment-friendly rural livelihoods • Key provisions of the EMF of the NRLP The methodology of the MDP (for 1 and 2) will primarily focus on: (a) learning from case studies drawn from existing Government and other livelihoods interventions (b) learning through exposure visits to existing programmes (c) learning through interaction sessions with key resource persons who can share experiences and ideas on the identified themes. Appropriate content (case studies, detailed schedules of the exposure visits, list of key resource persons for interaction sessions, etc.) have to be developed. 2. Orientation module on environmental management for DMMU and Block teams: An orientation module that will be integrated into all induction training programmes for all DMMU and Block teams will be developed. This will cover: • Opportunities for better environmental management in existing livelihoods • Green Opportunities for new environment-friendly rural livelihoods • Key provisions of the EMF of the NRLP – including the ‘regulatory requirements list’ 3. Training modules for Environment Management Coordinators (EMC) at State and District levels: Specialized training on environmental management is necessary for Environment Management Coordinators at State and District levels. This training needs to cover the following themes: State EMCs: • Environmental issues in the rural livelihood activities • Promotion of better environmental management in existing livelihoods (including climate change adaptation) • Promotion of Green Opportunities • Key provisions of the EMF of the NRLP • Preparatory work on environment for development of EAP for inclusion in the SPIP and 14 This annex is not the complete terms of reference (ToR). It contains the some of the key inputs to developing a full ToR. A-25 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 AAPs District EMCs: • Environmental issues in the rural livelihood activities • Promotion of better environmental management in existing livelihoods (including climate change adaptation) • Promotion of Green Opportunities (new environment-friendly livelihoods) • Key provisions of the EMF of the NRLP • Facilitating adherence to ‘regulatory requirements list’ by all SHG federations and producer collectives • Facilitating development and implementation of EMPs by SHG federations and CoPs by producer collectives The methodology of the training will primarily focus on: (a) learning from case studies drawn from existing Government and other livelihoods interventions (b) learning through exposure visits to existing programmes (c) learning through interaction sessions with key resource persons who can share experiences and ideas on the identified themes. Appropriate content (case studies, detailed schedules of the exposure visits, list of key resource persons for interaction sessions, etc.) have to be developed. 4. Training module for Block level Project Facilitating Teams (PFTs): The Block level teams have to be capacity-built to anchor the 2 pronged strategy of the EMF: universal application of the regulatory requirements to all SHG federations, and, pilots on development and implementation of Environmental Management Plans by SHG federations. This training needs to cover the following themes: • Environmental issues in the rural livelihood activities • Promotion of better environmental management in existing livelihoods (including climate change management) • Promotion of Green Opportunities • Key provisions of the EMF of the NRLP • Facilitating adherence to ‘regulatory requirements list’ by all SHG federations • Facilitating development and implementation of EMPs by SHG federations The methodology of the training will primarily focus on: (a) learning from case studies drawn from existing Government and other livelihoods interventions (b) learning through exposure visits to existing programmes within the state (c) learning through interaction sessions with key resource persons who can share experiences and ideas on the identified themes. Appropriate content (case studies, detailed schedules of the exposure visits [in each of the 12 project states], list of key resource persons for interaction sessions [for each of the 12 project states], etc.) have to be developed. 5. Training modules for Green CRPs: The Green CRP is a specialized cadre that can provide on- site support to SHG federations on environmental management. The Green CRPs have 3 key roles (a) facilitate planning to identify actions required to promote environmental management for livelihood security (b) identify need and scope for Green Opportunities (c) transfer knowledge and skills on better environmental management to SHG members. The training to this cadre will hence include an intensive module followed by a long-term strategy for refresher training. The training module for Green CRPs will include the following thematic modules: • Generic themes: Planning, Monitoring • Universal livelihoods: Agriculture, Livestock A-26 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 • Location-specific livelihoods: Non-timber Forest Produce, Fisheries • As the scope of the training module is ambitious, a clear phasing strategy needs to be specified for delivering it to the CRPs. For each theme, the training module will specify: • Knowledge, Attitude and Skills the Green CRPs are expected to gain • The methodology including classroom sessions, field exercises, field/exposure visits, interactions with best practitioners, documented good practices, etc. • Technical support institutions with expertise in the thematic area (for each of the 12 states) • Training institutions with expertise in training community institutions and para- professionals in the thematic area (for each of the 12 states) • Available training and IEC materials that can be replicated/adapted for use in the NRLP context 6. Orientation module on environmental management for CRPs: The NRLP will have a cadre of Community Resource Persons (CRPs) who provide on-going support to SHGs and their federations on micro-investment and livelihood planning. To mainstream environmental management in rural livelihoods, it is necessary to orient all the CRPs to the following: • Environmental issues in the livelihood activities • Key provisions of the EMF of the NRLP • Facilitating adherence to ‘regulatory requirements list’ by all SHG federations • This orientation module that will be integrated into all induction training programmes for the CRPs. 7. Training module for SHG primary federations: The primary federations, with support from the Green CRP, will be developing and implementing Environmental Management Plans. The thematic areas that need to be included in this module are: • Regulatory requirements on environment • Environment-friendly practices in the key livelihood activities (agriculture, livestock, NTFP) • New environment-friendly livelihood opportunities • Development and implementation of EMP • Periodic monitoring of implementation of EMP The methodology needs to include demonstrations, participatory discussions and exposure visits. 8. Training module for producer collectives: The producer collectives, with support from the Block PFTs and DMMU EMC, will be developing and implementing Codes of Practice on better environmental management. The thematic areas that need to be included in this module are: • Regulatory requirements on environment • Environment-friendly practices in the key livelihood activities (agriculture, livestock, NTFP) • New environment-friendly livelihood opportunities • Development and implementation of CoP • Periodic monitoring of implementation of CoP The methodology needs to include demonstrations, participatory discussions and exposure visits. A-27 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 II. OPERATIONAL MANUALS: The purpose of the operational manuals is to provide detailed guidance on the key elements of the EMF. The operational manuals that need to be developed along with the key elements that are to be included in each are as follows: • Operational manual on Green CRPs: Profile, identification/selection process, training, placement and coverage, roles and responsibilities, monitoring and reporting, outputs, performance evaluation, service fees, etc. • Operational manual on EMPs of primary federations: Description of process and methodology, content and format of the EMP, sources of support for implementation, monitoring and assessment of quality of EMP preparation and implementation, model EMPs from field testing, etc. • Operational manual on CoPs of producer collectives: Description of process and methodology, content and format of the CoP (including existing examples), sources of support for implementation, peer appraisal process, monitoring and assessment of quality of CoP preparation and implementation, model CoPs from field testing, etc. Process: The process of development of the training modules and the operational manuals will include: • Collection of relevant materials from the existing livelihoods projects and other interventions (for example, the CRP strategy/policy notes from SERP and BRLS) • Consultation with individuals and agencies associated with existing livelihood projects and other interventions • Field testing: Field testing of the training modules and operational manuals • Consultation on draft outputs: Circulation of draft outputs to key individuals in the existing livelihood projects and to the SRLMs/SMMUs • Finalization of the outputs Time frame: The assignment is for a period of 6 months. However, the final outputs are to be delivered as per the following timeframe (the draft outputs will be submitted one-month prior to the submission of the final outputs in each case): • Training modules: o MDP for SRLM/SMMU: Month 3 o Orientation module for DMMU, Block team: Month 6 o Training module for EMC at State and Districts: Month 3 o Training module for Block PFTs: Month 6 o Training module for Green CRPs: Month 6 o Orientation module for CRPs: Month 6 o Orientation module for federations, collectives Month 6 o Operational manuals: Month 6 Team composition: The consultant agency must have recognized field experience in working with SHGs and their federations on natural resource management. It should deploy a five member dedicated task team (including a task manager) for work on the development of the training modules and the operational manuals for the full duration of the assignment. Other members may be utilized on a part-time basis as per the need for additional expertise. The team must comprise of individuals with experience of at least 5 years (the task manager needs to have experience of at least 10 years) including field and programme management experience in capacity building/training/IEC and a master’s degree in the following fields: Agriculture, Horticulture, Forest Management, Natural Resource Management, Animal Husbandry, Fisheries or a relevant field. A-28 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex: 14 Climate Change Adaptations and Livelihoods Introduction Geography coupled with high levels of poverty and population density has rendered South Asia especially vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. The impacts of climate change in the form of higher temperatures, more variable precipitation, and more extreme weather events are already felt in South Asia. It has been projected that these will intensify. High population levels translate into increased resource demands on an already stressed natural resource base. By 2050, the South Asia’s population is likely to exceed 2.2 billion from the current level of 1.5 billion. With an estimated 600 million people subsisting on less than US$1.25 a day in South Asia, even small climate shocks can cause irreversible losses and tip a large number of people into destitution. High reliance on natural resources About 70 percent of South Asians live in rural areas and account for about 75 percent of the poor. Most of the rural poor depend on agriculture for their livelihoods. Agriculture employs about 60 percent of the labor force, but contributes only 22 percent of regional GDP. With their rural economies closely tied to climate sensitive sectors such as agriculture, the poor are likely to be disproportionately affected by climate change. in South Asia, finds that climate change will have a serious impact on India where about 1/3 of the land is already drought or flood prone. Looking at two drought prone regions in Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra, and one flood prone region in Orissa, the report finds that climate change can have the following serious impacts: • In Andhra Pradesh, dryland farmers may see their incomes plunge by 20%. • In Maharashtra, sugarcane yields may fall dramatically by 25-30%. • In Orissa, flooding will rise dramatically leading to a drop in rice yields by as much as 12% in some districts. Other climate hotspots in India – such as the fragile Himalayas, the biodiverse Western Ghats, the vast coastal areas, and the prolific agricultural lands of the Gangetic plains will need to be looked at in subsequent studies. A-29 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Climate change projections in select states of India Dry regions - Andhra Pradesh In the arid regions of Andhra Pradesh, the yields of all the major crops – rice, groundnut, and jowar – are expected to decline, although groundnut is expected to fare better than others. Under a modest to harsh climate change scenario - a substantial rise in temperatures (2.3 C – 3.4 C) and a modest but erratic increase in rainfall (4% to 8%) - small farmer incomes could decline by as much as 20%. Agriculture as it is practiced today will no longer be able to sustain large populations on small rain- fed farms. Dry regions - Maharashtra The drought-prone belt in Maharashtra offers a striking contrast. Climate projections indicate a significant though variable increase in rainfall (20% to 30%) along with higher temperatures (2.4 C to 3.8 C). As a result, yields of several dryland crops will rise, including millets such as jowar and bajra, boosting the incomes of small rain-fed farmers by about 8-10%. Yields of sugarcane, however, which is generously subsidized and widely grown on irrigated farms in arid regions, are expected to decline considerably - by nearly 30 %. Encouraging a shift from sugarcane to less water-intensive crops will shield farmers from the impacts of climate change and help conserve fast-depleting groundwater. Flood prone regions - Orissa Over the past fifty years, India’s flood affected areas have more than doubled, from about 5% to about 12%, despite generous and rising government spending on flood protection programs. In Orissa, climate projections suggest that there will be a further dramatic rise in flooding, especially in the already flood-prone coastal regions. Adaptation Actions Action is needed now to avoid higher costs in future. Given India’s immense geographic diversity, exact policies and interventions will need to be tailored to local conditions. Fortunately, many of India’s initiatives are moving in the right direction. The actions and policies proposed below will also promote development here and now (See Table A14-1): Drought-prone areas BETTER WATER MANAGEMENT Regulating the unrestrained competition for groundwater and aggressive pursuit of water conservation will be needed. PROMOTING CLIMATE-RESILIENT AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES AND CROPPING PATTERNS While much research is being conducted for rice, horticulture, and other crops, farmers will need greater support with knowledge and policy assistance to make the transition to sustainable dryland farming on a large scale. They could also diversify into agro-forestry which is more resilient, as well as livestock production. USING SMART SUBSIDIES TO ENCOURAGE A SHIFT TO MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY SUITED CROPS Current subsidies and incentives implicitly encourage farmers to cultivate water-intensive crops - such as sugarcane - in dry regions. Smart subsidies can encourage a shift to dryland crops that are more suited to local conditions and less environmentally degrading. DIVERSIFYING INCOMES Drought leads to farmer indebtedness. Coupling debt relief with micro-credit to start new businesses, or insurance to cover initial business risks, can encourage a change of occupation, limiting exposure to climate related risks. Imparting education and skills, building roads and A-30 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 developing markets are critical to building climate resilience in the long term. Flood prone areas MAKING AGRICULTURE FLOOD-RESILIENT AND ADAPTING LIVELIHOODS Continued research into more rainfall tolerant and shorter duration crops could increase flood resilience. Numerous pilots are helping to promote flood-based livelihoods in Orissa: aquaculture holds considerable potential if the supply chain and marketing are improved. PROMOTING LAND USE PLANNING AND ZONING Given rapid population growth and the increasing scarcity of land, more careful land use planning and flood zoning is a must. This needs to be undertaken together with water management, and requires better coordination between the various departments of government. STRENGTHENING SYSTEMS TO DETECT AND FORECAST FLOODS Effectiveness can be enhanced if flood management systems combine data collection, telemetry, flood forecasting, and flood warning into one flood management and information system for a river basin. Greater knowledge about changing water flows and rainfall patterns will help in the design and location of vital irrigation as well as flood protection infrastructure. Implementation Arrangements for Adaptation Given below is a menu of adaptation options that may be considered in NRLP through innovation pilots at the state level. In case a package of adaptation activities are taken up, these will be strategically planned by the state project director in coordination with the secretaries in the State Departments of Rural Development. The pilot activities will be built into the state perspective plans and will be facilitated through the NMMU in the form of training and capacity building. Additionally, the field based work in the state will be planned in collaboration with the district administration responsible for the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme and state watersheds programs to allow their engagement from the beginning and pave the way for scale up and convergence through the governmental set-up at a later stage. The activities will likely involve the recruitment of consultants and experienced civil society and private sector organizations that have the required competencies and are interested to partner with the State Governments to demonstrate a replicable package of innovative adaptation interventions. A-31 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A14-1: Menu of Adaptation Options in Flood and Drought Prone Areas Flood Related Adaptation Measure Crop Production Develop and distribute flood-resistant crop varieties through cooperation between research institutions/seed multiplication companies and farmers. Research and multiplication should be based on proven flood resistant (traditional) varieties identified by farmers. Introduce contour plowing and/or terracing to minimize crop and soil losses with receding flood water. Crop Introduce methods to dry and preserve, in seed banks situated in flood secure areas, stocks of husbandry flood resistant seeds as certified by farmers in cooperation with relevant institution. related Train selected farmers in seed multiplication to secure access to flood resistant seeds for farmers measures in the community. Develop flood avoidance strategies through early planting and harvesting of rice through the use of short-duration crop varieties and improved irrigation infrastructure to allow for early planting. Avoid long duration crops on areas prone to flooding and use such areas for short duration/high value crops In areas prone to salinization use salt resistant crops and crop varieties; such areas are often suitable for fodder crops. Livestock production Develop and introduce livestock breeds resistant to hot and humid conditions and associated disease patterns. Breeding programs should be developed in cooperation with farmers and based on locally well adapted individuals. Introduce an animal health service, including vaccination schemes, able to act quickly to counteract any emerging animal health issues. Livestock Secure year round availability of good quality fodder through introducing fodder production in the production crop rotation and through securing fodder storage facilities that can keep the fodder dry. Diversify production in the farming system to spread risks and reduce dependence on climatic conditions. Fish farming in tanks and introduction of flood resistant animals like ducks and geese primarily during the rainy season combined with poultry and/or rabbit during the dry season depending on cultural norms. Restore woodlands to protect watersheds and their ability to slow down runoff during heavy rains Ecosystem thereby reducing flash floods and, instead, generating a more gradual runoff of rainwater. The related focus should be on watersheds large and small/regional and local, often on common land. Use interventions indigenous tree species with multiple usage (fodder/fruit/fuel-wood) as far as possible to maximize to livelihood support such flood protection measures can provide. Infrastructure Undertake survey to ensure maximum drainage capacity of agricultural land Improve drainage system with open ditches, culverts and other structures. De-silt drainage canals and strengthen bunds. Construct water storage facilities to secure water access during dry season for production of high Infrastructure value dry-season vegetable crops thereby reducing reliance on rainy season crops for year-long related livelihood security. measures Stabilize river banks through earth works and flood resistant vegetation Stabilize coastline through planting of mangroves if applicable and/or other measures that reduces wave action on the beach such as artificial underwater structures. Improved communication infrastructure to broadcast weather and flood risk information, i.e. set up an early warning system. Support services Secure a buy-in from all stakeholder groups (farmers, village organizations, technical services and political leaders) in introducing, refining and providing continuous support to secure sustainability of new interventions. Service Secure access to financial resources on grant basis for testing and verifying suitability of related interventions, and on revolving fund basis for continuous operations. interventions Provide training to famers and village organizations on technical as well as institutional/operational aspects of new interventions. Introduce crop and livestock insurance schemes for production lines that have proven to be flood resistant. Drought Related Adaptation Measure Crop Production Crop Develop and spread drought-resistant crop varieties through cooperation between research A-32 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 institutions/seed multiplication companies and farmers. Research and multiplication should be based on proven drought resistant (traditional) varieties identified by farmers. Train selected farmers in seed multiplication to secure access to drought resistant seeds for farmers in the community. The window of opportunity for maximum sowing time is narrow in drylands so this is a more critical adaptation measure in drylands. Secure timely availability of suitable seed varieties through local seed banks. As a general principle introduce crop husbandry techniques that reduce water use and maximize water infiltration. production Introduce minimum/zero tillage to reduce water loss in the soil profile. related Add organic material to the soil through manure application and/or compost to increase water measures infiltration and water retention capacity of the soil. including Use intercropping to protect soil from erosion, reduce risk of crop failure, mix food and fodder water crop cultivation, maximize output per arable area management Diversify cropping pattern (reduce water demanding crops, use short duration and drought resistant crop varieties, use leguminous crops for nitrogen fixation, introduce fodder crops in cropping cycle) Introduce tree-crops (less vulnerable to droughts and beneficial for water infiltration and for fodder production) Use bunds for tree crops and fodder production Introduce high value medicinal plants as a cash crop. Maximize efficiency of irrigation water drawn from surface and/or groundwater by introducing sprinkler and/or drip irrigation In paddy cultivation areas, introduce the SRI technique. Livestock production Develop and introduce heat and drought resistant livestock breeds. Breeding programs should be developed in cooperation with farmers and based on locally well adapted individuals. Integrat crop and livestock management to spread risks and benefit from manure as organic matter and source of micro-nutrients (manure includes micro-nutrients that do not come with chemical fertilizers) Use livestock as drought power to minimize soil preparation time for planting. Timely planting secures a healthier crop. Introduce an animal health service, including vaccination schemes, able to act quickly to counteract any emerging animal health issues such as disease outbreaks in case of un-seasonal rains which is an emerging pattern in drylands. Secure year round availability of good quality fodder through introducing fodder production in the crop rotation and through securing fodder storage facilities that can keep the fodder in good notorious condition. Diversify production in the farming system to spread risks and reduce dependence on climatic conditions. Fish farming in tanks and introduction of drought resistant animals like poultry and/or rabbit, depending on cultural norms. Restore woodlands to protect watersheds and their ability to absorb water during the monsoon and Ecosystem prevent soil loss leading to siltation of tanks and waterways as well as early drying-up of related waterways. The focus should be on watersheds large and small/regional and local, often on interventions common land. Use indigenous tree species with multiple usage (fodder/fruit/fuel-wood) as far as possible to maximize to livelihood support such areas can provide. Support Services Secure a buy-in from all stakeholder groups (farmers, village organizations, technical services and political leaders) in introducing, refining and providing continuous support to secure sustainability of new interventions. Secure access to financial resources on grant basis for testing and verifying suitability of Service related interventions, and on revolving fund basis for continuous operations. interventions Provide training to famers and village organizations on technical as well as institutional/operational aspects of new interventions. Introduce crop and livestock insurance schemes for production lines that have proven to be drought resistant. REFERENCES India: Andhra Pradesh Drought Adaptation Initiative - Lessons from Community-based Adaptation Approaches to Strengthen Climate Resilience, Draft Final Report 2010, World Bank, Delhi Climate Change Impacts in Drought and Flood Affected Areas: Case Studies in India, Final Report, 2009, World Bank, Delhi A-33 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex 15 Training and Capacity Building Materials: Case Studies for Green Opportunities Thematic Area 1: Agriculture 1: COMMUNITY MANAGED SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE (CMSA) Introduction Agriculture supports sixty percent of the workforce in Andhra Pradesh and accounts for a quarter of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP). However, the high cost of conventional agriculture which is input intensive, the lack of access to institutional credit, insufficient irrigation and inadequate state- run extension services makes agriculture a challenging livelihood for small and marginal landholders (82 per cent of landholdings in the state) and especially for those in rain fed areas (56 per cent of net sown area). Farmers in the state spend as much as 35 per cent of their total cultivation expenditure on pesticides and fertilizers alone (the all India average is 30 per cent). The state currently records the highest consumption of pesticides in the country at 0.82 kg/hectare as against the national average of 0.3 kg/hectare. There is thus a strong case for investing in alternative agriculture technologies – to reduce input costs and to contribute to a safe and sustainable environment. The Bank supported Andhra Pradesh Rural Poverty Reduction Project (APRPRP) being implemented by the Society for Eradication of Poverty 9SERP) has successfully established Community Managed Sustainable Agriculture (CMSA) through community-based institutional mechanisms. Intervention The key objective of CMSA is to reduce the cost of cultivation by adopting practices that involve low or no expenditure and thereby increase net incomes. This initiative aims to address the major causes of agriculture distress - extensive use of chemical inputs, high costs of agriculture, displacement of local knowledge, unsustainable agricultural practices like monocropping, imperfect markets etc. CMSA is a paradigm shift in moving from input centric model to knowledge and skill based cropping model. CMSA technologies and practices are described as 'a mixture of scientifically proven methods, indigenous knowledge and traditional wisdom' and are deployed in a sequence on the farm. The guiding principles of CMSA are based on Non-pesticide Management, Non-chemical Soil Management and appropriate Crop Combinations. Table A15-1 summarizes CMSA’s approach to these issues. Table A15-1: Guiding Principles of CMSA Non-pesticide management (NPM): The key principle is that pests can be managed by understanding their behavior and lifecycle. The emphasis is on prevention rather than control. • Observation and documentation of pest and predator behavior, pest incidence on the farms • Replace chemical pesticides with physical methods of pest management complemented by botanical formulations and bio pesticides • Aim to manage pest populations, not to eliminate pests • Focus on balancing predator and pest populations Non-chemical Soil Management: The key principle is to view soil as a living organism and a bank for nutrients. Maintaining soil microbial activity is the key to ensuring soil fertility without adding A-34 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 high cost external inputs. • Enhance and maintain soil health through mulching, green manuring, adding of dung based inoculants and vermicompost • Reduce usage of synthetic (inorganic) fertilizers and later stop using it Appropriate Crop Combinations: • Increase diversity and intensity of crops • Identify appropriate cropping systems – inter-cropping, multi-cropping, crop rotations • Preserve local varieties and land race • Maintain local land races and crop genetic diversity Benefits of CMSA Economic benefits: • Lower cost of cultivation (the cost of cultivation per acre was found to be lower by 33 percent as compared to the costs under conventional agriculture) • Yield maintained or increased (yield in all cases has remained the same or increased slightly, ranging from 1900 kg to 2200 kg per acre for paddy) • Higher household income (farmers on an average save Rs.1500 on the cost of cultivation of paddy), relief from debt and mortgage (about 80% of families who mortgaged their land could get it released within two years from CMSA savings) • Higher cropping intensity due to growing of border crops, trap crops and intercrops along with the main crop (about 319,000 acres are currently under intercropping) • Lower risk perception and higher investment in agriculture (about 775 families in two districts have taken additional land on lease for cultivation) • Business innovation and new livelihood opportunities (2000 jobs have been created in villages through the establishment of shops for supply of bio-pesticides and organic nutrients, seed banks and agricultural implements hiring centers, about 5400 small and marginal farmers are generating additional income through vermi-composting units. In addition, substantial mandays of agriculture wage labour has been created due to increased cropping intensity) Environmental benefits: • Reduced use of agro-chemicals (no use of chemical pesticides and phasing out use of chemical fertilizers) and freedom from pesticide-related health problems • Soil and water conservation (10,000 composting pits and 1200 farm ponds have been dug and fertile tank silt has been applied in over 13,000 acres of farm land) • Conservation of agro-biodiversity as there is no use of broad-spectrum pesticides Implementation Strategy Initial Phase: Non-chemical Pest Management (NPM) was initiated by the SERP in 2004-05 in Mahabubnagar district with 350 farmers in 400 acres. Technical support for this intervention was provided by WASSAN, an NGO. Based on the positive results obtained in this intervention, a pilot on NPM was launched in 2005-06 in 25,000 acres in 450 villages of 10 districts. Technical support for the pilot was provided by a consortium of 55 NGOs led by Centre for Sustainable Agriculture (CSA). Scaling-up Phase: Since the pilot initiative, the program has scaled-up in two directions – (a) horizontal, to cover new villages and more farmers in the existing villages, and, (b) deepening, to cover more thematic areas, with the objective of achieving ‘low or zero external input’ agriculture. Table A15-2 below captures the scaling up of the program. A-35 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A15-2: Scaling-up CMSA Year Districts Villages Farmers Acres Orientation 2004-05 1 12 350 400 NPM 2005-06 10 450 15000 25000 NPM 2006-07 17 1050 80000 200000 NPM 2007-08 18 1715 189000 675000 CMSA 2008-09 18 3171 318420 1379000 CMSA 2010-11 21 4114 456604 1815358 CMSA 2011-12 22 7565 1008000 3000000 CMSA Key Features of the Strategy Stage-wise adoption of the technology: CMSA realized early on that asking farmers to give up use of chemicals right from the beginning would not meet with cooperation. Therefore, they followed an approach where they are gradually weaned away from the use of pesticides and fertilizers. Table A15-3 shows the stage-wise adoption of CMSA technologies and practices. For a farmer to be enrolled under CMSA, s/he has to adopt at least Stage 1 components which are deemed “non- negotiable”. Table A15-3: Stage-wise technology adoption in CMSA Pest Management Soil Fertility Management Crop Management Stage 1 CMSA (Non Pesticide Management) Step 1: Observations and Diagnostics Continue use of chemical Crop Rotation Observe and document pest and predator fertilizers in the initial stages behavior Begin use of manure & compost Understand pest life cycle Step 2: Physical methods of Pest Management Begin application of microbial Summer ploughing formulations Bonfires and pheromone traps Panchagavya – cow dung, cow Sticker plates urine, milk, ghee and yogurt Bird perches Jeevamrutham – jaggery, sugarcane juice, cow urine and Step 3: Biological Methods of Pest Management dung Trap crops along perimeter or in rows Step 4: Bio-pesticides Agniastram – chilli, garlic, neem and cow urine Brahmastram – neem leaves, custard apple, castor, papaya, bitter gourd, and cow urine Stage 2 CMSA (Sustainable Agriculture) Same as above Reduce and then replace chemical Inter-cropping fertilizers with soil fertility & multi- management through: cropping Application of tank silt Green manure crops Green leaf manure Mulching Vermicomposting Inoculation with Nitrogen fixing bacteria like Azospirillum and Azotobacter Biomass plantation on bunds Azolla application for rice A-36 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Investment in an institutional platform: The Government of Andhra Pradesh through the Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty (SERP) has organized about one crore women into 11,45,789 Self Help Groups (SHGs), covering all the villages in the state. The SHG network covers almost 68% rural households and covers more than 90% rural poor households in the state. The SHGs are federated into 37,896 village level federations (Grama Samakhya), covering 15-25 SHGs and further into 1099 mandal federations (Mandal Samakhyas) and 22 district federations (Zilla Samakhyas). It is this federated structure which has enabled the scaling up of a variety of interventions across the state, including the CMSA. These institutions take up planning, management, monitoring and scaling up responsibilities at much lower transaction cost and also lead to development of sustainable approaches. External technical support: A key factor that influenced the initial success and rapid scaling-up of the NPM intervention in SERP is the involvement of NGOs – WASSAN and CSA – as technical support partners. WASSAN provided the initial 'proof-of-concept' in 2004 by working with the Mandal Samkhya of Kosgi mandal in Mahbubnagar distrist to introduce NPM to 350 farmers. In the pilot and scaling up phase, CSA anchored a state level consortium of NGOs that were involved in the program. The consortium grew from 55 NGOs in 2005-06 to a peak of 130 NGOs during the course of the program. Since 2009, with increasing capacity of the Samakhyas and Community Resource Persons (CRPs) to manage the knowledge transfer in the program, withdrawal of NGOs has begun. Currently, there are 65 NGOs involved in the program. An important feature of the program is that the NGOs are directly accountable to the community institutions (who hire, monitor and pay for their services). Community ownership & supervision: The three-tier federation structure of SHGs takes up the management of the CMSA. The village level Grama Samakhya helps in the formation of farmer SHGs (Sasya Mitra Sangha) and manages the program at the village level. The Mandal Samakhya monitors implementation at the mandal level, coordinates with NGOs providing technical support, manages the Village and Cluster Activists, and coordinates with the Government's extension centres. The Zilla Samakhya oversees the program implementation at the district level. At each tier the Samakhyas have a sub-committee that regularly reviews the program through meetings and field visits. Community Cadre: A key feature of the CMSA initiative is its community cadre – Village Activists, Cluster Activists and Community Resource Persons. Each village has a Village Activiit who is a practicing CMSA farmer. The Village Activist organizes farmers' SHGs and provides extension support through Farmer Field Schools. There are a minimum of 80 farmers (200 acres) in each village (100 acres in new villages). A Cluster Activist is assigned for a group of five villages (400 farmers and 1000 acres) to organize training programs, field visits and provide necessary technical resources to the farmer SHGs. Community Resource Persons (CRPs) are responsible for taking CMSA to new villages. CRPs are identified from farmers who practice CMSA. Each CRP adopts 3 villages where they spend 15 days in a month providing expertise and initiating new farmers into the program. A-37 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Capacity building of farmers: The Village Activist with the help of the Grama Samakhya forms farmer SHGs with interested farmers. Farmers opt-into the program by paying a registration fee (initially Rs. 30 per annum, currently Rs. 50 per annum). There are 4 -5 farmer SHGs in a village, each with 20-25 members. The farmer SHG develops a CMSA plan on capacity building, production, maintaining internal controls and marketing. The farmers meet regularly in the Farmer Field School which serves as a platform for learning, experimenting and sharing of localized technology solutions. The focus of the field school is not on transferring a technology package. Rather, it is on building knowledge and skills on agro-ecology that better equips farmers to address pest and nutrient management problems, and aids innovation in the field. Farmers who are avid practitioners and are skilled in communication are selected as CRPs to take the program to new villages. Comprehensive service package: The CMSA approach bundles various services important to farmers – credit, inputs, aggregation and value addition – and provides these at the farmers’ doorstep. The approach involves facilitating development of micro-credit plans for sustainable agriculture and linking farmers to commercial banks. It also provides farmers access to high quality inputs through community seed banks and agricultural implement hiring centres. Procurement centers managed by the community institutions and marketing linkages enable farmers to get a better price for their produce. Convergence: CMSA utilizes several existing government schemes including Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS), Swarnajayanti Gram Swarojgar Yojana, and, National Horticulture Mission. Under the NREGS, a comprehensive programme involving digging of trenches along the field boundary, conservation furrows in the field against the slope, farm ponds, compost pits, tank silt application, ploughing with cultivator, etc., have been initiated. A multi-cropping model involving mixed crops (pulses, millets, vegetables), tree crops (fruits, teak), green manure plants and bio-fencing plants is promoted on these rainfed lands. On-going Research and Development: The SERP which spear-heads the CMSA initiative has 'practicing-leadership' as one of its strengths. The CMSA unit management invests in on-going research and development – piloting innovative models before scaling them up through the CMSA. An example of such an innovation is the 36 x 36 model of multi-cropping for nutritional security. This consists of a plot of 36’ x 36’ which has 7 different sets of crops being grown each at a different heights such that the canopy of one does not compete with the canopy of the other. The plants are chosen to ensure year round supply of vegetables and seasonal supply of fruits. The primary aim is to meet the nutritional requirement of a farming family; surplus is sold in the nearby markets, thus providing some cash income as well. Relevance of CMSA to NRLP Modern agriculture is characterized by use of chemicals for pest control and maintaining soil fertility. High external input costs and shrinking returns have made agriculture unattractive, especially for the small and marginal farmers. However, agriculture continues to be the largest source of livelihood for rural Indians. Therefore, it will form a major component of the Microcredit Plans that SHGs would propose under NRLP. Integrating CMSA into the NRLP at the design stage itself is essential to ensure not only economic benefits but also substantial environmental benefits. Needless to say, the long impact of these environmental benefits such as better soil fertility, better natural control of pests and diseases would make agriculture more sustainable, less risky and more profitable. A-38 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 2: TREE-BASED FARMING FOR DRYLAND AGRICULTURE Introduction Dryland agriculture dominates the Indian agricultural landscape. Nearly 60% of the coutnry’s land is under dryland agriculture producing only one crop/year, leaving precious land fallow for nearly 8-9 months a year. Even this single crop is a gamble with monsoon. The result is poor and limited livelihood options and seasonal and permanent migration. It is against this background that BAIF 15 (Bharatiya Agro Industries Foundation) has successfully integrated a tree component in dryland farming through people’s participation that has changed the socio-economic status of the families, including an increase in overall agriculture production, year- round local self-employment, sufficient fuel-wood for cooking, fodder for livestock, biomass for composting, and security of drinking water. Livestock interventions such as goat, sheep and improved cattle rearing have been integrated to maximize income. Called the “Wadi” model (Tree based farming system TBFS), it has become popular and has been replicated in several states in the country by BAIF as well as other organizations. Intervention TBFS consists of integrating growing trees into the cropping pattern. The choice of trees is such that it covers horticultural, forestry, fodder yielding and fuel-wood species. Thus, while the basic agricultural crop provides grain to the farmer, the trees provide fruits and timber for marketing and fodder and fuel-wood for own consumption. The dryland farmer is thus able to meet his needs of grain, fodder, fuel-wood as well as income. Further, given the different durations of gestation, yield and returns, the dry land farmer is assured income in short (grains, vegetable), medium (fuel-wood, fodder) and long term (timber species). Thus, TBFS also enhances income security of the dryland farmers. Broadly, it consists of: Digging trenches & rainwater harvesting pond • Digging trenches (10’ x 1.5’ x 1.5’) along the farm bunds and across contours in the farmers field. The soil from the trenches is piled on to the bunds, thus strengthening it. • The trenches are connected in such a way that excess rainwater from one trench flows into another trench that is at a lower contour. • A rainwater harvesting pond of 30’ x 30’ x 10’ (for an acre plot) is dug at the lowest level of the plot such that all the excess flow from the trenches and the run-off from the plot is channelized into the pond. Tree plantation Figure 15-1: Tree-based farming system • Timber species such as teak, acacia, silver oak, sisum, casurina etc. are planted at the rate of 2-3/trench • Fuel, fodder and other species such as subabul, Cassia siamea, drum stick are planted on the farm bunds such that an acre has about 200-300 plants. Sometimes even plants such as papaya are planted on the bunds • The main crop land is planted with fruit trees such as mango, sapota, guava, etc., depending on the choice of the farmer. 15 In Karnataka the organization is BAIF Institute of Rural Development-Karnataka (BIRD-K). The description of TBFS is largely drawn from their implementation experience. A-39 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 • In between these trees, the normal agricultural crop of the farmer is taken. • Along the border of the plot, live fence in the form of Euphorbia, Glyricidia, etc. are planted to provide protection to the plantations from grazing. In addition, these also provide a ready source of green leaf for manure and fodder purposes. Thus, an acre of farmland is planted with 400-600 trees along with providing enough space to grow agricultural crops. Implementation strategy People’s nursery The project in principle had decided in the beginning that all forestry seedlings required for the project are to be raised by the project participants themselves. Accordingly, arrangements were made to set up nurseries which were managed either by individuals or by groups. This process ensured that the project participants were empowered to select and raise the species of their own choice. The decentralized locations of these nurseries also helped to ensure timely plantations to avoid transportation of seedlings from a long distance. This has contributed sufficient income in lean seasons particularly for women. Formation of SHGs The basic strategy was to implement Hasiru Habba - Unique feature of TBFS TBFS at the community/village level but implementation with individual ownership. Therefore Hasiru Habba or Green Festival is a unique aspect of SHGs were formed to mobilize and TBFS implementation by BIRD-K. On an appointed organize the community. They played a day, declared as the Hasiru Habba day, the entire crucial role in the planning and community is decked up in green and goes in a large distribution of inputs, execution of procession throughout the village calling out to those community activities such as establishing that have not yet joined the procession. farm ponds, mobilization of savings and credit, important decision-making At every farmer’s plot, where, trenches and rainwater regarding control of grazing, etc. harvesting ponds have already been dug, saplings of species desired by the farmer’s family is kept ready for These groups also served as sharing planting. The entire group of people in the procession platforms. The groups also promoted go to each such plot and in an admirable show of social bondage among the participants and community action, plant all the saplings in the plot. encouraged voluntary participation such as One by one all the plots in the community marked for common harvesting and other activities, action that day is completed. which are highly labour-oriented. Preparation of MLPs & monitoring implementation A micro-level plan is prepared for each farmer’s plot with inputs from the farmer, other members of the SHG and BIRD-K experts. Based on an aggregation of the MLPs, the decentralised nurseries plan their work. Trenches and the rainwater harvesting ponds are dug on individual plots with community action. 1- 2 mandays of labour is expected to be contributed to each plot by every member of the group. Absence has to be compensated by paying the stipulated manday cost. Monitoring of quality and quantity of work is done by the individual farmer and a monitoring committee of the community. Benefits of TBFS Economic benefits A-40 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table 15-4: Summary of timing of benefits from TBFS Location Type of planting Returns Remarks Fence Cassia siamea, • Green leaf for manuring Returns are in the short term Glyricidia, Euphorbia, • Keeps out grazing animals • Since many of these species etc., planted at 1-2’ since they grow fast and coppice well, they can provide spacing thickly cover for 10-15 years. Trenches Forest species such as • Provide poles and timber Returns are both in short term and teak, acacia, silver • Yearly/seasonal Pruning long term oak, mahogany, sisum, will yield fuel-wood • Timber yield which is over 20-25 etc., at 3 saplings per years acts as a life insurance cover trench of 10” length. to the farmer • Pole yield is in the medium term • Fuel-wood is the short term return Farm Green manure, fodder, • Provides year-round fodder Returns are in the short term and bunds drumstick and some • Biomass for composting medium term fruit trees such as and green manuring papaya • Fruits Main crop Fruit trees such as • Fruits for sale Returns are in the medium term land mango, sapota, guava, • Pruning yields fuel-wood etc. @100 trees/Ha. Farm Fish rearing, planting Fish and vegetables for own use Returns are in the short term pond some vegetables on the bund • The introduction of TBF systems has resulted in increased production of fodder. This has further led to integration of livestock such as goats, sheep, upgraded cows, etc. A well-reared sheep fetches a net income of Rs.1000 per year. Each goat generates an annual income of Rs.2000. • Sufficient availability of biomass has facilitated promotion of in situ organic composting practices like vermin-composting and NADEPP-composting, etc. This has further resulted in reduction of input cost which is one of the major factors that contribute to the vicious circle of poverty of Indian farmers. • The families could realize actual benefits from forestry trees in terms of increased availability of fuel-wood and fodder. The forestry trees planted in the trenches and bunds are regularly pruned to avoid shade. Such pruned twigs meet the requirement of the family in terms of fodder and fuel-wood. • The fertility of the land has improved as a result of application of compost and vermin- compost. This has also been partly due to the year-round presence of the family on their land. • Trees have helped in the production of fuel-wood thereby reducing the time that women spent on collecting fuel-wood • From the fifth year onwards, the participant families have started earning an average amount of Rs.5000 to Rs.6000 every two years from the sale of poles or fuelwood. • From the fifth year onwards, from horticulture plants such as mango, cashew and tamarind, participants are earning an average amount of Rs.5000 to RS.10,000 per ha. • Many participants have shifted their residences to their plots since year-round employment is now available. This in turn has resulted in further improvement in agricultural practices. • Finally, mixed cropping has helped diversify the cropping portfolio of farmers thereby reducing risk of crop/market failure for any single crop. Further, with income from various components coming in different time periods, risk has been mitigated and security of income enhanced. A-41 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Environmental benefits • Trenches capture run-off water and thereby recharges groundwater. A single filling of a trench holds upto 1000 litres of water. Trenches also trap the soil that comes along with the run-off water and thereby prevent loss of fertile soil. • The rainwater harvesting pond can harvest 2,50,000 litre of water in a single filling. Thus, trenches and these ponds together help in improving the soil moisture regime in the plot. • Increased soil cover in the form of trees helps in checking soil erosion and in reducing soil moisture loss, especially during summers. • Availability of leafy green manure and other biomass helps in preparation of compost, which in turn improves the soil organic content • Availability of fodder leaves helps in reducing grazing pressure on common lands and helps regenerate them better. • Trees act as windbreaks and help in protecting crops and soil during storms. Relevance of TBFS to NRLP A large proportion of the area sought to be served by NRLP falls under dry-land farming, where agriculture is still the primary occupation. However, returns from farming are meager and uncertain. Precious land resources remain vacant for most part of the year as most of the farmers can take only one crop of about 3-4 months duration. This situation results in forced migration for small and marginal farmers during off-season leading to related social problems such as isolation of families and deprivation. Therefore, a viable strategy is required to help increase the productivity, income and range of livelihoods in these areas without endangering the already fragile eco-systems. Tree-based Farming System that incorporates tree farming into agriculture through the careful selection of tree species to yield food, fooder, manure, fuel-wood and timber is an appropriate solution. The yield of fodder and manure helps to diversify the source of income by supporting dairying and composting. Further, with income from different sources being spread over different time horizons with different risk profiles helps the farmer in better negotiating crop/market loss. Integrating with NRLP TBFS can be integrated with the NRLP through existing mechanism for promoting and implementing CMSA. Expertise in the areas of forestry, horticulture and watershed activities would need to be added to the district/block level team to support the implementation of TBFS. SHGs can be the implementing mechanism at the village level supported by the Village Activist. For more information contact: Dr. G.N.S. Reddy Vice President, BAIF Institute for Rural Development – Karnataka P.B. No. 3, “KAMADHENU”,Sharadanagara, TIPTUR – 572 202 Tumkur District, Karanataka, India. Phone: 91-8134-251337, 250658, 250659 Fax: 91-8134-251337 Email: birdktpr@gmail.com , Web: www.birdk.org.in A-42 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 3: SYSTEM FOR RICE & WHEAT INTENSIFICATION (SRI /SWI) Introduction Bihar has one of lowest crop yields in the country. The yield of rice in the state is 1486 kg/Ha compared to the all India average of 2131 kg/Ha while the yield of wheat is 1908 kg/Ha compared to the all India average of 2708 kg/Ha 16. Small and marginal farmers in the state can barely meet subsistence needs from agriculture. There is thus a strong case for investing in enhacement of agricultural productivity – to enhance food security and to create a marketable surplus. The Bank supported Bihar Rural Livelihoods Project (BRLP) has successfully introduced the System for Rice Intensification (SRI) and System for Wheat Intensification (SWI) – which are interventions for bringing about sustainable productivity-enhancement – to SHG members through community-based institutional mechanisms. Intervention System for Rice Intensification (SRI) SRI is an improved method of rice cultivation. The key features of SRI are: Table 15-5: SRI- Key features Principle Practice Utilize early vigour of young Quick and careful transplanting of young (8-12 days old at 2-leaf stage) seedlings to facilitate profuse seedlings at shallow depth tillering Reduce competition for light and Wider and regular spacing between plants (25 cm x 25 cm) nutrients Single seedling per hill (5-7 kg per ha) Prevent anoxic soil conditions to Unflooded irrigation – alternate wetting and drying with shallow (2.5 cm) avoid inhibition of the root system irrigation Intercultivation using weeder which removes weeds, aerate soils, incorporates weeds into soil (weeding at 10-12 day intervals) Increase soil microbial activity and Addition of organic matter (green manure crops, Azolla, crop residues, organic matter compost, farm yard manure, bio-fertilizers) The advantages of this method of rice cultivation include: • Low seed requirement • Low water requirement • Improved plant nutrition • Reduced incidence of pests and diseases • Reduced use of agro-chemicals • Higher yields of both grain and fodder System for Wheat Intensification (SWI) SWI is an improved method of wheat cultivation that has its roots in the SRI technology. The key practices recommended in SWI are 17: 16 2006-07, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 17 ATMA, Nalanda and PRADAN. Assessment, Refinement and Validation of Technology through System for Wheat Intensification in Nalanda. http://krishi.bih.nic.in A-43 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 • Grading and treatment of selected seeds with vermi-compost, cow urine, jaggery and a fungicide 18. • Dibbling of seeds (2 seeds per hill) as opposed to broadcasting seeds in the traditional method. • Spacing of seeds (20 cm x 20 cm) as opposed to irregular spacing in the traditional method. • Weeding twice during the crop season as opposed to no weeding in the traditional method. • Irrigation 4-5 times during the crop season as opposed to 2-4 times in the traditional method. The advantages of this method of wheat cultivation include: • Low seed requirement • Improved plant nutrition • Reduced incidence of pests and diseases • Reduced use of agro-chemicals • Higher yields of both grain and fodder Implementation strategy System for Rice Intensification (SRI) Initial Phase: SRI was initiated by the BRLP in 2007 as an action research initiative in 14 villages of the Bodh Gaya block of Gaya district and Harnaut block of Nalanda district. Technical assistance services for this initiative were hired from PRADAN, an NGO. The action research initiative involved 128 farmers (comprising 70% SHG farmers and 30% non-SHG farmers) taking up SRI in 75.51 acres 19. The key findings of this action research initiative were that the adoption of SRI led to: • Increase in yield: Yields of all farmers were higher in the SRI fields – yields were 10-15 ton/Ha for 34% of farmers and 7-10 ton/Ha for 37% of farmers as compared to 2-3.3 ton/Ha by the traditional method. • Decrease in labour by 17 days per acre. Scaling-up Phase: The success of the action research initiative led to the scaling-up of the SRI initiative in 2008 to 5795 farmers (both SHG and non-SHG farmers 20) in 173 villages of Gaya and Nalanda districts. The average acreage of SRI per household was around 0.28 acres in Gaya and 0.17 acres in Nalanda. The scaling-up was achieved through: development of an operational manual on SRI for scaling up, and, a farmer-to-farmer extension model involving Village Resource Persons (VRPs). The average yield through SRI in this scaling-up phase was 7-10 ton/Ha (the highest yield was 19.25 ton/Ha). In 2009, the project promoted SRI among 8637 farmers of 350 villages in 1318.6 acres in 12 blocks of six districts (Gaya, Nalanda, Purnia, Khagaria, Madhubani, Muzaffarpur). The average yield of SRI in Nalanda was 8 ton/Ha, while the highest yield was 13 ton/Ha. The average yield in Gaya was 7 ton/Ha, while the highest yield was 12.1 ton/Ha. In 2010, the demand for SRI came from 38219 SHG households of 388 VOs in 18 blocks of 6 project districts. The coverage of area under SRI is 3540 hectares. 18 Bavistin- containing Carbendazim ('unlikely to present acute hazard in normal use' as per the WHO classification). 19 731 farmers were exposed to SRI through IEC materials, trainings and meetings 179 farmers showed willingness to adopt the method and were provided inputs 157 farmers raised the nursery in the prescribed method 132 transplanted in the prescribed method 128 farmers continued with the full package of practices that constitute SRI. 20 77% of the participating farmers have a member of the family (mainly women) in the SHGs. The non-SHG farmers are also from BRLP's target communities – but have not yet been brought under SHGs. A-44 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 System of Wheat Intensification (SWI) The success of the SRI initiative led to the expansion of the strategy to influence productivity in wheat – the other major crop in Bihar. An action research initiative on System of Wheat Intensification (SWI) was launched by the BRLP as early as in 2008. This was undertaken with 405 farmers in Nalanda, Gaya and Purnea. In Rabi 2009-10, SWI was scaled up to 1200 hectares with 25235 SHG members of 184 VOs in 24 blocks of eight districts. 542 VRPs provided extension support to farmers. The average yield through SWI was 4.5 tons/Ha as compared to the yield from traditional cultivation which is 2.19 tons/Ha. The highest yield recorded was 10.012 tons/Ha. Key Features of the Strategy External technical support: A key factor that influenced the success of the SRI and SWI interventions in BRLP is the involvement of NGOs – PRADAN and ASA – as technical support partners. PRADAN was instrumental in execution of the action research initiative in 2007 that led to the framing of the strategy for scaling up. A mid-term impact assessment study comissioned by the BRLP in 2009 noted that a village would require about 3-4 years of intervention by the technical support organization to introduce the methodology, cover the entire village, set up systems and withdraw. In tune with this, in the current year, the external technical support agencies have been withdrawn from areas implementing SRI since 2008. The services of these agencies are planned to be utilized in project areas where the interventions are to be newly introduced. The monitoring of the field implementation in the older areas has been mainstreamed and is done by the CCs and BPMs. Technical support in these areas is taken from hired individual consultants as and when needed by BRLP. Village Resource Persons (VRPs) for on-farm extension: This is a farmer-to-farmer extension model that is low-cost and suited to small and marginal land holders. Rural youth belonging to families that practice SRI are identified to function as VRPs. While the VRP identification in the initial phases was done by PRADAN, this resposnibility was taken up by the VO in the later phases. The VRPs are given intensive training that includes on-field demonstration. The training module for VRPs was developed and delivered by PRADAN. On-the-job technical guidance to the VRPs is provided by Subject Matter Specialists (SMSs) appointed by the support agencies (PRADAN, ASA, etc.) or engaged directly by the BRLP. Each VRP provides services to 30 to 120 farmers (depending on the ability of the VRP to reach-out and influence farmers). VRPs undertake farm-visits to note the progress of the crop and advise the farmer on the field operations. They also participate in the meetings of the SHGs and VO where they share field observations and give recommendations. Each VRP visits each farmer's field once every week. The mid-term impact assessment study notes that 92% of the sampled 300 families were satisfied with the VRPs work and appreciate the hand holding support, timeliness of support, regular monitoring and input supply services provided by/through the VRP. The VOs monitor the progress of SRI/SWI and the work of VRPs. The payment structure of the VRP is based on the deliverables (number of farmers practicing SRI/SWI) and is positively biased towards farmers belonging to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes as well as towards farmers cultivating on leased land or share cropping. The service fee of the VRP for this group of farmers is Rs. 35/Month/HH while for providing services to Backward Caste farmers it is Rs. 25/Month/HH and for other farmers it is Rs. 20/Month/HH. The estimation of yield from the standing crop (based on actual measurements in 5 sample patches per field) is one of tasks of the VRP. Yield estimation is a transparent exercise conducted by scientists of Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK), district level Agriculture Technology Management Agency (ATMA), Bihar Agriculture Management Extension & Technology Institute (BAMETI), the Department of Agriculture or other VRPs. In 2008, 81 rural youth (including around 20 SHG members) were trained as VRPs. In 2009, 330 youth were trained as VRPs. In 2010, around 750 VRPs have been identified by the VOs and A-45 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 trained by technical consultants hired by the BRLP. Micro-Planning: Micro-planning has been utilized as a mechanism to generate demand for SRI and to standardize the package of inputs used by the farmers. A package of inputs are provided to all SHG members desirous of adopting SRI/SWI. These inputs include quality seed, vermi-compost, fertilizers, etc., which are collectively procured by the VO with facilitation by the VRP. This input package is costed at Rs. 970 per 10 katthas 21 of land and the SHG members repay this amount to the VO after the crop season (members not requiring a loan can pay the amount upfront to the VO – individual procurement is not permitted). This micro-planning cycle is repeated every crop season to ensure quality inputs to farmers. Role of VO: The SRI/SWI strategy in the BRLP optimally utilizes the capacity of the VO – it involves the VO in collective input procurement, VRP selection and management as well as in managing the agricultural tool-bank. Considering that the VOs in the BRLP are not more than 3 years old, these interventions provide opportunity for the VO to engage in collective action and contribute to its capacity-building. There are several areas for the VO to intervene in future. These include expanding the outreach of the interventions (enrolling more farmers), maintenance of the assets (weeders, pumps, etc.), managing the input support (identifying need for further inputs, sourcing inputs such as vermi-compost locally, etc.), management of the VRP extension system (sustaining payment of service fees to VRPs, developing and standardizing a yield-based payment system, enrolling adequate numbers of VRPs, enriching skills of VRPs through continued training), expanding the scope of the interventions (integrated pest management, organic farming, etc.), etc. Backward linkages: Each VO involved in the SRI/SWI initiative is provided with a set of tools/equipment that SHG members can borrow. These include a marker, a weeder, a pumpset and a sprayer. Users are charged fees for borrowing the the pumpset and sprayer. Vermi-compost is a key input in the SRI intervention under the BRLP. In 2009 a special effort was launched in order to promote its preparation by the SHGs (the current requirement is met by procurement from the market). This included an exposure visit for the project staff to the low cost vermi-composting at the Singrauli Project of PRADAN in Madhya Pradesh. The low cost vermi- compost pits are made using locally available materials (bamboo, soil, plastic sheet, water, paddy straw, strings, binding wires, nails and cattle dung, etc.) and do not involve brick and concrete structures. Vermi-composting was carried out in 29 villages with 363 farmers in Gaya and Nalanda districts in 2009. On-going Research and Development: The BRLP has viewed the SRI and SWI interventions as action research rather than as a prescriptive package to be implemented. This has enabled diversification from SRI to SWI and now to other crops (tomato, rapeseed). It has also enabled innovation. For example, based on feedback from the project team the design of the weeder was modified (the handle was changed from chest-height to waist-height) to make it more convenient for use by women farmers. Relevance of SRI/SWI to NRLP Paddy and wheat are the two crops grown in the largest area in India. Growth in yield of paddy and wheat has been stagnating over the last decade. SRI/SWI are simple technologies that can be adopted by all class of farmers to increase yield without the need for high external inputs. 21 1 acre = 22 katthas A-46 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 4: MARKETING KB DRIP – A LOW COST DRIP SOLUTION Introduction Lack of irrigation is the single most important limiting factor for increasing productivity, cropping intensity and thus, returns to the farmer. In the last three decades in the absence of large public investments in creating irrigation infrastructure in the country, ground-water based irrigation driven by private initiative has emerged as the largest contributor to increase in irrigated area. Aided by little or no electricity costs and low cost of owning an electric pump set, shallow tube wells have emerged as the major source of irrigation (>40% of net irrigated area 22) in the country. However, indiscriminate use of groundwater has resulted in fast depletion of the resource, frequent failure of the tube well, shortened period of yield and the need to dig deeper and deeper tube wells. Drip irrigation is well known technology to help conserve such precious water with the added benefit of improving yield and quality of produce due to maintenance of suitable soil moisture. However, conventional drip technology despite subsidies (often available to limited no. of farmers) has remained beyond the reach of small and marginal farmers. Further, the technology has been often promoted only for wide-spaced crops such as coconut, mango, grapes, etc., mainly due to the high cost of the equipment, mainly the lateral tubes and the emitters. Intervention International Development Enterprises (India) (IDE-India) a Section 25 company first challenged this notion by introducing micro-tube based drip irrigation technology that could be used in close- spaced crops such as mulberry, cotton, tomato, chillies, etc. However, even this technology was found costly for most small and marginal farmers. In a quantum leap of innovation, IDE-India introduced “pepsi tapes 23” with punched holes into which microtubes were inserted. At one stroke it reduced the cost of the equipment and did away with the need for an engineer to design and install the drip system in the farmer’s field. Needless to say, this was more affordable but still needed considerable labour in installation and in removing after the crop season and re-laying it for the next crop. The next generation of “pepsi tapes” now called KB 24 Drip tapes were made of better material; a mixture of LLDPE & LDPE 25 and came with pre-punched drip holes. They were also available in different thicknesses of 125, 250 & 500 microns. As compared to conventional drip systems these systems were cheaper by 70- 80% depending on the thickness of the KB Drip tape. A comparison of costs for conventional drip with KB Drip for close-spaced vegetable crops is given in Table A15-6. 22 Groundwater Irrigation in India: Gains, Costs and Risks. Vasant P. Gandhi, N.V. Namboodiri, IIM(A), March 2009 23 Ice candy is sold in transparent polythene tubes. Locally, they are called “pepsi”, hence the name “pepsi tapes” for low cost IDE drip tapes. 24 Krishak Bandhu is the brand name of IDE-India products 25 Linear Low Density Polyethylene and Low Density Polyethylene A-47 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A15-6: KB Drip vs. Conventional drip Crop: Vegetables, Tapioca, 125mic with 250mic with Regular system Turmeric, Cotton, Spacing: Prepunch KB Prepunch KB with In line 3.5 feet Drip Drip lateral Sl no Particulars Amount Amount Amount Rs./acre Rs./acre Rs./acre 1 Tube 16 mm 4604 9207 33500 2 Dripper 0 0 0 3 GTO16mm 540 540 540 4 joiner & End cap 308 308 550 5 Lateral 16 578 578 975 6 Ball valve 63mm 135 135 300 7 S/m pipe 63mm 2024 2024 2730 8 installation 500 500 750 9 TOTAL 8688 13292 39345 Soon other products followed such as Ventury Injectors for fertigation and KB Layflat pipes that replaced costly PVC pipes that are used as mains and sub-mains in conventional drip systems. Implementation strategy Among developmental NGO’s, IDE-India is unique in its strategy of using market forces to promote and distribute its low cost drip technology without the use of subsidies. Indeed, IDE-India uses developmental money to create new products and open up new markets through extensive and intensive promotion, recruit and train dealers and field-mechanics. Currently, IDE-India has drip operations in 7 states of the country. The entire channel is managed by a team headed by an Area Manager supported by Business Supervisors and Business Associates (BA). 1 or more blocks are covered by a BA, who is responsible for conducting and organizing promotion of KB products and provide marketing support to the KB Dealers in the area. In all there are 35 BAs in Tamil Nadu covering more than 8 districts. A BA gets a fixed base salary and commission at 7% of the total sales turnover achieved A-48 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Figure A15-2: Channel partner of IDE-India by his dealers. On an average a BA 26 who Manufacturer Manufacturer had worked for 2 or more years with IDE- India earned about Rs.5,650/month as Distributor commission alone. Global Easy There are 2 KB Dealer Water Product KB Dealer P.Ltd., manufacturers in Tamil Nadu who Customer Customer Customer Customer supply to Global Easy Water Product P.Ltd., (GEWP) a wholly owned subsidiary of KB Dealer IDE-India which is the sole distributor for Tamil Nadu. GEWP Customer Customer provides technical knowhow and information about suppliers of KB Drip tape manufacturing units. It also provides the manufacturer specifications of raw materials and approved suppliers. GEWP pays a fixed processing cost of Rs.20-23/kg of KB Drip tape manufactured which usually leaves a margin of 5% to the manufacturer. A Quality Supervisor 27 is placed at the manufacturing unit to ensure quality of input and output. BA to KB Dealer - Palanisamy Dealers buy from GEWP on a cash and carry basis. Often, of Erode given the proximity of GEWP to most dealers, delivery is also S.Palanisamy is the dynamic just-in-time, thus reducing the inventory costs of dealers. In dealer of KB products in Erode fact, for most dealers initial investment is just the value of the district of Tamil Nadu. He had first order 28 of which 50% is received as advance from the end- worked with IDE-India as a customer. In Tamil Nadu there are 135 dealers spread over 8 Business Associates for 3 years districts. A dealer is allowed a margin of 20% on total sales before quitting his job to take-up turnover. On an average a dealer with 2 years experience in the the dealership. He says that as a BA he was making a KB Drip business had a turnover of Rs.8 lacs with a profit commission of only 7% on the margin of Rs.1.6 lacs. The highest sales turnover was of Rs.20 turnover (Rs.20-25 lacs) in his lacs with a profit margin of Rs.4 lacs. territory, while as a dealer he A typical dealer employs 2-5 Fitters and 8-10 Helpers who would get 20% on his turnover install the KB Drip systems. Each team of a Fitter and 2 (Rs.30 lacs this year). Therefore, Helpers are paid Rs.1500/acre. Average earning/Fitter is about it is better to be a dealer than Rs.60,000-80,000/year. being a BA! Benefits of KB Drip Economic benefits at farm level Economic benefits of KB Drip at the farm level are well known. A study 29 carried out by the present author in 2007 captured the impact as depicted in Figure A15-3. 26 Data is for Tamil Nadu 27 In the unit visited by us, all the workers were women and the Quality Supervisor from GEWP was also a woman! 28 S.Palanisamy invested 50% of the last salary he received as a BA to start the KB dealership 29 This study covered 3 states and explored how the increased income was being used by KB Drip users. A-49 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Figure A15-3: Income impact of KB Drip Investment to increase water security Adoption of KB-Drip Increase in cropped area Increase in yield Increase in inputs Increase in income Primary cycle Increase in investment Increase in risk Secondary appetite cycle Increase in household expenditure & asset Shift to high-value building crops Increased land holding Increase in income A case study (Table A15-7) carried out in the same study illustrates the economic, social and environmental benefits of KB Drip on marginal farmers in this case a women farmer from Maharashtra. Table A15-7: Indomitable spirit – Akka Tai Jagannath Karande Name & address Akka Tai Jagannath Karande, Karandewadi village, Sangola taluk, Solarpur district Family details • 2 adults & 3 children. Husband is not educated, she has studied upto 1st standard Assets • Kutcha house with no electricity and cooking in a makeshift thatch-roof room on traditional fire-wood cookstove Landholding 0.5 acres Water sources Does not own a well, but shares an ancestral well with 20 other families. The well itself has long run dry, but each family buys water at Rs.50/hr from a 5hP pump, fills the well and then repumps the water to their fields Cropping pattern Now only pomegranate Reasons for adopting • Akka Bai and her husband Jagannath Karande have been married for 16 years now. KB Drip • They have always worked as labourers in other fields, sugarcane factory and even a textile mill • About 9 years back, Jagannath and his 2 brothers bought 2 acres of land at Rs.16,000/acre. Akka Bai received a share of 0.5 acres. • She spent a further Rs.15,000 in clearing the land and ploughing, thus the cost of her 0.5 acres is about Rs.23,000. A-50 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 • Initially, she grew jowar, bajra, while her husband continued to work in the factory • However, she observed that others around her were growing pomegranate and prospering • She applied for and received a subsidy under the Horticulture Development scheme that is available to all farmers to raise fruit orchards • With the subsidy, she blasted pits into the rocky land and planted 171 pomegranate plants (Ganesh variety that was popular then. Now she has replaced some of them with Bhagva variety that is more popular and fetches a higher price in the market) • She purchased water and started cultivating the orchard, but the yield was very low since the land is undulating and water was not reaching all the plants uniformly • She had heard of drip irrigation, but could not afford it. When she heard that KB Drip would cost her only about Rs.2000 she raised the money and purchased it. She has been using it since last 5 years. Benefits from KB Drip • In the very first year of using KB Drip her income from Pomegranate went up to Rs.30,000 from a meager Rs.10,000. This was entirely on account of better distribution of water among the plants (Increased yield, increase in water use efficiency and increased income effects). • In the second year it went up to Rs.40,000 and in the 3 year to Rs.50,000. • Earlier cropping yielded only some foodgrains and certainly no cash. Cash income was from her husband working in a factory and she herself working in a grape drying unit. • This year she is expecting an income of Rs.2.00 lacs from her 0.5 acres of pomegranate. After covering her farm expenses of Rs.40,000 (Increased input usage), she would be left with a cash surplus of Rs.1.6 lacs • In addition, her husband earns a further Rs.20,000 a year from selling the kulfi that Akka Bai makes at home and Rs.10,000 by working as an expert pruner. • Akka Bai continues to work in a grape drying unit for about 2-3 months and earns Rs.5000 • Thus this year’s annual income is expected to be Rs.1.95 lacs • Of this about Rs.20,000 is being spent on household expenses. This has increased from Rs.10,000 (Increased household expenditure). • The increase is mainly on account of clothing, purchase of food grains and increased frequency of meat eating, about 2-3 times/week (Increased food quality and security) Future plans • Top priority is to dig a well and secure the source of water (Asset building effect, reducing cropping risk). When we met her she was supervising (increased self- confidence) the digging of a well and had hired a blasting expert to blast the rocks. • She has already invested Rs.1.0 lacs (Increased investment capacity) to dig upto 50 feet but is to yet strike water. She is planning to dig 20 feet more and then bore horizontally (Increased self-confidence and increased risk-appetite) • She has borrowed about Rs.1.0 lacs to dig the well (increased risk appetite) • She has made an offer to her neighbour (Increased self-confidence, positive attitude towards life) to purchase his land (Asset building effect) for Rs.20,000/acre should he choose to sell it • To convert the entire plot into Bhagva variety since it fetches higher returns as compared to Ganesh variety (change in cropping pattern effect, increased risk- appetite) • Her goal is to have an orchard in about 2 acre (Positive outlook, clear vision and confidence of achieving it), which she reckons would give her family a decent standard of living. Only after achieving this goal she would like to invest in improving the house, taking an electricity connection, etc. Analysis A-51 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 • Change in cropping pattern, especially shift to high-value crops (Jowar to pomegranate, within pomegranate to higher yielding Bhagva) • Technical effects Increased water use efficiency (higher yield from the same 0.5 acre plot on account of water being more uniformly distributed through KB drip) • Increase in level of inputs (She has spent Rs.40,000 on her 0.5 cre plot this year to ensure high yields from pomegranate. This is higher than the yield from pomegranate in the previous year) • Increased income (from being barely able to make two ends meet to now having an Economi income of Rs.1.6 lacs from only 0.5 acre of Pomegranate) effects • Asset building, she is digging a well and has made an offer to her neighbour to purchase his land c • Increased self-confidence, from realization of set goals, increase in income, stability in income • Increased risk appetite, plans to bring entire area under Bhagva variety, has borrowed to dig a well, has made an offer to her neighbour to buy his land • Improved quality of life, now the family is clothed better and eats better (meat 2-3 times/week), does not work in others’ fields, but continues to work in the grape Social effect factory, while husband sells kulfi icecreams • Positive outlook about the future reflected in clarity on future plans and the decision to put on hold asset creation and expenditure on the home front until she meets her set goals Comments • Akka Bai Jagannath Karande is tale of a woman’s indomitable spirit to overcome her circumstance by sheer will power and dint of hard work. • The choice of crop (pomegranate) and its economics is the key to her economic development, but it is KB Drip that is the critical input that enabled her to realize her goals. • Most importantly, it has turned her into a farmer who has a positive attitude towards life, full of self-confidence and a clear vision of what she wants to do. Economic benefits at business level As already described in the previous section, as a BA or as a dealer or even as a fitter, marketing of KB Drip provides a profitable source of livelihood. With the micro-irrigation market 30 pegged at Rs.17 billion in 2009 and expected to grow, the volume of KB Drip is also expected to grow leading to higher earnings for its channel partner as well. Thus, acquiring a KB dealership is an attractive business proposition given the high volume of business and the low entry barriers in terms of low investments. Relevance of KB Drip to NRLP Given that agriculture would be one of the primary livelihoods that NRLP would be promoting, efficient use of irrigation water would be of crucial importance both from an environmental and economic angle. Therefore, drip technology would be relevant to NRLP, especially where ground- water based irrigation is the norm. However, given the poor paying capacity of most of NRLP beneficiaries, KB Drip tapes, being low-cost but highly reliable would be very appropriate. Integrating KB Drip into NRLP NRLP should initiate a dialogue with IDE-India at the national level to forge a partnership. On the one hand, KB Drip may be introduced in NRLP locations where drip is relevant, while on the other, individuals or SHGs within the NRLP beneficiaries may be given opportunities to be fitter, helpers and dealers of KB Drip. KB Drip may be put on a list of items for which SHGs could raise loans 30 Micro Irrigation System in India 2010; a report prepared by Netscribes (India) Private Limited A-52 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 from banks or SHG Federations. For more information contact: Mr.Amitabha Sadangi / Mr.Suresh Subramaniam INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISES (INDIA) C 5/43, (1st & 2nd Floor), Safdarjang Development Area , New Delhi - 110016 Phone Nos. +91 - 11 - 46000400 Fax No. +91 - 11 - 46000444 Email : suresh@ide-india.org A-53 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 5: DECENTRALIZED PRODUCTION OF BIO-FERTILIZERS & BIO-PESTICIDES Introduction Soil is the most important asset of a farmer. Soil fertility is to a large extent determined by the presence of suitable soil biota, which in turn is determined by the soil organic content. Repeated use of chemical fertilizers destroys the soil biota and thereby affects fertility and yield. Application of bio-fertilizers in the form of N2 fixers (Azospirillum, Rhizobium, Acetobacter, blue green algae, Azolla), Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria (PSB) and fungi (mycorrhizae) can help in improving the soil biota status and thus improve the soil quality. Since many of them fix nitrogen from the atmosphere, need for application of Nitrogen would also be reduced. Further, some of them help in making soil nutrients available in a form ready for uptake by plants and help in improving the nutrient availability status of the soil. Similarly with pest control also, indiscriminate use of broad-spectrum chemical pesticides has destroyed natural predators of crop pests and created pesticide resistance among pests. Use of bio- pesticides can address these issues very effectively. Bio-fertilizers and bio-pesticides are being manufactured in India since late 1970s. However, it received serious attention only in the early 1990s. Since then a no. of manufacturing units have come up, but farmers continue to face problems in accessing good quality materials in a timely manner. The main constraints expressed by manufacturers are: unattractive carrier material, low shelf-life, lack of proper storage facilities, loss of quality on transportation, poor marketing, high risk and less profit. Adoption has been good wherever the manufacturer is doing “niche marketing”. Against this background the JRD Tata Ecotechnology Centre (JRDT –ETC) of the MS Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF), Chennai initiated a project to train a group of SHGs members to manufacture these bio-fertilizers and bio-pesticides by demystifying the biotechnology. They had to make crucial innovations in the manufacturing process to enable production in local, decentralized and un-lab-like conditions. Intervention The JRD Tata Ecotechnology Centre works with women from small & marginal farm families and agricultural labourers. They promote eco-enterprise development through the creation of biovillages (See Figure A15-6 and box). Eco-enterprises are designed in such a manner that they meet the following criteria: • Economically viable • Environmentally sustainable • Socially equitable • Energy efficient • Employment generating With this framework for development of eco-enterprises, work was initiated in Kuttathuavarampatti (bio-fertilizers) and S.Pudur (bio-pesticide) in the Kannivadi region of Dindigul district, Tamil Nadu and Keezhsathamangalam (bio-fertilizers) of Puducherry UT. These area were chosen because they had the cropping pattern suitable for use of these products and thus offered a local market. A-54 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Figure A15-4: Concept of biovillage Eco-entrepreneurship & eco-jobs Eco-entrepreneurship is defined as the technical, managerial and marketing capacity of rural women and men to mobilize and organize themselves as entrepreneurs to produce environment-friendly products and services for sustainable development. Eco-jobs are defined as employment opportunities in the sectors that use natural resources efficiently and effectively without creating environmental instability. Implementation strategy Selection of Women SHGs The JRDT-ETC had been working in these areas for some time and had developed SHGs and federated them into two CBOs, namely, the Kulumai in Kannivadi and the Bio-council in Puducherry. These federations were the fora for presenting and discussing the idea of eco- enterprises based on bio-fertilizers and bio-pesticides to the SHG leaders. In turn, these leaders discussed them in their respective SHGs. Finally, 3 SHGs were chosen to set up the eco-enterprises viz., Jhansi Rani WSHG, Kuttathuavarampatti and Elayathendral Women’s Self-Help Group of S. Pudur in Kannivadi region of Dindigul district and Manimegalai WSHG of Keezhsathamangalam of Puducherry region. Training & Capacity Building • Exposure visit • Hands-on experience on the production process before initiating the process • Learning by doing after establishing the unit while stabilization in the production process was on • Group and account management training to leaders and • Need-based training on the problems encountered during the production Preparation of microplan Based on the micro-plan, the the bio-fertilizer/bio-pesticide units were set-up as per the schedule given in Figure A15-5. A detailed business plan was prepared and loans availed to set up the units. The total project cost of the bio-pesticide unit was Rs.2.4 lacs and received a loan of Rs.1.75 lacs from Canara Bank at Kannivadi. The bio-fertilizer units cost Rs.1.5 lacs each which were financed through an SGSY loan and members contributions. A-55 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Figure A15-5: Steps in setting-up the units Products, production process and operations Azospirillum, Phosphobacteria and Trichoderma viride are the three major products being produced by the eco-enterprises.(See box below). Bioproducts Azospirillum Azospirillum can utilize atmosphereic nitrogen and contribute to plant nitrogen nutrition, it can also improve the plant nutrient uptake and contribute towards the balance of the root environment through protection against pathogens and equilibrate nutrient flow in the soil. It can fix atmospheric nitrogen to the tune of about 15-20 kg/N/acre/year, which reflects in an increase in the crop yield by 15-20 %. It has the potential to reduce the consumption of chemical nitrogen fertilizer by 20-30 %. Phosphobacteria Several soil bacteria and fungi, notably species of Pseudomonas and Bacillus secrete organic acids that bring about the dissolution of the bound phosphates in the soil. Utilization of phosphate-solubilising microorganisms (Pseudomonas and Bacillus) account for about 45 % of the total biofertilizer production and use. Trichoderma viride It is a green coloured, fast-growing beneficial fungal species. It has multiple uses in crop production, as a biocontrol and decomposing agent. It also acts as a growth promoter by producing growth hormones. It controls soil borne pathogens through either antibiosis or competition or hyperparasitism on harmful fungus. It acts against species like Fusarium, Phytopthora, Botrytis, Pythium, Verticililium and Sclerotia, and reduces the use of chemical fungicides. The product is compatible with biofertilisers like Azosprillum and Rhizobium and other biofungicdes like Pseudomonas and Bacillus subtilis. Application of the product through seed and seedling/ tuber/corm treatment helps the farmer to protect the seeds from diseases, and ensures vigorous and uniform plant establishment A-56 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 The key steps in production of these products are: • Isolation of efficient local strains of the microorganisms • Maintenance of the isolated strains as mother culture at MSSRF microbiology lab • Preparation of starter culture/inoculum from the mother culture at the dencentralized production unit • Preparation of broth, sterilization of Horlicks bottles used as fermentors • Inoculating the sterilized broth and incubating for a period of 4-6 days • Preparation of carrier material namely, vermicompost • Mixing the broth containing the bioagents with vermicompost, drying and packing The President of the SHG allocates the various tasks among the SHG members. Care is taken to rotate the members among the various tasks so that everyone is well-versed in all aspects of the production process. Quality control Serial dilution method has been used to determine the Colony Forming Units (CFUs) in each batch. From the production after thorough mixing through random sampling a small quantity is taken by the quartering method and tested for its CFUs in the concentration of 106 to 1010. Separate register is maintained for quality check details and materials are passed for packing only when the lot contains 1 x1010. Meanwhile, once in a quarter, random samples from the production is taken and checked for its consistency in quality at the microbiology laboratory of Chennai as well as at the unit by the professional staff. The bio-pesticide is registered with the Central Insecticides Board and Registration Committee, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Faridabad, Haryana 31, under Central Insecticides Act of 1971. Marketing The SHG groups have entered in to an MoU with a few agri-input companies and dealers to market their products. In addition, they have identified plantation crop farmers in areas close to their villages and market to them directly. Further, they have a working relationship with the Reddiarchattram Seed Growers Association (RSGA, also promoted by JRDT-ETC) to promote their products amongst their farmer members. However, since 2008-09, all the eco-enterprises in the Kannivadi region of Dindigul district have been brought under the Kulumai 32 Livelihood Promotion Cell (KLPC), which buys the products from these units and markets them through a Marketing Officer appointed by the KLPC. In addition, SHG members of the units are free to sell the products on their own too. Benefits to the eco-entrepreneurs The total project cost including capital costs and working capital is around Rs.1.5 lacs. The following table shows the production and returns from each unit since its inception As can be seen from the table, all the units have paid off their loans and are providing monthly returns of Rs.1500-2500 to each member of the group. In all there are 108 women from various SHGs involved in these eco-enterprises. 31 www. http://cibrc.nic.in/cibrc.htm 32 The KLPC is the SHG Federation Level body to promote eco-products A-57 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A15-8: Earnings per member for different eco-enterprises 1. Trichoderma viride Year Sales Net profit (Rs) Average income per member* per month 2004-05 2500 kg 75000 2005-06 1650kg 66000 The profit was used to repay the bank 2006-07 1400 kg 56000 loan taken to establish the unit 2007-08 1900kg 76000 2008-09 3600 kg 144000 1333.33 2009-10 3860 146680 1358.00 2. Pseudomonas fluorescens 2004-2005 4536 158760 2005-06 1565 54775 The profit was used to repay the bank 2006-07 1300 45500 loan taken to establish the unit 2007-08 1745 66310 2008-09 2954 103390 921.00 2009-10 3158 110530 1023.45 3. Biofertilizers (Azosprillum and phosphobacteria) 2005-06 1100 22000 The profit was used to repay the bank 2006-07 3200 64000 loan taken to establish the unit 2007-08 3800 76000 2008-09 4250 85000 787.00 2009-10 4626 92520 856.70 *- apart from wages from employment in the unit which is on an average of Rs 1000/month 4. VAM** - 2006-07 600 12000 The profit was used to repay the bank 2007-08 2800 56000 loan taken to establish the unit 2008-09 3200 64000 666.70 2009-10 3480 69200 720.80 ** - the amount of time spent by the members on the production is less than a hour in a day – members do the task after their agriculture work Innovations in production Many changes were made in the production process and materials to bring down the cost as well as make the process easy to follow at the grass-roots level. Key changes were: • Laminar flow chamber: In order to maintain the quality and at the same time reduce the contamination, make it more women friendly and simple, low-cost Laminar Air Flow chamber was fabricated to ease the inoculation purpose. • For the mass multiplication of Azospirillum/ Phosphobacteria: Locally available, low-cost container, i.e. ½ litre horlicks bottle were used instead of culture flasks/fermentors. • Carrier material: In order to avoid the purchase of external carrier materials the use of locally available FYM was composted using earthworms, used as a carrier material. • In the case of Trichoderma viride, the inoculated broth was incubated for 3 days and if no growth was observed they were immediately discarded instead of waiting for the entire period of 15 days before taking the decision. This helped in reducing wastage of time and poor performance of a batch. Relevance of bio-fertilizer & bio-pesticide based eco-enterprises to NRLP Agriculture is the largest source of livelihood. With the NRLP promoting CMSA as a flag-ship initiative to ensure an eco-friendly and cost-effective sustainable agriculture technology, production A-58 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 and supply of key eco-friendly inputs would become vital. Therefore, the establishment of such eco- enterprises to produce bio-fertilizers and bio-pesticides would go a longway in ensuring steady, reliable, timely and cost-effective supply of quality inputs. Integrating with NRLP Production of these bio-inputs, should be integrated with CMSA and/or other similar agricultural interventions. These activities can be taken up by SHGs once the area has been surveyed and suitability of the products to the crops being grown has been established. At the national level the PMU may like to collaborate with the JRDT-ETC to help in transfer of technology as well demystifying it for application at the grass-roots level. For more information contact: Dr.Sudha Nair, Director JRD Tata Ecotechnology Centre M. S. Swaminathan Research Foundation III Cross Street, Institutional Area Taramani, Chennai – 600 113, INDIA. Tele: +91 44 22541229; 22541698 Fax: +91 44 22541319 Email: ecotech@mssrf.res.in A-59 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Thematic Area 2: Animal husbandry 6: PARAMPARA HERBAL PRODUCERS’ COMPANY Introduction In India, cattle and small ruminants are the most sought after assets for securing a livelihood. Most women SHG members prefer this option while preparing a microcredit plan since they have sufficient skills to use the assets and local resources are available to maintain the assets. However, often managing the health of the animals proves difficult either due to lack of access to veterinary services or due to its expensiveness. The Institute of Ayurveda and Integrative Medicine33 (IAIM) along with the Dakshina Kannada Milk Union and the National Dairy Development Board (NDDB) has successfully harnessed local veterinary traditions (ethnoveterinary) for treating a selected and prioritized set of cattle diseases. Following successful clinical trials they have helped set-up a community owned and managed business enterprise (Parampara Herbal Producers’ Company) to manufacture and market these ethno-veterinary products. Intervention The Indian subcontinent has a rich ethnoveterinary health tradition owing to the large agriculture based livelihoods and rich biodiversity. Due to various social, economic and political factors this tradition is facing the threat of rapid erosion. IAIM along with other organizations started a programme to revitalize these traditions. A participatory Rapid Assessment Programme was designed in order to find the best ethnoveterinary practices in select location of southern India. This method is a community-based rapid assessment in which ethnoveterinary folk healers, veterinary doctors, ayurvedic doctors, botanists and field workers play key roles. A total of 116 plant species for treating nearly 19 health conditions that are commonly seen in cattle were taken for assessment in different geographical locations. The basic principle of this assessment is a consensus of opinion among different medical systems about the management of a health condition. It was found that nearly 70% of the practices had supportive evidence from Ayurveda and modern pharmacology on their prescribed uses. It was also found that 55% of those positively assessed plants are easily available locally in each of the bio- geographical locations and could be easily grown in homestead gardens. The process, steps and outputs of a typical RALHT is shown in the figure below 34: Implementation Strategy In this section how the above process was applied in a specific case and products identified for promotion is described. The following figures/tables show the outputs from RALHT conducted in Dakshina Kannada District Milk Union area in Karnataka: 33 Earlier called Foundation for Revitalization of Local Health Traditions (FRLHT) 34 Documentation & Participatory Rapid Assessment of Ethnoveterinary Practices, Raneesh Santhanakrishnan etal, August 2007, Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, Vol.7(2), April 2008, pp 360-364 A-60 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Figure A15-6: Rapid Assessment of Local Health Traditions A-61 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Figure A15-7: Prioritized list of animal health conditions A-62 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Figure A15-8: Comparative assessment of remedies from different sources Figure A15-9: Folk understanding of mastitis & clinical features A-63 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A15-9: Comparative assessment of local remedies for treating mastitis Remedy ISM 35 Doctor Veterinary Doctor Community Promotion Remedy 1: Wattaka volubilis leaf & stem Yes Yes Yes Yes paste applied over affected areas of the udder Remedy 2: Wattaka volubilis leaf & stem Yes Do not know Yes Yes paste and Commelina benghalensis leaf paste applied over affected areas of the udder Remedy 3: Handful of Andropographis No Ayurvedic No information on Yes Needs more serpyllifolia (leaves & root), 15 flakes of references to its use for treating investigation Allium sativum bulb, and Piper nigrum (9 Andropograph mastitis in modern before it is no.s) are ground to a paste and administered is serpyllifolia pharmacology accepted or orally for a period of 9-21 days. in treating rejected mastitis Based on the RALHT process a set of products were identified and put under clinical trial under the supervision of Dr.Raviraja Udupa, Veterinary doctor from the Dakshina Kannada Milk Union. Following successful trials, the products were standardized and the decision to manufacture and market them was taken. Accordingly the Parampara Herbal Producers Company (PHPC) was established in 2003 by 280 members from amongst cooperative milk producers of Kaup block of Udupi district as well as 30 Self-Help Groups of Dakshina Kannada Milk Union with help from IAIM and the NDDB. Share capital & sales turnover A sum of Rs. 5,00,000 is the current share capital. The General Body in June 2010 has approved to increase this share capital to Rs. 25,00,000. Sales Turnover for the financial year 2009-10 amounts to Rs. 18 lakhs. Net profit after all taxes was Rs.62,923 with an Earnings per share of Rs.12.27. During this year, PHPC has already achieved a sales turnover of Rs. 8 lakhs and is expected to achieve around Rs. 25 lakhs. Products of PHPC Table A15-10: Products of PHPC Product Use Price Rs. Mastaheal (100 gms.), Herbal ointment used in management of mastitis Rs.55 Larvin (50 gms.) Herbal ointment used in management of wounds Rs.35 Nirgundi Taila (50 ml. and 100 ml. Pain relieving herbal oil Rs.25 & 45 Hi- Milk Gain (500 gms.) Herbal mixture used to improve both the quality and Rs.72 quantity of milk Fertaheal Herbal mixture used in management of infertility and Rs.116 downer cow syndrome Triphala Vet Herbal choorna used in management of bloat and Rs.28 indigestion 35 Indian System of Medicine (Ayurveda, Siddha, Unani) A-64 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Of these the greatest demand is for Ferta Heal Powder, Hi-Milk Gain Mixture and Mastaheal Ointment. The raw materials for these products are procured from around 300 home herbal gardens of SHG members. Those that are not produced locally are purchased from the market. Where home herbal gardens have been set up, women SHG members have been trained in preparing veterinary remedies at home for treating their own animals. Benefits of ethno-veterinary medicines Economic benefits Apart from the sharing the profits (a sum of Rs.65000 has been distributed so far) amongst shareholders (280 dairy famrers and members of 30 SHG groups), the use of ethno-veterinary medicine delivers benefits to the users too. • For example, it costs Rs. 1200/- per episode of treatment of mastitis. Whereas the treatment with the help of Mastinil costs around Rs. 200/-. • Another benefit is that “An Year - a Calf” is possible through the use of Fertaheal. This means the dairy farmer gets to earn his income from early calving, which otherwise gets affected due to repeat breeding for a number of months. • The product “High Milk Gain” helps the milk producer to improve the quality of milk (higher SNF and fat) as well as the quantity of milk produced, without use of synthetic products. Health benefits Most important benefit is that these products are available through Milk Producer Societies 24 x 7. Even before calling a veterinary doctor, a milk producer has an opportunity to use these readily available products, to improve the health of their animals as a first response. Some examples are given below: • Haemogalactia is managed by the dairy farmers through use of a locally available medicinal plant (which is a weed) namely Mimosa pudica. The retained fetal membrane is managed through use of bamboo (Bambusa arundinacea) leaves. Curry leaves (Murraya koenigii) is used for management of infertility. Teat herpis is managed through use of Memycylon malabaricum. • Adhatoda zeylanica leaves are used for management of simple cold and cough. Tinospora cordifolia stems are used to manage common fever. Aloe vera pulp is used both for minor cuts and wounds as well as gastritis. Herpis is managed by the use of Memycylon malabaricum. Future plans • Promote homestead cultivation of medicinal plants for both home based remedies for primary vet-care as well as to supply the surplus to PHPC. A-65 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 • Expand the number of products from 6 to 15, covering both human as well as veterinary healthcare as well as other consumer products from locally and organically cultivable medicinal as well horticultural produces. • Increase the sales turnover from Rs. 18 lakhs to Rs. 1 crore by distributing the herbal products to other district milk unions of Karnataka. • Explore the potential for establishment of four more production units depending on market needs in other zones of Karnataka. Relevance of ethno-veterinary medicines to NRLP Dairying is one of the most sought after livelihoods in rural India. However, having invested in cows and buffaloes, quite often poor vetcare services result in either loss of the animals (asset) or poor returns to the owners. Using RALHT process to identify local remedies, local sources of medicines and systematically assessing them would help build knowledge in the community to better manage the health of their own animals. Further, when these products are manufactured and marketed, it opens up a new source of employment and enterprise activity for women SHG federations. With home herbal gardens being set up to supply plant materials to the production unit, further flow of income to the individual household is ensured. Integrating with NRLP Therefore, the process of RALHT to identify ethno-veterinary services should be made an integral part of any micro-credit plan that involves cattle-rearing. Further, following the identification of the local remedies and the plant material needed, home herbal gardens should be set up. Thus, setting up of home herbal gardens should also be treated as an integral part of the micro-credit plan for cattle-rearing. The decision to set up a Producers’ company may be taken at the level of a SHG Federation once the market for such products is assessed in the area. NRLP at the national level may seek to collaborate with IAIM to build the knowledge and skills of their personnel at the district and block levels in ethno-veterinary services and the process of RALHT itself. For more information contact: Mr.Hariramamurthy, Institute of Ayurveda and Integrative Medicine No.74/2, Jarakbande Kaval Post: Attur, Via Yelahanka Bangalore - 560 064 Tel: +91 80 2856 8000/ 8001/ 8002/ 7926 & 09448372020 Email: g.hari@frlht.org, hariram_01@yahoo.co A-66 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Thematic Area 3: Green Energy 7: INNOVATIVE USE OF CER/VER TO FINANCE BIOGAS+ Introduction Keeping diary animals (cows and buffaloes) is one of the most sought after livelihood options for rural Indians. In fact, it is a tradition that is based on treating dairying as an integral component of sustainable farming. Cowdung when allowed to decompose in pits along with other agriculture biomass waste becomes a good source of organic manure. However, this process releases methane (CH4) and carbon-di-oxide (CO2), both gases that have high global warming potential. Using cowdung in specially designed digesters helped harvest the methane, which could be used as a domestic cooking fuel. This is called biogas technology. The Ministry of New & Renewable Energy (MNRE) was promoting this under a national programme that offered subsidy to those families that opted for installing a biogas plant. However, with the withdrawal of the programme, adoption of this technology has flagged. SKG Sangha, an NGO based in Kolar district of Karnataka and working in several part of the country, especially in Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, is now promoting this technology with the help finance that has become available from sale of avoided emission reduction units. This represents an innovative use of CDM finance to promote an environmentally sound technology. Intervention SKG Sangha is promoting a fixed-dome type biogas digester of 3m3 and higher capacities. Unlike in traditional biogas digesters where the spent slurry that comes out of the digester is let out into the open and wasted, SKG Sangha builds a vermicomposting tanks to receive the slurry. This slurry along with other agri-residue is fed to earthworms that convert this mixture into vermicompost, a good and easy to handle organic manure. However, in the absence of subsidy that the MNRE was offering, SKG Sangha has identified buyers of CERs (Certified Emissions Reduction units) and VERs (Verified Emission Reduction Units) to finance its operations and provide a subsidy to the biogas adopting families. SKG Sangha has estimated that a single biogas unit of 3m3 generates about 6 CERs/year or 60 CERs over a period of 10 years, the maximum crediting period for claiming CDM benefits without reviewing the baseline emissions. The current discounted rate for claiming CERs in advance for 10 years is about 7 Euros 36, which translates into Rs.25,200 for each biogas plant. This amount is used to finance its costs of operations, capital subsidy for biogas installation and providing maintenance and monitoring services over the next ten years. The customer for the biogas pays about 20-50% of the total cost of installing and operationalizing the biogas. Implementation strategy SKG Sangha has a network of Village Representatives (VR) who scout for potential customers for biogas plants.On finding a customer, s/he informs SKG Sangha, who then depute a trained mason drawn from their cadre of biogas masons to the site.The customer provides material such as sand, bricks, cement, etc., along with labour to complete installation. The VR supervises the installation and takes an approval of works done and acceptance letter from the customer. SKG Sangha bundles about 10-15,000 such biogas plants and presents them as a Small-scale bundled CDM project to potential buyers. On finding a buyer, the process of preparing a Project Design Document (PDD) and validation of the PDD is carried out. The buyer pays upfront for the estimated CERs. SKG Sangha then uses this amount to finance the implementation of the project. 36 1 Euro = Rs.60 A-67 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 The VRs are local youth selected based on their interest, aptitude and ability to do the work. They are paid a salary of Rs.3-5000 + incentives for meeting their targets. In addition, they are also responsible to attend to customer complaints and monitor the working of the biogas plant in their area of operations. Typically, a VR is expected to cover 5-10 villages depending on the potential. The VRs are supervised by block level and district level supervisors. Some of the block level supervisors are drawn from VRs who have been promoted. Currently there are more than 50 Village Representatives working with SKG Sangha. These VRs attend to their work with SKG Sanghs in addition, to doing their own farming and other activities. Benefits from SKG Sangha’s Biogas Projects Economic benefits • Savings on time spent in collecting and processing firewood which can be used for economic activities • Faster cooking time on biogas as compared to traditional biomass cookstoves • Sanitation is improved as the cowdung, cow urine and other wastes are treated in scientific manner leading to lower incidence of diseases in the households • Health of women and children is improved as indoor air pollution is avoided and sanitation is improved • Child education improves as they are no longer needed in collection and process of fire wood and the mother can spare time on child education • Soil fertility increases as the vermicompost in the form of organic fertilizer • Employment generation is assured in the rural areas by implementation and maintenance of the project. Environmental benefits • GHG emission reduction is about 15 tons CO2 equivalent/year/unit, which can be avoided by using biogas digesters • Avoided biomass burning of 4 tons per year saves about 5 tons CO2 equivalent • About 22 tons of cow dung results in emission of about 4 tons of CO2 equivalent • About 25 tons of biomass and agricultural residues and animal urine results in emissions of 4 tons of CO2 equivalent • One ton of avoided chemical fertiliser manufacturing and usage will contribute about 2 tons of CO2 equivalent • Avoidance of kerosene usage in the house holds for emergency needs and to start fire in traditional biomass stoves saves about 100 litres of kerosene per year and • N2O emissions because of wood burning and chemical fertiliser application and cow dung and urine fermentation in anaerobic traditional compost pits also contribute to emission savings • Prevents cowdung, cow urine and other wastes from getting into water systems thereby avoiding polluting them. Relevance of Biogas to NRLP With dairying being the most sought after livelihood intervention across the country, a technology that helps reduce the negative environmental impact in terms of methane and CO2 emission from poor management of cow dung and urine would have wide spread application and relevance. Further, with CDM funds being available for financing such initiatives as demonstrated by SKG Sangha, this technology can be made more affordable and accessible. For more information contact: A-68 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 SKG SANGHA H.No. 532, 2nd Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, KOLAR Karnataka State, INDIA. Postal Code – 563 101 Ph: +91 8152 225370 Fax: +91 8152 224146 Email : info@skgsangha.org, skgsangha@gmail.com A-69 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 8: LIGHTING A BILLION LIVES (LABL) Introduction In the 21st century electricity is a basic need for a civilized human life. Yet, over 2 billion people are without access to electricity; of this 25% are in India alone, almost exclusively in rural areas. Many homes wake in darkness and are forced to go to bed once the sun sets. Lighting in these families is often provided by feeble, smoky kerosene lamps, which have an adverse impact on eyes as well lungs of the users, especially children who study. Grid extension is being taken up on an accelerated mode by the government, but with crunching power shortages that the country is facing, reliable power supply to these newly connected rural areas is but a wishful dream. In this context, The Energy & Resources Institute (TERI) has launched an innovative campaign to provide basic lighting to a billion lives. In the process, it has not only provided lights to rural people, but has also created numerous rural eco-jobs /enterprises. Intervention Solar PV technology-based solutions for rural lighting have been around for more than 2 decades. Its penetration has been poor largely on account of its high up-front cost of ownership. Often, capital subsidies and/or loans have been used to make it more affordable. However, even this has not been very successful in reaching out to the poorest. Sporadic attempts at renting out solar lighting devices have shown encouraging results, but have stumbled while scaling-up for lack of a well thought-out implementation and financing mechanism. TERI, through its LaBL Figure A15-10: LaBL Solar Charging Station Schematic (Lighting a Billion Lights) campaign has addressed these issues on a comprehensive basis. LaBL operates on a fee-for-service model wherein solar lanterns are rented out every day in exchange for a nominal recharging fee. This is institutionalized by setting up Solar Charging Stations (SCS) in villages for charging the lanterns and providing the lanterns daily on rent to households and enterprises. A-70 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Figure A15-11: LaBL Solar Charging Station A typical SCS designed by TERI specifically for LaBL consists of 5 (five) self contained modular kits each consisting of 10 (ten) lanterns, one junction box and one solar panel (50 Wp) each. Thereby, one SCS cumulatively has 50 solar lanterns along with 5 (five) solar panels and 5 (five) junction boxes. The SCS being modular, the number of solar panels along with solar lanterns can be decreased or expanded (in multiples of 10 lanterns) based on the needs and capacities of the community. The Solar Lantern itself is based on LED (Light Emitting Diode) technology which guarantees a long life of the lamp. The lantern provides light for 5–6 hours daily using LED lamps on full charge of the battery providing illumination of 200–250 lumens or light equivalent to a 40 W incandescent bulb. The LED works for a full night (about eight hours) if operated on the dimming option. If required, a battery is also provided in the SCS which acts as a back-up source for charging the lanterns during cloudy or foggy days or for any emergency charging during night. Implementation Strategy The Campaign facilitates in creating local LaBL-Entrepreneur driven delivery channels for distribution and servicing of solar lanterns to rural communities where kerosene is the predominant fuel for lighting—not only in households but also in small enterprises such as shops, local bazaars, tuition and coaching centers, and various cottage industries. It is implemented in partnership with NGOs/Trusts/PRIs referred to as LaBL-Partner Organizations. These partners coordinate, monitor and advance the Campaign in their areas of operations and directly supervise and handhold the entrepreneurs for effective operation and management of the charging stations. TERI is the overall campaign coordinator and manages the programme in coordination with various other stakeholders. TERI facilitates turnkey installation and commissioning of the SCS through the LaBL–Technology Partner. While stringent quality check is ensured by TERI, LaBL–TP undertakes the supply and installation of the hardware and the post warranty after sales service is provided by the LaBL–TRCs (Technology Resource Centres). The LaBL–PO (Partner Organization) also has the option of becoming LaBL–TRCs. TERI conducts rigorous theoretical and in field training for the prospective LaBL–TRCs before they are authorized as TRCs. The TRCs are authorized to cover a 15–20 SCS in a cluster for providing post warranty after sales service against a service fee from the LaBL Entrepreneurs. Continuous upgrade in the technology and its acceptance in the society are also ensured by TERI during all phases of the campaign. A-71 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 LaBL–PO: The entire campaign rests on the strong partnerships developed at the grassroots level with LaBL–PO. LaBL–POs facilitate direct livelihood to at least one person in the village by engaging her/him as LaBL Entrepreneur. The LaBL entrepreneurs act as custodians of the SCS under the project and are responsible for regular O&M (operation and maintenance) of the SCS. The income from the renting of the solar lantern can be shared by the LaBL–PO and the LaBL entrepreneur, with the amount decided mutually. However, a part of the money should be spent for O&M of the charging station and for replacement of the battery as may be required after 18–24 months of operation. In case, any loan has been obtained towards co-financing, a part of the income also has to be spent for repaying the loan. The SCS can also be customized to generate additional income by providing facilities such as charging of mobile phones, other ICT based services and sale. Figure A15-12: LaBL Partnership Network Financing model The cost for standard LaBL SCS with 50 LED lanterns ranges from Rs 140 000 to Rs 150 000 (depending on the specifications and configuration of the system). This includes complete hardware as well as the cost of installation and commissioning of the SCS at the village location. TERI has created a LaBL fund for providing support to install SCS in the villages. A subsidy amount of up to Rs 95 000 is available per SCS from the LaBL Fund at the sole discretion of TERI. The balance amount needs to be leveraged by LaBL–PO either as a contribution from their own sources OR by availing a loan from banks/financial institutions. Operation and management of the SCSs is sole the responsibility of the LaBL–PO. The earning from the rent amount could be utilized for this purpose. Any other administrative cost also has to be managed A-72 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 by the LaBL–PO. The following tables provide the indicative revenue model for the SCS: Table A15-11: Capital cost & capital financing Capital Required Capital for Solar Lantern Charging Station Rs.150,000 (Less) Expected Support from MNRE Rs.37,500 (Less) Expected Support from LaBL fund Rs.62,500 Expected Investment by Entrepreneur/ Bank Finance Rs.50,000 Table A15-12: Profitability of SCS Monthly Income Income from Renting (average utilization 45 lanterns/day) Rs 5640 Income from mobile charging (say 150 mobile charging/month) Rs.450 Commission from sale of standalone solar lanterns & solar torches Rs. 110 Total Monthly Income Rs.6200 Monthly Expenses Debt Servicing (@12 % interest, 5 years tenure) Rs 1100 Operation and Maintenance expenses Rs.700 Total Monthly Expenses Rs 1800 Monthly Net Income (say) Rs.4400 Benefits of LaBL The lighting benefits of LaBL to those renting the solar lanterns are obvious. For the first time many are experiencing the benefits of electric lighting without having to pay for the ownership cost of the equipment. Economic benefits The process of operating and managing a SCS, where lanterns are charged during the day and rented in the evening creates business opportunities for the rural entrepreneur. Thus, the LaBL Campaign apart from providing reliable and ensured lighting to households at an affordable rate, also facilitates entrepreneurial development among rural communities. The solar charging station can, for example, also provide other services such as telecommunication services, purification of potable water, mobile telephone charging, etc. Currently, the LaBL Campaign has managed an impressive record in the field. 33,000 households covering 165,000 people have been lit up in 600 villages across 16 states of the country. In the process it has created 600 eco-enterprises each earning about Rs.3500- 5000/month. Environmental benefits Each solar lantern in its useful life of 10 years displaces the use of about 400-500 litres of A-73 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 kerosene thereby mitigating about 1.45 tonne of CO2, assuming 4-6 litres of kerosene consumption per month per household. Thus, for the 33,000 households covered, the total carbon savings is about 48,000 t of CO2 Relevance to NRLP Lighting is a basic necessity of life. Often, it also enhance productivity and helps increase household incomes. Vast areas of rural India are either underserved by the grid or do not have a connection at all. A large no. of NRLP target groups would fall into these categories that exist without modern lighting services. Being served by a public electric grid system is but a pipe- dream for most of them. Perhaps, a LaBL kind of initiative that does away with the need to own costly SPV systems but offers them on a rent through a local entrepreneur may be best way to serve them in the short to medium term. Thus, LaBL would be relevant to NRLP, especially where clustering of at least 50 customers is possible. Integrating with NRLP NRLP should partner with LabL at the national and state levels to help identify villages not served by the electric grid. The LaBL implementation mechanism should be made available to all SMMUs so that they may include it during the preparation of the SPIPs. At the field level, the LaBL is best anchored at the Federation level which can act as the LaBL- PO. Individual members of SHGs or local entrepreneurs may act as the LaBL Entrepreneurs. For more information contact: Mr.Debajit Palit The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) Darbari Seth Block, IHC Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003 Tel: +91 11 2468 2100/111; Fax: +91 11 2468 2144/45 Email: debajitpalit@gmail.com A-74 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 9: RICE HUSK POWERED ELECTRICITY FOR MINIGRIDS Introduction Electricity is a basic service needed to enjoy the fruits of modern civilization. It is a shame that nearly 400 million people in India alone do not have access to electricity. They are condemned to a life that comes to a standstill with the setting sun. Worse there is no hope of change for these people even in the near future, since the country is reeling under a double onslaught of ever increasing consumption from those connected to the grid and lack installed capacity to generate power to meet even the current demand. With most of the 400 million living in rural India, their capacity to negotiate a better infrastructure is very limited. Several programmes, especially from the Ministry of Non-conventional & Renewable Energy (MNRE) based on a Solar PV, Micro-hydro and biomass gasification have failed either to technical or organizational shortcomings. Thus, these people have been left to fend for themselves and have resorted to kerosene lamps or connected up to diesel-based mini-grids operated by intrepid entrepreneurs in densely populated areas. Many, have simply given up and are resigned to life ending for the day with the setting sun. Against this background the success of Husk Power System’s biomass gasification-producer engine technology and the business model to operate it is astounding. Intervention When Husk Power Systems (HPS) was founded by Gyanesh Pandey 37, Manoj Sinha, Ratnesh Yadav and Charles W. Ransler, they had no idea how they would translate their organizations motto “Tamaso Ma Jyotirgamaya” (lead me from darkness to light) in to practical action. They dabbled with Solar PV, bio-fuels such as jatropha and gave them up as not being suitable for producing grid quality power. One abundant resource that they being thrown away as waste in Bihar was rice husk, but found not suitable technology to use it. Then they met a biomass gasifier salesman who offered to produce gas from biomass which could be used to run a modified diesel engine on a dual fuel mode comprising 70% producer gas 38 and 30% on diesel. Such an engine when coupled to a generator could produce grid quality electricity. The natural question was could the producer gas be used to run a 100% gas engine? Research results from multiple institutes in the country averred that rice husk on gasification gave out a producer gas with a very high tar content. Such a gas would clog up a 100% gas engine and therefore was not suitable for use to generate electricity. However, Gyanesh Pandey and others refused to accept the results. They argued that if engines could be cleaned before they clogged up, rice husk would be a cheap raw material to produce electricity. They got a biomass gasifier fabricated locally, purchased a cheap gas engine and set about working on it. After numerous iterations of adjusting valves and pressures, the gas-to-air ratios, the combustion temperature, the starting mechanism, they came up with a system that could burn 50 kilograms of rice husk per hour and produce 32 kilowatts of power, sufficient for about 500 village households. And thus, was born the first HPS rice husk based biomass gasifier power station in Tamkuha (ironically the name of village meant “Fog of darkness”) in rural Bihar. For 80 rupees a month a 37 All had worked in multinationals in the United States of America and had returned to India 38 Producer gas is a mixture of Carbon mono-oxide, methane and hydrogen which is produced on gasifying biomass. A-75 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 household could get daily power for one 30-watt or two 15-watt compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs and unlimited cell phone charging between 5:00 p.m and 11:00 p.m. For many families, the price was less than half their monthly kerosene costs, and the light would be much brighter. It would also be less smoky, less of a fire hazard, and better for the environment. Customers could pay for more power if they needed it -- for radios, TVs, ceiling fans or water pumps. But many had no appliances and lived in huts so small, one bulb was enough. The system went live on August 15, 2007, the anniversary of India's independence. Implementation strategy So far, all the plants being run by HPS are Figure A15-13: A typical HPS Power plant wholly owned by them. However, recently, a few villages are being taken-up on a franchisee model. A typical Husk Power Systems (HPS) compound is only 5000-6000 square foot of rented land with a small biomass gasifier on it, one storey tall and slim enough that two men could encircle it with their arms. Biomass gasification is a simple and relatively old process, in which biomass is heated to very high temperatures in an atmosphere of less than 1% oxygen. Under these conditions, it does not burn in flames, but turns into a ‘producer gas.’ In the HPS compound, there are large Figure A15-14: Gasifier in operation at Malahitola piles of biscuit-coloured rice husk for feeding the machine, and smaller piles of black rice husk char, which is the small amount of solid waste the gasification process generates in addition to the gas. Next to the gasifier are four filters for cleaning tar and dust from the gas, and a gas engine in which the producer gas is used to drive a generator and create electricity. From the compound run the HPS wires that carry electricity to houses within a maximum distance of two to three kilometres, because, beyond that, there begins to be a drop in voltage. A typical HPS power plant serves a cluster of about 500-700 connections. A-76 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Innovation – the key principle of success Technically, most of the problems were solved by 2008. But to make the business viable has required an ongoing process of what has been called "frugal innovation" -- radically simplifying things to serve the needs of poor customers who would otherwise be excluded from basic market services due to their limited ability to pay. In order to bring down costs, for example, the company stripped down the gasifiers and engines, removing everything non-essential that added to manufacturing or maintenance expenses, such as turbo-charging. They replaced an automated water-aided process for the removal of rice husk char (burned husk) from gasifiers with one that uses 80 percent less water and can be operated with a hand crank. They kept labor costs down by recruiting locals, often from very poor families with modest education levels (who would be considered unemployable by many companies) and training them to operate and load machines, and work as fee collectors and auditors, going door-to-door ensuring that villagers aren't using more electricity than they pay for. As against the national average of 30% commercial losses, Husk Power says it has managed to keep such losses down to five percent. When the company noticed that customers were purchasing poor-quality CFL bulbs, which waste energy, they partnered with Havells India, a large manufacturer, to purchase thousands of high quality bulbs at discount rates, which their collectors now sell to clients. They also saw that collectors could become discount suppliers of other products -- like soap, biscuits and oil -- so they added a product fulfillment business into the mix. They found ways to extract value from the rice husk char -- the waste product Coopting opponents of a waste product -- by setting up another side business turning the char When HPS first began buying rice husk for their pilot into incense sticks. This business now plant, local rice millers noticed the commodity had operates in five locations and provides suddenly become valuable and started hoarding it, supplemental income to 500 women. driving prices up.. Ratnesh and Gyanesh responded by setting up their own rice mill, dehusking villagers’ rice The company also receives for free. All the other rice mills went out of business. government subsidies for renewable Ratnesh and Gyanesh signed a contract with the rice energy and is seeking Clean mills, guaranteeing that they could buy rice husk at an Development Mechanism benefits. affordable price for the next six to eight years, and then With growth, human audits have shut down their free mill to direct the business back to proven inadequate to control the other mills. electricity theft or inadvertent overuse. They have a similarly inclusive approach to the diesel So the company developed a stripped- merchants, as many of the villages they’ve set up in down pre-payment smart-card reader have private micro-grids already in place, distributing electricity generated by enterprising individuals from for home installation. The going rate burning diesel. “First we offer them work at our plant. for smart-card readers is between $50 If they choose not to work with us, there’s enough and $90. Husk Power is near business that we can both set up there. We don’t want completion of one that Gyanesh to completely take over somebody else’s business.”, Pandey says will cost under $7. says Ratnesh Alone, none of these steps would have been significant. Taken together, however, they make it possible for power units to deliver tiny volumes of electricity while enjoying a 30 percent profit margin. The side businesses add another A-77 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 20 percent to the bottom line. HPS says new power units become profitable within 2 to 3 months of installation. They expect the company to be financially self-sustaining by June 2011. Scale of operations While government sponsored programmes to install and commission decentralised and distributed generation has failed miserably, the rate of growth of HPS is awe-inspiring. Currently, the company is operating 60 minipower plants that provide electricity to 25,000 households in more than 250 villages and impacts the lives of 150,000 people. To manage the steep scale-up that HPS is planning it has set up a HPS University to identify and train thousands of operators, technicians and managers that it would need in the future. Typical growth path expected for a HPS University trainee is as below: Figure A15-15: HR Plan for scale-up A-78 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Figure A15-16: Key milestones & future plans of HPS Currently, the company is operating 60 minipower plants that provide electricity to 25,000 households in more than 250 villages and impacts the lives of 150,000 people. To manage the steep scale-up that HPS is planning it has set up a HPS University to identify and train thousands of operators, technicians and managers that it would need in the future. Typical growth path expected for a HPS University trainee is as below: Benefits of HPS Power Plants Economic benefits • Economic benefits to customers includes extended time to pursue economic activities, for children to study • Saving on health related costs • However, HPS has contributed substantially in terms of employing in its 60 power plants nearly 300 local persons whom it has trained in operation and maintenance of the power plants as well as in managing billing and collection of user fees from the users. Environmental benefits Every HPS power plant replaces 42,000 litres of kerosene and 18,000 litres of diesel every year. As of August, 2010, HPS has already sequestered nearly 50,000 tons of CO2. Further, they found an economic use for rice husk a commodity that was hitherto being dumped in landfills where it decomposed and emitted methane, a deadly greenhouse gas. Relevance of HPS to NRLP Availability of electricity, especially one that is of grid quality, opens up new avenues of livelihoods. However, for the rural poor access to and affordability of electricity is but a pipe- dream. Against this background, the obvious success of HPS in the backward state of Bihar merits attention. Where clustering of about 400-500 customers is possible, HPS would be a very cost effective and impactful way of delivering electricity services. Integrating with NRLP Clearly, there is a lot learn from HPS in not technological aspects, but also from the angle of making and managing development happen through commercial forces. Collaboration with HPS at the national level of NRLP would go a long way in building the capacity of the NMMU. All SMMUs, especially those where grid coverage or quality of grid supply is poor should be exposed to HPS model of biomass power based mingrids so that they may include it in their SPIPs. A-79 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 For more information contact: Mr.Gyanesh Pandey Husk Power Systems Pvt. Ltd. Opp. Shiv Mandir, Shastri Nagar Market, Sheikhpura, Patna- 800 014 Bihar, India Phone: +91 (612) 2283333 Email: pandey@huskpowersystems.com A-80 Annex 16A: BUDGET for EMF implementation EMF BUDGET Major heads Detailed sub-heads Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Totals in INR Total in USD Unit Unit cost No. Cost No. Cost No. Cost No. Cost No. Cost NMMU 1 Technical Assistance to States Development of Operational Manuals and Training Modules / a LS 2000000 1 2000000 2000000 44793 MDP - Exposure tours to SRLM/SMMU / b Tour 500000 4 2000000 4 2000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 4000000 89586 Development of repository of Green Opportunies / c LS 500000 4 2000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000000 44793 National workshop on development of EAP-SPIP/AAP LS 1500000 1 1500000 1 1500000 0 0 0 0 0 0 3000000 67189 National workshop for review of EAP-SPIP/AAP preparation LS 500000 1 500000 1 500000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1000000 22396 National workshop for review of EAP-SPIP/AAP implementation LS 500000 0 0 1 500000 1 500000 1 500000 1 500000 2000000 44793 2 External environmental audit External environmental audit LS 1000000 0 0 1 1000000 1 1000000 1 1000000 1 1000000 4000000 89586 3 Staffing at NMMU Staff costs / d 0 0 SMMU (12 states) 0 0 4 EAPs in SPIP/AAPs Consultancy fee for situational analysis and EAP preparation LS 1000000 6 6000000 6 6000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 12000000 268757 5 IEC materials Production and printing of training and IEC materials / e LS 1000000 6 6000000 6 6000000 12000000 268757 6 Orientation to EMF Orientation to EMF - all DMMU, Block/PFTs (all NRLP districts) / f Orientation to EMF - all CRPs / f Orientation to EMF - all Primary Federations, Producer Collectives / f Specialised training on EMF to DMMU Environment/Livelihood Training - DMMU Environment Coordinators and Livelihood Coordinators (all 7 Coordinators NRLP districts) Batch 100000 6 600000 12 1200000 12 1200000 12 1200000 12 1200000 5400000 120941 8 EMP Pilot Implementation Training - Block/PFTs in EMP pilot Batch 100000 6 600000 12 1200000 12 1200000 12 1200000 12 1200000 5400000 120941 Training - Green CRPs in EMP pilot Batch 200000 6 1200000 12 2400000 30 6000000 30 6000000 30 6000000 21600000 483763 Training - Primary Federations in EMP pilot Batch 50000 0 0 18 900000 90 4500000 420 21000000 360 18000000 44400000 994401 Training - Producer Collectives in CoP pilot Batch 50000 0 0 0 0 12 600000 24 1200000 24 1200000 3000000 67189 Technical service providers to support Green CRPs/Primary Federations for EMP pilot LS 500000 6 3000000 12 6000000 30 15000000 30 15000000 30 15000000 54000000 1209406 Green CRP service fees / g CRP 37500 72 2700000 216 8100000 1200 45000000 1200 45000000 1200 45000000 145800000 3265398 EMP Implementation - Blocks / h 12 0 36 0 120 0 120 0 120 0 0 0 CoP Implementation / h 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 42 0 0 0 9 State review workshops State level review and learning workshops LS 300000 6 1800000 12 3600000 12 3600000 12 3600000 12 3600000 16200000 362822 10 Green Opportunity Pilots Pilots on Green Opportunities / i 11 Staffing at States Staff costs / d 0 0 12000000 12000000 0 0 0 337800000 7565510 a - EMP, CoP, Green CRPs, Green Opportunities b - Thematic exposure tours - Agriculture, Livestock, NTFP, Water resources c - Detailed directory of demonstrated Green Opportunities in Agriculture, Livestock, NTFP, Fisheries with details of resource institutions/persons d - Based on (a) for DMMU, Block/PFTs, Green CRPs, Primary Federations, Producer Collectives e - As part of induction training. Cost to be included in Capacity Building Budget f - 1 person x Rs.250 per day x 150 days g - Cost to be included in Livelihood Plans Budget h - Cost to be included in Special Purpose Vehicles Budget i - Cost to be included in Communication Budget, will include printing costs of all materials developed j - Cost to be included in HR Budget ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex 16B: Plan for Scaling Up Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 NRLP Phasing No. of States 6 12 12 12 12 No. of Districts 33 77 100 100 100 No. of Blocks 130 310 400 400 400 No. of Vos 40000 EMP Phasing FOR EACH BATCH 1 STATE Districts 1 2 3 3 3 Blocks - B1 states 2 4 12 12 12 CRPs 12 24 120 120 120 Vos 0 60 180 720 1200 FOR 6 BATCH 1 STATES Districts 6 12 18 18 18 Blocks - B1 states 12 24 72 72 72 CRPs 72 144 720 720 720 Vos 0 360 1080 4320 7200 FOR EACH BATCH 2 STATE Districts 0 1 2 2 2 Blocks - B2 states 0 2 8 8 8 CRPs 0 12 80 80 80 Vos 0 0 60 460 800 FOR 6 BATCH 2 STATES Districts 0 6 12 12 12 Blocks - B1 states 0 12 48 48 48 CRPs 0 72 480 480 480 Vos 0 0 360 2760 4800 % of BATCH 1 + BATCH 2 NRLP States 6 12 12 12 12 100 Districts 6 18 30 30 30 30 Blocks 12 36 120 120 120 30 CRPs 72 216 1200 1200 1200 Vos 0 360 1440 7080 12000 30 Notes: 3 districts per state in batch 1, 2 districts per state in batch 2. 2 blocks per district in years 1, 2 and 4 blocks per district in years 3, 4, 5. 6 CRPs per block in years 1, 2 and 10 CRPs per block in years 3, 4, 5. Each CRP works with 5 Vos in his/her first year and 10 Vos subsequently. A-82 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex 17 National Consultation on EMF for NRLP A national consultation workshop was organized by GoI on February 7, 2011 in which more than 60 participants from Bihar, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Kerala were present. There was a mix of government officials and NGOs. A presentation on the EMF and the Green Opportunities was made to the entire group. A smaller group was then formed to discuss in detail the EMF and the Green Opportunities. The following were the key outcomes of the consultations: • Overall the group felt that the EMF and the Green Opportunities was a very constructive approach. The Project Director, BRLP felt that it was ambitious to implement it in all areas. On clarifying that the proposal was to pilot in 360 VOs during year 2 and gradually scale-up to cover 30% of the total VOs under NRLP, the entire group felt that it was very “doable”. • However, the group suggested that the initial set of 360 VOs should be carefully chosen. It was explained that the 360 VOs would be spread over 6 states. Within each state 2 blocks from a district would be chosen. In each block a cluster of 30 VOs would be chosen. The group concurred with the proposal. • Dr. Ajay Verma, Member Secretary, DoST, Government of Kerala, raised the issue of possible conflicts between VOs and PRIs, especially when it came to creating or protecting public goods for private use. Mr.Raidu from SERP, AP clarified that if the VOs were strengthened, then the PRIs would find the VOs as a good platform to deliver goods and services. Overall it was emphasized that VOs need to be strengthened so as to be able to work effectively with the PRIs. The group agreed that since the very basis of NRLP is to give the poor an institutional platform to effectively exercise their rights, strengthening of the VOs would be given prime importance. • Extensive capacity building of Green-CRPs, VOs and PRIs was suggested as the means to ensure that the EMPs prepared were based on well-informed discussions. Further, it was mentioned that it was important that knowledge of thematic areas (agriculture, animal husbandry, etc.) as well as regulatory requirements would be essential to protect the environment as well as secure livelihoods. • The group felt that Green Opportunities were a welcome and innovative approach, but implementation of any particular Green Opportunity out of the set presented in the EA/EMF Study report should not be mandatory for the states. Appropriate Green Opportunities should be selected by the states as a part of the EAP during the preparation of the SPIP. It was clarified that the set of Green Opportunities presented are only an indicative list and by no mean exclusive or exhaustive. In fact, the EMF recommends that each state should strategize which Green Opportunity they want to pursue and include it in the SPIP. Further, each state is encouraged to set up a Green Opportunities Repository. • As a part of financing the implementation of the EMPs, convergence with existing schemes such as, NHM, NFSM, MNREGA, etc., was highlighted as important. Mr.Raidu felt that if the VO is very strong, then PRIs and other departments would pursue the VOs to deliver some of their schemes through them. • Mr.Smruthi Ranjan Pradhan from Orissa mentioned that in some of the areas where mining is the major activity, relevance of the EMP process may be questionable. However, the group felt that the EMP was being designed to secure livelihoods proposed under the NRLP and to carry out a general environmental protection of the village. Therefore, the group suggested that such Critical areas/hot spots should be identified and addressed during the preparation of the SPIP. A-83 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 These comments /suggestions of this sub-group were then presented to the larger group, which concurred. Overall, the group agreed that the proposal to have a community based EMP and channel for Green Opportunities was welcome, but it needed to be piloted, evaluated before being scaled-up. A-84 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-85 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-86 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-87 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-88 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-89 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-90 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-91 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-92 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 EMF Design A-93 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-94 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-95 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-96 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-97 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-98 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-99 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Registration Sheet A-100 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-101 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-102 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-103 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-104 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 A-105 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Annex B Annex 18 Background Reading Material on Environmental Status — State Profiles The NRLP involves intensive investment in selected districts and sub-districts of 12 high-priority states and will also demonstrate a model for expansion of NRLM throughout the country. The 12 states are: Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Orissa, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Gujarat and Assam. This annex provides a brief analysis of the environmental status and issues in each state. This is the output of a secondary research exercise aimed at understanding the environmental context for the project area. The chapter is organized state-wise and each state-profile contains the following sections: • Introduction • Agro-climatic zones • Land use • Land degradation • Soils • Water (Rainfall, Surface water, Groundwater) • Agriculture (Irrigation, Agro-chemicals) • Livestock • Forests • Summary of key environmental issues [Note: Maps and large tables are presented at the end of each State section.] KARNATAKA Karnataka is located between 11°30' - 18°30' N latitudes and 74° - 78°30' E longitudes. It is the eighth largest state in the country with an area of 191,791 sq km. It has a population of 528 lakh accounting for 5.1 % of India’s population. The population density in the state is 275 persons per sq km1. The state is divided into 27 districts which are further divided into 176 talukas and 29,406 villages2. Agroclimatic zones 3 The state is divided into 10 agro-climatic sub-zones. The Map A17-1 depicts the agro-climatic zones in the state. The key features of the agro-climatic zones are described in Table A17-1. 1 Eleventh Plan Vision and Strategy. Planning Department, Government of Karnataka. 2 State profiles. National Rural Health Mission, Mininstry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. http://www.mohfw.nic.in/nrhm.htm 3 Department of Agriculture, Government of Karnataka. http://raitamitra.kar.nic.in, Agroclimatic zones of Karnataka state. IMD, Government of India. http://imdbangalore.gov.in/pdf/agroclimaticzones.pdf, Ramachandra T.V. and Kamakshi G. Bioresource Potential of Karnataka, Energy & Wetlands Research Group, The Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Technical Report No: 109, November 2005. Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, http://wgbis.ces.iisc.ernet.in/energy/paper/TR109/tr109_std2.htm. A-80 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-1: Agroclimatic zones of Karnataka Region Districts Rainfall Soil Crops (mm) North Bidar 829.5 to Shallow to medium black Pulses, Jowar, Eastern 919.00 clay soils in major areas. Oilseeds, Bajra, Transition Red lateritic soils in Cotton, Sugarcane. remaining areas. North Gulbarga, parts of Raichur 633.22 to Deep to very deep black Rabi jowar, Bajra, Eastern Dry 806.6 clay soils in major areas. Pulses, Oilseeds, Zone Shallow to medium black Cotton. soils in minor pockets. Northern Bijapur, Bellary, Dharwad, parts of 464.5 to Black clay medium and Rabi jowar, Maize, Dry Zone Belgaum, Gadag, Bagalkote, 785.7 deep in major areas, sand Bajra, Groundnut, Koppal, some parts of Raichur loams in remaining areas. Cotton, Wheat, Sugarcane, Tobacco. Central Dry Parts of Tumkur, Chitradurga, 455.5 to Red Sandy loams in major Ragi, Jowar, Pulses, Zone Davanagere, parts of Chikmagaluru 717.4 areas, shallow to deep black Oilseeds. soil in remaining areas. Eastern Dry Bengaluru Rural, Bengaluru Urban, 679.1 to Red loamy soils in major Ragi, Rice, Pulses, Zone Kolar, Tumkur 888.9 areas, clay lateritic soils in Maize, Oil seeds. remaining areas. Southern Mysore, Tumkur, Mandya, parts of 670.6 to Red sandy loams in major Rice, Ragi, Pulses, Dry Zone Hassan, Chamarajnager 888.6 areas and in remaining Jowar, Tobacco. areas, pockets of black soils. Southern Parts of Hassan, parts of Mandya, 611.7 to Red sandy loams in major Rice, Ragi, Pulses, Transition parts of Mysore 1053.9 areas and in remaining Jowar, Tobacco. Zone areas, red loamy soils. Northern Parts of Dharwad, parts of 618.4 to Shallow to medium black Rice, Jowar, Transition Belgaum, Haveri 1303.2 clay soils and red sandy Groundnut, Pulses, loamy soils in equal Sugarcane, Tobacco. proportion. Hilly Zone Parts of Uttara Kannada, parts of 904.4 to Red clay loamy soils in Rice, Pulses. Chikmagaluru, parts of Dharwad, 3695.1 major areas. Kodagu, parts of Hassan, Shimoga, Parts of Belgaum Coastal Zone Dakshina Kannada, Udupi, Uttara 3010.9 to Red lateritic and coastal Rice, Pulses, Kannada 4694.4 alluvial. Sugarcane. Land use 4 4 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-81 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 About 55% of the state's geographical area is cropped. Only about 24% of the net sown area is cropped more than once. 16% of the state's geographical area is under forests. Only about 5% is under pastures and grazing land. Fallow lands account for about 9% of the area. Table A17-2: Land use in Karnataka 5 (2007-2008) Area in ha Total reporting area 19049836 Forest 3071833 Area under non-agricultural uses 1369281 Barren and non-cultivatable land 787776 Total land not available for cultivation 2157057 Permanent pastures, Grazing lands 929642 Tree Crops and Groves 289966 Culturable Wasteland 415051 Total uncultivated land (not fallows) 1634659 Fallow lands 505075 Current fallow 1262420 Total fallows 1767495 Net area sown 10418792 Area sown more than once 2473879 Total cropped area 12892671 Chart A17-1: Land use in Karnataka 6 Tables A17-2 and A17-12 give details of land use for the districts of Karnataka. As seen, the districts of Uttarkannada, Chamrajnagar, Kodagu and Shimoga have the more than 30% of their area under forests. Uttarkannada has more than 8 lakh ha of forest while Shimoga, Chamrajnagar and Chikmagalur have more than 2 lakh ha under forests. Bijapur (83.56%), Gagad and Haveri have the highest proportion of cropped area. The forested districts of Uttarkannada (11.19%) and Shimoga are also those with the least proportion of area under crops. The cropping intensity ratio 5 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 6 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-82 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 for the state is 1.24. The districts with the highest cropping intensity are Mysore (1.7), Dharwad and Gagad while Ramangara (1.03), Chickaballapur and Kolar have the lowest cropping intensity 7. Land degradation Wastelands are spread over an area of 14438 sq km in Karnataka accounting for 7.53% of the state's geographic area. Of the total wasteland in the state, land with dense and open scrub accounts for the largest proportion (6401.98 sq km). Degraded forest (scrub and agriculture) accounts for 5890.17 sq km. Map A17-2 depicts the spread of wastelands in the state. The Table A17-3 gives details of wastelands in the districts of Karnataka 8. The districts of Bellary, Chitradurga, Bagalkote, Karwar and Kolar have more than 10% of their area under wasteland. The districts of Bellary, Belgaum, Chitradurga and Gulbarga have more than 1000 sq km of wastelands while Haveri, Mysore, Dharwad and Kodagu (Coorg) have less than 150 km under wastelands. Table A17-3: Wastelands of Karnataka (2010) 9 Category of wastelands Area Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 127.11 Land with Dense Scrub 4745.46 Land with Open Scrub 1656.52 Waterlogged and marsh land-Permanent 13.23 Waterlogged and marsh land-Seasonal 4.63 Land affected by Salinity/Alkalinity – Moderate 512.97 Land affected by Salinity/Alkalinity – Strong 0.35 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 5245.32 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 644.85 Degraded pastures and grazing lands 6.36 Degraded land under plantation crops 9.04 Sands – Riverine 11.62 Sands – Coastal 9.22 Mining wastelands 28.36 Barren rocky area 1423.09 Total 14438.12 Total Geographic Area (TGA) 191791 Soils 10 The soils of Karnataka comprise of red soils (37%), laterite soils (6%), black soils (28%), alluvio- collovial soils (16%), brown forest soils (6%), coastal soils (4%), and miscellanous soils (3%). Red soils are shallow to deep in depth, well to excessively drained and have moderate to severe erosion. They are found in hills, ridges, and undulating lands of the plateua and ghats. Black soils are shallow to deep, moderately well drained, cracking clay to silty clay soils and are found in gently sloping plains, valleys, plateau summits and table lands. Alluvio-collovial soils are shallow 7 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 8 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 9 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 10 Department of Agriculture, Government of Karnataka. http://raitamitra.kar.nic.in A-83 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 to deep, moderately well drained to imperfectly and poorly drained, have salinity/alkalinity in patches and are found in valleys, lowlands and very gently sloping plains. Forest soils are deep to moderately deep, well drained to excessively drained, humus rich and slightly eroded. They are found in hill ranges and sloping lands of Western Ghats. Laterite soils are deep, well drained to excessively drained, moderate to severly eroded with surface crusting. It is estimated that land degradation affects about 39.8% of Karnataka (7631 thousand ha). Of this, more than 76% is affected by water erosion (5810 thousand ha), 12% by water logging (941 thousand ha) and 1.44% by salinity/alkalinity (110 thousand ha) 11. The Map A17-3 depicts the soil erosion affected areas in the state. As seen in Table A17-15, most of the districts in the state have either high or medium status of soil macronutrients. However, Kolar has low organic carbon while Bagalakote, Hassan, Bellary and Bijapur have low phosphorus 12. Water Rainfall The average annual rainfall is 1139 mm 13. The State receives 80% of the annual rainfall in the southwest monsoon period, 12% in the post-monsoon period, 7% in the summer and 1% in winter. The coastal region, on the windward side of the Ghats, receives 3350 mm of rainfall during the southwest monsoon. On the leeward side of the Ghats the rainfall drops to as low as 600-700 mm. The major rainfall deficit areas are in north interior Karnataka: (a) covering Bijapur, east Belgaum, north-east Dharwad and the west Raichur districts and (b) east Bellary and Chitradurga district and a small portion of Tumkur district 14. About 2/3rd of the geographical area of the State receives less than 750 mm of rainfall 15. The Map A17-4 depicts the rainfall in the state. The districts of Shimoga, Bidar, Mandya, Gulbarga, Bijapur, Chitradurga and Mysore have a higher probability of drought 16. Surface water There are seven river systems in the State viz., Krishna, Cauvery, Godavari, West Flowing Rivers, North Pennar, South Pennar and Palar. The Map A17-5 depicts the river basins in the state. Yield in the seven river basins is estimated as 3438 TMC. The economically utilizable water for irrigation is estimated as 1695 TMC 17. There are 36679 irrigation tanks in the state with a command area of over 6.84 lakh ha 18. 11 Land Degradation Scenario of India and Programmes/Schemes for development of degraded lands. Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. www.agricoop.nic.in 12 Indian Institute of Soil Science, ICAR. http://www.iiss.nic.in 13 Department of Agriculture, Government of Karnataka. http://raitamitra.kar.nic.in 14 Ramachandra T.V. and Kamakshi G. Bioresource Potential of Karnataka, Energy & Wetlands Research Group, The Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Technical Report No: 109, November 2005. Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, http://wgbis.ces.iisc.ernet.in/energy/paper/TR109/tr109_std2.htm. 15 State Water Policy 2002. Water Resources Department, Government of Karnataka. http://waterresources.kar.nic.in/state_water_policy-2002.htm 16 P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune 17 State Water Policy 2002. Water Resources Department, Government of Karnataka. http://waterresources.kar.nic.in/state_water_policy-2002.htm 18 A-84 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-4: Probability of Drought in Districts of Karnataka 19 District Probability of Moderate Probability of Severe Drought (%) Drought (%) Bidar 28 02 Bijapur 21 01 Belgaum 09 01 Gulbarga 22 06 Raichur 17 04 Kanara North 03 01 Kanara South 04 00 Bangalore 17 02 Bellary 15 03 Chikmangalur 07 03 Chitradurga 21 01 Hassan 18 01 Kolar 18 03 Coorg/Kodagu 07 00 Mandya 27 03 Mysore 20 03 Shimoga 34 02 Tumkur 19 02 Ground water The annual replenishable ground water resource in the state is estimated to be 15.93 BCM 20. The net annual ground water availability is 15.30 BCM. The annual ground water draft is estimated to be 10.71 BCM making the stage of ground water development 70%. Of the 176 administrative divisions (called talukas) in the state, 65 are classified 21 as Over Exploited, 3 as Critical and 14 as having Semi-critical groundwater status 22. As seen in the Table A17-5, the stage of groundwater development ranges from 100% or above in Kolar, Tumkur and Chitradurga to less than 30% in Raichur, Uttarkannada, Gulbarga and 19 P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune 20 BMC = Billion Cubic Meters 21 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category 22 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Groundwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). A-85 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Kodagu 23. Groundwater quality in parts of the state is affected by Salinity, Fluoride, Chloride, Iron and Nitrate. Of the 56,682 habitations in the state, the quality of drinking water is affected in 8,791 (15.5%) habitations 24. Tumkur district is the worst affected by poor water quality with 2544 habitations. The map ___ depicts the areas affected by high flouride content in groundwater. The Table A17-5 provides details of the districts and habitations affected by poor groundwater quality. Table A17-5: Districts affected by poor groundwater quality 25 Contaminant Affected districts Salinity (EC > 3000 Bagalkot, Belgaun, Bellary, Davangiri,Gadag, Gulburga, Raichur µS/cm at 25 ° C) Fluoride (>1.5 mg/l) Bagalkot, Bangalore, Belgaun, Bellary, Bidar, Bijapur, Chamarajanagara, Chikmagalur, Chitradurga, Davanagere, Dharwad, Gadag, Gulburga, Haveri, Kolar, Koppala, Mandya, Mysore, Raichur, Tumkur Chloride (> 1000 mg/l) Bagalkot, Belgaum, Gadag, Dharwar Iron (>1.0 mg/l) Bagalkot, Bangalore, Belgaum, Bellary, Bidar, Bijapur, Chikmagalur, Chitradurga, Dakshina Kannada, Davanagere, Gulburga, Hasan, Haveri, Kodagu, Kolar, Koppala, Mysore, Raichur, Shimoga, Tumkur, Udupi, Uttar Kannada Nitrate (>45 mg/l) Bagalkot, Bangalore, Belgaum, Bellary, Bidar, Bijapur, Chamarajanagara, Chikmagalur, Chitradurga, Davanagere, Dharwad, Gadag, Gulburga, Hassan, Haveri, Kodagu, Kolar, Koppala, Mandya, Mysore, Raichur, Shimoga, Udupi, Uttar Kannada Agriculture Agriculture production in the State is spread over three seasons Kharif (July to October), Rabi (October to March) and summer. Kharif accounts for nearly 70% of the annual food grain production, Rabi for 22% and Summer for 8%. The area coverage under Kharif, Rabi and summer seasons is around 70 lakh hectares, 30 lakh hectares and 6 lakh hectares, respectively. Some of the important crops grown are cereals like rice, jowar, bajra, maize, wheat, ragi and minor millets; pulses like tur, Bengal gram, horse gram, black gram, green gram, cowpea, etc; oil seeds like groundnut, sesamum, sunflower, soyabean and safflower; and, commercial crops like sugarcane, cotton and tobacco 26. Table A17-6: Production of major crops in Karnataka (2009-10) 27 Crop Area in lakh ha Production in lakh tonnes Rice 14.16 31.76 Ragi 8.33 13.69 Jowar 13.82 16.82 23 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 24 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in 25 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – Karnataka. 26 Ramachandra T.V. and Kamakshi G. Bioresource Potential of Karnataka, Energy & Wetlands Research Group, The Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Technical Report No: 109, November 2005. Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, http://wgbis.ces.iisc.ernet.in/energy/paper/TR109/tr109_std2.htm. 27 Agricultural Statistics 2009-10. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Karnataka. A-86 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Bajra 4.32 3.35 Maize 11.13 33.21 Wheat 2.76 2.80 Tur 6.81 4.51 Groundnut 9.08 7.31 Sugarcane 3.06 259.51 Cotton 4.03 7.05 Coffee 20.42 19.15 The productivity of several crops including Paddy, Jowar, Maize and Sugarcane in Karnataka is more than that of the country. However, the productivity of others such as Bajra, Red Gram, Groundnut and Cotton is lower in comparison. Table A17-7: Productivity of major crops in Karnataka 28 Productivity in kg/ha (2007-08) Karnataka India Paddy 2360 2203 Jowar 1281 981 Maize 3141 2337 Bajra 817 1030 Red Gram 697 824 Groundnut 848 1460 Cotton 313 466 Sugar cane (tonnes/ha) 89 68 The details on area, production and yield/ha of cereals and pulses in the state are provided in Table A17-6 29. Irrigation About 30% of the net sown area in the state is irrigated. Canals are the source of irrigation for about 32% of the irrigated area, tubewells account for 34%, other wells account for about 14% and tanks contribute to about 7%. The Chart A17-2 gives details of the area irrigated by different sources in the state30. Mandya and Raichur have over 70% of their irrigation coming from canals. The districts with 100% dependence on tubewells for irrigation are Chickaballapur and Kolar. Udipi, Mandya, Mysore, Uttarakannada and Gulbarga have the least dependence on tubewells for irrigation (less than 10%). In Shimoga, Hassan and Chikmagalur tanks are the source for more than 30% of the irrigated area. Irrigation induced salinity, water logging and alkalinity is a problem in about 10% of the irrigated areas in the state due to poor drainage. Salinity is acute in the command areas of Tungabhadra, Cauvery, Ghataprabha, Malaprabha, Upper Krishna, etc. Alkalinity is a problem in the command 28 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 29 30 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-87 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 areas of Upper Krishna. It is estimated that most of the irrigation tanks are silted up to more than 30% of their capacity reducing their command area by 35%. Chart A17-2: Irrigation Sources in Karnataka Agro-chemicals As seen in the Table A17-8, the use of chemical fertilizers in Karnataka is higher than the national average. Compared to the desirable N:P:K ratio of 4 : 2 : 1 – the ratio in Karnataka is 2.11 : 1.3 : 1. The use of fertilizers is high in the command areas of Krishna, Bhadra and Cauvery compared to the rainfed areas of the state. Belgaum, Bellary, Raichur, Mandya and Davanagere consume maximum amount of fertilizers as rice and sugarcane are the major crops here. Table A17-8: Use of Chemical Fertilizers 2008-09 (kg/ha) 31 N P K Total Karnataka 69.47 44.93 32.88 147.28 India 77.9 33.69 17.1 128.58 The consumption of chemical pesticides in Karnataka is low (accounting for 1.63% of India's consumption of 37959 MT in 2006-07). It shows a decreasing trend over the past 4 years – while 2700 MT of pesticides were consumed in 2002-03, the consumption decreased to 620 MT in 2006- 07 32. The use of pesticides is more prevalent in crops like cotton, red gram, rice and vegetables. Table A17-9: Consumption of chemical pesticides in Karnataka (2002-07) Year Consumption of Pesticides (MT – technical grade) 2002-03 2700 2003-04 1692 2004-05 2200 2005-06 1638 2006-07 620 31 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 32 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html A-88 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Livestock Karnataka had 5.15% of Cattle, 4.08% of buffaloes, 11.8% of sheep, 3.61% of goats and 2.31% of pig population of the country. The state has the third highest sheep population in the country. The poultry population is 5.23% (fourth in rank) of the country’s total poultry population 33. Table A17-10: Livestock Population in Karnataka ('000) 34 1993 2003 % change Crossbred cattle 1293 1602 23.90 Indigenous cattle 9539 7936 -16.8 Total cattle 10832 9538 -11.95 Buffaloes 4367 3991 -8.61 Total Bovines 15199 13530 -10.98 Sheep 8003 7256 -9.33 Goats 4875 4484 -8.02 Pigs 405 312 -22.96 Others 44 39 -11.36 Total Livestock 28526 25621 -10.18 Over the period 1997-2003, the crossbred cattle increased by about 24% but the indigenous cattle decreased significantly. The buffalo, sheep, goats and pigs population also decreased. The total livestock in the state has decreased by 10.18%. The production of fodder in the state over the period 2000-2003 shows a decrease from 493.99 lakh tonnes to 355.63 lakh tonnes. While the green fodder production from forests, permanent pastures, grazing lands and cultivated areas has shown a decline of 2 lakh tonnes, the dry fodder production (crop residue of cereals, pulses and oil seeds) shows a deep decline of over 136 lakh tonnes 35. Table A17-11: Production of fodder in Karnataka ('000 tonnes) 36 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Dry fodder 41990 32759 28368 Green fodder 7409 7299 7195 Total fodder 49399 40058 35563 Energy 37 33 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 34 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 35 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 36 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 37 ENVIS Centre, Department of Ecology and Environment, Government of Karnataka. http://parisaramahiti.kar.nic.in/karmaps.html A-89 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Firewood is the primary source of cooking fuel in about 85% of rural households. The consumption of firewood is estimated to be 0.5 tons/head/year. In the districts of the northern plateau Prosopis juliflora is the main source of fuelwood. In the Malnad districts (Uttara Kannada, Mangalore, Udupi, Shimoga, Kodagu and Chikkamagalur) fuelwood is collected from forests. Coast 38 Karnataka’s coastline extends over a length of 320 km. About 50% of the area under the coastal zone (490,000 ha) is subjected to moderate soil erosion and 6 percent of the area (56,000 ha) to severe erosion. The problem is relatively more severe in Dakshina Kannada and Udipi coasts. Karnataka contributes to 10% of the total marine fish catch in the country. The substantial increase in trawlers and the use of trawl nets is contributing to unsustainable fishing. Forests 39 Karnataka has a recorded forest cover of 38,284 sq km (about two-fifths of the state's geographical area). This comprises of 74.94% reserved forests, 10.27% protected forests and 14.79% unclassed forests. 4.91% of the forest cover is very dense forest, 55.76% is moderately dense and 39.32% is open forest. The Map A17-7 depicts the forest areas in the state. The forest types in the state include Tropical Wet Evergreen, Tropical Semi Evergreen, Tropical Moist Deciduous, Tropical Dry Deciduous and Tropical Thorn, and Subtropical Broadleaved Hill Forests. About 30% of the total forest cover of the state is estimated to be degraded due to a range of pressures including grazing, fuelwood extraction, encroachment, etc. Table A17-19 gives details of district wise forest cover in the state. As seen, Chikmagalur, Dakshin Kannda, Kodagu, Shimoga and Uttar Kannada have the maximum extent of very dense forest. The districts with the largest extent of moderately dense forest are Uttar Kannada, Shimoga, Chikmagalur and Kodagu. The Protected Areas in Karnataka comprises of 21 sanctuaries and 5 National Parks. These constitute 3.31% of the geographical area of the State (6351 sq km). The state has two Tiger Reserves – Bandipur Nagarhole (extension) and Bhadra. Table A17-20 gives details of the protected areas in the state. Karnataka’s forests support about 25% of the elephant population and about 10% of the tiger population of the country. The Western Ghats which cover about 60% of the state’s forests is one among the 18 biodiversity hotspots of the world. Summary of key environmental issues Existing Issues Potential Interventions Land degradation – about 40% of the state's geographical area is degraded. Soil and water conservation Soil erosion – particularly water erosion (accounting for 76% of the land Treatment of saline/sodic soils degradation) - especially in all northeastern plain districts, and water erosion in the Integrated nutrient management coastal and Western Ghat districts. Water quality management Overexploitation of groundwater – 47% of blocks classified as having over- Fodder management exploited/ critical/ semi-critical groundwater status. Poor water quality in 15% habitations. 38 ENVIS Centre, Department of Ecology and Environment, Government of Karnataka. http://parisaramahiti.kar.nic.in/karmaps.html 39 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. http://www.fsi.nic.in A-90 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Excessive chemical fertilizer use – especially in Shimoga, Mandya, Bellary and Raichur. Excessive chemical pesticide use – especially in Gulbarga, Bijapur and Raichur. Decreasing fodder production. A-91 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-1: Agroclimatic zones of Karnataka 40 40 ENVIS Centre, Department of Ecology and Environment, Government of Karnataka. http://parisaramahiti.kar.nic.in/karmaps.html A-92 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-12: Land Use in Districts of Karnataka 2007-08 41 (area in ha) Total Area and Classification of Area in Districts of Karnataka 2007-08 (area in ha) Area under Barren and Total land Permanent Total Total non- non- not pastures, uncultivated Total Area sown reporting agricultural cultivatable available for Grazing Tree Crops Culturable land (not Fallow Current Total Net area cropped more than area Forest uses land cultivation lands and Groves Wasteland fallows) lands fallow fallows sown area once BAGALKOT 658877 81126 28832 24810 53642 3429 274 2035 5738 9971 40124 50095 468276 600414 132138 BANGALORE 229519 11322 39841 11124 50965 3879 12227 3898 20004 14470 28906 43376 103852 134084 30232 BANGALORE 217410 5055 111436 4911 116347 5674 7498 4444 17616 5074 14434 19508 58884 60814 1930 BELGAUM 1344382 190424 69368 44342 113710 24807 3085 12761 40653 6997 159577 166574 833021 1051947 218926 BELLARY 813196 97017 68623 53477 122100 5472 3606 24839 33917 27805 68296 96101 464061 602438 138377 BIDAR 541765 27707 22006 19127 41133 13964 10861 19382 44207 41519 56972 98491 330227 411180 80953 BIJAPUR 1053471 1977 35847 29059 64906 9575 1316 5502 16393 5685 85297 90982 879213 1060841 181628 CHAMRAJNAGAR 569901 275610 24606 21434 46040 22750 4782 7637 35169 19145 7874 27019 186063 218655 32592 CHICKABALLAPUR 404501 49704 31933 34302 66235 59510 6482 6143 72135 8703 37025 45728 170699 176468 5769 CHIKMAGALUR 722075 200485 42639 28322 70961 90186 21249 19404 130839 4797 18244 23041 296749 323014 26265 CHITRADURGA 770702 73719 51243 25403 76646 88740 11317 21615 121672 24459 38770 63229 435436 484550 49114 DAKSHINAKANNADA 477149 128476 63790 59063 122853 19150 31962 31297 82409 5595 7417 13012 130399 158179 27780 DEVANAGRRE 597597 89918 38963 20533 59496 19538 4955 8525 33018 5861 19533 25394 389771 422634 32863 DHARWAD 427329 35235 21747 3985 25732 3571 178 2669 6418 6819 34631 41450 318494 528521 210027 GAGAD 465715 32614 10481 11628 22109 2592 263 1010 3865 3459 18937 22396 384731 558533 173802 GULBARGA 1610208 69089 67952 63155 131107 37610 1845 11802 51257 22995 177990 200985 1157770 1444923 287153 HASSAN 662602 58775 78681 30365 109046 32943 6957 14142 54042 36300 34784 71084 369655 440719 71064 HAVERI 485156 47454 31687 5793 37480 12209 2136 2989 17334 5325 12320 17645 365243 429658 64415 KODAGU(COORG) 410775 134597 23961 31010 54971 14774 23452 9128 47354 2738 3763 6501 167352 179229 11877 KOLAR 374966 20620 45677 28870 74547 39418 7009 6397 52824 12813 41301 54114 172861 179355 6494 KOPAL 552495 29451 38870 16627 55497 14675 210 2568 17453 0 68440 68440 381654 508052 126398 MANDYA 498244 24765 60906 21519 82425 38049 3382 41955 83386 42999 30724 73723 233945 283928 49983 MYSORE 676382 62851 67028 45812 112840 55256 6871 21460 83587 40080 35718 75798 341306 579739 238433 RAICHUR 835843 18167 20563 20084 40647 19816 13680 10712 44208 40832 116438 157270 575551 722518 146967 RAMANGARA 355912 69946 26225 24339 50564 24662 3950 1178 29790 30127 16556 46683 158929 163595 4666 SHIMOGA 847784 276855 88453 13312 101765 163463 26868 16307 206638 30337 11300 41637 220889 256163 35274 TUMKUR 1064755 45177 84241 67539 151780 76453 21033 62642 160128 30093 69384 99477 608193 664314 56121 UDIPPI 356446 100102 39260 11597 50857 10625 47704 36160 94489 8344 1778 10122 100876 122943 22067 UTTARAKANNADA 1024679 813595 34422 16234 50656 16852 4814 6450 28116 11733 5887 17620 114692 125263 10571 State 19049836 3071833 1369281 787776 2157057 929642 289966 415051 1634659 505075 1262420 1767495 10418792 12892671 2473879 41 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-93 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-13: Wastelands in Districts of Karnataka 42 (2010) Uttar Bangalore Category Bellary Belgaum Chitradurga Gulbarga Kolar Bagalkote Tumkur Raichur Kannada R Karwar Koppal Davangere Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 6.14 0.36 21.31 2.5 25.97 1.04 7.22 0 0.23 9.98 0 0 1.49 Land with Dense Scrub 258.79 420.74 511.93 332.99 488.48 112.92 422.89 227.5 36.01 207.15 127.13 204.8 63.76 Land with Open Scrub 42.72 117.49 188.8 125.63 50.35 57.58 7.66 55.94 10.09 42.64 66.9 54.98 101.88 Waterlogged and marsh land- Permanent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0 7.25 0 0 0 0 Waterlogged and marsh land- Seasonal 0 0 0 0 0 4.63 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Land affected by Salinity/Alkalinity – Moderate 72.3 2.32 80.51 124.14 0.14 1.73 19.69 72.75 0.02 0 0 84.76 28.49 Land affected by Salinity/Alkalinity – Strong 0 0 0.27 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 936.33 459.08 161.11 332.29 171.3 502.61 145.27 228.49 353.44 259.34 301.4 85.02 314.38 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 13.09 119.56 23.54 0.04 19.39 10.64 0.26 0 185.32 15.38 83.83 2.03 0.17 Degraded pastures and grazing lands 0 0 3.33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Degraded land under plantation crops 0.74 0 0 0 0 0.68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 Sands – Riverine 7.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0 Sands – Coastal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.17 0 0 0 0 Mining wastelands 0.84 0 2.29 2.97 0.05 0 0 0 0.98 0.51 0.04 4.92 0.16 Barren rocky area 124.68 17.63 70.88 113.82 174.91 114.39 135.87 108.29 64.67 87.35 4.02 119.43 4.91 Total 1462.73 1137.18 1063.97 1034.45 930.59 806.22 738.89 692.96 659.19 622.36 583.31 555.98 515.54 TGA 8419 13415 8440 16224 8223 6575 10598 6828 10291 5815 4843 7189 5966 % to TGA 17.37 8.48 12.61 6.38 11.32 12.26 6.97 10.15 6.41 10.7 12.04 7.73 8.64 42 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. A-94 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-14: Wastelands in Districts of Karnataka 43 (2010) Dakshin Bangalore Category Bidar Mandya Hassan Chamarajnagar Chikmanglur Gadag Bijapur Udupi Kannada Haveri Mysore U Dharwad Coorg Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 0 12.13 15.26 0.95 6.49 1.12 8.04 0 0 3.78 1.51 1.62 0 0 Land with Dense Scrub 222.32 125.65 220.64 206.06 131.87 39.73 11.58 30.31 89.63 75.96 75.37 60.59 37.65 3.01 Land with Open Scrub 169.76 62.24 101.7 62.78 13.64 47.91 146.16 14.82 13.07 20.61 7.73 46.05 23.52 3.88 Waterlogged and marsh land- Permanent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.37 4.57 0 0 0 0 0 Waterlogged and marsh land- Seasonal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Land affected by Salinity/Alkalinity – Moderate 0 0.09 0 11.23 1.54 6.7 2.9 0 0 0 3.61 0 0.06 0 Land affected by Salinity/Alkalinity – Strong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 59.54 159.77 67.73 106.3 63.43 196.06 15.36 50.83 28.28 43.8 27.7 20.93 69.01 86.51 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 2.65 0.11 0 13.25 89.02 0.75 0.05 36.12 1.18 0 15.66 1.47 0 11.33 Degraded pastures and grazing lands 0 0 0 0 0.41 0 0 2.62 0 0 0 0 0 0 Degraded land under plantation crops 0 0 0 0 0.35 0 0 4.16 0 2.8 0 0 0 0 Sands – Riverine 0 2.08 0 0.59 0 0.32 0 0 0.12 0.08 1.29 0 0 0 Sands – Coastal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.08 1.96 0 0 0 0 0 Mining wastelands 0 5.89 0 0.15 8.32 0 0 0.51 0.35 0.31 0.05 0 0.03 0 Barren rocky area 1.9 66.87 13.34 5.22 5.4 22.31 71.6 38.7 41.23 1.04 6.01 1.84 0.89 5.88 Total 456.18 434.82 418.67 406.52 320.47 314.89 255.69 185.51 180.39 148.39 138.93 132.5 131.16 110.61 TGA 5448 4961 6814 5685 7201 4657 10494 3598 8465 4851 6269 2190 4230 4102 % to TGA 8.37 8.76 6.14 7.15 4.45 6.76 2.44 5.16 2.13 3.06 2.22 6.05 3.1 2.7 43 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. A-95 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-2: Wastelands in Districts of Karnataka 44 (2010) 44 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. A-96 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-3: Soil erosion in Karnataka 45 45 ENVIS Centre, Department of Ecology and Environment, Government of Karnataka. http://parisaramahiti.kar.nic.in/karmaps.html A-97 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-15: Status of soil macronutrients in districts of Karnataka 46 Name of the districts OC % P (kg/ha) K (kg/ha) Bangalore (R) M H - Bangalore (u) M M - Bagalakote H L - Chitradurga M M - Davanagere M H - Dharwad H M - Gadag H M - Haveri H M - Kolar L M - North canra - - - Belagaum H M - South Canara - - - Gulburga M M H Hassan M L H Raichur M M H Mandya H H M Mysore M M H Chamrajnager H H H Bellari M L H Shimoga M M M Kodagi H M H Bijapura M L H Tumkur M M H Bidar M M H Chikkamagalore H M M 46 Indian Institute of Soil Science, ICAR. http://www.iiss.nic.in A-98 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-4: Rainfall in Karnataka 47 47 ENVIS Centre, Department of Ecology and Environment, Government of Karnataka. http://parisaramahiti.kar.nic.in/karmaps.html A-99 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-5: Riverbasins of Karnataka 48 48 ENVIS Centre, Department of Ecology and Environment, Government of Karnataka. http://parisaramahiti.kar.nic.in/karmaps.html A-100 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-16: Districtwise Groundwater Resources in Karnataka 49 (2004) 49 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Groundwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). A-101 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-17: District-wise habitations affected by poor water quality in Karnataka 50 Total Fluoride Arsenic Iron Salinity Nitrate BAGALKOT 140 80 0 30 28 2 BANGALORE RURAL 34 0 0 34 0 0 BANGLORE URBAN 384 58 0 324 2 0 BELGAUM 321 63 0 245 13 0 BELLARY 389 357 0 5 17 10 BIDAR 14 7 0 0 3 4 BIJAPUR 314 161 0 80 72 1 CHAMARAJANAGAR 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHIK BALLAPUR 265 261 0 0 3 1 CHIKMAGALUR 158 1 0 155 2 0 CHITRADURGA 530 212 0 228 88 2 DAKSHIN KANNAD 231 1 0 229 1 0 DAVANGERE 384 277 0 2 57 48 DHARWAD 46 2 0 38 6 0 GADAG 51 50 0 0 1 0 GULBARGA 59 59 0 0 0 0 HASSAN 171 79 0 33 59 0 HAVERI 19 18 0 0 0 1 KODAGU 9 0 0 9 0 0 KOLAR 623 193 0 160 7 263 KOPPAL 180 161 0 5 14 0 MANDYA 447 201 0 230 15 1 MYSORE 426 49 0 377 0 0 RAICHUR 363 235 18 0 110 0 RAMANAGARAM 138 99 0 31 5 3 SHIMOGA 257 44 0 202 11 0 TUMKUR 2544 411 0 1331 483 319 UDUPI 196 1 0 195 0 0 UTTAR KANNADA 50 0 0 48 2 0 YADGIR 48 4 16 27 1 0 TOTAL 8791 3084 34 4018 1000 655 50 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in A-102 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-6: Flouride affected areas in Karnataka 51 51 ENVIS Centre, Department of Ecology and Environment, Government of Karnataka. http://parisaramahiti.kar.nic.in/karmaps.html A-103 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-18: Irrigated area (Sourcewise) in Districts of Karnataka 2007-08 52 (area in ha) Canals Tanks Tubewells Other wells Other sources Total BAGALKOT 47509 798 80357 11581 88512 228757 BANGALORE R 0 128 26422 65 43 26658 BANGALORE U 0 465 10300 217 0 10982 BELGAUM 91039 2362 108061 114358 123989 439809 BELLARY 78152 2928 63251 5482 36261 186074 BIDAR 1168 973 18363 24894 1022 46420 BIJAPUR 72633 4074 75155 107147 19213 278222 CHAMRAJNAGAR 11344 8099 36282 7491 550 63766 CHICKABALLAPUR 0 0 43667 0 0 43667 CHIKMAGALUR 2765 10705 12134 733 8139 34476 CHITRADURGA 4940 806 77227 0 0 82973 DAKSHINAKANNADA 0 0 9686 40330 20632 70648 DEVANAGRRE 51795 1522 81787 693 18605 154402 DHARWAD 24957 60 14185 0 283 39485 GAGAD 21305 1079 27299 1323 25233 76239 GULBARGA 129689 3248 16220 37515 6095 192767 HASSAN 34595 28956 22753 1072 1217 88593 HAVERI 0 9909 44118 0 16716 70743 KODAGU(COORG) 2100 394 1013 54 432 3993 KOLAR 0 0 31090 0 0 31090 KOPAL 30030 460 65047 0 5220 100757 MANDYA 96873 18989 4512 7157 3443 130974 MYSORE 108790 20710 9385 19900 358 159143 RAICHUR 133856 2763 19343 17999 11491 185452 RAMANGARA 3352 25 37092 0 210 40679 SHIMOGA 42176 57626 20804 5521 10845 136972 TUMKUR 1661 24713 120790 969 32 148165 UDIPPI 0 1365 401 21304 9771 32841 UTTARAKANNADA 0 4973 2176 8015 11746 26910 Total 990729 208130 1078920 433820 420058 3131657 52 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-104 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-19: District-wise Forest Cover in Karnataka 53 (2007) (are in sq km) 53 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. http://www.fsi.nic.in A-105 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-7: Forest Cover in Karnataka 54 54 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. http://www.fsi.nic.in A-106 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-20: Protected areas of Karnataka 55 Protected Area Area in sq km District Key species Anshi National Park 250.00 Uttara Kannada Bandipur National Park 874.20 Mysore, Chamarajanagar Bannerghatta National Park 104.27 Bangalore Kudremukha National Park 600.32 Dakshin Kannada, Udipi,Chikmagalur Nagarahole National Park 643.39 Kodagu, Mysore Adichunchanagiri Peacock Sanctuary 0.84 Mandya Arabithittu Wildlife Sanctuary 13.50 Mysore Attiveri Bird Sanctuary 2.23 Uttara Kannada BRT Wildlife Sanctuary 539.58 Chikmagalur, Shimoga Bhadra Wildlife Sanctuary 492.46 Chamarajanagar Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary 181.80 Kodagu Cauvery Wildlife Sanctuary 102.59 Mysore, Bangalore, Mandya Dandeli Wildlife Sanctuary 475.02 Uttara Kannada Doraji Bear Sanctuary 55.87 Dharwar Ghataprabha Wildlife Sanctuary 20.78 Belgaum Gudavi Bird Sanctuary 0.73 Shimoga Melukote Wildlife Sanctuary 45.82 Mandya Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary 247.00 Udipi Nugu Wildlife Sanctuary 30.32 Mysore Pushpagiri Wildlife Sanctuary 102.59 Kodagu, Dakshin Kannada Ranganathittu Bird Sanctuary 0.67 Dharwad Ranibennur Blackbuck Sanctuary 119.00 Mysore Sharavathi Wildlife Sanctuary 431.23 Shimoga Shettihalla Wildlife Sanctuary 395.60 Shimoga Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary 88.40 Udipi Thalakaveri Wildlife Sanctuary 105.00 Kodagu Bandipur Tiger Reserve 874 Bhadra Tiger Reserve 492 Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve 5520 55 ENVIS Wildlife and Protected Areas, Wildlife Institute of India, Mininstry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. http://wiienvis.nic.in A-107 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 MADHYA PRADESH Madhya Pradesh is a land locked state located between latitude 21°06'N to 26°54'N and longitude 74°02' and 82°47' E. It is the second largest state in India with an area of 308,245 sq km. The total population of the state is 603 lakh with population density of 196 persons per sq km 56. The state has 48 districts divided into 313 blocks and 55,393 villages 57. Agroclimatic zones 58 The state is divided into 11 agro-climatic zones on the basis of rainfall and temperature. The key features of the agro-climatic zones are described in Table A17-21. Table A17-21: Agroclimatic zones of Madhya Pradesh Zone Districts Rainfall in mm Soils Crop zone Chhattisgarh plains Red and yellow (medium) 1200 to 1600 Balaghat Rice Northern Hill Red and yellow, medium 1200 to 1600 Shahdol, Mandla, Dindori, Rice Region of black and skeltal Anppur, Sidhi (Partly), Umaria Chhattisgarh (medium/light) Kymore Plateau & Mixed red and black soils 1000 to 1400 Rewa, Satna, Panna, Jabalpur, Wheat Rice Satpura Hills (medium) Seoni, Katni, Sidhi (except Singroli tehsil of Jabalpur) Central Narmada Deep black (deep) 1200 to 1600 Narsinghpur, Hoshangabad Wheat Valley Sehore (Partly), Raisen (Partly) Vindhya Plateau Medium black and deep 1200 to 1400 Bhopal, Sagar, Damoh, Vidisha, Wheat black (medium/heavy) Raisen (except Bareli Tehsil), Sehore (except Budni Tehsil), Guna (Partly). Gird Region Alluvial (light) 800 to 1000 Gwalior, Bhind, Morena, Wheat Jowar Sheopur-Kala, Shivpuri (except Pichore, Karera, Narwar, Khaniadana Tehsils), Guna (except Aron, Raghogarh, Chachoda Tehsils), Ashoknagar Bundelkhand Mixed red and black 800 to 1400 Chhattarpur, Datia, Tikamgarh, Wheat Jowar (medium) Shivpuri (Partly) Satpura Plateau Shallow black (medium) 1000 to 1200 Betul, Chhindwara Wheat Jowar Malwa Plateau Medium black (medium) 800 to 1200 Mandsaur, Neemuch, Ratlam, Cotton Jowar Ujjain, Dewas, Indore, Shajapur, Rajgarh, Dhar (Partly) Nimar Plains Medium black (medium) 800 to 1000 Khandwa, Burhanpur, Khargone, Cotton Jowar Barwani, Harda, Dhar (Partly) Jhabua Hills Medium black skeletal 800 to 1000 Jhabua (except Cotton Jowar (light/medium) Petlawad Tehsil), Dhar (Partly) Land use 59 About 48% of the state's geographical area is cropped and about 28% of the land is under forests. Only about 4% is under pastures and grazing land. Fallow lands account for about 4.5% of the area. 56 Census of India, 2001. 57 State profiles. National Rural Health Mission, Mininstry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. http://www.mohfw.nic.in/nrhm.htm 58 Department of Agriculture, Government of Madhya Pradesh. http://mpkrishi.org 59 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-108 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-22: Land use in Madhya Pradesh (2006-07) Area in ha Total reporting area 30755753 Forest 8698529 Area under non-agricultural uses 1991770 Barren and non-cultivatable land 1405503 Total land not available for cultivation 3397273 Permanent pastures, Grazing lands 1348363 Tree Crops and Groves 18665 Culturable Wasteland 1176732 Total uncultivated land (not fallows) 2543760 Fallow lands 611914 Current fallow 768915 Total fallows 1380829 Net area sown 14735362 Total cropped area 20113059 Area sown more than once 5377697 Chart A17-3: Land use in Madhya Pradesh (2006-07) The Table A17-22 gives details of land use for the districts of Madhya Pradesh. As seen, the districts of Mandla, Burhanpur, Balaghat and Umariya have over half of their area under forests. Of these, Mandla and Burhanpur top the list with about 61% and 59% of their land under forests. Sagar, Rajgarh and Chhatarpur have more than fifty thousand hectares under pastures and grazing lands. While Dindori, Chhatarpur and Tikamgarh have more than 15% of their area under fallows, twelve other districts have less than 1% area under fallows. The cropping intensity ratio for the state is 1.36. The districts with the highest cropping intensity are Indore (1.77) and Harda (1.76) while Bhind (1.07) and Burhanpur (1.14) have the lowest cropping intensity. A-109 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Land degradation 60 Wastelands are spread over an area of 40,042 sq.km in Madhya Pradesh accounting for 13% of the state's geographic area. Of the total wasteland in the state, more than half (56.42%) is scrub land, followed by degraded forest (38.44%). The Map A17-8 depicts the spread of wastelands in the state. Table A17-23: Wastelands of Madhya Pradesh 61 (2010) Area in sq % of Category km TGA Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 1493.69 0.48 Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 8.37 0 Land with Dense Scrub 6361.08 2.06 Land with Open Scrub 16231.47 5.27 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 12256.23 3.98 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 3136.55 1.02 Degraded pastures and grazing lands 20.19 0.01 Mining wastelands 75.72 0.02 Industrial wastelands 1.48 0 Barren rocky area 458.19 0.15 Total 40042.97 12.99 Total Geographic Area (TGA) 308252 Table A17-23 gives details of wastelands in the districts of Madhya Pradesh. The districts of Shyopur & Kalan, Morena and Neemuch have more than 25% of their area under wasteland. Land with medium gullies is highest in Morena (about 496 sq km) and Bhind (about 399 sq km). Land under degraded scrub forest is the highest in Shyopur & Kalan (more than 1150 sq km), Barwani and Shivpuri. Soils 62 The State has 4 different soil types. The western and central regions are covered by medium and deep soils constituting 53% of the soil area. The eastern part of the State is primarily covered by black soils which comprises of 25-26% of the total geographical area. Table A17-24 gives details of the status of the soil macronutrients in the districts of Madhya Pradesh. 14 of the 49 districts (29%) have low Nitrogen status, 13 districts have low Phosphorus status and 7 have low Potassium status 63. Table A17-24: Soil types in Madhya Pradesh 64 S.No. Type of soil and extent Districts with this soil type I Medium & Deep Soils Narsingpur, Hosangabad, Harda, Shahdol, Umaria, Jabalpur, Katni, Sagar, (52.95%) Damoh, Vidisha, Raisen, Bhopal, Sehore, Rajgarh, Ujjain, Dewas, Shajapur, Mandsaur, Neemach, Ratlam, Jhabua, Dhar, Indore, Khargone, Barwani, Khandwa, Guna (Partly), Shivpuri (Partly), Datia (Partly), and Sidhi (Partly) 60 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 61 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 62 Department of Agriculture, Government of Andhra Pradesh. http://agri.ap.nic.in 63 Indian Institute of Soil Science, ICAR. http://www.iiss.nic.in 64 Agriculture/Agroprocessing Industry, Government of Madhya Pradesh. http://www.mpnricentre.nic.in A-110 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 II Alluvial Soils (10.90%) Gwalior, Morena, Sheopurkala, Bhind III Shallow & Medium Black Betul, Chhindwara and Seoni Soils (9.86%) IV Black Soils (26.39%) Mandla, Dindori , Balaghat, Rewa, Satna, Panna, Chhatarpuur, Tikamgarh, Shivpuri.(Partly), Guna (Partly), Datia (Partly), and Sidhi (Partly) Water It is estimated that surface water availability in the state is 81.50 lakh ha m while the groundwater availability is 34.5 lakh ha m. Table A17-25: Water resources in Madhya Pradesh 65 Lakh hectare metres Surface water available (75% dependable yield) 81.50 Utlisation of available surface water 56.80 Utlisation of available surface water by neighbouring states 24.70 Ground water availablty 34.50 Irrigation potential created 20.40 Rainfall The average annual rainfall in the state is 917 mm. High rainfall in the range of 1100 mm to 2200 mm occurs in Seoni, Balaghat, Umaria, Katni, Sidhi, Panna and Satna. Low rainfall below 600 mm occurs in Ratlam, Ujjain, Barwani, Khargone, Rajgarh, etc 66. As seen in Table A17-36, the districts of Dewas, Datia, Ratlam, Dhar, Ujjain, Sidhi, Hoshangabad, Sehpore, Seoni, Jhabua and Shajapur have a higher probability of drought (20% or more) 67. Surface water The State has five river basins – Ganga, Narmada, Tapti, Mahi and Godavri. Three major rain-fed river systems – Narmada (Shahdol district), Tapti (Betul District) and Mahi (Dhar District) originate in low mountains in the state. Madhya Pradesh also provides water to Ganga and Yamuna through Chambal, Sindh, Betwa and Son, Rihand and Ken rivers and to Godavari river basin through Wain Ganga (Pranhita) rivers. Most water courses remain dry from January to June. Ground water The annual replenishable ground water resource in the state is estimated to be 37.19 BCM 68. The net annual ground water availability is 35.33 BCM. The annual ground water draft is estimated to be 17.12 BCM making the stage of ground water development 48%. Of the 459 administrative divisions (called blocks) in the state, 24 are classified 69 as Over Exploited, 5 are classified as 65 State of Environment and Issues. ENVIS-Madhya Pradesh. http://www.mpenvis.nic.in/ 66 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – Madhya Pradesh. 67 P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune 68 BMC = Billion Cubic Meters 69 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category A-111 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Critical and 19 are classified as having Semi-critical groundwater status 70. As seen in the Table A17-26, the stage of groundwater development exceeds 100% in Ratlam (117%), Shajapur, Mandsaur, Ujjain, Indore and Dhar. It is less than 10% in Mandla (6%), Shahdol, Dindori, Annupur and Umaria. The Annex ___ gives details of the blocks classified as Over Exploited, Critical and Semi-critical with respect to the groundwater status. Groundwater quality in parts of the state is affected by high salinity, Fluoride, Chloride, Iron and Nitrate. Of the 1,06,291 habitations in the state, the quality of drinking water is affected in 3358 habitations. These include 2906 habitations affected by Flouride, 349 habitations affected by high salinity, 97 habitations affected by Iron contamination and 6 affected by Nitrate contamination 71. Tables A17-37 and A17-38 provide details of the districts and habitations affected by poor groundwater quality. Table A17-26: Districts affected by poor groundwater quality 72 Contaminant Affected districts Salinity (EC>3000 µS/cm at 25° C) Bhind, Indore, Jhabua, Sheopur, Ujjain Fluoride (>1.5 mg/l) Bhind, Chhatarpur, Chhindwara, Datia, Dewas, Dhar, Guna, Gwalior, Harda, Jabalpur, Jhabua, Khargaon, Mandsaur, Rajgarh, Satna, Seoni, Shajapur, Sheopur, Sidhi Chloride (>1000 mg/l) Bhind, Ujjain Iron (>1.0 mg/l) Balaghat, Betul, Bhind, Chhatarpur, Chhindwara, Guna, Gwalior, Hoshangabad, Narsinghpur, Panna, Raisen, Rajgarh, Rewa, Sagar, Satna, Sehore, Seoni, Shahdol, Shajapur, Sidhi, Ujjain, Umaria, Vidisha, Dindori, East Nimar Nitrate (>45 mg/l) Anuppur, Ashok Nagar, Balaghat, Barwani, Betul, Bhind, Bhopal, Burhanpur, Chhatarpur, Chhindwara, Damoh, Datia, Dewas, Dhar, Gwalior, Harda, Hoshangabad, Indore, Jabalpur, Jhabua, Katni, Khandwa, Khargaon, Mandla, Mandsaur, Morena, Narsimhapur, Neemuch, Panna, Raisen, Rajgarh, Ratlam, Rewa, Sagar, Satna, Sehore, Seoni, Shahdol, Shajapur, Sheopur, Shivpuri, Sidhi, Tikamgarh, Ujjain, Umaria, Vidisha Agriculture About 47.91% of the state's geographical area is cultivated (147.35 lakh ha out of 307.55 lakh ha). The main crops grown are Cereals - Wheat, Jowar, Maize, Paddy; Oilseeds - Soybean, Mustard, Linseed; Pulses - Gram, Tur, Masoor; Vegetables - Green Peas, Cauliflower, Okra, Tomato, Onion, Potato; Fruits - Mango, Guava, Orange, Papaya, Banana; Spices - Chillies, Garlic, Coriander, Ginger, Turmeric. The State is also the largest producer of soya bean (28% of national production) and gram and the second largest producer of jowar and masoor in the Country. Out of the total gross cropped area 59% is sown in the Kharif season and 41% in the Rabi season. The details on area, production and yield/ha of the major crops in the state are provided in Table A17-27 73. 70 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 71 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in 72 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – Madhya Pradesh. 73 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-112 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-27: Productivity of major crops in Madhya Pradesh 74 Productivity in kg/ha (2006-07) Madhya Pradesh India Wheat 1835 2708 Maize 976 1912 Jowar 1039 844 Soyabean 1006 1063 Gram 980 845 Red Gram (Tur) 683 650 Irrigation 43.19% of the net sown area in the state is irrigated. Of the net irrigated area of 6364557 ha, nearly 28% is irrigated by tubewells and 38% by other wells. Irrigation from canals accounts for about 17% of the net irrigated area while tanks account for just 2.34%. The Chart ___ gives details of the area irrigated by different sources in the state. 75 The rain rich eastern tract is more dependent on surface water for irrigation, while groundwater dependence is found to be high in the western tract in general and Malwa Plateau in particular. Around 20 per cent of the total dry land districts of the country fall within Madhya Pradesh, reflecting the predominance of dry land agriculture in the state 76. The districts with the highest dependence on tubewells for irrigation (more than 60%) are Indore (66.56%) and Ujjain (62.01%). Canals irrigate more than 50% of the irrigated area in Mandla, Dindori, Datia, Balaghat, Harda, Hoshangabad and Shoepur. Tank irrigation is highest in the districts of Balaghat (20.43%) and Jhabua (15.77%). Wells (other than tubewells) account for more than 70% irrigated area in Mandsaur, Tikamgarh and Chhatarpur 77. Agro-chemicals As seen in the Table A17-28, the use of chemical fertilizers in Madhya Pradesh is much lesser as compared to the national averages. It is also imbalanceed as compared to the desirable N:P:K ratio of 4 : 2 : 1 – the ratio in Madhya Pradesh is 8.93 : 5.89 : 1. Table A17-28: Use of Chemical Fertilizers 2008-09 (kg/ha) N P K Total Madhya Pradesh 39.94 26.36 4.47 70.77 India 77.9 33.69 17.1 128.58 The consumption of chemical pesticides in Madhya Pradesh shows an increasing trend over the past 4 years – while 662 MT of pesticides were consumed in 2003-04, the consumption increased to 879 MT in 2006-07 78. 74 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 75 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 76 Natural Resource Management Strategies to enhance Tribal Livelihood in Madhya Pradesh under the Central India Initiative. Collectives for Integrated Livelihood Initiatives (CinI). Sir Ratan Tata Trust. http://www.cinicell.org 77 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 78 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html A-113 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-29: Trend in Pesticide Consumption in Madhya Pradesh 2002-2007 79 Year Consumption of Pesticides (MT – technical grade) 2002-03 1026 2003-04 662 2004-05 749 2005-06 787 2006-07 879 Livestock Madhya Pradesh has 10.21% of Cattle, about 7.74% of buffaloes, 6.55% of the goat and 2.65% of the pig population of the country 80. Table A17-30: Livestock population in Madhya Pradesh ('000) 81 1997 2003 % change Crossbred cattle 177 317 79.10 Indigenous cattle 19320 18595 -3.75 Total cattle 19497 18912 -3.00 Buffaloes 6648 7575 13.94 Total Bovines 26145 26487 1.31 Sheep 657 546 -16.89 Goats 6470 8142 25.84 Pigs 375 358 -4.53 Others 120 83 -30.83 Total Livestock 33767 35616 5.48 As seen in Table A17-30, over the period 1997 and 2003, the number of crossbreed cattle increased by 79% while indigenous cattle declined. While there is a decline in the number of bovines, the goat population has increased tremendously. This indicates a heightened pressure on land for browsing (especially forests). However, the production of fodder in the state has been on the decline. The estimated green fodder production from forests, permanent pastures, grazing lands and cultivated areas has declined from 349.21 lakh tonnes in 2000-2001 to 332.27 lakh tonnes in 2002-03. Dry fodder production (crop residue of cereals, pulses and oil seeds) over the same period declined from 292.87 lakh tonnes to 272.23 lakh tonnes 82. 79 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 80 17th Indian Livestock Census. All India Summary Report 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 81 17th Indian Livestock Census. All India Summary Report 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 82 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in A-114 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-31: Production of fodder in Madhya Pradesh ('000 tonnes) 83 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 Dry fodder 29287 37672 27223 Green fodder 34921 34059 33227 Total fodder 64208 71732 60450 Forests 84 Forests constitute 31% of the geographic area of Madhya Pradesh (94,689 sq km). This is comprised of, by legal status, 65.36% reserved forests, 32.84% protected forest and 1.8% un- classed forests. The forest cover comprises of 6,647 sq km of very dense forest, 35,007 sq km of moderately dense forest and 36,046 sq km of open forest. The Map A17-9 depicts the forest cover in the state. The 3 major forest types in the State are Tropical Dry Deciduous, Tropical Moist Deciduous and Tropical Thorn Forest. Tables A17-41 and 42 gives details of the forest cover in the districts of Madhya Pradesh. The districts with the maximum extent of very dense forest are Balaghat (1339 sq km) and Dindori (1033 sq km). The maximum extent of moderately dense forest is found in Balaghat (2711 sq km), Chhindwara (2044 sq km), Betul (1967 sq km) and Sidhi (1936 sq km). About 22,600 villages in the state are located in or near forest areas 85. The forests of Madhya Pradesh have many important non-wood forest products. These include Tendu leaves or Bidi leaves (Diospyros melanoxylon), Sal Seed (Shorea robusta), Chebulic myrobolan or Harra (Terminalia chebula), Gum, Chironji (Buchanania lanzan), flower and seeds of Mahua (Madhuca indica) and flowers, seeds, bark and roots of various plant species. Madhya Pradesh has 9 National Parks and 25 Wildlife Sanctuaries covering an area of 10814 sq km (3.51% of the geographic area). The Table A17-43 gives details of these protected areas (district, area, key faunal species). Summary of key environmental issues Existing Issues Potential Interventions Severe soil erosion (gullies, ravines) affect about 1500 sq Soil and water conservation (soil moisture conservation, km erosion control, rainwater harvesting, improved irrigation Poor soil fertility status (30% of the districts have poor N efficiency) and P status) Soil testing and fertilizer scheduling High probability of drought (>20%) in 11 districts Increased use of organic manures and non-chemical Overexploitation of groundwater in 6 districts pesticides Poor water quality in 3358 habitations Water quality management High dependence on tubewells for irrigation Fodder management Imbalanced use of chemical fertilizers Sustainable NTFP extraction Increasing use of chemical pesticides Increasing population of goats Decreasing fodder production 83 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 84 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 85 Natural Resource Management Strategies to enhance Tribal Livelihood in Madhya Pradesh under the Central India Initiative. Collectives for Integrated Livelihood Initiatives (CinI). Sir Ratan Tata Trust. http://www.cinicell.org A-115 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-32: Land use in districts of Madhya Pradesh 2006-07 86 (are in ha) Total land Area under Barren and not Permanent Total Total non- non- available pastures, uncultivated Total Area sown reporting agricultural cultivatable for Grazing Tree Crops Culturable land (not Fallow Current Total Net area cropped more than area Forest uses land cultivation lands and Groves Wasteland fallows) lands fallow fallows sown area once ANUPPUR 374671 76448 32182 21807 53989 4039 341 28832 33212 25095 25528 50623 160399 194083 33684 ASHOKNAGAR 467394 52784 27660 36152 63812 12497 0 25372 37869 3477 2334 5811 307118 375428 68310 BADWANI 529846 182956 25252 72272 97524 4333 517 9792 14642 3570 2166 5736 228988 271556 42568 BALAGHAT 924500 504997 47444 9492 56936 30883 677 28500 60060 15906 13362 29268 273239 341364 68125 BETUL 1007800 396694 46819 25942 72761 27292 4 40928 68224 34887 30612 65499 404622 561075 156453 BHIND 445204 8905 37183 21794 58977 15958 577 11825 28360 6511 21650 28161 320801 344741 23940 BHOPAL 277880 44106 31428 3896 35324 33765 26 4701 38492 3754 2880 6634 153324 225174 71850 BURHANPUR 342741 201976 15809 6138 21947 10363 8 870 11241 1841 1295 3136 104441 118964 14523 CHHATARPUR 863036 213983 44228 1610 45838 63261 338 70333 133932 44347 105014 149361 319922 404708 84786 CHINDWARA 1184923 479479 53566 26724 80290 52012 31 17612 69655 30402 40724 71126 484373 619926 135553 DAMOH 728583 267134 32079 59243 91322 33934 43 13597 47574 6534 4649 11183 311370 405630 94260 DATIA 295874 29339 23799 12742 36541 4521 2807 10328 17656 9116 16508 25624 186714 238382 51668 DEWAS 701307 206636 35492 10773 46265 58015 24 2954 60993 1202 410 1612 385801 599788 213987 DHAR 819541 120623 51987 75729 127716 47108 34 14641 61783 2948 2017 4965 504454 743868 239414 DINDORI 358935 25334 26901 10897 37798 12556 41 14357 26954 30801 34400 65201 203648 274750 71102 EASTNIMAR 775616 309289 82602 8394 90996 54831 71 157 55059 12042 5718 17760 302512 385835 83323 GUNA 630766 101375 34375 61450 95825 29797 19 76525 106341 7869 4922 12791 314434 426428 111994 GWALIOR 456449 111048 33265 50647 83912 13954 81 23194 37229 9444 19093 28537 195723 251779 56056 HARDA 330579 104793 8686 15718 24404 13729 363 5059 19151 1537 111 1648 180583 318124 137541 HOSHANGABAD 668689 256109 43666 2487 46153 26000 132 25304 51436 8668 5419 14087 300904 504422 203518 INDORE 383097 52208 27188 6954 34142 19472 75 13876 33423 3898 2226 6124 257200 455620 198420 JABALPUR 519757 77654 36722 36943 73665 39679 100 22579 62358 16067 16201 32268 273812 371842 98030 JHABUA 675716 131709 57245 83414 140659 8695 0 25814 34509 4657 4666 9323 359516 429481 69965 KATANI 493092 100028 12831 55763 68594 38609 129 39454 78192 26161 27444 53605 192673 245885 53212 MANDLA 965559 593213 42445 10607 53052 19856 66 21463 41385 32183 31409 63592 214317 279019 64702 86 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-116 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-33: Land use in districts of Madhya Pradesh 2006-07 87 (are in ha) Total land Area under Barren and not Permanent Total Total non- non- available pastures, uncultivated Total Area sown reporting agricultural cultivatable for Grazing Tree Crops Culturable land (not Fallow Current Total Net area cropped more than area Forest uses land cultivation lands and Groves Wasteland fallows) lands fallow fallows sown area once MANDSAUR 551790 38615 73791 47675 121466 14366 44 15667 30077 1115 1860 2975 358657 558432 199775 MORENA 501686 50669 40143 89562 129705 18831 0 22508 41339 5842 11467 17309 262664 337334 74670 NARSIMPUR 513651 136512 24684 1028 25712 23705 164 14622 38491 5320 3918 9238 303698 388415 84717 NIMACH 393554 94413 46537 40261 86798 7652 3 19684 27339 519 670 1189 183815 297637 113822 PANNA 702924 299715 41975 22659 64634 8327 0 60066 68393 14448 21650 36098 234084 268919 34835 RAISEN 848746 333672 39710 3554 43264 24544 107 12121 36772 3064 871 3935 431103 510369 79266 RAJGARH 616300 17636 42231 29152 71383 66212 236 28831 95279 4668 1571 6239 425763 608682 182919 RATLAM 486007 34295 30731 41600 72331 28597 124 15260 43981 1102 1335 2437 332963 499983 167020 REWA 628745 85659 61392 34423 95815 26873 1506 5454 33833 23648 37564 61212 352226 478462 126236 SAGAR 1022759 298010 52946 14637 67583 85399 1326 10210 96935 13273 9535 22808 537423 736310 198887 SATNA 742432 203659 66777 14566 81343 20358 3396 48875 72629 17279 26236 43515 341286 456205 114919 SEHORE 656368 172564 37665 8081 45746 36217 8 12948 49173 3321 359 3680 385205 607301 222096 SEONI 875401 328152 48179 12011 60190 20056 30 40202 60288 27474 27560 55034 371737 493731 121994 SHAHDOL 561006 227886 44662 9241 53903 6537 650 40791 47978 27641 30837 58478 172761 201670 28909 SHAJAPUR 618534 6012 54840 40318 95158 50881 69 10422 61372 1878 806 2684 453308 680158 226850 SHEOPUR 666650 292289 39286 86555 125841 37163 0 39927 77090 5597 8268 13865 157565 199131 41566 SHIVPURI 995392 330078 60504 38121 98625 26118 3902 74054 104074 31184 37496 68680 393935 498807 104872 SIDHI 1039194 434814 83082 16620 99702 14509 8 65693 80210 28033 42853 70886 353582 481524 127942 TIKAMGARH 504002 68564 23629 72028 95657 24514 156 22835 47505 22824 60619 83443 208833 300965 92132 UJJAIN 609874 3149 57784 5864 63648 39428 138 9148 48714 1875 985 2860 491503 819680 328177 UMARIYA 450329 236714 33090 8634 41724 15142 161 16602 31905 16993 17733 34726 105260 137277 32017 VIDISHA 730197 109601 38096 9187 47283 19154 126 17050 36330 3336 2212 5548 531435 684062 152627 WESTNIMAR 818657 247031 39182 32138 71320 58621 7 25695 84323 8563 1752 10315 405668 480133 74465 87 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-117 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-34: Wastelands in the districts of Madhya Pradesh 88 (2010) Category Shyopur&Kalan Barwani Shivpuri WestNimar Neemuch Jhabua Morena EastNimar Dewas Gwalior Sidhi Mandla Panna Chhindwara Dhar Balaghat Dindori Shahdol Satna Sagar Guna Sehore Betul Gullied and/or ravinous land- Medium 99.74 47.67 9.46 26.55 4.34 0 495.82 4.68 11.53 38.91 17.13 2.05 4.31 0.44 30.72 0.23 0 2.06 5.51 7.73 12.53 2.82 0.71 Gullied and/or ravinous land- Deep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.86 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Land with Dense Scrub 83.54 5.16 62.53 31.65 65.64 46.11 28.28 102.92 66.34 33.14 446.91 363.54 296.25 126.93 144.99 277.22 168.38 248.86 108.51 322.68 26.3 68.22 139.14 Land with Open Scrub 461.04 355.78 955.23 698.21 375.75 339.94 305.88 381.92 291.25 352.15 746.03 404.05 466.51 156.05 535.63 296.29 215.09 533.45 405.5 977.98 556.65 159.75 194.86 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 1155.69 897.15 887.5 668.68 662.2 571.98 549.46 509.08 470.95 458.82 437.25 376.65 335.42 307.19 278.06 236.34 231.68 229.13 219.39 204.07 197.79 188.18 176.94 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 78.06 0 185.9 0 0 0 22.53 0 0 67.94 227.77 275.2 215.51 0 0 247.69 283.19 257.12 178.13 41.87 427.43 0 0 Degraded pastures and grazing lands 0 0 1.33 0 0 0 0 0.46 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mining wastelands 0.02 0 0.02 0 5.42 0.56 0.28 0 0 0.15 11.27 0.79 0.31 9.55 0 9.78 0 0 10.38 0 0.38 0.17 0.6 Industrial wastelands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.48 0 0 0 0 Barren rocky area 0.37 2.5 8.86 47.44 11.06 19.97 2.78 11.43 3.5 2.17 9.91 3.61 0.39 1.05 20.91 0.27 0 33.66 16.43 5.01 0 0.43 0.24 Total 1878.46 1308.26 2110.84 1472.53 1124.41 978.56 1405.38 1010.5 843.57 953.28 1896.27 1425.89 1318.7 601.21 1020.29 1067.82 898.34 1304.28 945.33 1559.34 1221.08 419.57 512.48 TGA 6606 5422 10278 8028 4256 6782 4988 10779 7020 5214 10526 9201 7135 11815 8153 9229 4068 10349 7502 10252 11065 6578 10043 Category Seoni Tikamgarh Ratlam Chhatarpur Raisen Rewa Damoh Vidisha Mandsaur Indore Umaria Rajgarh Datia Bhopal Narsimhapur Katni Hoshangabad Jabalpur Shajapur Harda Bhind Ujjain Gullied and/or ravinous land- Medium 0.26 2.72 65.85 34.87 0 9.36 6.14 4.06 16.83 2.18 9.08 9.88 19.75 3.14 11.12 2.49 3.82 45.31 3.02 1.87 399.12 17.89 Gullied and/or ravinous land- Deep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.49 0 0 3.46 0 0 0.21 0 Land with Dense Scrub 62.28 18.28 183.12 147.77 175.54 38.74 172.86 157.02 74.08 103.07 180.46 98.68 18.81 113.32 56.36 499.65 53.08 203.62 314.04 51.37 2.71 372.98 Land with Open Scrub 99.57 338.26 281.31 688.95 135.86 286.23 559.07 108.22 505.66 206.38 288.14 451.77 80.66 144.45 86.87 576.11 112.67 303.33 477.27 79.42 68.07 188.21 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 162.91 155.27 154.24 153.29 143.79 129.26 127.25 126.91 123.57 121.99 86.43 77.8 73.03 69.57 63 59.65 39.3 39.22 38.37 38.08 19.2 4.5 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 0 126.94 0 155.12 0.02 48.8 90.42 6.04 0 0 94.52 0 19.05 0.02 0.14 35.4 0 41.73 0 0 10.01 0 Degraded pastures and grazing lands 0 0 1.88 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.91 Mining wastelands 0.18 0.12 0.26 0 1.67 3.44 0 0.32 3.09 1.29 0.47 0.29 0 0.59 0 12.23 0 1.51 0.09 0.16 0 0.35 Industrial wastelands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barren rocky area 0.99 1.03 10.51 4.89 11 96.81 2.01 3.88 67.52 13.79 0 18.1 0.4 0.63 1.36 4.98 0.83 1.28 9.96 0 4.84 1.38 Total 326.19 642.62 697.17 1184.89 467.88 612.64 957.75 406.45 790.75 450.17 659.1 656.52 211.7 331.71 219.34 1190.51 209.7 639.46 842.74 170.9 504.16 594.22 TGA 8758 5048 4861 8687 8466 6314 7306 7371 5535 3898 3679 6154 2038 2772 5133 6134 6707 4026 6196 3330 4459 6091 88 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. A-118 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-8: Wastelands in the districts of Madhya Pradesh 89 (2010) 89 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. A-119 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-35: Status of soil macronutrients in districts of Madhya Pradesh 90 Name of the Name of the districts N P K districts N P K Dhar H L Khandwa M M H Anuppur M M L Khargone M H Ashok Nagar H L M Mandla M M M Bagwai M M H Mandsaur L M H Balaghat M M M Meemuch L M H Betul M L L Morena L M L Bhind L L H Narsinghpur M M H Bhopal M M H Panna L L H Bodwani M H Raisen M M H Burhanpur M M H Rajgarh H H H Chhattarpur L L H Ratlam L M H Chhind wara M M H Rewa M M M Damoh M M Sagar M M L Daria L L M Satna M M M Dewas M L H Sehore H H H Dindori M H M Seoni M M H Guna H H M Shahdol M M H Gwalior L L L Shajapur M Harda M M M Sheopu L M H Hoshangabad H H H Shivpuri L M Indore L M H Sidhi L M L Japlpur L L M Tikmgarh M M M Jhabua L H Ujjain M L H Katni M L M Umaria M L M Vidisha M M H 90 Indian Institute of Soil Science, ICAR. http://www.iiss.nic.in A-120 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-36: Probability of drought in districts of Madhya Pradesh 91 Probability of Probability of Moderate Severe District Drought (%) Drought (%) Balaghat 14 0 Bastar 14 0 Bhilsa/Vidisha 19 0 Bhind 16 8 Bilaspur 6 0 Chhatrapur 16 5 Chindwara 18 0 Damoh 15 1 Datia 24 3 Dewas 25 2 Dhar 23 2 Durg 11 0 Guna 17 1 Gwalior 13 6 Hoshangabad 22 0 Indore 19 2 Jabalpur 14 0 Jhabua 20 3 Mandla 11 1 Mandsaur 15 3 Morena 18 5 Narsinghpur 14 0 Nimar/Khargone 15 0 Panna 16 4 Raesen 12 1 Raigarh 6 0 Ratlam 24 3 Rewa 17 2 Sagar 12 0 Satna 15 1 Sehpore 22 2 Seoni 21 1 Shahdol 15 0 Shajapur 20 2 Shivpuri 17 2 Sidhi 22 3 Surguja 9 1 Tikamgarh 19 3 Ujjain 23 3 91 Data Source: P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune A-121 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-37: Groundwater status in districts of Madhya Pradesh 92 92 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). A-122 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-38: Groundwater status in districts of Madhya Pradesh 93 93 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). A-123 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-39: Habitations with poor groundwater quality in Madhya Pradesh 94 District Name Total Fluoride Iron Salinity Nitrate District Name Total Fluoride Iron Salinity Nitrate ALIRAJPUR 27 27 0 0 0 KHARGONE 29 29 0 0 0 ANUPPUR 0 0 0 0 0 MANDLA 355 355 0 0 0 ASHOKNAGAR 0 0 0 0 0 MANDSAUR 54 0 0 54 0 BALAGHAT 7 3 4 0 0 MORENA 0 0 0 0 0 BARWANI 0 0 0 0 0 NARSINGHPUR 0 0 0 0 0 BETUL 71 71 0 0 0 NEEMUCH 98 5 6 87 0 BHIND 34 0 0 34 0 PANNA 0 0 0 0 0 BHOPAL 0 0 0 0 0 RAISEN 59 47 10 2 0 BURHANPUR 0 0 0 0 0 RAJGARH 157 156 1 0 0 CHHATARPUR 0 0 0 0 0 RATLAM 129 96 0 33 0 CHHINDWARA 400 382 18 0 0 REWA 88 0 0 88 0 DAMOH 0 0 0 0 0 SAGAR 10 10 0 0 0 DATIA 0 0 0 0 0 SATNA 0 0 0 0 0 DEWAS 10 0 0 10 0 SEHORE 165 115 41 9 0 DHAR 801 795 0 0 6 SEONI 424 409 15 0 0 DINDORI 29 29 0 0 0 SHAHDOL 0 0 0 0 0 GUNA 0 0 0 0 0 SHAJAPUR 11 11 0 0 0 GWALIOR 0 0 0 0 0 SHEOPUR 5 5 0 0 0 HARDA 0 0 0 0 0 SHIVPURI 0 0 0 0 0 HOSHANGABAD 0 0 0 0 0 SIDHI 0 0 0 0 0 INDORE 2 0 2 0 0 SINGROULI 0 0 0 0 0 JABALPUR 0 0 0 0 0 TIKAMGARH 0 0 0 0 0 JHABUA 341 341 0 0 0 UJJAIN 36 4 0 32 0 KATNI 0 0 0 0 0 UMARIA 0 0 0 0 0 KHANDWA 0 0 0 0 0 VIDISHA 16 16 0 0 0 TOTAL 3358 2906 97 349 6 94 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in A-124 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-40: Area irrigated by different sources in districts of Madhya Pradesh (2006-07) 95 (area in ha) Other Canals Tanks Tubewells Other wells sources Total ANUPPUR 827 176 334 1444 1566 4347 ASHOK NAGAR 11057 3597 44689 18011 38199 115553 BADWANI 7628 0 21651 37717 17878 84874 BALAGHAT 73640 25470 99 20590 4919 124718 BETUL 18888 212 12623 71634 12580 115937 BHIND 18205 408 17961 66599 1878 105051 BHOPAL 5712 1249 27524 28697 25536 88718 BURHANPUR 316 0 11237 22999 2158 36710 CHHATARPUR 7956 3224 3104 120632 22068 156984 CHINDWARA 10749 4234 29867 76113 5842 126805 DAMOH 11604 783 29798 28296 45300 115781 DATIA 83547 0 2318 54121 1231 141217 DEWAS 5311 2372 87539 66912 11307 173441 DHAR 13274 11961 122671 82158 51854 281918 DINDORI 1139 0 0 145 398 1682 EAST NIMAR 6305 545 18261 82323 15401 122835 GUNA 19864 4450 56478 40190 26761 147743 GWALIOR 52927 205 38424 9399 5373 106328 HARDA 79464 158 14214 30641 16910 141387 HOSHANGABAD 147080 1069 52317 53491 16290 270247 INDORE 17735 5093 117612 18264 17993 176697 JABALPUR 9445 99 66680 25404 15761 117389 JHABUA 9773 10682 1721 22132 23449 67757 KATANI 8049 646 1288 24176 15063 49222 MANDLA 15854 12 0 2924 1650 20440 MANDSAUR 1012 2696 18301 151899 14350 188258 MORENA 57807 135 40510 73980 2197 174629 NARSIMPUR 1095 8 76538 92766 7350 177757 NIMACH 3327 1141 23498 66050 3178 97194 PANNA 6500 3750 5175 17370 45769 78564 RAISEN 64225 2002 81122 27991 34728 210068 RAJGARH 5712 4220 31251 124330 13282 178795 RATLAM 2345 3278 79479 48380 10800 144282 REWA 12294 1618 34000 18377 19906 86195 SAGAR 8166 2645 36962 116988 76295 241056 SATNA 7148 2596 58244 35380 21817 125185 SEHORE 41217 6264 53880 83431 44856 229648 SEONI 56752 8890 2983 31822 13235 113682 SHAHDOL 4364 2385 1317 3835 8897 20798 SHAJAPUR 10197 6086 57190 117409 20482 211364 SHEOPUR 60521 1127 35732 9628 6087 113095 SHIVPURI 22713 3702 46125 65967 22527 161034 SIDHI 13301 840 12742 26424 11497 64804 TIKAMGARH 6700 6173 8000 85110 4374 110357 UJJAIN 2164 6598 172864 66187 30949 278762 UMARIYA 2891 811 3654 3941 8095 19392 VIDISHA 39894 4854 106261 42634 61897 255540 WESTNIMAR 24188 444 28914 87690 49081 190317 TOTAL 1090882 148908 1793152 2402601 929014 6364557 95 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-125 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-41: Forest cover in districts of Madhya Pradesh 2007 96 (area in sq km) 96 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. A-126 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-42: Forest cover in districts of Madhya Pradesh 2007 97 (area in sq km) 97 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. A-127 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-9: Forest cover in Madhya Pradesh 2007 98 98 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. A-128 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-43: Protected areas in Madhya Pradesh 99 Protected Area Area (sq km) District Key species of fauna Bandhavgarh NP 448.85 Umaria, Katni Fossil NP 0.27 Mandla Kanha NP 940 Mandla, Balaghat, Dindori Madhav NP 375.22 Shivpuri Tiger, Leopard, Chital, Sambhar, Blue bull, Chinkara, Chousingha, Wild boar, etc. Panna NP 542.67 Panna, Chhatarpur Tiger, Panther, Blue bull, Sambhar, Chinkara, Spotted deer, Bear, Wild dog, Wolf, Jackal, Monkey, Crocodiles, several species of Birds, etc. Pench (Priyadarshini) NP 292.85 Seoni, Chhindwara Sanjay NP 466.88 Sidhi Tiger, Panther, Sambhar, Blue Bull, Chousingha, Cheetal, Gour, Bear, several Bird species Satpura NP 585.17 Hoshangabad Van Vihar NP 4.45 Bhopal Bagdara WLS 478 Sidhi Tiger, Panther, Chinkara, Cheetal, Sambhar, Wild Boar, Black Buck, etc. and several Bird species Bori WLS 485.72 Hoshangabad Gandhi Sagar WLS 368.62 Mandsaur Ghatigaon WLS 511 Gwalior Karera WLS 202.21 Shivpuri The Great Indian Bustard and several species of Birds, Chital, Blackbuck Ken Gharial WLS 45.2 Panna, Chhatarpur Alligator, Chinkara, Chital, Wild boar Blue bull, etc. Kheoni WLS 122.7 Dewas, Sehore Cheetal, Sambhar, Blue bull, Four horned antelope, Wild Boar, Barking Deer, Wolf etc. Narsighgarh WLS 59.19 Raigarh Chital, Sambhar, BlueBull, Leopard, Wild Boar, Bhedki, Crocodile and Birds of various kinds National Chambal WLS 435 Morena, Bhind 99 ENVIS Wildlife and Protected Areas, Wildlife Institute of India. http://wiienvis.nic.in/ A-129 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Noradehi WLS 1,194.67 Damoh, Sagar, Narsimhapur Tiger, Leopard, Wolf, Wild dog, Fox, Blue bull, Crocodile, Sambhar, Chital, Chinkara, Bear, etc. Orcha WLS 44.91 Tikamgarh Spotted deer, Blue bull, Wild pig, Jackal several species of Birds, etc. Pachmarhi WLS 417.78 Hoshngabad Palpur-Kuno WLS 344.68 Morena Panna (Gangau) WLS 68.14 Panna Panpatha WLS 245.84 Umaria Pench WLS 118.47 Seoni, Chhindwara Phen WLS 110.74 Mandla Ralamandal WLS 2.34 Indore Ratapani WLS 823.84 Raisen Tiger, Leopard, Cheetal, Sambhar ,Wild Boar, Bear, Blue Bull, Wild Dog, etc. and Birds of various kinds Sailana WLS 12.96 Ratlam Sanjay Dubri WLS 364.59 Sidhi Tiger, Panther, Sambhar, Cheetal, BlueBull, Barking Deer, Chinkara, Wild Dog, Bear, Wolf, Jackal, Wild Boar, etc. and several species of Birds Sardarpur WLS 348.12 Dhar Singhori WLS 287.91 Raisen Tiger, Leopard, Sambhar, Chital, Wild Boar, various species of Birds Son Gharial WLS 41.8 Sidhi, Shahdol, Satna Alligators, Crocodiles, Tortoises several Bird species Veerangna Durgawati WLS 23.97 Damoh Tiger, Panther, Spotted deer, Sambhar, Chousingha, Wild boar, Blue bull, Barking deer, several species of Birds, etc. A-130 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 CHHATTISGARH Chhattisgarh is a land locked state located between latitude 17°47'N to 24°06'N and longitude 80°15' and 84°24' E. It occupies 4.1% of the country with an area of 135,191 sq km. The total population of the state is 208.3 lakh with population density of 154 persons per sq km 100. The state is divided into 16 districts that are further organized into 146 blocks comprising of 20,308 villages 101. Agroclimatic zones 102 The state is divided into 3 agro-climatic zones on the basis of rainfall and temperature. The key features of the agro-climatic zones are described in Table A17-44. Table A17-44: Agroclimatic zones of Chhattisgarh Zone Districts Rainfall Soils Crops in mm Northern Hills of Sarguja, Koria, Jashpur & Dharamjaigarh Hilly soils Rice, Maize, Rape- Chhattisgarh Tehsil of Raigarh Districts Mustard, Wheat, Gram. Chhattisgrah Plains Raipur, Mahasamund, Dhamtari, Durg, Lateritic, Rice, Lathyrus, Wheat, Rajnandgaon, Kabirdham, Bilaspur, Korba, Sandy loam, Gram, Soybean, Janjgeer, Raigarh and a part of Kanker Clay loam, Sunflower. Districts (Narharpur & Kanker Block) Clay Bastar Plateau Jagdalpur, Dantewada and the remaining Coarse sandy, Rice, Maize, Rape- part of Kanker Districts Sandy, Sandy Mustar, Gram. loam, Clay and clayey loam Land use 103 About 46.09% of the state's geographical area is under forests and about 34.24% of the land is under agriculture. About 6.22% is under pastures and grazing land. Fallow lands account for about 3.69% of the area. Chart A17-4: Land use in Chhattisgarh (2006-07) 100 Census of India, 2001. 101 State profiles. National Rural Health Mission, Mininstry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. http://www.mohfw.nic.in/nrhm.htm 102 Action Plan - Chhattisgrah. National Horticulture Mission. Government of India. http://nhm.nic.in/ActionPlan/ActionPlan_Chhatisgarh.pdf 103 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-131 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-45: Land use in Chhattisgarh (2006-07) Area in ha Total reporting area 13789836 Forest 6355166 Area under non-agricultural uses 683136 Barren and non-cultivatable land 312955 Total land not available for cultivation 996091 Permanent pastures, Grazing lands 857485 Tree Crops and Groves 557 Culturable Wasteland 349770 Total uncultivated land (not fallows) 1207812 Fallow lands 238123 Current fallow 270715 Total fallows 508838 Net area sown 4721929 Total cropped area 5731677 Area sown more than once 1009748 The Table A17-45 gives details of land use for the districts of Chhattisgarh. As seen, the districts of Narayanpur, Bijapur, Koriya, Korba, Dantewada and Dhamtari have over half of their area under forests. Of these, Narayanpur and Bijapur top the list with about 92.14% and 75.57% of their land under forests. Sarguja has more than 1.8 lakh hectares under pastures and grazing lands. The districts of Durg, Janjgir and Mahasamund have the highest percentage of land under crops (more than 50% of their geographic area is cropped). The cropping intensity ratio for the state is 1.21. The districts with the highest cropping intensity are Dhamtari, Durg, Kawardha, Bilaspur and Rajnandgaon while Bijapur, Dantewada and Narayanpur have the lowest cropping intensity. Land degradation 104 Wastelands are spread over an area of 11,817 sq km in Chhattisgarh accounting for 8.74% of the state's geographic area. Of the total wasteland in the state, more than half (55.51%) is degraded forest, followed by scrub land (34.71%). The Map A17-10 depicts the spread of the wastelands in the state. The Table A17-46 gives details of wastelands in the districts of Chhattisgarh. The districts of Surguja, Janjagirchapa and Raigarh have more than 10% of their area under wasteland. Land under degraded forest is the highest in Dantewada, Surguja, Raipur and Bastar. 104 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. A-132 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-46: Wastelands of Chhattisgarh 105 % of Category Area in sq km TGA Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 142.9 0.11 Land with Dense Scrub 1049.85 0.78 Land with Open Scrub 3052.58 2.26 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity 0.28 0 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 2943.76 2.18 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Agriculture 3616.45 2.68 Sands – Riverine 179.1 0.13 Mining wastelands 5.91 0 Barren rocky area 827 0.61 Total 11817.83 8.74 Total Geographic Area (TGA) 135194 Soils 106 Physiographyically, the State is divided into three zones: Chhattisgarh plains, Bastar plateau and Northern hills. In upper part of the landscape the soils are shallow and are highly eroded. Moving down the slope, there is increase in soil depth, water holding capacity, ion exchange capacity and a change in colour from red to dark brown. The texture changes from sandy loam to clayey, consistency from non-sticky to very sticky, and calcium carbonate from none to abundant. About 17.61 per cent of the State has very high soil drainage due to presence of coarse soil and highly undulating terrain with fairly high slope 107. The distribution of various soil types in the State and their suitability to various crops is mentioned in the Table A17-47. Table A17-47: Soil types Soil Percentage of Districts Main crops area covered Red-yellow soil 60-65 Surguja, Koriya, Jashpur, Raigarh, Korba, Paddy Bilaspur, Kawardha, Durg, Raipur, Dhamtari, Mahasamund. Red-sandy soil 20-25 Bastar, Dantewara, Kanker, Durg, Kodo-Kutki, Jowar, Maize, Rajnandgaon, Dhamtari. Potato, Coarse grains, etc. Red-domat soil Dantewara and Konta tehsils. Paddy Laterite soil Bagicha, Samri, Sitapur, Ambikapur, Pulses, Jowar, Kodo-Kutki, Kawardha, Chhui-Khadan, Saja, Bemetara and Oilseeds, Potato, Coarse grains, Jagdalpur tehsils. etc. Black soil Mungeli, Pandariya, Raipur, Rajim, Paddy, Wheat, Cotton, Gram, Mahasamund, Kurud and Kawardha tehsils. Sugarcane and Rabi Crops. Table A17-57 gives details of the status of the soil macronutrients in the districts of Chhattisgarh. The districts of Ambikapur, Raipur, Mahasamund and Dhamtari have low Nitrogen and low Phosphorus status. Most of the districts have high Potassium status 108. 105 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 106 Chhattisgrah Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Government of Chhattisgarh. http://cg.nic.in/nbsap 107 Status of Environment Report, Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board, Government of Chhattisgarh. 108 Indian Institute of Soil Science, ICAR. http://www.iiss.nic.in A-133 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Water Chhattisgarh has sufficient water resources and a large untapped potential. Utilizable surface water potential in the State, if harnessed, can irrigate an estimated 4.3 m ha area, against the actual irrigated area of 1.38 m ha. Table A17-48: Water resources of Chhattisgarh 109 Surface Water Estimated Utilizable Potential 41,720 MCM Potential Irrigable Area 4.30 m ha Actual Irrigated Area 1.34 m ha Ground Water Net Utilizable Potential 11,960 MCM Actual Potential Utilized NA Rainfall The average annual rainfall of the region is around 1400 mm and about 90 to 95 percent of this amount is received during south-west monsoon season (June-October). Higher normal annual rainfall, more than 1500 mm is restricted to plateau regions of north-eastern and southern parts. Plains of central and northern-most parts of the region receive less than 1500 mm 110. The districts of Durg, Surguja, Bilaspur and Raigarh have a probability of moderate drought of 11, 9, 6 and 6 respectively 111. Surface water 112 The main rivers that flow in the State are Mahanadi and its tributaries Seonath, Hasdeo, Mand, Arpa, which drain parts of Raipur, Durg, Rajnandgaon, Bilaspur, Raigarh and Surguja districts. The river Indravati, a tributary of Godavari, drains parts of Rajnandgaon, Durg, Bastar and Dantewada districts. Some of the tributaries of Ganges drain parts of Sarguja and Koria districts. Parts of Rajnandgaon and Kawardha districts are drained by Narmada river. Most of the rivers are perennial. There are 3 major, 26 medium and 2,892 minor irrigation projects in the State. Besides these, there are a number of tanks, ponds, etc 113. Ground water The annual replenishable ground water resource in the state is estimated to be 14.93 BCM 114. The net annual ground water availability is 13.68 BCM. The annual ground water draft is estimated to be 2.80 BCM making the stage of ground water development 20%. Of the 146 administrative divisions (called blocks) in the state, none are classified 115 as Over Exploited 109 State of Environment of Chhattisgarh 2004. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board, Government of Chhattisgarh. 110 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – Chhattisgarh. 111 P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune 112 Chhattisgrah Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Government of Chhattisgarh. http://cg.nic.in/nbsap 113 State of Environment of Chhattisgarh 2004. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board, Government of Chhattisgarh. 114 BMC = Billion Cubic Meters 115 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category A-134 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 or as Critical, 8 are classified as Semi-critical and 138 as safe with respect to the groundwater status 116. As seen in the Table A17-49, the stage of groundwater development is the maximum in Durg district at 65% and is the lowest in Dantewada district at 2%. Annex _ gives details of the blocks classified as Semi-critical with respect to the groundwater status. Groundwater quality in parts of the state is affected by high Fluoride, Iron, Nitrate and Arsenic. Of the 20308 habitations in the state, the quality of drinking water is affected in 8838 habitations (43.5%). These include 8747 habitations affected by Iron, 65 habitations affected by salinity, 18 habitations affected by Flouride and 8 habitations affected by Nitrate 117. Tables A17-58 and A17-59 provide details of the districts and habitations affected by poor groundwater quality. Table A17-49: Districts affected by poor groundwater quality 118 Contaminant Affected districts Fluoride (>1.5 mg/l) Bastar, Bilaspur, Dantewada, Janjgir-Champa, Jashpur, Kanker, Korba, Koriya, Mahasamund, Raipur, Rajnandgaon, Surguja Iron (>1.0 mg/l) Bastar, Dantewada, Kanker, Koriya, Nitrate (>45 mg/l) Bastar, Bilaspur, Dantewada, Dhamtari, Jashpur, Kanker, Kawardha, Korba, Mahasamund, Raigarh, Raipur, Rajnandgaon Arsenic (>0.05 mg/l) Rajnandgaon Agriculture About 34.24% of the state's geographical area is cultivated (47.21 lakh ha out of 137.89 lakh ha). In Chhattisgarh rice is the main crop-grown in about 37 lakh ha. covering 77 percent of the net sown area. After rice, kodo-kutki is an important crop covering major areas in Chhattisgarh plains and Bastar plateau. There is substantial area under maize during kharif season (45000 ha) in Northern hills and about 25000 ha in Bastar plateau. Soybean and sunflower crops cover more than 1.0 lakh ha in Chhattisgarh plains. During rabi season lathyrus, gram, wheat and linseed are grown. Lathyrus is the main crop during rabi season covering an area of about 5.8 lakh ha 119. Other major crops are wheat, groundnut, pulses and oilseeds 120. The productivity of rice in rainfed areas is around 1.0 to 1.1 t/ha. while irrigated rice yields are about 16.0 to 19.0 t/ha. The average productivity of some important crops in the three agro-climatic zones are given in Table A17-50. As seen the productivity in all regions of Chhattisgarh is low when compared to the national average. Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category 116 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 117 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in 118 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – Madhya Pradesh. 119 Action Plan - Chhattisgrah. National Horticulture Mission. Government of India. http://nhm.nic.in/ActionPlan/ActionPlan_Chhatisgarh.pdf 120 Department of Agriculture, Government of Chhattisgarh. http://agridept.cg.gov.in A-135 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-50: Yield of major crops in Chhattisgrah (kg/ha) 121 Crop Chhattisgarh Plains Bastar plateau Northern hills India Rice (rainfed) 1107 1016 1019 Rice (irrigated) 1649 1797 1894 Rice 1314 1041 1019 2131 Maize - 1586 1142 1912 Rape-Mustard - 637 566 1095 Wheat 1475 - 1521 2708 Gram 662 624 533 845 Irrigation Only about 27 percent of the net sown area is under irrigation and rest is under rainfed conditions. Of the three-agroclimatic zones, about 73% area in Chhattisgarh plains, 97 percent in Bastar plateau and 95% area in Northern hills are rainfed. The districts with the maximum proportion of the cropped area under irrigation are Janjgir-Champa, Dhamtari and Raipur (more than 40%) while Dantewara and Narayanpur have less than 1% under irrigation 122. Of the net irrigated area of 1282285 ha, nearly 69% is irrigated by canals, 17% by tubewells and 3% by other wells. Irrigation from tanks accounts for just 4%. Table A17-60 gives details of the area irrigated by different sources in the state. Canals irrigate more than 80% of the irrigated area in Bijapur (94%), Janjgir-Champa, Dhamtari, Bilaspur and Raipur (80%). The districts with the highest dependence on tubewells for irrigation (more than 40%) are Kawardha and Raigarh 123. Agro-chemicals As seen in the Table A17-51, the use of chemical fertilizers in Chhattisgarh is much lesser as compared to the national averages. However, it is close to the desirable N:P:K ratio of 4 : 2 : 1 – the ratio in Chhattisgarh is 4.39 : 2.2 : 1. Table A17-51: Use of Chemical Fertilizers 2008-09 (kg/ha) N P K Total Chhattisgarh 46.69 23.42 10.63 80.74 India 77.9 33.69 17.1 128.58 The consumption of chemical pesticides in Chhattisgarh shows an increasing trend over the past 4 years – while 332 MT of pesticides were consumed in 2003-04, the consumption increased to 490 MT in 2006-07 124. 121 Action Plan - Chhattisgrah. National Horticulture Mission. Government of India. http://nhm.nic.in/ActionPlan/ActionPlan_Chhatisgarh.pdf 122 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 123 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 124 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html A-136 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-52: Trend in Pesticide Consumption in Chhattisgarh 2002-2007 125 Year Consumption of Pesticides (MT – technical grade) 2003-04 332 2004-05 486 2005-06 450 2006-07 490 Livestock The state of Chhattisgarh had 4.80% of Cattle, 1.63% of buffaloes, 0.20% of sheep, 1.88% of goats and 4.1% of pig population of the country. The poultry population is 1.67% of the country’s total poultry population 126. Table A17-53: Livestock population in Chhattisgarh ('000) 127 1997 2003 % change Crossbred cattle 105 252 140.94 Indigenous cattle 8680 8629 -0.59 Total cattle 8786 8882 1.09 Buffaloes 1941 1598 -17.67 Total Bovines 10727 10480 -2.30 Sheep 196 121 -38.27 Goats 2154 2336 8.45 Pigs 456 552 21.05 Others 10 4 -60.00 Total Livestock 13543 13493 -0.37 As seen in Table A17-53, over the period 1997 and 2003, the number of crossbreed cattle increased by 141% while indigenous cattle declined. While there is a decline in the number of bovines and sheep, the goat population has increased. This indicates a heightened pressure on land for browsing (especially forests). However, the production of fodder in the state has been on the decline. The estimated green fodder production from forests, permanent pastures, grazing lands and cultivated areas has declined from 211.92 lakh tonnes in 2000-2001 to 207.30 lakh tonnes in 2002-03. Dry fodder production (crop residue of cereals, pulses and oil seeds) over the same period increased from 471.0 lakh tonnes to 518.9 lakh tonnes 128. Forests 129 Forests constitute 44.21% of the geographic area of Chhattisgarh (59,772 sq km). This is comprised of, by legal status, 43.13% reserved forests, 40.21% protected forest and 16.65% 125 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 126 17th Indian Livestock Census. All India Summary Report 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 127 17th Indian Livestock Census. All India Summary Report 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 128 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 129 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. A-137 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 un-classed forests. The forest cover comprises of 4162 sq km of very dense forest, 35038 sq km of moderately dense forest and 16670 sq km of open forest. The Map A17-11 depicts the forest cover in the state. The 2 major forest types in the State are Tropical Moist Deciduous Forest and Tropical Dry Deciduous Forest. Table A17-54: Production of fodder in Chhattisgarh ('000 tonnes) 130 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 Dry fodder 4710 8942 5189 Green fodder 21192 20957 20730 Total fodder 25903 29899 25919 Table A17-61 gives details of the forest cover in the districts of Chhattisgarh. The districts with the maximum extent of very dense forest are Bastar and Dantewara. The maximum extent of moderately dense forest is found in Dantewara, Sarguja, Bastar, Raipur and Dhamtari. The forests of Chhattisgarh have many important non-wood forest products. These include Tendu leaves or Bidi leaves (Diospyros melanoxylon), Sal Seed (Shorea robusta), Chebulic myrobolan or Harra (Terminalia chebula), Gum, Chironji (Buchanania lanzan), flower and seeds of Mahua (Madhuca indica) and flowers, seeds, bark and roots of various plant species. Chhattisgarh has 3 National Parks and 11 Wildlife Sanctuaries covering an area of 0.65 million ha (4.79% of the geographic area). Table ___ gives details of these protected areas (district, area, key faunal species). Mineral resources 131 Chhattisgarh contributes 13.64% of the income generated through the minerals of the country. Minerals including Iron ore, Coal, Lime stone, Uranium, Bauxite, Dolomite, Tin ore, Gold, etc. and precious stones like Diamond, Corundum, Alexandrite, Garnet, etc as found in the state. The Bilaspur revenue division contributes 80% of the total income through minerals, while 11% and 9% is generated from Raipur and Bastar revenue divisions. Among all the districts Korba contributes 50% of the total income generated through minerals in the State. Summary of key environmental issues Existing Issues Potential Interventions Poor water retention due to high slope and coarse soils Soil and water conservation (soil moisture conservation, (about 17% of state) erosion control, rainwater harvesting, improved irrigation Poor water quality in 8838 habitations efficiency) Increasing use of chemical pesticides Soil testing and fertilizer scheduling Increasing population of goats Increased use of non-chemical pesticides Decreasing green fodder production Water quality management Fodder management Sustainable NTFP extraction 130 Data Source: Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 131 Chhattisgrah Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Government of Chhattisgarh. http://cg.nic.in/nbsap A-138 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-55: Land use in districts of Chhattisgarh 2006-07 132 (area in ha) Area under Barren and Permanent Total non- non- Total land not pastures, uncultivated Total Area sown Total reporting agricultural cultivatable available for Grazing Tree Crops Culturable land (not Fallow Current Total Net area cropped more than area Forest uses land cultivation lands and Groves Wasteland fallows) lands fallow fallows sown area once BASTAR 1010288 499414 35016 37955 72971 42169 0 51522 93691 12376 14543 26919 317293 327554 10261 BIJAPUR 656248 495955 18469 6410 24879 7762 0 40807 48569 8623 12427 21050 65795 66449 654 BILASPUR 856885 330940 41923 10227 52150 64450 0 15340 79790 14877 12377 27254 366751 478994 112243 DANTEWARA 904629 501533 23285 38595 61880 27278 0 82800 110078 15700 37673 53373 177765 180673 2908 DHAMTARI 408193 221292 28799 1549 30348 15792 3 3581 19376 2222 1504 3726 133451 211889 78438 DURG 870180 99603 89910 9886 99796 62466 151 24588 87205 18207 13083 31290 552286 810944 258658 JANJGIR-CHAMPA 446674 89110 35350 2351 37701 37893 16 10247 48156 6161 5101 11262 260445 323599 63154 JASHPUR 645741 230905 24936 52332 77268 40532 0 6695 47227 16108 25393 41501 248840 264361 15521 KANKER 643268 280340 12755 37655 50410 47696 19 23692 71407 14770 15984 30754 210357 227283 16926 KAWARDHA 444705 189451 16090 11255 27345 28498 31 3236 31765 5319 5850 11169 184975 241927 56952 KORBA 714544 473551 28005 30636 58641 21692 35 13426 35153 8537 6387 14924 132275 143329 11054 KORIYA 597770 400112 22146 12823 34969 32448 0 0 32448 10347 12647 22994 107247 119530 12283 MAHASMUND 496301 140638 37011 6740 43751 29378 15 5359 34752 5017 4064 9081 268079 297423 29344 NARAYANPUR 691316 637007 3128 1649 4777 3721 0 7365 11086 2437 3227 5664 32782 33544 762 RAIGARH 652774 208009 49923 14303 64226 64041 0 7852 71893 16278 15243 31521 277125 309818 32693 RAIPUR 1344628 526270 91546 9716 101262 93986 128 34598 128712 27038 15019 42057 546327 684160 137833 RAJNANDGAON 802252 259292 45503 20915 66418 53848 159 18662 72669 21968 23582 45550 358323 453049 94726 SURGUJA 1603440 771744 79341 7958 87299 183835 0 0 183835 32138 46611 78749 481813 557151 75338 State 13789836 6355166 683136 312955 996091 857485 557 349770 1207812 238123 270715 508838 4721929 5731677 1009748 132 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-139 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-56: Wastelands in Chhattisgarh 2010 133 (area in sq km) Janjagir Rajnanda Koriyabai Maha Category Total Surguja Raigarh Chapa Raipur Korba gaon kunthpur Bilaspur Durg Bastar samund Dhamtari Jaspur Kankar Kawardha Dantewara Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 142.9 0 2.96 0.39 0.32 0 0 15.76 0 0 0 0 0 123.47 0 0 0 Land with Dense Scrub 1049.85 155.1 88.11 5.21 1.94 44.05 10.37 101.31 133.19 218.58 85.39 10.08 0.1 21.75 167.61 0.17 6.89 Land with Open Scrub 3052.58 876.7 439.75 351.41 264.46 254.51 240.31 207.45 183.54 118.02 32.31 30.07 24.76 21.38 3.86 3.16 0.88 Land affected by slilnity/alkalinity 0.28 0.04 0.13 0 0 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 2943.76 854.52 96.33 30.69 382.15 189.64 90.86 60.24 98.58 60.39 146.96 40.46 59.88 48.65 132.47 75.25 576.69 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Agriculture 3616.45 874.17 68.66 3.19 331.91 181.42 157.01 190.97 100.21 38.54 249.29 77.73 63.76 44.99 150.07 89.24 995.27 Sands – Riverine 179.1 4.53 27.69 75.74 10.29 13.02 1.95 11.19 6.69 9.42 0.49 0 4.66 7.63 0.32 3.87 1.61 Mining wastelands 5.91 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.87 0 2.04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barren rocky area 827 34.96 98.24 5.78 133.88 22.15 77.03 57.5 6.03 156.84 16.42 89.13 6.46 70.93 8.1 43.56 0 Total 11817.82 2800.01 821.88 472.41 1124.93 704.91 577.52 648.29 528.25 603.82 530.87 247.47 159.63 338.81 462.43 215.26 1581.33 TGA 135194 15733 7086 3672 12507 9010 6904 6604 7215 8537 14974 4702 4049 5838 6506 4223 17634 % TGA 8.74 17.8 11.6 12.87 8.99 7.82 8.37 9.82 7.32 7.07 3.55 5.26 3.94 5.8 7.11 5.1 8.97 133 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. A-140 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-10: Wastelands in Chhattisgarh 2010 134 134 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. A-141 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-57: Soil macronutrient status in dsitrcts of Chhattisgarh 135 Name of the districts N P K 1. Bilaspur M M H 2. Janigir M M H 3. Korba M L H 4. Rajgarh M M H 5. Jashpur M M H 6. Ambikapur L L H 7. Baikunthapur M M H 8. Sarguja M M H 9. Raipur L L M 10. Mahasmund L L M 11. Dhamtari L L M 135 Indian Institute of Soil Science, ICAR. http://www.iiss.nic.in A-142 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-58: Groundwater status in districts of Chhattisgarh 2004 136 136 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). A-143 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-59: Habitations with poor water quality in Chhattisgarh 137 District Name Total Fluoride Iron Salinity Nitrate BASTAR 2012 0 2012 0 0 BIJAPUR 493 2 491 0 0 BILASPUR 311 0 311 0 0 DANTEWADA 942 0 942 0 0 DHAMTARI 488 0 485 3 0 DURG 20 1 16 3 0 JANJGIR-CHAMPA 66 0 66 0 0 JASHPUR 1031 0 1031 0 0 KANKER 951 0 951 0 0 KAWARDHA 97 0 97 0 0 KORBA 538 0 538 0 0 KORIYA 439 9 430 0 0 MAHASAMUND 53 0 53 0 0 NARAYANPUR 127 0 127 0 0 RAIGARH 337 6 272 59 0 RAIPUR 0 0 0 0 0 RAJNANDAGON 348 0 348 0 0 SURGUJA 585 0 577 0 8 TOTAL 8838 18 8747 65 8 137 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in A-144 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-60: Source of irrigation in Chhattisgarh 2006-07 138 (area in ha) District Canals Tanks Tubewells Other wells Other sources Total BASTAR 182 1520 1890 811 3329 7732 BIJAPUR 3408 0 0 99 117 3624 BILASPUR 115504 4207 16615 4357 2172 142855 DANTEWARA 559 0 145 32 282 1018 DHAMTARI 81456 492 11269 857 1527 95601 DURG 129366 4941 75728 2431 16681 229147 JANJGIR-CHAMPA 157523 3514 6150 4273 1937 173397 JASHPUR 4592 218 2 2052 1534 8398 KANKER 7427 3509 5081 927 6016 22960 KAWARDHA 17029 2141 19762 465 2239 41636 KORBA 3905 784 85 1054 1655 7483 KORIYA 4529 187 180 845 1359 7100 MAHASMUND 43405 11367 20042 1237 2475 78526 NARAYANPUR 0 60 0 10 33 103 RAIGARH 21984 5218 24733 770 6894 59599 RAIPUR 234220 8280 31834 5052 13274 292660 RAJNANDGAON 52744 3594 8927 2945 2622 70832 SURGUJA 9744 2057 927 6636 20250 39614 Total 887577 52089 223370 34853 84396 1282285 138 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in A-145 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-61: Forest cover in districts of Chhattisgarh 139 139 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. A-146 ANNEX B | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-11: Forest cover in districts of Chhattisgarh 140 140 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. A-147 RAJASTHAN Rajasthan is located between 23°4' and 30°11'N latitude and 69°29' and 78°17'E longitude. It is the largest state in India with an area of 342,239 sq km accounting for 10.41% of India's territory and a population of 56,507,188 with 165 persons per sq km 141. Rajasthan has 33 districts and is further divided into 237 blocks and 41353 villages 142. Agroclimatic zones The state is divided into 10 agro-climatic zones on the basis of rainfall and temperature. The Map A17-12 depicts the agro-climatic zones in the state. The key features of the agro-climatic zones are described in Table A17-62. Table A17-62: Agroclimatic zones of Rajasthan 143 Zone Districts Rainfall Crops IA-Arid Jodhpur (Jodhpur, Phalodi, 200-370 Mostly rainfed crops like bajra, kharif pulses, guar etc. Western Shergarh, Osian), Barmer mm are own during the kharif season. Rabi crops like wheat, rape-seed and mustard are grown only in areas where irrigation water is available. IB-Irrigated Ganganagar, Hanumangarh 100-350 Amongst the kharif crops cotton, sugarcane and pulses North Western mm are of importance. In the rabi season, wheat, mustard, Plain gram, vegetables and fruits are produced. IC-Hyper Arid Jaisalmer, Jodhpur, Churu 100-300 Mostly rainfed crops like bajra, kharif pulses, guar etc. Irrigated (Sujangarh, Ratangarh, mm are own during the kharif season. Rabi crops like Western Plain Sardarshahar, Dungargarh) wheat, rape-seed and mustard are grown only in areas Partially where irrigation water is available. IIA- Nagaur, Sikar, Jhunjhunu, Churu 300-500 Bajra, sesamum and kharif pulses are the main crops of Transitional (Taranagar, Churu, Rajgarh) mm the rainy season. Wheat, barley, mustard and gram are Plain of Inland grown as irrigated crops or on conserved soil moisture Drainage during Rabi. IIB- Pali, Jalore, Jodhpur 300-500 The area produces bajra, maize, guar, sesamum and Transitional (Bilara, Bhopalgarh, Reodhar, mm pulses in the kharif season. In the rabi season, wheat, Plain of Luni Sirohi, Shivganj) barley and mustard are the dominant crops, specially in Basin irrigated areas. IIIA-Semi arid Ajmer, Jaipur, Dausa, Tonk 500-700 In the total gross cultivated area of this zone, bajra, Eastern Plain mm sorghum and pulses are grown in the kharif season, and wheat, barley, gram, mustard in the rabi season. IIIB-Flood Alwar, Bharatpur, Dholpur, 500-700 The region produces bajra, sorghum, maize, sugarcane, Prone Eastern Karoli (Toda Bhim, Karoli, mm sesamum and a variety of pulses in the kharif season. Plain Nadauti, Sapotara, Hindaun), Wheat, barley, gram and mustard are the dominant Sawai Madhopur (Bamanwas, crops during rabi season. Bauli, Gangapur) IVA- Rajsamand, Bhilwara, Chittorgarh 500-900 The area produces maize as the chief food crop of the Subhumid (except Bari Sadari, Pratapgarh, mm Kharif season but in irrigated areas, paddy is also Southern Plain Arnod, Choti Sadari), Udaipur grown. In the Rabi season, wheat, gram and oil seeds (except Dhariyabad, Salumber, are the main crops. In areas of black soil, cotton and Sarada), Sirohi (Abu Road, opium are also cultivated. Pindwara) IVB-Humid Dungarpur, Banswara, Bhilwara, 500- Cotton and sugarcane are the chief cash crops grown in 141 Census of India, 2001. 142 State profiles. National Rural Health Mission, Mininstry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. http://www.mohfw.nic.in/nrhm.htm 143 Water Resources Department, Government of Rajasthan. http://waterresources.rajasthan.gov.in Southern Udaipur (Dhariyabad, Salumber, 1100 the black soil region. Maize, sorghum and paddy are the Sarada), Chittogarh (Bari Sadari, mm chief food crops of the Kharif season. Groundnut, Pratapgarh, Arnod, Choti Sadari) mustard, sesamum and rapeseed are also grown. V-Humid Jhalawar, Kota, Bundi, Baran, 650- Paddy and sorghum are the chief food crops grown in Southern Sawai Madhopur, Bharatpur, 1000 the Kharif season. This area is suitable for soyabeen Eastern Plain Sawai Madhopur (Khandar, Sawai mm crop also. Wheat, barley, grain and mustard are grown Madhopur) in winter. Land use 144 About 49% of the state's geographical area is cropped and about 7.8% of the land is under forests. Only about 5% is under pastures and grazing land. Fallow lands account for about 12% of the area. Table A17-63: Land use in Rajasthan 2005-06 (area in ha) Area in ha Reporting area for land utilisation statistics 34266090 Forests 2674961 Area under non-agricultural uses 1823361 Barren and un-culturable land 2438899 Total not available for cultivation 4262260 Permanent pastures and other grazing lands 1707694 Land under misc tree crops and groves not included in net area 20919 Culturable waste land 4590102 Total uncultivated land 6318715 Fallow lands other than current fallows 2264007 Current fallow 1909659 Total fallows 4173666 Net Area Sown 16836488 Total Cropped Area 21699348 Area sown more than once 4862860 Chart A17-5: Land use in Rajasthan 2005-06 The Table A17-63 gives details of land use for the districts of Rajasthan. As seen, the districts of Kuruli, Baran, Sirohi and Udaipur have over a quarter of their area under forests. Of these, Kuruli 144 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in and Baran top the list with 34% and 31% of their land under forests. Jodhpur, Ganganagar, Bikaner and Barmer have more than 20% of their area under fallows. The proportion of cropped area is the highest in Churu (84%), Hanumangarh, Bharatpur, Jhunjhunu, and Nagaur (71%). The cropping intensity ratio for the state is 1.29 and the districts with higher cropping intensity are Alwar and Jhunjhunu (1.6), Jaipur, Chittorgarh and Dausa. Barmer and Pali have the lowest cropping intensity ratio at 1.05 and 1.08 respectively. Land degradation 145 Wastelands are spread over an area of 93689 sq km in Rajasthan accounting for 27.38% of the state's geographic area. Of the total wasteland in the state, nearly 41% is scrub land, followed by sands (34%), and degraded forest (13%). The Map A17-13 depicts the spread of wastelands in the state. Table A17-64: Wastelands of Rajasthan 146 % of Area in sq km TGA Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 1020.17 0.3 Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 864.75 0.25 Land with Dense Scrub 23661.7 6.91 Land with Open Scrub 14619.38 4.27 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Permanent 64.88 0.02 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Seasonal 54.94 0.02 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity-Moderate 347.12 0.1 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity-Strong 269.12 0.08 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 11365.78 3.32 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 854.34 0.25 Degraded pastures and grazing lands 3918.42 1.14 Sands-Riverine 196.69 0.06 Sands-Desertic 4655.88 1.36 Sands-Semi stabilised-Stabilised >40m 11188.21 3.27 Sands-Semi stabilised-Stabilised Moderate High 15- 40m 15586.44 4.55 Mining wastelands 106.86 0.03 Industrial wastelands 9.06 0 Barren rocky area 4905.72 1.43 Total 93689.47 27.38 Total Geographic Area (TGA) 342239 Tables A17-72 and A17-73 gives details of wastelands in the districts of Rajasthan. The districts with the maximum proportion of their land under wastelands are Jaisalmer (68.34%), Rajsamand (48.91%), and Bikaner (39.15%). Churu (4.24%) and Hanumangarh (4.65%) have the least extent of wastelands. Soils 147 The Aravalli range divides the State into two distinct zones: the region to the west and north-west, comprising of eleven districts and nearly 61 per cent of the total area of the State, is known as the great Indian Thar Desert. The soil type in this region is sandy, is poor in nitrogen and has low water holding capacity. The south-east and eastern part of the Aravalli Hills is productive for agriculture 145 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 146 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 147 Water Resources Department, Government of Rajasthan. http://waterresources.rajasthan.gov.in purposes and has clay loam soil type 148. The soils of Rajasthan can be put in five major groups based on the soil texture. They are, (1) sandy soils or light soils, (2) sandy loam or light medium soils, (3) loam or medium soils, (4) clay loam to clay or heavy soils and (5) skeletal soils or shallow rocky and hilly soils 149. An estimated 6650 thousand ha (about 19% of the geographic area) in the state is affected by wind erosion and 3137 thousand hectares (about 9% of the geographic area) is affected by water erosion. About 1418 thousand hectares is affected by salinity/alkalinity 150. The Table A17-74 gives details of the status of the soil macronutrients in the districts of Rajasthan 151. Most districts have low Nitrogen status (25) and high Potassium status (23) while 14 districts have low Phosphorus status. Water Rajasthan is the driest state having only 1.16 percent of country's surface water. The estimated annual, per capita water availability in the state during 2001 was 840 Cu M indicating severe water scarcity (it is expected to be 439 Cu M by the year 2050, against the national average of 1,140 Cu m by 2050) 152. Rainfall The mean annual rainfall of the state is 490 mm with the local averages ranging from 100 mm in the northwestern part of Jaisalmer to over 1,000 mm in Jhalawar. Arid or semi-arid areas occupy 60-75 percent of the state. Droughts of varying intensity, particularly in the western part, are a recurring phenomenon. During 1901-2003, western Rajasthan experienced 20 moderate droughts (with 50% to 75% of the normal annual rainfall) and 10 severe droughts (rainfall below 50% of the normal) compared to 14 moderate and 5 severe droughts in eastern Rajasthan. The Map A17-14 shows the frequency of drought in the state. As seen in Table A17-75, the districts of Sirohi, Jhalawar, Dungarpur and Pali have a higher probability of moderate drought (25% or more) while the districts of Jaisalmer and Jodhpur have a higher probability of severe drought (15% or more) 153. Surface water The total surface water available at 50% dependability is 21.71 BCM, out of which 16.05 BCM is utilizable. The state also receives 18.08 BCM water as per interstate agreements 154. There are eight major river basins in the state but Chambal and Mahi are the only perennial rivers. The highest per capita water availability of 1,798 Cu m is in the Chambal basin, followed by the Sabarmati (1,729 Cu m) and the Mahi (1,120 Cu m), whereas the lowest (190 Cu m) is in the Banganga basin. There are 203 major and medium tanks and reservoirs in the state, which store about 13.72 BCM of water at their full capacity and a reduced volume of 11.51 BCM during dry years. Besides, there are large numbers of minor rainwater harvesting structures with a storage capacity of 2.28 BCM, thus increasing the total storage at full-capacity level to 16 BCM. However, during droughts, the estimated total surface water availability is reduced to 12.88 BCM creating a shortfall of 3.12 BCM. Ground water 148 Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007-2012), Planning Department, Government of Rajasthan. http://www.planning.rajasthan.gov.in 149 Water Resources Department, Government of Rajasthan. http://waterresources.rajasthan.gov.in 150 NBSS&LUP, ICAR. 2005. State-wise extent of various kinds of Land Degradation in India. Land Degradation Scenario of India and Programmes/Schemes for development of degraded lands. 151 Indian Institute of Soil Science, ICAR. http://www.iiss.nic.in 152 Narain, P.; Khan, M. A.; Singh, G. 2005. Potential for water conservation and harvesting against drought in Rajasthan, India. Working Paper 104 (Drought Series: Paper 7). Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 153 P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune 154 Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007-2012), Planning Department, Government of Rajasthan. http://www.planning.rajasthan.gov.in The annual replenishable ground water resource in the state is estimated to be 11.56 BCM 155. The net annual ground water availability is 10.38 BCM. The annual ground water draft is estimated to be 12.99 BCM making the stage of ground water development 125%. Of the 236 administrative divisions (called blocks) in the state, 140 (about 60%) are classified 156 as Over Exploited, 50 are classified as Critical and 14 are classified as having Semi-critical groundwater status 157. As seen in the Table A17-65, the stage of groundwater development exceeds 100% in 23 of the 32 districts. It exceeds 150% in Jaipur, Jalore, Jhunjunu, Jodhpur and Nagaur. The Annex ___ gives details of the blocks classified as Over Exploited, Critical and Semi-critical with respect to the groundwater status. Table A17-65: Districts affected by poor groundwater quality 158 Contaminant Affected districts Salinity (EC>3000 Ajmer, Alwar, Barmer, Bharatpur, Bhilwara, Bundi, Bikaner, Churu, Chittaurgarh, µS/cm at 25 ° C) Dhaulpur, Dausa, Ganganagar, Hanumangarh, Jaipur, Jaisalmer, Jalor,Jhunjhunun, Karoli, Nagaur, Neemuch, Raja Samand, Sirohi, Sikar, Swai Madhopur, Tonk, Udaipur Fluoride (>1.5 mg/l) Ajmer, Alwar, Banaswara, Barmer, Bharatpur, Bhilwara, Bikaner, Bundi, Chittaurgarh, Churu, Dausa, Dhaulpur, Dungarpur, Ganganagar, Hanumangarh, Jaipur, Jaisalmer, Jalor,Jhunjhunu, Jodhpur, Karauli, Kota, Nagaur, Pali, Rajasamand, Sirohi, Sikar, SawaiMadhopur, Tonk, Udaipur Chloride (>1000 mg/l) Barmer, Bharatpur, Bikaner, Churu, Ganganagar, Hanumangarh, Jaipur, Jaisalmer, Jalor, Jhunjhunun, Jodhpur Nagaur, Sirohi, Nagaur, Sikar, Tonk Iron (>1.0 mg/l) Ajmer, Alwar, Banswara, Baran, Bharatpur, Bhilwara, Bikaner, Chittaurgarh, Churu, Dausa, Dhaulpur, Dungarpur, Ganganagar, Hanumangarh, Jaipur, Jaisalmer, Jhalawar, Jhunjhunu, Jodhpur, Karauli, Kota, Nagaur, Pali, Rajasamand, Sikar, Sawai Madhopur, Tonk, Udaipur Nitrate (>45 mg/l) Ajmer, Alwar, Banaswara, Baran, Barmer, Bharatpur, Bhilwara, Bikaner, Chittaurgarh, Churu, Dausa, Dhaulpur, Dungarpur, Ganganagar, Hanumangarh, Jaipur, Jaisalmer, Jalor, Jhalawar, Jhunjhunu, Jodhpur, Karauli, Kota, Nagaur, Pali, Partapgarh, Rajasamand, Sirohi, Sikar, Swai Madhopur, Tonk, Udaipur Groundwater quality in parts of the state is affected by high salinity, Fluoride, Chloride, Iron and Nitrate. Of the -- habitations in the state, the quality of drinking water is affected by salinity in 23168 habitations, by Flouride in 10788 habitations, by Nitrate in 856 habitations and by Iron in 60 habitations 159. Tables A17-76 and 77 provide details of the districts and habitations affected by poor groundwater quality. Agriculture About 49% of the state's geographical area is cultivated (168.36 lakh ha out of 342.66 lakh ha). The main crops grown are jowar, bajra, maize, gram, wheat, oilseeds, cotton, pulses, tobacco, 155 BMC = Billion Cubic Meters 156 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category 157 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 158 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – Rajasthan. 159 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in vegetables, citrus fruits, red chillies, methi, hina, mustard and cumin seed. Table A17-66: Yield of major crops in Rajasthan (2006-07) Crop Yield in Rajasthan (kg/ha) Yield in India (kg/ha) Jowar 556 844 Maize 1086 1912 Gram 863 845 Wheat 2751 2708 Groundnut 1310 866 Cotton 363 421 The details on area, production and yield/ha of the major crops in the state are provided in Table A17-66 160. Irrigation 37.38% of the net sown area in the state is irrigated. Of the net irrigated area of 6293946 ha, nearly 30% is irrigated by tubewells and 40% by other wells. Irrigation from canals accounts for 27% of the net irrigated area while tanks account for just 1.22%. The districts with the highest dependence on tubewells for irrigation (more than 90%) are Jodhpur and Bharatpur while Jhunjunu and Ajmer depend on other wells for 90% of the irrigation. Canals irrigate more than 90% of the irrigated area in Ganganagar and Hanumangarh 161. Agro-chemicals As seen in the Table A17-67, the use of chemical fertilizers in Rajasthan is much lower as compared to the national averages. Also, it is far from the desirable N:P:K ratio of 4 : 2 : 1 – the ratio in Rajasthan is 30.22 : 13.58 : 1. Table A17-67: Use of Chemical Fertilizers 2008-09 (kg/ha) N P K Total Rajasthan 32.95 14.81 1.09 48.85 India 77.9 33.69 17.1 128.58 The consumption of chemical pesticides in Rajasthan shows a declining trend over the past 5 years – while 3200 MT of pesticides were consumed in 2002-03, the consumption fell to less than half of this – 1523 MT – in 2006-07 162. Table A17-68: Trend in Pesticide Consumption in Rajasthan 2002-2007 163 Year Consumption of Pesticides (MT – technical grade) 2002-03 3200 2003-04 2303 2004-05 1628 160 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 161 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 162 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 163 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 2005-06 1008 2006-07 1523 Livestock The state of Rajasthan had 5.86% of cattle, 10.63% of buffaloes, 16.36% of sheep, 13.52% of goats and 2.50% of pig population of the country. The poultry population is 1.27% of the country’s total poultry population. The state ranks third in buffalo population, second in sheep population and second in goats population in the country 164. Table A17-69: Livestock population in Rajasthan ('000) 165 1997 2003 % change Crossbred cattle 211 464 119.91 Indigenous cattle 11931 10390 -12.92 Total cattle 12142 10854 -10.61 Buffaloes 9770 10414 6.59 Total Bovines 21912 21268 -2.94 Sheep 14585 10054 -31.07 Goats 16971 16809 -0.96 Pigs 305 338 10.82 Camels 669 498 -25.56 Others 213 171 -19.72 Total Livestock 54655 49138 -10.10 As seen in Table A17-69, over the period 1997 and 2003, the number of crossbreed cattle increased by about 120% while indigenous cattle declined. The number of small ruminants, especially sheep, have also decreased. The production of fodder in the state has been inconsistent. The estimated green fodder production from forests, permanent pastures, grazing lands and cultivated areas has increased from 116.8 lakh tonnes in 2000-2001 to 117.2 lakh tonnes in 2002-03. Dry fodder production (crop residue of cereals, pulses and oil seeds) over the same period declined from 240.5 lakh tonnes to 165.4 lakh tonnes 166. Table A17-70: Production of fodder in Rajasthan ('000 tonnes) 167 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Dry fodder 24056 37460 16540 Green fodder 116890 117093 117297 Total fodder 140946 154553 133836 164 17th Indian Livestock Census. All India Summary Report 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 165 17th Indian Livestock Census. All India Summary Report 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 166 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 167 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in Forests Forests constitute 9.54% of the geographic area of Rajasthan (32639 sq km). This is comprised of, by legal status, 38.16% reserved forests, 53.36% protected forest and 8.48% un-classed forests. The forests of Rajasthan comprise 72 sq km of very dense forest, 4450 sq km of moderately dense forest km, and 11514 of open forest. The 2 major forest types in the State are Tropical Dry Deciduous Forest and Tropical Thorn Forest. The districts of Udaipur, Sirohi, Baran and Chittorgrah have more than 15% of their geographical area under forests. 168 Rajasthan has 25 Wildlife Sanctuaries and 5 National Parks spread over an area of 9326 sq km (2.7% of the state's geographic area). The state has two Tiger Reserves - Ranthambore and Sariska. The Keoladeo Ghana National Park is a designated world heritage site and a Ramsar site 169. The Table A17-80 gives details of these protected areas (district, area, key faunal species). Mineral resources 170 Rajasthan has vast reserves of metallic minerals (Copper, Lead, Zinc) and non-metallic minerals (Soapstone, Silica Sand, Limestone, Marble Gypsum). There are 44 major minerals and 22 minor minerals found in the state. Lead and Zinc ore mining is undertaken at Agucha (Bhilwara), Dariba –Bethumni (Rajsamand), Zawar (Udaipur). The release of Lead contaminants into the air and ground water is a major concern in these locations. Clusters of stone mining exist in Bijolian (Bhilwara), Kota Stone in Ramganj Mandi and Jhalawar, Karauli, Dholpur, Bansi Paharpur (Bharatpur), Fedusar in Jodhpur, Slate Stone in Alwar and Phyllite in Tonk. The Kota Stone mining cluster in Ramganj Mandi and Jhalawar produces about 1.35 MT/year of Kota Stone and generates waste of more than 2.0 MT/year. This bulk quantity of waste causes significant land degradation (seared landscape, deforestation, spread of wind blown sand on agriculture fields, gully erosion, soil contamination, pollution of surface and ground water). Of the workforce engaged in small scale mining, 37% are women and 15% are children. The main occupational health hazards include silicosis, tuberculosis and bronchitis due to inhalation of the fine dust generated during mining activity 171. Summary of key environmental issues Existing Issues Potential Interventions Poor water retention capacity of soils Soil and water conservation (soil moisture conservation, Soil erosion – especially wind erosion (19%) and water erosion control, rainwater harvesting, improved irrigation erosion (9%) efficiency) Severe water scarcity Drought adaptation measures Drought prone Soil testing and fertilizer scheduling Over exploitation of groundwater (86% of blocks Water quality management classified as overexploited, critical or semi-critical) Fodder management Poor water quality in 34872 habitations High dependence on tubewells for irrigation Imbalanced use of chemical fertilizers Declining fodder production 168 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India. http://fsi.org.in 169 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India. http://fsi.org.in 170 State of Environment Report for Rajasthan 2007. Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board, Government of Rajasthan. http://rajenvis.nic.in 171 Sengupta, R. 2005. Report on ASM in Rajasthan. Map A17-12: Agro-climatic zones of Rajasthan 172 172 State of Environment Report of Rajasthan 2007. ENVIS. Government of Rajasthan. Http://rajenvis.nic.in Table A17-71: Land use in districts of Rajasthan 2005-06 173 (area in ha) Land Under Misc Tree Reporting Area Under Permanent Crops and Fallow Lands Area for Land Non- Barren and Total not Pastures and Groves not Culturable Total Other than Total Area Sown Utilisation agricultural Un-culturable available for Other Grazing Included in Waste uncultivated Current Current Total Net Area Cropped More than Statistics Forests Uses Land cultivation Lands Net Area Land land Fallows Fallow fallows Sown Area Once AJMER 842345 55617 50084 88795 138879 78929 148 69540 148617 39781 28893 68674 430558 519998 89440 ALWAR 782899 79390 45368 82552 127920 24191 179 8041 32411 18615 16240 34855 508323 814375 306052 BANSWARA 506279 112949 11304 57841 69145 12649 198 30956 43803 34444 10661 45105 235277 338546 103269 BARAN 699652 216165 25419 38681 64100 35733 143 20500 56376 18604 10593 29197 333814 500944 167130 BARMER 2817332 31727 72997 125899 198896 202713 161 209390 412264 328555 235128 563683 1610762 1694257 83495 BHARATPUR 507073 30336 29908 23902 53810 8678 93 3128 11899 8472 6003 14475 396553 572134 175581 BHILWARA 1047441 74382 67238 144283 211521 120217 137 137560 257914 56945 41014 97959 405665 574334 168669 BIKANER 3038215 82500 292638 14 292652 53377 3971 770610 827958 311803 318781 630584 1204521 1332260 127739 BUNDI 581938 141311 39644 50188 89832 24553 135 29776 54464 24207 12323 36530 259801 391103 131302 CHITTORGARH 1035704 195445 49678 88955 138633 90560 390 140311 231261 23645 14089 37734 432631 676019 243388 CHURU 1385898 6452 63707 677 64384 37905 0 10581 48486 42648 55692 98340 1168236 1422929 254693 DAUSA 340467 24471 20206 17497 37703 26170 475 7099 33744 10660 9526 20186 224363 348877 124514 DHOLPUR 300905 27059 16362 58463 74825 17872 533 10792 29197 10224 9114 19338 150486 209341 58855 DUNGARPUR 385593 61475 22979 72577 95556 34553 2008 22950 59511 36926 9986 46912 122139 174587 52448 GANGANAGAR 1093352 60514 70681 0 70681 140 3503 38147 41790 129282 145571 274853 645514 884584 239070 HANUMANGARH 970315 18079 55624 888 56512 4018 21 5334 9373 35365 86280 121645 764706 1063693 298987 JAIPUR 1105519 81061 76764 54355 131119 76914 902 34144 111960 60925 98323 159248 622131 989491 367360 JAISALMER 3839154 25938 130988 365305 496293 104002 591 2498476 2603069 144111 53259 197370 516484 578104 61620 JALORE 1056602 21756 41011 81856 122867 47371 27 30194 77592 94659 83911 178570 655817 787157 131340 JHALAWAR 632235 124006 24745 36469 61214 48981 2338 49644 100963 19728 9260 28988 317064 465164 148100 JHUNJHUNU 591536 39680 22149 15220 37369 39456 55 6906 46417 20632 18796 39428 428642 686200 257558 JODHPUR 2256405 6996 79291 145351 224642 122349 101 39751 162201 346912 246223 593135 1269431 1377699 108268 KARULI 505217 172573 23615 48263 71878 30920 352 13318 44590 10347 9076 19423 196753 300021 103268 KOTA 521133 123019 29626 36736 66362 14105 257 21999 36361 12595 7805 20400 274991 415941 140950 NAGAUR 1764380 18271 86791 58582 145373 72667 187 14353 87207 93946 165327 259273 1254256 1483255 228999 PALI 1233079 82010 58281 143918 202199 90862 103 45804 136769 121852 82758 204610 607491 657457 49966 RAJSAMAND 455093 24663 23492 104511 128003 57729 0 117187 174916 25269 3644 28913 98598 126695 28097 SAWAIMADHOPUR 498075 78887 28863 39514 68377 24730 409 12199 37338 13650 12809 26459 287014 357117 70103 SIKAR 774244 61089 33960 18120 52080 40640 60 9211 49911 38129 41741 79870 531294 764109 232815 SIROHI 517947 155439 25107 74840 99947 33381 113 10448 43942 39038 25455 64493 154126 210808 56682 TONK 717958 27216 47926 27935 75861 42795 147 43243 86185 27154 26302 53456 475240 611710 136470 UDAIPUR 1462105 414485 156915 336712 493627 88534 3182 128510 220226 64884 15076 79960 253807 370439 116632 State 34266090 2674961 1823361 2438899 4262260 1707694 20919 4590102 6318715 2264007 1909659 4173666 16836488 21699348 4862860 173 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in Table A17-72: Wastelands in the districts of Rajasthan 174 Category Ajmer Alwar Banswara Baran Barmer Bharatpur Bhilwara Bikaner Bundi Chittaurgarh Churu Dausa Dholpur Dungarpur Ganganagar Hanumangarh Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 0.09 56.69 0 78.3 0 59.41 12.32 59.16 99.29 0 0 73.49 68.06 0 0 0 Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 0 67.94 0 100.47 20.22 0 0 37.25 210.29 0 0 33.23 120.08 0 0 0 Land with Dense Scrub 654.08 449.93 169.5 191.44 1032.84 193.16 1618.22 1430.39 247.19 866.63 52.82 129.78 315.96 371.09 21.95 13.66 Land with Open Scrub 910.43 83.24 164.26 131.87 384.68 58.7 768.28 265.73 37.2 442.76 343.38 93.33 83.08 552.6 89.39 33.61 Waterlogged and Marshy land- Permanent 8.31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.37 0 0 1.32 0 0 0 0 5 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Seasonal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.97 1.4 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity- Moderate 11.98 0.2 0 0 123.12 0.25 0 0 0 2.54 14.71 0.17 0 0 0 0 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity- Strong 19.9 0 0 0 9.93 0 0 0 0 0 0.39 0.15 0 0 0 0 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 210.79 111.1 629.12 1197.68 124.69 57.07 363.48 70.87 770.48 892.1 0 75.97 297.98 324.88 0 23.12 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 0 40.59 25.97 130.61 0.75 0.19 9.11 0 0 183.16 0 1.24 56.96 18.22 0 0 Degraded pastures and grazing lands 128.01 0 23.57 106.82 279.09 0 324.26 485.71 27.2 50.57 128.12 15.1 0 27.97 0 21.46 Sands-Riverine 0.08 0.35 0 46.52 0 6.94 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.15 0 0 0 Sands-Desertic 19.14 0.08 0 0 402.27 6.04 0.08 1111.56 0.35 0 58.42 0.48 0 0 154.59 330.54 Sands-Semi stabilised-Stabilised >40m 0 0 0 0 1728.7 0 0 1278.94 0 0 0 0 0 0 1088.21 20.44 Sands-Semi stabilised-Stabilised Moderate High 15-40m 0 0 0 0 2598.27 0 0 5907.5 0 0 109.99 0 0 0 171.83 0 Mining wastelands 3.37 0.75 3.71 0 1.95 1.41 2.65 0 0.41 4.99 0.04 0.72 0.22 2.23 0 0 Industrial wastelands 0 0 0.34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.14 2.57 0 Barren rocky area 182.53 273.7 102.9 35.27 299.06 196.08 206.16 19.63 88.81 98.87 4.94 26.7 20.5 52.8 0 0 Total 2148.69 1084.56 1119.37 2018.97 7005.56 579.25 3304.55 10667.12 1481.21 2541.62 714.14 451.25 963 1349.93 1531.49 449.23 TGA 8481 8380 5037 6955 28387 5092 10455 27244 5550 10856 16830 3432 3008 3770 10978 9656 % to TGA 25.34 12.94 22.22 29.03 24.68 11.38 31.61 39.15 26.69 23.41 4.24 13.15 32.01 35.81 13.95 4.65 174 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. Table A17-73: Wastelands in the districts of Rajasthan 175 Sawai Category Jaipur Jaisalmer Jalore Jhalawar Jhunjhunu Jodhpur Karauli Kota Nagaur Pali Rajsamand madhopur Sikar Sirohi Tonk Udaipur Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 3.31 0 51.89 19.71 1.42 11.72 134.53 96.61 0 14.35 0 114.95 21.43 42.62 0.83 0 Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 17.89 0 20.42 0.26 27.46 0 26.95 156.24 0 0 0 9.36 2.64 10.74 3.32 0 Land with Dense Scrub 181.24 8352.4 233.51 731.81 30.23 439.6 310.24 238.47 291.82 1188.03 1478.24 163.49 50.38 526.85 324.15 1362.6 Land with Open Scrub 874.92 3870.31 80.84 374.63 324.37 945.42 60.69 19.84 289.53 361.5 328.08 156.77 392.1 400.07 269.22 1428.55 Waterlogged and Marshy land- Permanent 10.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38.05 0 0 0 0.09 1.62 0 0 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Seasonal 0 15.33 0 0 0 27.57 0 0 0 7.01 0 0 0.67 0 0 0 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity- Moderate 19.12 11.36 11.91 0 0 48.97 0 0 18.09 77.78 0 0 6.93 0 0 0 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity- Strong 39.87 40.67 36.66 0 0 6.18 0 0 102.56 7.72 0 0.62 4.48 0 0 0 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 385.51 145.87 161.06 604.36 169.99 57.53 1121.07 521.43 127.64 197.16 41.21 388.69 309.74 504.43 102.92 1377.87 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 0 0.04 0 12.83 0 0 243.21 0 0 4.16 10.66 15.14 0 14.84 0 86.67 Degraded pastures and grazing lands 55.98 85.98 286.88 16.15 56.71 661.95 1.38 6.08 528.26 395.64 30.73 11.68 68.08 50.28 4.18 40.6 Sands-Riverine 23.23 0 0.03 0 15.48 4.1 0 0.34 0 69.59 0.09 2.59 19.85 4.51 1.94 0 Sands-Desertic 97.69 528.99 285.73 0 19.21 1084.12 0.05 0 327.84 8.87 0 8.54 178 33.16 0.16 0 Sands-Semi stabilised-Stabilised >40m 0 6905.69 20.57 0 0 145.66 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sands-Semi stabilised-Stabilised Moderate High 15-40m 0 5058.99 132.3 0 0 1349.97 0 0 248.36 0 0 0 0 9.24 0 0 Mining wastelands 3.2 0.84 0.91 3.3 0 20.59 0.56 0.53 4.27 5.85 12.52 0.36 0.12 4.97 0.17 26.21 Industrial wastelands 0 0 0.61 0 0 0.99 0 0 0 1.37 0 0 0 2.08 0 0.97 Barren rocky area 80.79 1228.13 173.3 13.9 32.69 500.21 55.44 11.32 92.67 289.24 392.05 12.33 28.33 117.27 22.49 247.63 Total 1792.85 26244.58 1496.61 1776.94 677.56 5304.56 1954.13 1050.85 2069.09 2628.27 2293.56 884.51 1082.84 1722.69 729.38 4571.11 TGA 10636 38401 10640 6219 5928 22850 5524 5481 17718 12387 4689 5003 7732 5136 7194 12590 % to TGA 16.86 68.34 14.07 28.57 11.43 23.21 35.38 19.17 11.68 21.22 48.91 17.68 14 33.54 10.14 36.31 175 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. Map A17-13: Wastelands in the districts of Rajasthan 176 176 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. Table A17-74: Status of soil macronutrients in the districts of Rajasthan 177 Name of the districts N P K Ajmer L M M Alwar L M H Banswara L M M Baran L M H Baratpur L L M Barmer L L H Bhilwara M M M Bhundi L M M Chittorgarh M M H Churu L L H Dausa - - - Dholpur L L M Durgapur L L H Hanumangarh L L H Jaiselmer L L H Jalore L L H Jhalawar M M H Jhunjhun - - H Jodhpur L M H Karauli L L H Kota L M H Nagpur L M H Pali L M H Rajsamand L M M S Madhopur L L H Sikar L L H Sirohi L L H Sirohi L L H Sriganganagar L L H Tonk L M H Udaipur M M H 177 Indian Institute of Soil Science, ICAR. http://www.iiss.nic.in Table A17-75: Probability of drought in districts of Rajasthan 178 Probability of Probability of Moderate Severe District Drought (%) Drought (%) Ajmer 17 8 Alwar 20 8 Banswara 21 6 Barmer 24 14 Bharatpur 12 8 Bhilwara 20 5 Bikaner 21 11 Bundi 21 8 Chittorgarh 21 4 Churu 17 7 Dungarpur 25 5 Ganganagar 24 8 Jaipur 17 8 Jaisalmer 17 17 Jalore 23 14 Jhalawar 27 1 Jhunjhunu 14 8 Jodhpur 22 15 Kota 21 4 Nagour 22 10 Pali 25 12 SawaiMadhopur 23 5 Sikar 21 8 Sirohi 28 13 Tonk 17 8 Udaipur 20 5 178 P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune Map A17-14: Frequency of drought in Rajasthan 179 179 Disaster Management and Relief Department, Government of Rajasthan. http://www.rajrelief.nic.in Table A17-76: Status of Groundwater in districts of Rajasthan 180 180 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). Table A17-77: Quality of groundwater in districts of Rajasthan 181 District Name Total Fluoride Arsenic Iron Salinity Nitrate AJMER 674 502 1 0 171 0 ALWAR 86 38 0 0 48 0 BANSWARA 0 0 0 0 0 0 BARAN 64 31 0 9 24 0 BARMER 11025 0 0 0 11025 0 BHARATPUR 1097 17 0 1 1079 0 BHILWARA 600 543 0 11 24 22 BIKANER 152 50 0 0 85 17 BUNDI 185 29 0 0 156 0 CHITTAURGARH 39 15 0 0 3 21 CHURU 410 62 0 0 348 0 DAUSA 382 345 2 0 35 0 DHAULPUR 3 0 0 0 3 0 DUNGARPUR 526 234 1 0 124 167 GANGANAGAR 176 87 0 0 89 0 HANUMANGARH 60 17 0 0 43 0 JAIPUR 559 472 1 0 84 2 JAISALMER 1587 423 1 2 1161 0 JALOR 963 859 0 0 103 1 JHALAWAR 63 42 0 1 18 2 JHUNJHUNUN 258 65 0 0 190 3 JODHPUR 9037 2170 0 0 6843 24 KARAULI 317 184 0 0 133 0 KOTA 317 6 0 0 311 0 NAGAUR 2870 2264 0 0 600 6 PALI 173 146 0 0 26 1 RAJSAMAND 511 388 1 36 16 70 SAWAI MADHOPUR 346 194 0 0 150 2 SIKAR 484 394 0 0 90 0 SIROHI 0 0 0 0 0 0 TONK 930 913 1 0 12 4 UDAIPUR 986 298 0 0 174 514 TOTAL 34880 10788 8 60 23168 856 181 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in Table A17-78: Area irrigated source wise in districts of Rajasthan 2005-06 182 (area in ha) Canals Tanks Tubewells Other wells Other sources Total AJMER 15 2850 583 62110 1749 67307 ALWAR 2809 103 198917 253858 119 455806 BANSWARA 49249 6112 1658 15601 16882 89502 BARAN 60649 3765 178696 36093 20515 299718 BARMER 0 0 16360 92532 20 108912 BHARATPUR 3323 0 294081 10775 0 308179 BHILWARA 7294 9562 12035 107407 1813 138111 BIKANER 148003 0 62652 5107 189 215951 BUNDI 113821 288 30849 61022 4437 210417 CHITTORGARH 14098 4436 101609 109912 1970 232025 CHURU 363 0 25180 37177 0 62720 DAUSA 1292 6 47232 117162 0 165692 DHOLPUR 11275 162 84186 5313 4194 105130 DUNGARPUR 7242 3383 1615 20591 2549 35380 GANGANAGAR 575983 0 2012 0 0 577995 HANUMANGARH 326544 0 19532 0 26 346102 JAIPUR 2649 0 78724 248271 38 329682 JAISALMER 119725 0 25665 726 130 146246 JALORE 3616 0 39843 163509 0 206968 JHALAWAR 16548 892 39691 112421 1353 170905 JHUNJHUNU 106 0 5679 231837 0 237622 JODHPUR 93 0 167022 6918 7 174040 KARULI 8281 3436 66993 40406 1457 120573 KOTA 119680 768 86562 23335 4842 235187 NAGAUR 0 0 165772 126844 0 292616 PALI 0 12553 13768 52367 211 78899 RAJSAMAND 1654 1967 1312 22113 678 27724 SAWAIMADHOPUR 14775 1489 61562 115483 6139 199448 SIKAR 0 0 37893 213988 0 251881 SIROHI 8914 5620 6747 50618 0 71899 TONK 71155 3833 8865 136877 12727 233457 UDAIPUR 16611 15515 5235 57702 2789 97852 Total 1705767 76740 1888530 2538075 84834 6293946 182 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in Table A17-79: Forest cover in the districts of Rajasthan 183 183 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India. http://fsi.org.in Map A17-15: Forest cover in the districts of Rajasthan 184 184 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India. http://fsi.org.in Table A17-80: Protected Areas of Rajasthan 185 Protected Area Area (sq km) District Key species of fauna Darrah NP 265.8 Kota Wolf, Sloth Bear, Chinkara, Leopard, etc. Desert NP 3,162.00 Jaisalmer, Barmer Blackbuck, Chinkara, Wolf, Indian fox, Desert fox, Hare, Desert cat and a variety of Birds including the Great Indian Bustard, etc. Keoladeo Ghana NP 28.73 Bharatpur A variety of Water fowl and reptiles. Ranthambhore NP 392 Sawai Madhopur Tiger, Leopard, Caracal, Hyena, Jackal, Jungle Cat, Marsh Crocodiles, Wild Boar, Bears and various species of Deer, etc. Sariska NP 273.8 Alwar Leopard, Wild Dog, Jungle Cat, Civets Hyena, Jackal, Tiger, Sambar, Chital, Nilgai, Chausingha, Wild Boar, Langur, Rhesus Monkeys, a variety of Birds, etc. Bandh Baratha WLS 192.76 Bharatpur Leopard, Hyena, Jungle Cat, Blue Bull, Jackal, Wolf and Birds, etc. Bassi WLS 152.9 Chittaurgarh Panther, Chital. Wild Boar, Hyena, Jackal, Four Horned Antelope, etc. Bhensrodgarh WLS 229.14 Chittaurgarh Panther , Wild Boar, Chinkara , Fox, Four Horned Antilope, Civet, etc. Jaisamand WLS 52 Rajsamand Panther , Chinkara, Wild Boar, Chinkara, Hyaena, Civet, Jungle Cat, etc. Jamwa Ramgarh WLS 300 Jaipur Panther, Chital. Wild Boar, Hyena, Sambhar, Blue Bull, Jackal, Fox, Jungle Cat. Jawahar Sagar WLS 100 Kota Gavial, Crocodile, Sambhar, Chital, Wild boar, Sloth Bear, Leopard, Fishes, etc. Kailadevi WLS 676.38 Sawai Madhopur Panther, Sambhar, Sloth Bear Cheetal, Wild Boar, Hyena, Jackal, Chinkara, etc. Kesarbagh WLS 14.76 Dholpur Kumbhalgarh WLS 578.25 Udaipur, Pali Wolf, Leopard, Sloth bear, Hyena, Jackal, Jungle cat, Sambhar, Nilgai, Chaisingh, Chinkara, Hare, etc. Mount Abu WLS 288.84 Sirohi Panther, Sloth bear, Sambhar, Jungle Cat, Small Indian Civet, Wolf, Hyaena, Jackal, Indian Fox, Common Langoor, Wild Boar, Pangolin, Ratel, Common Mongoose, Indian Hare, Porcupine, Hedgehog, etc. Nahargarh WLS 50 Jaipur Leopard, Hyena, Jungle Cat, Wild boar, Fox, Jackal, Bluebull, Crocodile, many migratory and resident Birds, etc. National Chambal WLS 280 Kota Gavial Crocodile, Otter, Dolphin, a variety of water fowl, Panther, Jackal, Sambhar, Hyena, 185 ENVIS Wildlife and Protected Areas, Willife Institute of India, Mininstry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. http://wiienvis.nic.in Chinkara, etc. Phulwari Ki Nal WLS 511.41 Udaipur, Pali Leopard, Hyena, Chinkara, Wild boar, Four-horned Antelope, Flying squirrel, Pangolin and 120 species of Birds, etc. Ramgarh Vishdhari WLS 301 Bundi Leopard, Sambhar, Wild boar, Chinkara, Sloth bear, Indian Wolf, Hyena, Jackal, Fox, etc. Ramsagar WLS 34.4 Dholpur Sajjangarh WLS 5.19 Udaipur Panther, Hyena, Chital, Sambar, Wild Boar, Blue Bull, Hare, Jackal, a variety of reptiles and birds, etc. Sariska WLS 492 Alwar Leopard, Wild Dog, Jungle Cat, Civets Hyena, Jackal, Tiger, Sambar, Chital, Nilgai, Chausingha, Wild Boar, Langur, Rhesus Monkeys, a variety of Birds, etc. Sawai Man Singh WLS 103.25 Sawai Madhopur Sloth Bear , Wild Boar , Caracal. Chital. Chinkara, Hyaena, Jackal, Sambhar, etc. Shergarh WLS 98.71 Kota Leopard, Hyena, Wild boar, Chital, Sambhar, Chinkara, Sloth bear, etc. Sitamata WLS 422.94 Chittaurgarh, Udaipur Leopard, a variety of Deer that includes Chousingha, Caracal, Wild boar, Pangolin, etc. Tal Chhapper WLS 7.9 Churu Black buck and a variety of Birds, etc. Tadgarh Raoli WLS 495.27 Ajmer, Rajsamand, Pali Van Vihar WLS 59.93 Dholpur UTTAR PRADESH Uttar Pradesh is located between 23°52' and 31°28'N latitude and 77°04' and 84°38'E longitude. It has an area of 2.40 lakh sq km and has a population of 1662 lakh with 690 persons per sq km 186. The state has 71 districts divided further into 813 blocks and 107,452 villages 187. Agroclimatic zones 188 The state is divided into 9 agro-climatic zones on the basis of soil characterization, rainfall, temperature and terrain. The Map A17-15 depicts the agroclimatic zones in the state. The key features of the agro-climatic zones are described in Table A17-81. Table A17-81: Agroclimatic Zones of Uttar Pradesh Agro-climatic zone Districts Main crops Features Tarai and Bhabar Saharanpur (58%), Muzaffarnagar What, Rice, Sugarcane, Maize, Micronutrient deficiecny Nagar (10%), Bijnor (79%), Pulses (Gram and Lentil), Toria. in soils. Moradabad (21%), Rampur (40%), Bareilly (19%), Pilibihit (75%), Shahjahanpur (6%), Khiri (39%), Bahraich (47%), Shravasti (71%) Western Plain Saharanpur (42%), Muzaffarnagar Wheat, Sugarcane, Forage maize, Rising water table and Nagar (90%), Meerut, Bagpat, Rice, Pearl millet, Cotton. salinity. Secondary and Gaziabad, Gautam Budha Nagar, micronutrient Buland Shahar deficiencies in soils. Mid Western Plain Bareilly (81%), Badaun, Pilibihit Wheat, Rice, Sugarcane, Millet, Secondary and (25%), Moradabad (79%), Maize, Groundnut, Rape and micronutrient Jyotibaphule Nagar, Rampur (60%), Mustard, Chick pea, Pea, Lentil, deficiencies in soils. Bijnor (21%), Black gram, Red gram, Potato, Forages. South Western Dry Agra, Firozabad, Aligarh, Hathras, Wheat, Pearl millet, Barley, Brackish water, salinity- Plain Mathura, Mainpuri, Etah Maize, Rice, Rapeseed, Mustard, alkalinity, undulating Sugarcane, Potato, Groundnut, ravines. Linseed, Cotton, Greengram, Pea, Redgram, Smaller millets. Central Plain Shahjahanpur (94%), Kanpur Nagar, Wheat, Pearl millet, Sorghum, Soil salinity and Kanpur Dehat, Etawa, Auraiya, Redgram, Groundnut, Chick pea, alkalinity. Impeded Farrukhabad, Kannauj, Lucknow, Rapeseed, Mustard, Potato. drainage. Deficiency of Unnao, Raibareilly, Sitapur, Hardoi, secondary and Khiri (61%), Fetehpur, Allahabad micronutrients. Poor soil (58%), Kaushmbi fertility. Bundelkhand Jhansi, Lalitpur, Jalaun, Hamirpur, Wheat, Chick pea, Sorghum, Problem soils with poor Mahoba, Banda, Chitrkoot Redgram, Lentil, Linseed, Til, water retention capacity. Rice. Heavy textured soils. North Eastern Gorakhpur, Maharajganj, Deoria, Rice, Maize, smaller Millets, Flood-prone zone with Plain Kushi Nagar, Basti, St. Kabir Nagar, Sugarcane, Wheat, Chick pea, vast area remains Siddhartha Nagar, Gonda, Baharaich Barley, Pea. inundated for (53%), Balrampur, Shravasti (29%) considerable period, problem soils. Eastern Plain Azamgarh, Mau, Balia, Pratapgarh, Rice, Sugarcane, Maize, Redgram, Saline alkali soils, Diara Faizabad, Ambedkar Nagar, Smaller millets, Wheat, Barley, land. Barabanki, Sultanpur, Varanasi, Chick pea, Pea. 186 Census of India, 2001. http://gov.bih.nic.in/Profile/CensusStats-01.htm 187 State profiles. National Rural Health Mission, Mininstry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. http://www.mohfw.nic.in/nrhm.htm 188 Annual Plan 2009-2010. Planning Department. Government of Uttar Pradesh. http://planning.up.nic.in/; M. D. Pathak, 1991. Rice production in Uttar Pradesh: progress and suggestions for improvement. IRRI. Chandauli, Jaunpur, Gazipur, St. Ravidas Nagar (86%) Vindhyan Allahabad (42%), St. Ravidas Nagar Rice, Smaller millets, Redgram, Black, heavy soils. Red (14%), Mirzapur, Sonebadhra Maize, Wheat, Barley, Chick pea, soils with poor water Linseed, Mustard. holding capacity. Land use Of the total geographic area of 241.7 lakh ha in the state, nearly 69% is cropped. About 37% of the area is cropped twice. The gross and net sown area in the State is estimated at 254.14 lakh ha and 165.73 lakh ha respectively. The cropping intensity is 1.53. Forest area is limited (6.86%) and the area under pastures and grazing lands is extremly scarce (0.27%). Table A17-82 gives details of the land use in the state. Table A17-82: Land use in Uttar Pradesh (2006-2007) 189 Category Area in ha Reporting Area for Land Utilisation Statistics 24170403 Forests 1657023 Area Under Non-agricultural Uses 2729303 Barren and Unculturable Land 506863 Total Land Not Available for Cultivation 3236166 Permanent Pastures and Other Grazing Lands 64320 Land Under Miscellaneous Tree Crops and Groves not Included in Net Area 372622 Culturable Waste Land 439874 Total Uncultivated Land Exclusing Fallow Land 876816 Fallow Lands Other than Current Fallows 542309 Current Fallow 1284611 Total Fallows 1826920 Net Area Sown 16573478 Total Cropped Area 25414596 Area Sown More than Once 8841118 Chart A17-6: Land use in Uttar Pradesh (2006-2007) 190 The Table A17-82 gives details of land use for the districts of Uttar Pradesh 191. As seen, the districts of Kheri, Sitapur, Hardoi amd Badaun have the largest net sown area (more than 4 lakh ha). 189 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 190 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 191 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in Sonbhadra, Mirzapur and Chitrakut have the least proportion of area under crops (22.37%, 42.15% and 50.82% respectively). The extent of fallow lands is the maximum in the districts of Allahabad, Sonbhadra and Hardoi (while as percentage of the district area Pratapgarh, Allahabad, Sultanpur and Varanasi have more than 15% area under fallows). Cropping intensity is highest in Mainpuri (1.98) and Chandauli (1.93) while it is the lowest in Chitrakut (1.09) and Hanirpur (1.11). Sonbhadra has over 3.3 lakh ha under forests (about 49% of its area) while Kheri and Mirzapur have more than 1 lakh ha under forests (more than 20% of their area). Pastures and grazing lands are extremly limited with nearly all districts having less than 1% of their area under this land use. Jhansi and Chitrakut have the largest extent of barren and unculturable area (0.31 and 0.22 lakh ha respectively). Land degradation 192 Wastelands are spread over an area of 10988 sq.km in Uttar Pradesh accounting for 4.56% of the state's geographic area. Of the total wasteland in the state, land with scrub (dense and open) accounts for 2995 sq km (about 1.24%), land affected by salinity/alkalinity (moderate and strong) accounts for 2911 sq km (about 1.21%) and degraded forest land accounts for about 1922 sq km (0.8%). The Map A17-16 depicts the spread of wastelands in the state. Table A17-83: Wastelands in Uttar Pradesh (2010) Categories Area in sq km % of geographic area Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 1216.48 0.5 Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 264.63 0.11 Land with Dense Scrub 1160.19 0.48 Land with Open Scrub 1835.12 0.76 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Permanent 376.54 0.16 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Seasonal 721.12 0.3 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity-Moderate 2193.28 0.91 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity-Strong 718.46 0.3 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub dominated 1857.31 0.77 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 64.61 0.03 Degraded pastures/grazing land 21.47 0.01 Degraded land under plantation crops 3.48 0 Sands-Riverine 109.92 0.05 Mining wastelands 16.16 0.01 Industrial wastelands 18.07 0.01 Barren rocky area 411.75 0.17 Total 10988.59 4.56 TGA 240928 Tables A17-83 and A17-91 gives details of wastelands in the districts of Uttar Pradesh. The districts of Etawah, Auraiya, Jhansi, Agra and Kanpur (R) have more than 10% of their area under wasteland (Jhansi has the maximum area under wastelands with 539.21 sq km, followed by Sonbadra and Agra). Eight districts including Saharanpur, Bijnor, Bagpat and Moradabad have less than 1% of their area under wastelands. The maximum area of land with open scrub is in Jhansi (235.18 sq km) and with dense scrub is in Lalitpur (152.99 sq km). Degraded forest land (scrub) is the most in Sonbadra (236.4 sq km). Land affected by strong salinity is highest in the districts of Raebareli (103.75 sq km), Pratapgarh and Unno. Land affected by moderate salinity is highest in Unno (162.48) while Mainpuri, Kanpur (R), Hardo, Kannauj, Raebareli, Fatehpur, Etah and Sultanpur all have more than 100 sq km of affected land. The districts of Jalaun, Jhansi, Agra, Banda, Hamirpur, Sultanpur, Kanpur R, Firozabad and Fatehpur have the maximum extent of gullied and ravinous land. The Map A17-17 depict the spread of soil erosion, sodic soils, and the soil drainage in the 192 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. state. Soils 193 Soils of Uttar Pradesh are predominantly alluvial (about 72%). The other major soil types in the state are the Bundelkhand soils (about 13%), Tarai soils (about 7%) and Vindhyan soils (about 6%). • Alluvial soils are generally very deep and include recent alluvia (light textured, calcareous), flat land soils (neutral to moderately alkaline, calcareous, partially waterlogged), upland soils (neutral to slightly acidic, freely permeable, excessively drained), and lowland soils. • Bundelkhand soils are found south-west of river Yamuna in the districts of Jhansi, Jalaun, Hamirpur, Banda and Lalitpur. These comprise of coarse grained reddish brown soils (shallow depth, low organic matter, poor waterholding capacity), coarse grained grey to greyish brown soils (greater depth), clayey loam black soils (heavy texture), clayey black soils (deep, fertile). • Tarai soils occur in a narrow belt in valleys of the sub-mountaneous region of north Uttar Pradesh. Though initially rich in organic content, cultivation over the last half century has left the soils degraded. • Vindhyan soils occur south of Ganga in districts of Mirzapur, Varanasi and Allahabad. In uplands soils are shallow, excessively drained and have poor nutrient status. In flatlands soils have more depth, are rich in organic matter and support good crop growth. In lowlands soils have fine texture. • Bhabar soils occur in narrow belt in the foothill region of spurs of Himalayas in the districts of Sanharangur, Bijnaur. They are rich in plant nutrients but fail to support normal cultivation due to acute shortage of moisture due to excessive drainage or rapid percolation. • Aravali soils occur in south-western corner of Agra, and parts adjoining outer spurs of hills of Central India and Rajasthan. Soils are coarse and support scanty cultivation. Table A17-92 gives details of the status of the soil macronutrients in the districts of Uttar Pradesh. Nearly all districts of the state have low levels of Nitrogen and Phosphorus (except Mirzapur and Sant Ravidas Nagar which have medium Nitrogen status and Hardoi which has medium Phosphorus status). 25 districts have high and the rest have medium Potassium status. Water The water resources of the state are estimated to be about 161.70 BCM of surface water and about 72 BCM of exploitable ground water resource. Consumption of water for irrigation is the highest accounting for about 43.8 BCM of surface water and about 27 BCM of ground water. Consumption of water for drinking and domestic requirement is about 4.3 BCM. 194 Rainfall The average annual rainfall of Uttar Pradesh is 950 mm (it ranges from 1021 mm in Eastern Uttar Pradesh to 950 mm in Western Uttar Pradesh). Of this, it is estimated that 17.5% is lost as evaporation, 29.55% is absorbed by the soil, 15.45% infiltrates as ground water and 37.5% flows into rivers 195. 193 M. D. Pathak, 1991. Rice production in Uttar Pradesh: progress and suggestions for improvement. IRRI. 194 State Water Policy. Irrigation Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh. http://irrigation.up.nic.in 195 Environmental Information System, Directorate of Environment, Government of Uttar Pradesh. As seen in Table A17-93, the districts of Raebareli, Bareilly, Hardoi, Varanasi, Pratapgarh, Jalaun, Faizabad and Lucknow have a higher probability of moderate drought (20% or more) and Pilibhit has the highest probability of severe drought (10%) 196. Surface water The major sources of surface water in the State are rivers. These include the major rivers Ganga, Yamuna, Ghagra, Gomti, Gandak, Sone and Sarda, and a number of smaller rivers 197. The Map A17-18 depicts the river basins of the state. During the monsoons, rivers cause flooding of large areas, particularly in the Eastern parts of the state. Of about the 29.44 million ha. of geographical area of the state, 7.336 million ha has been recognised as flood prone. 198 Ground water The annual replenishable ground water resource in the state is estimated to be 76.35 BCM 199. The net annual ground water availability is 70.18 BCM. The annual ground water draft is estimated to be 48.78 BCM making the stage of ground water development 70%. Of the 802 blocks in the state, 37 are classified 200 as Over Exploited, 13 as Critical and 88 Semi-critical with respect to the groundwater status. As seen in the Table A17-84, the stage of groundwater development exceeds 90% in Badaun, Baghpat, Hathras, Moradabad, Saharanpur and Kannauj. It is under 45% in Jalaun, Banda, Etawah, Chandauli, Jhansi, Sonbhadra and Kushinagar. Groundwater quality in parts of the state is affected by high Salinity, Fluoride, Chloride, Iron, Nitrate and Arsenic. Of the 97941 habitations in the state, the quality of drinking water is affected by Arsenic in 856 habitations, by Flouride in 530 habitations, by Iron in 500 habitations, by Salinity in 199 habitations and by Nitrate in 2 habitations 201. Tables A17-94 and A17-95 provide details of the districts and habitations affected by poor groundwater quality. Table A17-84: Districts affected by poor groundwater quality 202 Contaminant Districts affected Salinity (EC > 3000 Agra, Hathras, Mathura µS/cm at 25 ° C) Fluoride (>1.5 mg/l) Agra, Aligarh, Etah, Firozabad, Jaunpur, Kannauj, Mahamaya Nagar, Mainpuri, Mathura, Maunath Bhanjan Chloride (> 1000 mg/l) Mathura, Agra Iron (>1.0 mg/l) Azamgarh, Balia, Balrampur, Etawah, Fatehpur, Gazipur, Gonda, Hardoi, Kanpur Dehat, Kanpur Nagar, Lakhimpur, Lalitpur, Mau, Siddartnagar, Unnao 196 P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune 197 Irrigation Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh. http://irrigation.up.nic.in 198 State Water Policy. Irrigation Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh. http://irrigation.up.nic.in 199 BMC = Billion Cubic Meters 200 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category 201 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in 202 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – Bihar. Nitrate (>45 mg/l) Agra, Aligarh, Allahbad, Ambedkar Nagar, Auraiyya, Badaun, Baghpat, Balrampur, Banda, Barabanki, Bareilly, Basti, Bijnour, Bulandsahar, Chitrakoot, Etah, Etawa, Fatehpur, Firozabad, GB Nagar, Ghaziabad, Ghazipur, Hamirpur, Hardoi, Jaunpur, Jhansi, Kannauj, Kanpur Dehat, Lakhimpur, Mahoba, Mathura, Meerut, Moradabad, Muzaffarnagar, Raibarelli, Rampur, Sant Ravidas Nagar, Shajahanpur, Sitapur, Sonbhadra, Sultanpur, Unnao Arsenic (>0.05 mg/l ) Agra, Aligarh, Balia, Balrampur, Gonda, Gorakhpur, Lakhimpur Kheri, Mathura, Muradabad Agriculture Uttar Pradesh has a total geographical area of 241.70 lakh hectares of which 165.73 lakh hectares (about 69%) is cultivated. The main crops grown are Rice, Wheat, Bajra, Maize, Gram, Arhar, Lentils, Rapeseed/Mustard, Sugarcane and Potato. Uttar Pradesh accounts for 47.25% of the Lentil production of the country, 46.39% of the Potato, 37.68% of Sugarcane, 33.02% of Wheat, 12.99% of Arhar and 11.91% of Rice in the country203. As seen in the Table A17-85, the crop productivity for Potato, Lentil, Arhar and Wheat in Uttar Pradesh are higher than that of the country 204. Table A17-85: Productivity of major crops in Uttar Pradesh (2006-07) 205 Crop Productivity in Uttar Productivity in Pradesh (kg/ha) India (kg/ha) Potato 21851 14903 Lentil 705 621 Arhar 749 650 Wheat 2721 2708 Sugarcane 59626 69022 Rice 1879 2131 The productivity of crops varies across the agro-climatic zones in the state. The productivity of food grains varies from 14.58 Q/Ha (in Bundelkhand zone) to 31.53 Q/Ha (in Western plain zone). The productivity of cereals ranges from 19.19 Q/Ha (in Vindhyan zone) to 32.39 Q/Ha (in Western plain zone). The productivity of pulses varies in agroclimatic zones from 7.05 Q/Ha (in Western Plain zone) to 9.59 Q/Ha (in Central Plain zone). The Oil seeds productivity varies from 4.27 Q/Ha ((in Bundelkhand zone) to 15.26 Q/Ha (in South-Western semi dry zone). The details on area, production and yield/ha of the major crops in the state are provided in Table A17-96 206. Irrigation Uttar Pradesh has a net irrigated area of 133.13 lakh ha (80% of the net sown area of 165.73 lakh ha). Of the net irrigated area, 71% is irrigated by tubewells and 20% is irrigated by canals. Irrigation by tanks is just about 1%. The districts with the highest dependence on tubewells for irrigation are Kheri, Sitapur, Shahjahanpur with more than 3 lakh ha irrigated from this source. The districts with the largest area (more than 1 lakh ha) irrigated by canals are Jalaun, Chandauli, Mathura, Allahabad and Raebareli. Table A17-97 gives details of the sources of irrigation for each district in the state 207. 203 Annual Plan 2009-2010. Planning Department. Government of Uttar Pradesh. http://planning.up.nic.in/ 204 2006-07. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 205 2006-07. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 206 Annual Plan 2009-2010. Planning Department. Government of Uttar Pradesh. http://planning.up.nic.in/ 207 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in Agro-chemicals As seen in the Table A17-86, the use of nitrogenous fertilizers in Uttar Pradesh is much higher as compared to the national average 208. Table A17-86: Use of Chemical Fertilizers 2008-09 (kg/ha) 209 N P K Total Uttar Pradesh 111.71 34.90 9.70 156.31 India 77.9 33.69 17.1 128.58 As seen in Table A17-86, the consumption of chemical fertilizers in the state is imbalanced with the N : P : K ratio at 11.51 : 3.59 : 1 210 (the optimum nutrient ratio recommended for Indian soils is 4 : 2 : 1). The consumption of chemical pesticides in Uttar Pradesh in 2006-07 was 7022 MT 211. Table A17-87: Trend in Pesticide Consumption in Uttar Pradesh 2002-2007 212 Year Consumption of Pesticides (MT – technical grade) 2002-03 6775 2003-04 6710 2004-05 6855 2005-06 6672 2006-07 7022 Livestock Uttar Pradesh has 10.02% of cattle, 23.4% of buffaloes, 2.34% of sheep, 10.41% of goats and 16.89% of pig population of the country. The state ranks first in the country in buffalo and pig populations and the second highest in cattle population in the country 213. The estimated green fodder production from forests, permanent pastures, grazing lands and cultivated areas has declined from 370.65 lakh tonnes in 2000-2001 to 358.23 lakh tonnes in 2002- 03. Dry fodder production (crop residue of cereals, pulses and oil seeds) over the same period declined from 870.14 lakh tonnes to 807.98 lakh tonnes 214. 208 Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2009. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 209 Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2009. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 210 Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2009. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 211 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 212 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 213 17th Indian Livestock Census. All India Summary Report 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 214 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in Table A17-88: Production of fodder in Uttar Pradesh ('000 tonnes) 215 Year Dry Fodder Green Fodder Total Fodder 2000-01 87014 37065 124079 2001-02 91433 36438 127871 2002-03 80798 35823 116621 Forests 216 Only about 6.97% of the geographical area (16796 sq km) of the state of Uttar Pradesh is under forests. This consists of 1297 sq km of very dense forests, 4682 sq km of moderate dense forests and 8148 sq km of open forest. The forests of Uttar Pradesh include Tropical Moist Deciduous, Tropical Dry Deciduous and Thorn Forests. The forested areas in the state lie to the North, North- East and Southern regions. The details on the type of forest cover in the five most forested districts of the state are given in Table A17-89. Table A17-89: Forest cover details of the most forested districts of Uttar Pradesh 217 (area in sq km) District Geographical Very dense Moderately Open forest Total forest Forest as % of Scrub area forest dense forest geographical area Chandauli 2549 2 190 327 519 20.36 2 Kheri 7680 366 502 446 1314 17.11 5 Mirzapur 4521 0 316 466 782 17.30 48 Pilibhit 3499 290 204 203 697 19.92 0 Sonbhadra 6788 17 846 1606 2469 36.37 41 Uttar Pradesh has 1 national park and 23 sanctuaries comprising a protected area of 0.57 million ha (2.36% of the geographical area of the state). The Table A17-98 gives details of these protected areas. Summary of key environmental issues Existing Issues Potential Interventions Severe soil erosion in parts of the state Soil and water conservation (soil moisture conservation, Saline/sodic soils in parts of the state erosion control, improved irrigation efficiency) 8 districts with high drought probability Drought adaptation measures 17% of blocks classified as overexploited, critical or semi- Water quality management critical Soil testing and fertilizer scheduling Poor water quality in 856 habitations Fodder management High dependence on tubewells for irrigation Imbalanced use of chemical fertilizers Increasing use of chemical pesticides Declining fodder production 215 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 216 State of Forest Report 2005. Forest Survey of India. Government of India. 217 Map A17-16: Agro-climatic zones of Uttar Pradesh 218 218 ICT Based Agriculture Monitoring and Development Initiative. Implemented under Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana by ITSL and AFCL. http://ict.agri.net.in Table A17-90: Land use in Districts of Uttar Pradesh (2006-07) 219 Land use in Districts of Uttar Pradesh 2006-2007 (area in ha) Land Under Reporting Permanent Misc Tree Total Other Area for Area Under Total Land Pastures and Crops and Uncultivated Fallow Lands Land Non- Barren and Not Other Groves not Culturable Land Other than Total Area Sown Utilisation agricultural Unculturable Available for Grazing Included in Waste Excluding Current Current Total Net Area Cropped More than Statistics Forests Uses Land Cultivation Lands Net Area Land Fallow Land Fallows Fallow Fallows Sown Area Once AGRA 398970 34255 38747 4904 43651 890 10089 2420 13399 5615 18687 24302 283363 410000 126637 ALIGARH 371287 2577 37754 7919 45673 1729 334 5422 7485 5765 8922 14687 300865 516619 215754 ALLAHABAD 557012 21455 77988 16630 94618 1652 9821 12363 23836 25359 76060 101419 315684 500031 184347 AMBEDKAR 236103 270 38223 3714 41937 583 4498 4362 9443 5926 10892 16818 167635 282538 114903 AURAIYA 206126 10283 19890 7175 27065 1292 680 5099 7071 5781 12083 17864 143843 235432 91589 AZAMGARH 424058 110 59344 6897 66241 1395 6759 6367 14521 7902 32368 40270 302916 515205 212289 BADAUN 520079 6902 47375 10387 57762 259 6540 5240 12039 11276 18053 29329 414047 699922 285875 BAGPAT 134994 1525 15818 2344 18162 82 74 1989 2145 952 1829 2781 110381 175272 64891 BAHRAICH 486062 67727 56280 3688 59968 512 6145 2113 8770 5998 18737 24735 324862 501280 176418 BALLIA 299265 0 44362 8922 53284 140 6063 1498 7701 4333 12776 17109 221171 351683 130512 BALRAMPUR 324697 58940 33092 3511 36603 235 5410 2026 7671 2715 6189 8904 212579 313830 101251 BANDA 438949 5421 29431 11397 40828 389 1227 11584 13200 14873 16890 31763 347737 410364 62627 BARABANKI 442763 6298 60936 4247 65183 1900 9755 9525 21180 14283 43718 58001 292101 533264 241163 BAREILLY 406915 285 51042 7296 58338 315 2509 1679 4503 3200 11300 14500 329289 531753 202464 BASTI 277039 4093 38311 4006 42317 504 6648 4446 11598 3808 5493 9301 209730 300883 91153 BIJNOR 464578 54898 54206 4278 58484 462 2976 3977 7415 3400 4550 7950 335831 427985 92154 BULLANDSHAHR 364974 7795 40107 6744 46851 942 915 5053 6910 1073 4777 5850 297568 507667 210099 CHANDAULI 253338 77400 25351 2830 28181 37 1201 1191 2429 2022 7965 9987 135341 261386 126045 CHITRAKUT 338897 59731 29335 22173 51508 48 26343 10355 36746 5207 13481 18688 172224 186924 14700 DEORIA 249376 261 31982 1611 33593 76 3323 1850 5249 2559 12354 14913 195360 319136 123776 ETAH 439635 3058 44433 5994 50427 517 1131 23050 24698 17084 13843 30927 330525 542313 211788 ETAWAH 240265 30140 23884 10654 34538 609 682 7563 8854 5001 16305 21306 145427 241438 96011 FAIZABAD 206090 1116 31600 2348 33948 1693 8769 3222 13684 9325 15290 24615 132727 213076 80349 FARRUKHABAD 219911 5908 25872 5338 31210 609 3378 2978 6965 4150 23633 27783 148045 215832 67787 FATEHPUR 422126 5208 47985 10751 58736 2507 6340 10782 19629 15242 30345 45587 292966 407693 114727 FEROZABAD 241180 8611 24436 6805 31241 624 1100 2986 4710 7496 7009 14505 182113 289072 106959 GAUTAM BUDDHA 125399 1999 23950 3453 27403 503 473 2476 3452 7904 2856 10760 81785 128798 47013 GHAZIABAD 206934 3542 38813 4033 42846 77 185 3228 3490 4211 8161 12372 144684 226571 81887 GHAZIPUR 333214 121 48655 3043 51698 816 3384 3599 7799 3616 15667 19283 254313 415443 161130 GONDA 401021 12933 51988 3277 55265 1311 8437 7987 17735 6308 14797 21105 293983 441135 147152 GORAKHPUR 335164 6031 44692 4011 48703 200 2894 2378 5472 6445 18017 24462 250496 381673 131177 HAMIRPUR 390179 23520 30703 9247 39950 432 713 4525 5670 3555 26699 30254 290785 324059 33274 HARDOI 598782 8951 51571 14620 66191 4808 13109 14055 31972 25468 44668 70136 421532 669524 247992 STATE 24170403 1657023 2729303 506863 3236166 64320 372622 439874 876816 542309 1284611 1826920 16573478 25414596 8841118 219 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in Table A17-90 contd: Land use in Districts of Uttar Pradesh (2006-07) 220 Land use in Districts of Uttar Pradesh 2006-2007 (area in ha) Land Under Reporting Permanent Misc Tree Total Other Area for Area Under Total Land Pastures and Crops and Uncultivated Fallow Lands Land Non- Barren and Not Other Groves not Culturable Land Other than Total Area Sown Utilisation agricultural Unculturable Available for Grazing Included in Waste Excluding Current Current Total Net Area Cropped More than Statistics Forests Uses Land Cultivation Lands Net Area Land Fallow Land Fallows Fallow Fallows Sown Area Once HATHARAS 180043 2100 18016 3453 21469 988 378 1805 3171 2581 2500 5081 148222 235861 87639 JALAUN 454434 28177 37532 11569 49101 136 1638 1829 3603 6389 24489 30878 342675 436920 94245 JAUNPUR 399713 63 45452 6969 52421 1356 4807 7992 14155 20508 33481 53989 279085 454937 175852 JBFLUE NAGAR 216846 21001 16665 1002 17667 196 333 906 1435 1720 3015 4735 172008 260401 88393 JHANSI 501327 34378 42285 31672 73957 685 982 15722 17389 7549 62207 69756 305847 432430 126583 KANNAUJ 208973 8024 18792 5811 24603 2087 2859 6684 11630 7174 14687 21861 142855 222135 79280 KANPUR D 314984 5797 26843 17475 44318 376 4514 4258 9148 15306 16434 31740 223981 317129 93148 KANPUR S 301326 5656 39025 16787 55812 3659 3146 9707 16512 6712 26773 33485 189861 272088 82227 KHERI 772339 164848 77218 3524 80742 944 5480 2960 9384 4186 27244 31430 485935 705752 219817 KOSHAMBHI 185504 234 22058 8430 30488 531 4503 3990 9024 4878 7132 12010 133748 175861 42113 KUSHINAGAR 291466 817 51049 4507 55556 329 3789 1775 5893 1177 2795 3972 225228 342222 116994 LALITPUR 509791 76160 40730 14962 55692 2773 683 61756 65212 14819 27635 42454 270273 377348 107075 LUCKNOW 253304 13082 46158 7674 53832 3205 2070 6569 11844 21461 7678 29139 145407 217520 72113 MAHARAJ GANJ 290548 49988 30805 1249 32054 197 250 507 954 1474 4311 5785 201767 363944 162177 MAHOBA 327429 16213 38123 8708 46831 493 355 10737 11585 4314 11391 15705 237095 277844 40749 MAINPURI 272723 1775 19188 16378 35566 1353 1615 7467 10435 16507 24302 40809 184138 364188 180050 MATHURA 330384 1596 37081 4706 41787 1333 1044 5523 7900 3067 6541 9608 269493 391255 121762 MAU 171624 560 22771 1738 24509 185 3519 2295 5999 2444 13659 16103 124453 207490 83037 MEERUT 273005 21314 39232 3057 42289 372 2016 2630 5018 2489 2842 5331 199053 303870 104817 MIRZAPUR 452508 109236 48390 9166 57556 514 29664 14536 44714 8965 41311 50276 190726 281979 91253 MORADABAD 375979 64 41994 3232 45226 425 2396 1532 4353 2506 7634 10140 316196 556814 240618 MUZAFFARNAGAR 421473 27060 49998 4524 54522 411 2414 2458 5283 2580 5641 8221 326387 472441 146054 PILIBHIT 378315 80010 41484 6773 48257 274 4742 3262 8278 2305 4125 6430 235340 395332 159992 PRATAPGARH 361577 569 39750 9244 48994 654 15691 7398 23743 13411 52499 65910 222361 298128 75767 RAEBARELI 456416 5717 60893 15249 76142 3952 22603 16035 42590 25538 34697 60235 271732 409399 137667 RAMPUR 235726 6611 26725 5331 32056 4 1129 120 1253 638 1461 2099 193707 366576 172869 S.RAVIDAS NGR 103045 56 16614 2534 19148 289 676 430 1395 4274 8186 12460 69986 97645 27659 SAHARANPUR 363791 33229 48586 424 49010 169 1352 732 2253 1823 2639 4462 274837 405032 130195 SANT KABIR NGR 174810 4364 27505 1871 29376 122 5055 2628 7805 3226 8109 11335 121930 208387 86457 SHAHJAHANPUR 437477 10499 40171 6959 47130 971 3927 3675 8573 7278 16295 23573 347702 604912 257210 SHRAVASTI 192887 34353 20704 417 21121 66 1347 494 1907 808 2821 3629 131877 186582 54705 SIDHARTHA 297814 3708 35292 2662 37954 533 3273 2866 6672 2253 11625 13878 235602 393904 158302 SITAPUR 573846 5805 63657 5794 69451 627 5255 6340 12222 12031 36285 48316 438052 646373 208321 SONBHADRA 680961 333608 48931 9912 58843 242 53755 10158 64155 14203 57800 72003 152352 192835 40483 SULTANPUR 439676 2057 53087 14624 67711 2419 7287 9725 19431 18973 47853 66826 283651 433886 150235 UNNAO 460279 16930 52787 12079 64866 3292 3174 11971 18437 26626 31254 57880 302166 468987 166821 VARANASI 152678 0 25556 2150 27706 10 2996 3014 6020 2264 20846 23110 95842 158388 62546 STATE 24170403 1657023 2729303 506863 3236166 64320 372622 439874 876816 542309 1284611 1826920 16573478 25414596 8841118 220 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in Table A17-91: Wastelands of Uttar Pradesh (2010) 221 Ambedkar Category Agra Aligarh Allahabad nagar Auraiya Azamgarh Badaun Bagpat Ballia Balrampur Banda Barabanki Barelly Basti Bhairch Bijnor Bulandshair Chandauli Chitrakoot Deoria Etah Etawah Faizabad Farrukhabad Fatehpur Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 102.91 0 33.25 4.1 13.44 33.76 0.71 0 0 0 102.86 18.6 0 3.02 0 0 7.59 0 8.63 0 0 15.4 7.05 0 80.99 Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 56.08 0 0 0 42.93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20.63 0 0 0 Land with Dense Scrub 12.85 3.81 51.03 1.81 0 7.96 96.75 1.23 78.32 15.84 2.91 49.85 4.16 8.5 57.46 1.26 10.15 27.15 40.5 15.54 0.73 0 18.42 1.28 4.19 Land with Open Scrub 37.33 0.67 69.11 9.97 0 41.83 40.61 0 0 64.24 5.65 48.86 26.3 12.02 72.03 1.45 2.23 18.48 112.27 3.72 3.8 0.21 16.75 19.57 1.9 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Permanent 0 17.77 23.07 1.99 0 47.8 6.03 0 4.95 11.28 0 11.28 1.18 6.25 3.36 0 5.38 5.55 0 3.4 2.13 0 0.51 0.66 4.39 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Seasonal 0.03 5.91 19.76 13.36 7.26 17.23 3.87 0 1.98 20.37 0 13.84 0.66 36.09 2.27 0.78 3.93 1.74 0 2.12 9.71 1.38 9.47 32.44 11.11 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity- Moderate 6.53 45.64 17.49 11.56 82.52 70.96 8.36 0 3.8 0 0 27.99 2.99 0.64 0 0 15.19 0.95 0 0 108.35 49.44 12.97 51.58 112.76 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity-Strong 2.04 7.21 15.68 5.17 14.17 35.66 14.94 0 3.76 0 0 14.85 2.13 0.44 0 0 7.65 2.43 0 0 17.01 4.23 7.04 0.2 14.33 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub dominated 191.69 0.03 21.24 0 66.43 0 24.11 0.57 0 46.63 1.65 3.28 0 0 82.34 0.75 6.45 14.59 34.37 0 0 196.83 0 0 0 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Agriculture 0 0 0 0 0.18 0 0.27 0.03 0 1.04 0 0 0 0 14.51 0 0.46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Degraded pastures/grazing land 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.59 0 0 0 13.79 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Degraded land under plantation crops 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sands-Riverine 0 0 1.56 0.22 0 3.61 0 0 19.29 0 0 0.36 13.08 1.55 0 0 0 0.12 0 0.07 0 0.65 0.06 0.82 0 Mining wastelands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Industrial wastelands 0 0 3.78 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barren rocky area 13.46 0 146.33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.42 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.98 17.94 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 423.32 81.04 402.3 48.18 226.93 258.81 195.65 1.83 112.1 162.88 117.08 188.91 50.5 68.51 245.76 4.24 59.03 74.99 213.71 24.85 141.73 288.77 72.27 106.55 229.67 TGA 4027 2881 5482 2350 2015 4054 5168 1321 2981 3349 4460 4402 4120 2688 4420 4561 4352 2541 3164 2538 4446 2311 2341 2181 4152 % to TGA 10.51 2.81 7.34 2.05 11.26 6.38 3.79 0.14 3.76 4.86 2.63 4.29 1.23 2.55 5.56 0.09 1.36 2.95 6.75 0.98 3.19 12.5 3.09 4.89 5.53 221 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. Table A17-91 contd: Wastelands of Uttar Pradesh (2010) 222 Gutambudda Jyotibarao Kanshiram Lakhimpur Mahamaya Category Firozabad Ghaziabad Ghazipur Gonda Gorakpur nagar Hamirpur Hardoi Jalaun Jaunpur Jhansi phule nagar Kannauj Kanpur R Kanpur U nagar Kosambi Kushnagar Kheri Lalitpur Luckhnow nagar Maharajganj Mahoba Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 31.47 2.14 3.28 0 0 0.54 90.3 3.12 166.78 33.04 112.96 0 0 82.13 23.92 0 2.57 0.36 0 0 0.07 2.08 0 5.81 Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 68.34 0 0 0 0 0 14.44 0 34.1 0 8.08 0 0 20.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Land with Dense Scrub 0.1 8.47 0.65 30.89 13.68 5.75 2.82 1.73 1.9 1.65 50.6 9.04 0.45 0 4.69 25.58 0 8.57 86.54 116.21 1.38 0.32 0 2.47 Land with Open Scrub 0 0.23 11.66 91.07 0.01 4.48 2.75 43.67 1.79 17.06 235.18 6.2 15.12 5.63 26.63 9.6 2.4 0.64 31.73 152.99 8.05 0.13 1.6 36.11 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Permanent 0 12.61 8.35 4.47 9.33 1.67 0 4.53 0 10.98 0 0 0.49 0.66 0.27 28.34 1.34 2.32 32.77 0 0.6 9.57 0.71 0 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Seasonal 0.83 3.51 4.23 9.82 30.56 0.47 0 27.44 0 44.52 0 11.17 5.17 9.94 10.64 4.14 3.76 16.83 14.08 0 15.54 9.09 5.23 0 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity-Moderate 67.83 0.5 40.85 0 2.01 2.78 1.25 131.33 0 76.42 0 6.15 123.45 133.39 91.12 19.56 8.08 0.31 10.97 0 89.2 41.82 0.14 0 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity-Strong 12.18 0 2.52 0 0.98 1.75 0 27.99 0 48.31 0 0 10.84 11.47 6.23 0.32 32.75 0 1.73 0 35.48 25.21 0 0 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub dominated 50.93 1.76 0 21.96 0 0.86 97.04 0.12 141.17 0 63.04 18.61 0 41.68 9.81 0 0 0 136.3 76.9 0 0.82 26.06 10.23 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Agriculture 0 0 0 2.68 0 0 0.15 0 1.81 0 1.81 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.49 12.63 0 0 0 12.41 0 Degraded pastures/grazing land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Degraded land under plantation crops 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sands-Riverine 0 0 5.17 1.33 26.24 3.27 0 0.34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.99 0 0 0 0 0 Mining wastelands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.04 0 0 0 2.2 Industrial wastelands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.24 0 0 0 0 Barren rocky area 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61.53 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 62.33 0 0 0 16.79 Total 231.68 29.22 76.71 162.22 82.81 21.57 208.75 240.27 347.55 231.98 539.21 51.17 155.52 304.93 173.31 87.54 50.9 29.52 333.74 410.71 150.32 89.04 46.15 73.61 TGA 2361 1148 3377 4003 3321 1442 4282 5986 4565 4038 5024 2249 2093 3021 3155 1958 1780 2906 7680 5039 2528 1840 2948 2884 % to TGA 9.81 2.55 2.27 4.05 2.49 1.5 4.88 4.01 7.61 5.74 10.73 2.28 7.43 10.09 5.49 4.47 2.86 1.02 4.35 8.15 5.95 4.84 1.57 2.55 222 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. Table A17-91 contd: Wastelands of Uttar Pradesh (2010) 223 MauNath Muzaffar Pratapg St_Kabir Santravidas Shahjahan Siddarth Sultan Category Mainpuri Mathura Bhanjan Meerut Mirzapur Moradabad nagar Pilibhit arh Raebareli Rampur Saharanpur nagar nagar pur Shravasti nagar Sitapur Sonbadra pur Unno Varanasi Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 0 20.88 2.03 0 5.96 0 0 0 60.12 22.92 0 0 0.5 10.88 0 0 0 1.61 0 88.98 0 9.72 Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Land with Dense Scrub 0.94 27.2 9.04 4.47 26.48 1.91 16.98 76.89 0 9.97 2.99 1.42 0 0 19.53 16.64 0.06 12.16 29.43 0.58 17.87 0.44 Land with Open Scrub 2.47 12.52 2.51 0 157.36 1.71 0.78 30.7 0 18.65 4.32 0.52 3.9 0 35 26.4 7.74 42.85 155.26 6.37 10.8 1.53 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Permanent 0 15.95 10.89 0 0 0 0 2.25 7.72 8.08 0 0 0 4.14 9.23 1.45 0.84 18.24 0 7.58 0 4.18 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Seasonal 12.08 2.29 4.02 29.44 0 0 0 3.19 33.06 33.05 1.84 0 7.62 2.3 4.44 1.72 29.34 13.27 0 81.2 17.17 2.81 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity-Moderate 140.5 4.64 12.95 0 1.12 0 0 0.02 94.07 115.23 0.38 0 0 13.95 19.24 0 0 35.34 0 107.06 162.48 9.42 Land affected by salinity/alkalinity-Strong 12.01 0.31 15.47 0 0 0 0 0 65.89 103.75 0 0 0 12.53 1.46 0 0 4.35 0 49.65 59.2 7.14 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub dominated 0 1.54 0 1.09 117.02 0 11.75 57.29 0 0 5.74 1.13 0 0 4.97 7.88 0.29 23.07 236.4 0.89 0 0 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Agriculture 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10.36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.54 0 0 3.12 2.12 0 0 0 Degraded pastures/grazing land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.69 0 0 0 0 0 0 Degraded land under plantation crops 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sands-Riverine 0 0 0 0 0 0.28 0 8.69 0 0 8.15 0 0 0 6 0 0.43 0 0 0.09 0 1.55 Mining wastelands 0 0 0 0 0.36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.29 0 0 0 0 6.26 0 0 0 Industrial wastelands 0 0 0 0 0.04 2.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.02 0 0 0 0 9.98 0 0 0 Barren rocky area 0 0.23 0 0 85.74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 168 85.56 56.91 35 394.08 5.91 29.51 189.39 260.86 311.65 23.42 3.07 12.02 45.11 100.41 60.78 38.7 154.01 439.45 342.4 267.52 36.79 TGA 2760 3340 1713 2590 4521 3718 4008 3499 3717 4609 2367 3689 1646 1015 4575 2458 2895 5743 6788 4436 4558 1535 % to TGA 6.09 2.56 3.32 1.35 8.72 0.16 0.74 5.41 7.02 6.76 0.99 0.08 0.73 4.44 2.19 2.47 1.34 2.68 6.47 7.72 5.87 2.4 223 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. Map A17-17: Wastelands of Uttar Pradesh (2010) 224 224 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. Map A17-18: Soil erosion, salinity/sodicity and drainage in Uttar Pradesh 225 225 ICT Based Agriculture Monitoring and Development Initiative. Implemented under Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana by ITSL and AFCL. http://ict.agri.net.in Table A17-92: Status of Soil Macronutrients in the districts of Uttar Pradesh 226 S.No Districts N P K S.No Districts N P K 1 Luckhnow L L H 37 Banda L L M 2 Unnav L L H 38 Chitrakut L L M 3 Raybareli L L H 39 Agra L L H 4 Sitapur L L M 40 Firozabad L L H 5 Hardoi L M H 41 Mainpuri L L H 6 Lukhimpur L L M 42 Eta L L H 7 Faizabad L L M 43 Kashiram nagar L L H 8 Barabanki L L M 44 Mathura L L M 9 Ambedkarnagar L L M 45 Hathras L L H 10 Sultanpur L L M 46 Aligarh L L H 11 .Gonda L L M 47 Lalitpur L L H 12 Balrampur L L M 48 Jalaun L L H 13 Bahraich L L M 49 Jhashi L L H 14 Sribasti L L M 50 Saharanpur L L M 15 Varanasi L L M 51 Muzzafar nagar L L M 16 Chandouli L L M 52 Meerut L L M 17 Jaunpur L L H 53 Baghpat L L M 18 Gazipur L L M 54 Gaziyabad L L H 19 Mirzapur M L H 55 Gautambhudh nagar L L M 20 Santravidasnagar M L H 56 Buland Shahar L L H 21 Sonbhadra L L H 57 Gorakhapur L L M 22 Baliya L L M 58 Maharajgang L L M 23 Mau L L M 59 Devariya L L M 24 Aazamgarh L L M 60 Kushinagar L L M 25 Allahabad L L H 61 Basti L L M 26 Kaushambee L L H 62 Santkabeer nagar L L M 27 Fatehabad L L H 63 Sidharth nagar L L M 28 Pratapgarh L L M 64 Bareli L L M 29 Kanpur Nagar L L M 65 Shahjahapur L L M 30 Kanpur Dehat L L M 66 Badanyu L L H 31 Farukkhabad L L M 67 Peelibhit L L M 32 Kannauj L L M 68 Muradabad L L M 33 Etawa L L M 69 Jyotishaphool nagar L L M 34 Auraiya L L M 70 Bojnaur L L M 35 Hameerpur L L H 71 Rampur L L M 36 Mahowa L L M Total of Uttar Pradesh L L M 226 Indian Institute of Soil Science, ICAR. http://www.iiss.nic.in Map A17-19: River basins of Uttar Pradesh 227 227 Irrigation Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh. http://irrigation.up.nic.in Table A17-93: Probability of drought in districts of Uttar Pradesh 228 Probability % of Probability % of Moderate Probability % of Moderate Probability % of District Drought Severe Drought District Drought Severe Drought Pilibhit 18 10 Kheri Lakhimpur 15 3 Muzaffarnagar 7 8 Fatehpur 14 3 Bulandshahr 19 7 Moradabad 13 3 Badaun 16 7 Mirzapur 11 3 Agra 15 7 Ballia 17 2 Mathura 12 7 Gazipur 15 2 Saharanpur 18 6 Sultanpur 15 2 Meerut 13 6 Basti 13 2 Jalaun 21 5 Allahabad 10 2 Etawah 17 5 Raebareli 37 1 Kanpur 16 5 Bareilly 29 1 Aligarh 15 5 Varanasi 22 1 Hardoi 26 4 Pratapgarh 21 1 Faizabad 20 4 Bijnor 18 1 Lucknow 20 4 Banda 17 1 Hamirpur 15 4 Azamgarh 14 1 Bahraich 13 4 Gonda 12 1 Mainpuri 13 4 Unnao 16 0 Jhansi 12 4 Gorakhpur 14 0 Jaunpur 13 0 228 Data Source: P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report Table A17-94: Groundwater Resources in Districts of Uttar Pradesh (2004) 229 229 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). Table A17-94 contd: Groundwater Resources in Districts of Uttar Pradesh (2004) 230 230 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). Table A17-95: District-wise habitations affected by poor water quality in Uttar Pradesh 231 District Name Total Fluoride Arsenic Iron Salinity Nitrate District Name Total Fluoride Arsenic Iron Salinity Nitrate AGRA 22 11 0 0 11 0 JHANSI 5 5 0 0 0 0 ALIGARH 5 0 0 0 5 0 JYOTIBA PHOOLE NAGAR 0 0 0 0 0 0 ALLAHABAD 22 7 0 15 0 0 KANNAUJ 6 6 0 0 0 0 AMBEDKAR NAGAR 0 0 0 0 0 0 KANPUR DEHAT 0 0 0 0 0 0 AURAIYA 14 14 0 0 0 0 KANPUR NAGAR 5 5 0 0 0 0 AZAMGARH 0 0 0 0 0 0 KAUSHAMBI 25 0 0 9 16 0 BAGHPAT 0 0 0 0 0 0 KHERI 181 74 93 14 0 0 BAHRAICH 474 0 429 45 0 0 KUSHI NAGAR 70 1 0 69 0 0 BALLIA 231 0 229 2 0 0 LALITPUR 5 1 0 2 0 2 BALRAMPUR 4 0 0 4 0 0 LUCKNOW 2 2 0 0 0 0 BANDA 4 3 0 1 0 0 MAHAMAYA NAGAR 3 2 0 0 1 0 BARABANKI 7 0 0 4 3 0 MAHARAJGANJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 BAREILLY 17 0 17 0 0 0 MAHOBA 0 0 0 0 0 0 BASTI 14 11 0 3 0 0 MAINPURI 0 0 0 0 0 0 BIJNOR 10 0 0 10 0 0 MATHURA 138 25 0 11 102 0 BUDAUN 0 0 0 0 0 0 MAU 0 0 0 0 0 0 BULANDSHAHR 1 1 0 0 0 0 MEERUT 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHANDAULI 19 0 19 0 0 0 MIRZAPUR 135 48 0 87 0 0 CHITRAKOOT 0 0 0 0 0 0 MORADABAD 0 0 0 0 0 0 DEORIA 78 50 0 28 0 0 MUZAFFARNAGAR 17 13 0 4 0 0 ETAH 6 0 0 1 5 0 PILIBHIT 0 0 0 0 0 0 ETAWAH 3 1 0 2 0 0 PRATAPGARH 131 65 0 38 28 0 FAIZABAD 0 0 0 0 0 0 RAE BARELI 20 3 0 0 17 0 FARRUKHABAD 3 3 0 0 0 0 RAMPUR 0 0 0 0 0 0 FATEHPUR 71 26 0 40 5 0 SAHARANPUR 0 0 0 0 0 0 FIROZABAD 34 29 0 3 2 0 SANT KABEER NAGAR 10 0 0 10 0 0 GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR 0 0 0 0 0 0 SANT RAVIDAS NAGAR 0 0 0 0 0 0 GHAZIABAD 4 4 0 0 0 0 SHAHJAHANPUR 0 0 0 0 0 0 GHAZIPUR 24 0 24 0 0 0 SHRAVASTI 0 0 0 0 0 0 GONDA 0 0 0 0 0 0 SIDDHARTH NAGAR 0 0 0 0 0 0 GORAKHPUR 138 13 45 80 0 0 SITAPUR 0 0 0 0 0 0 HAMIRPUR 1 1 0 0 0 0 SONBHADRA 31 20 0 11 0 0 HARDOI 6 0 0 5 1 0 SULTANPUR 0 0 0 0 0 0 JALAUN 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNNAO 89 86 0 0 3 0 JAUNPUR 0 0 0 0 0 0 VARANASI 2 0 0 2 0 0 TOTAL 2087 530 856 500 199 2 231 National Rural Drinking Water Programme, Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Ministry of Rural Development. http://indiawater.gov.in Table A17-96: Productivity of major crops in Agro-climatic Zones of Uttar Pradesh 2008-09 232 (Q/ha) Food Total Total Total Oil Rapeseed/ Agro-climatic Zones Grains Cereals Rice Wheat Jowar Bajra Maize Pulses Arhar Gram Pea Masoor Urd Seeds Mustard Tarai & Bhabhar 25.07 26.05 20.99 31.9 14.31 11.5 9.78 8.11 7.04 9.95 12.07 8.18 7.75 8.2 9.14 Western Plain 31.53 32.39 22.73 36.47 7.64 17.85 21.38 7.05 7.58 9.84 12.07 6.15 5.38 10.79 10.93 Mid-Western 25.17 25.7 19.58 31.96 13 14.27 18.38 8.99 8.47 9.92 12.07 9.94 8.53 8.99 9.45 South Western Semi-Dry 27.51 28.16 24.18 33.78 9.91 17.62 23.04 7.47 7.05 10.06 12.07 8.83 5.38 15.26 15.51 Mid-Plain/ Central 24.68 26.31 21.94 30.98 12.36 17.78 16.38 9.59 12.58 12.96 12.57 8.35 4.51 8.93 10.66 Bundelkhand 14.58 20.61 13.23 24 7.86 9.1 9.94 9.02 9.72 9.1 12.17 9.09 5.22 4.27 8.05 North Eastern 23.24 24.08 22.12 27.56 11.45 17.61 7.47 8.64 6.53 9.82 12.07 8.6 5.38 7.34 7.38 Eastern Plain 23.43 24.47 22.04 27.97 10.19 11.27 9.84 9.04 7.9 10.91 11.69 9.93 5.22 7.39 7.95 Vindhyan 17.62 19.19 21.01 20.99 12.66 10.07 5.82 8.66 8.59 9.84 10.27 7.1 5.21 4.97 5.96 Uttar Pradesh 23.66 25.51 21.71 30.02 10.15 16.09 14.96 8.99 9.14 10.13 12.07 8.83 5.38 8.81 11.23 232 Annual Plan 2009-2010. Planning Department. Government of Uttar Pradesh. http://planning.up.nic.in/ Table A17-97: Net area irrigated source-wise in districts of Uttar Pradesh (2006-07) 233 Source-wise Details of Net Area Irrigated 2006-2007 (Area in ha) OTHER OTHER OTHER OTHER CANALS TANKS TUBEWELLS WELLS SOURCES TOTAL CANALS TANKS TUBEWELLS WELLS SOURCES TOTAL LALITPUR 86027 41551 36681 71763 7424 243446 SHAHJAHANPUR 12400 75 309091 0 0 321566 SIDHARTHA NAGAR 9332 15922 154895 8400 0 188549 SULTANPUR 62887 75 170306 41 0 233309 GONDA 1181 12800 238301 10712 678 263672 KUSHINAGAR 51602 69 104540 10159 1162 167532 BASTI 432 11919 135613 1077 0 149041 KANNAUJ 15107 56 113379 0 0 128542 RAEBARELI 107151 10610 130610 12 1 248384 AMBEDKAR NAGAR 25188 48 133043 0 0 158279 MAHOBA 20313 9717 2742 58859 4887 96518 MAU 12918 36 101998 112 0 115064 JHANSI 81823 7043 12330 75440 3461 180097 KHERI 21211 35 374355 0 44 395645 CHITRAKUT 11391 6565 16380 10466 156 44958 FAIZABAD 24225 27 93473 141 0 117866 MIRZAPUR 69590 6233 23029 11074 3233 113159 MAINPURI 40101 20 142480 33 0 182634 HAMIRPUR 22162 4646 43488 33352 26 103674 JAUNPUR 65683 14 177711 0 0 243408 BANDA 54882 4341 52758 15350 766 128097 BARABANKI 82746 10 166414 3203 28 252401 ALLAHABAD 107350 3832 121865 7099 376 240522 CHANDAULI 113536 10 9601 926 379 124452 BALRAMPUR 4241 1491 64434 990 2306 73462 SAHARANPUR 42665 8 212744 0 48 255465 MAHARAJ GANJ 33583 1455 131278 2445 32 168793 KOSHAMBHI 15844 6 76157 94 79 92180 GORAKHPUR 6884 1405 196840 135 256 205520 FARRUKHABAD 2071 5 123654 947 0 126677 BAREILLY 32463 1205 274392 0 4361 312421 VARANASI 10058 4 69582 355 7 80006 AZAMGARH 55172 1131 227199 149 0 283651 GHAZIPUR 50714 2 163608 67 0 214391 HARDOI 63128 959 296660 2988 8 363743 BADAUN 60 0 278483 102484 4106 385133 UNNAO 67279 742 209455 637 323 278436 ALIGARH 33324 0 254731 58 1 288114 JALAUN 168556 711 38208 17116 4836 229427 MUZAFFARNAGAR 75211 0 248205 48 10 323474 SONBHADRA 28919 660 0 1693 769 32041 ETAH 32248 0 198665 75412 6169 312494 AGRA 30930 577 217301 1015 159 249982 BIJNOR 13806 0 189926 106348 0 310080 SANT KABIR NGR 2441 567 89519 7474 219 100220 MEERUT 34540 0 155453 39 141 190173 BULLANDSHAHR 31280 419 221936 5628 0 259263 FEROZABAD 17517 0 154584 2241 188 174530 LUCKNOW 26820 342 105693 38 344 133237 MATHURA 108104 0 151940 133 0 260177 FATEHPUR 37464 323 149588 254 219 187848 BALLIA 22461 0 150320 200 0 172981 SITAPUR 23141 300 340670 11017 787 375915 DEORIA 18325 0 145044 8998 20 172387 KANPUR (S) 29706 275 103324 452 909 134666 HATHARAS 12777 0 134856 0 0 147633 AURAIYA 54644 236 67965 67 0 122912 RAMPUR 1431 0 117558 67165 751 186905 PILIBHIT 51644 167 120041 41355 1099 214306 PRATAPGARH 78093 0 117084 0 14 195191 BAHRAICH 6200 117 160960 47 0 167324 GHAZIABAD 20771 0 106636 3705 0 131112 KANPUR (D) 67090 117 97011 4 10 164232 BAGPAT 2412 0 104268 37 11 106728 ETAWAH 60089 113 61658 383 9 122252 JB PHULE NAGAR 0 0 49204 64493 207 113904 MORADABAD 16088 95 126062 116318 10009 268572 S.RAVI DAS NGR 8927 0 46710 347 0 55984 SHRAVASTI 0 80 50957 2672 0 53709 GAUTAM BUDDHA 15306 0 36728 21947 704 74685 Total 2613665 149166 9502374 986214 61732 13313151 233 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in Map A17-20: Forests of Uttar Pradesh 234 234 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Table A17-98: Details of Protected Areas in Uttar Pradesh 235 Name of National Park (NP) / Wildlife Sanctuary (WLS) Year of Estd. Area (km2) District / Location Dudhwa NP 1977 490 Lakhimpur-Kheri Bakhira WLS 1990 28.94 Sant Kabir Nagar (Basti) Chandraprabha WLS 1957 78 Chandauli Muzzafar Nagar, Meerut,Ghaziabad, Hastinapur WLS 1986 2073 Bijnore & Jyotibaphuley Nagar Kaimur WLS 1982 500.73 Mirzapur, Sonbhadra Katerniaghat WLS 1976 400.69 Bahraich Kishanpur WLS 1972 227 Lakhimpur-Kheri, Shahjahanpur Lakh Bahosi WLS 1988 80.24 Farrukhabad Mahavir Swami WLS 1977 5.41 Lalitpur National Chambal WLS 1979 635 Agra,Etawah Nawabganj WLS 1984 2.25 Unnao/ Lucknow Okhala WLS 1990 4 Ghaziabad Parvati Aranga WLS 1990 10.84 Gonda Patna WLS 1990 1.09 Etah Ranipur WLS 1977 230.31 Banda,Chitrakoot Saman WLS 1990 5.25 Mainpuri Samaspur WLS 1987 7.99 Rae Bareli Sandi WLS 1990 3.09 Hardoi Sohagibarwa WLS 1987 428.2 Maharajganj Sohelwa WLS 1988 452.47 Shravasti,Balrampur Sur Sarovar WLS 1991 4.03 Agra Surha Tal WLS 1991 34.32 Ballia Turtle WLS 1989 7 Varanasi Vijai Sagar WLS 1990 2.62 Mahoba 235 ENVIS – Wildlife and Protected Areas. Wildlife Institute of India. http://oldwww.wii.gov.in/envis/ BIHAR Bihar is located between 24°20'30" and 27°31'15"N latitude and 83°19'50" and 88°17'40"E longitude. It has an area of over 94,163 sq. km and is extended for 483 km from east to west and 345 km from north to south. Bihar has a population of 8,28,78,796 with 880 persons per sq. km236. The state is divided into 38 districts and further into 534 blocks with 8463 Panchayats and 39015 villages 237. Agroclimatic zones 238 The state is divided into 3 agro-climatic zones on the basis of soil characterization, rainfall, temperature and terrain. The agro-climatic zones are depicted in Map A17- and the key features of the zones are described in Table A17-99. Table A17-99: Agroclimatic Zones of Bihar Agro-climatic zone Districts Total area Net sown Irrigated Main cropping systems (m ha) area (m ha) area (m ha) Zone-I North-West West Champaran, East 3.26 2.15 (66)* 0.86 (40)** Rice-Wheat, Maize-Wheat, Alluvial Plain Champaran, Gopalganj, Maize-Arhar, Maize- Saran, Siwan, Sitamarhi, Potato-Moong, Maize- Muzaffarpur, Darbhanga, Sweet Potato-Onion, Vaishali, Samastipur, Maize-Mustard-Moong, Sheohar, Madhubani Rice-Potato-Maize, Rice- Sugarcane Zone-II Purnea, Katihar, 2.08 1.21 (58)* 0.24 (20)** Jute-Rice, Jute-Wheat, (North-East Alluvial Madhepura, Saharsa, Jute-Rice-Wheat, Jute- plain) Araria, Akishanganj, Potato, Jute-Kalai-Wheat, Supaul, Khagaria, Jute-Mustard, Jute-Pea, Begusarai Rice-Wheat-Moong Zone-IIIA (South Banka, Munger, Jamui, 1.11 0.49 (44)* 0.21 (43)** Rice-Wheat, Rice-Wheat- Bihar Alluvial plain Lakhisarai, Shekhpura, Moong, Rice-Gram-Rice, (East) Bhagalpur Rice-Potato-Onion, Rice- Mustard-Moong, Rice- Berseem Zone-IIIB (South Patna, Gaya, Jahanabad, 2.92 1.68 (58)* 1.37 (81)** Rice-Wheat-Moong, Rice- Bihar Alluvial plain Nawada, Nalanda, Rohtas, Wheat-Rice, Rice-Gram- (West) Bhojpur, Aurangabad, Rice, Rice-Gram-Moong Buxar, Kaimur. Total 9.37 5.53 (59)* 2.68 (48)** * Figures in parenthesis are % of geographical area. ** Figures in parenthesis are % of net area sown. Land use Bihar has a geographical area of about 94.20 thousand sq km. The state is divided by river Ganges into two parts, the North Bihar with an area of 53.30 thousand sq km, and the South Bihar with an area of 40.90 thousand sq km 239. Of the total geographic area of 94.16 lakh ha, about 60% is cropped and only about 22% of the area 236 Census of India, 2001. http://gov.bih.nic.in/Profile/CensusStats-01.htm 237 Bihar at a Glance 2009. Department of Planning and Development, Government of Bihar. 238 Mangala Rai. Strategies for Enhancing Agricultural Productivity and Production during Rabi Season to Mitigate the Adverse Effects of Drought and Floods during the Kharif Season in Bihar. ICAR. Government of India. http://www.rwc.cgiar.org/pubs/95/Floods_In_Bihar.pdf 239 Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar. http://krishi.bih.nic.in/introduction.html is cropped twice. The gross and net sown area in the State is estimated at 77.18 lakh ha and 56.65 lakh ha respectively. The cropping intensity is 1.36. Forest area is limited (6.6%) and the area under pastures and grazing lands is extremly scarce (0.18%). Table A17-100 gives details of the land use in the state. Table A17-100: Land use in Bihar (2006-2007) 240 Area in ha Forest 621635 Area under non-agricultural uses 1646888 Barren and non-cultivatable land 436062 Total land not available for cultivation 2082950 Permanent pastures, Grazing lands 17334 Tree Crops and Groves 240516 Culturable Wasteland 45649 Total uncultivated land (not fallows) 303499 Fallow lands 119970 Current fallow 566392 Total fallows 686362 Net area sown 5665122 Area sown more than once 2053826 Total cropped area 7718948 Reporting area for land use 9359568 Total geographical area 9416300 Chart A17-7: Land use in Bihar (2006-2007) 241 Table A17-100 gives details of land use for the districts of Bihar. As seen, the districts of East and West Champaran, Rohtas, Madhubani and Purnea have the largest net sown area. However, in terms of the net sown area as a percentage of the district area Buxar, Bhojpur and Nalanda top the list with more than 75% while Jamui and Monghyr are at the bottom of the list with less than 40%. The extent of fallow lands is the maximum in the districts of Gaya, Jamui, Purnea (while as percentage of the district area Sheikhpura, Jamui and Gaya have more than 20% area under fallows). Cropping intensity is highest in Saharsa (1.76), Sivhar and Supaul and 240 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 241 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in lowest in Banka (1.07), Darbhanga and Patna. The districts with more than 50,000 ha under forests are Bhabua, Jamui, West Champaran, Gaya, Rohtas and Nawadha. Only 9 districts have more than 500 ha under pastures and grazing lands with Gaya having the maxium area at 2192 ha (0.44%). Land degradation 242 Wastelands are spread over an area of 6841 sq.km in Bihar accounting for 7.26% of the state's geographic area. Of the total wasteland in the state, land with scrub (dense and open) accounts for 3715 sq km (about 4%), waterlogged area (permanent and seasonal) accounts for 1564 sq km (1.66%) and degraded forest land with scrub accounts for about 1200 sq km (1.27%). Table A17-101 gives details of wastelands in the districts of Bihar (also see Map A17-21). The districts of Jamui and Banka have more than 20% of their area under wasteland. Nalanda, Bhojpur, Buxar and Khagaria have the least extent of wastelands in the state. Jamui, Banka, West Champaran and Katihar have the maximum area under degraded scrub land. The districts most affected by permanent waterlogging are Saran, Siwan, Vaishali and Muzaffarpur and those affected by seasonal waterlogging are Purnia, Madhepura and Saharsa. Table A17-101: Wastelands of Bihar Percentage of geographic Category of wasteland Area in sq. km area Gullied and/or ravinous land – Medium 71.83 0.08 Land with dense scrub 954.39 1.01 Land with open scrub 2761.16 2.93 Waterlogged and marshy land – Permanent 694.65 0.74 Waterlogged and marshy land – Seasonal 869.4 0.92 Land affected by slinity/alkalinity – Moderate 0 0 Land affected by slinity/alkalinity – Strong 3.97 0 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Scrub dominated 1198.63 1.27 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Agriculture 76.85 0.08 Degraded pastures/grazing 60.63 0.06 Degraded land under plantation crops 11.54 0.01 Sands-Riverine 6.82 0.01 Sands-Riverine 0 0 Mining wastelands 0.22 0 Industrial wastelands 6.66 0.01 Barren rocky area 124.35 0.13 Total 6841.1 7.26 Total Geographic Area 94171 Soils In the Zone-I North West Alluvial Plains (West and East Champaran, Gopalganj, Siwan, Saran, Sitamarhi, Muzaffarpur, Vaishali, Madhubani, Begusarai, Seohar, Darbhanga and Samastipur) the soils are medium acidic and heavy textured sandy loams to clayey soils. Large areas remain under water called Chaur, Maun and Tal lands. In the Zone-II North East Alluvial Plains (Purnea, Katihar, Saharsa, Supaul, Arariya, Kishanganj, Madhepura and Khagaria) light to medium textured, slightly acidic, sandy to silty loams are found. Large areas comprise of Tal and Diara lands. In the Zone-III, South Bihar Alluvial Plains (Bhagalpur, Banka, Munger, Jamui, Lakhisarai, Shekhpura, Gaya, Aurangabad, Jahanabad, Nawada, Arwal, Nalanda, Patna, Bhojpur, Buxar, Bhabhua, and Rohtash) 242 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. old alluvium to sandy loams are found 243. Waterlogging affects over 1564 sq km in Bihar. The causes of waterlogging are surface ponding of water during rainy season, erratic rainfall, poor sub-surface drainage, and exessive canal irrigation in the rabi season. The table ___ gives details of the status of the soil macronutrients in the districts of Bihar. The districts of Gaya and Saharsa have low levels of all three macronutrients Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium. Water The total water resources (surface and ground water) of Bihar are estimated to be ___ MCM, of which about ___ MCM are currently utilized for drinking (___ MCM or __%), irrigation (___ MCM or ___%), industry (___ MCM or __%) and power generation (___ MCM or __%). The per capita water availability in the state is about ___ cubic metres. Rainfall The average annual rainfall of Bihar is 1271.9 mm. The Zone-II North East Alluvial Plains has the highest rainfall ranging between 1200-1700 mm, the Zone-I North West Alluvial Plains has rainfall between 1040-1450 mm, and the Zone-III, South Bihar Alluvial Plains has the lowest rainfall ranging between 990-1240 mm. As seen in table ___, the districts of Kishanganj, Araria, West Champaran and Purnia receive over 1400 mm rainfall. Patna and Nalanda receive less than 1000 mm of rainfall annually. As seen in table ___, the districts of Saran, Darbhanga, Patna and Muzaffarpur have a higher probability of drought (15% or more) 244. Surface water Bihar is richly endowed with surface water resources. The state has 14 river basins: (i) the Ghaghra, (ii) the Gandak, (iii) the Burhi Gandak, (iv) the Bagmati, (v) the Kamla-Balan, (vi) the Kosi, (vii) the Mahananda, (viii) the Karmnasa, (ix) the Sone, (x) the Punpun, (xi) the Kiul-horhar, (xii) the Badua, (xiii) the Chandan, and (xiv) the main Ganga stem. All these rivers drain into the main Ganga stem which divide the state into Northern and Southern parts. The seven river systems from Ghaghra to Mahananda drain North Bihar and the remaining six river systems drain the South Bihar. Most of rivers are seasonal with good flow during the Kharif season, insignificant flows during winter and dry status during summer. Bihar is the most flood prone state in the country with 73.06 % of its geographical area area (68.80 lakh hectares) affected by floods (the state accounts for 17.2 % of the total flood prone area in the country) 245. The flood situation is most severe in the northern plains of Bihar. The flood prone districts in Bihar are East Champaran, West Champaran, Sitamarhi, Madhubani, Begusarai, Saharsa, Supaul, Madhepura, Purnea and Katihar. About 3430 km of embankments have been constructed along the river courses in the state to protect an area of 29.16 lakh hectares of area (about 42% of the flood prone area). The table ___ gives details of the river basins in the state including flood prone area and area protected by embankments. 243 Bihar’s Agriculture Development: Opportunities & Challenges - A report of the special task force on Bihar. Government of India. 2008 244 P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune 245 BAMETI. Status of Agriculture in Bihar. www.bameti.org/pdf/State%20Profile.pdf Table A17-102: River Basins of Bihar 246 Name of the Catchment Area Length of River Embankment Flood Prone Protected Area Basin (sq km) in Bihar (km) Constructed (km) Area (sq km) (sq km) Ganga 19322 445 537.81 12920 4300 Kosi 11410 260 797.90 10150 9300 Burhi Gandak 9601 320 656.00 8210 4010 Kiul-harohar 17225 NA 7.00 6340 Nil Punpun 9026 235 40.60 6130 260 Mahananda 6150 376 247.80 5150 1210 Sone 15820 202 51.69 3700 210 Bagmati 6500 394 313.73 4440 3170 Kamla Balan 4488 120 155.50 3700 2810 Gandak 4188 260 456.04 3350 3350 Ghaghra 2995 83 125.00 2530 790 Chandan 4093 118 65.00 1130 80 Badua 2215 130 Nil 1050 Nil Total 3454.07 68800 29490 In addition to flood prone area, there are extensive low lying areas around the river Ganga in the districts of Patna, Begusarai, Khagaria and Bhagalpur. These areas, called Tal areas, are inundated annually by flood waters which recede only after December-January. Ground water The annual replenishable ground water resource in the state is estimated to be 29.19 BCM 247. The net annual ground water availability is 27.42 BCM. The annual ground water draft is estimated to be 10.77 BCM making the stage of ground water development 39%. None of the administrative divisions (called blocks) in the state are classified 248 as Over Exploited, Critical or Semi-critical with respect to the groundwater status. As seen in the table ___, the stage of groundwater development exceeds 50% in Nalanda, Jehanabad, Begusarai, Siwan, Saran and Patna. Groundwater quality in parts of the state is affected by high Fluoride, Iron, Nitrate and Arsenic. Of the 39015 habitations in the state, the quality of driking water is affected by Iron in 18673 habitations, by Flouride in 4157 habitations and by Arsenic in 1590 habitations 249. The tables ___ and ___ provide details of the districts and habitations affected by poor groundwater quality. 246 Basin-wise flood prone and protected areas. Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar. http://wrd.bih.nic.in 247 BMC = Billion Cubic Meters 248 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category 249 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in Table A17-103: Districts affected by poor groundwater quality 250 Contaminant Districts affected Fluoride (>1.5 mg/l) Aurangabad, Banka, Buxar, Bhabua(Kaimur), Jamui, Munger, Nawada, Rohtas, Supaul Iron (>1.0 mg/l) Aurangabad, Begusarai, Bhojpur, Buxar, Bhabua(Kaimur), East Champaran, Gopalganj, Katihar, Khagaria, Kishanganj, Lakhiserai, Madhepura, Muzafferpur, Nawada, Rohtas, Saharsa, Samastipur, Siwan, Supaul, West Champaran Nitrate (>45 mg/l) Aurangabad, Banka, Bhagalpur, Bhojpur, Bhabua, Patna, Rohtas, Saran, Siwan Arsenic (>0.05 mg/l ) Begusarai, Bhagalpur, Bhojpur, Buxar, Darbhanga, Katihar, Khagaria, Kishanganj, Lakhiserai,Munger, Patna, Purnea, Samastipur, Saran, Vaishali Agriculture Bihar has a total geographical area of 93.60 lakh hectares of which 56.03 lakh hectares (about 60%) is cultivated. The main crops grown are rice, wheat, maize, pulses (masoor, moong, khesari, gram), rapeseed, mustard, potato, jute and sugarcane. The crop productivity in Bihar is one of the lowest in the country. The productivity of rice is 1486 kg/ha, which is low in comparison to the national average of 2131 kg/ha. The average wheat productivity of the state is 1908 kg/ha as compared to 2708 kg/ha for the country. The average productivity of Maize is 2671 kg/ha which is higher compared to that of the country as a whole (1912 kg/ha) 251. The districts of Rohtas, Aurangabad, Bhabha, Banka and Nalanda have the highest rice production (with productivity >2.3 tonnes/ha) while the lowest rice productivity is seen in Shivhar (0.52 tonnes/ha), Samastipur and Muzaffarpur. Rohtas, Gopalganj and Saran have the highest wheat production (with productivity >2.3 tonnes/ha) while the lowest wheat productivity is seen in Araria (0.7 tonnes/ha), Katihar and Kishanganj. The production of maize is the highest in Khagaria, Samastipur and Purnia (with productivity >3.5 tonnes/ha) while Jamui, Buxar and East Champaran have the lowest productivity of this crop. The details on area, production and yield/ha of the major crops in the state are provided in table ___ 252. Bihar ranks 8th with respect to the area (11.21 lakh hectares) and 5th with respect to the production (173.35 lakh MT) of horticultural crops in the country 253. Major fruits grown in the state are Mango, Litchi, Guava, Pineapple, Banana, Aonla, Bel and Makhana. The prime fruit growing districts are Muzaffarpur, Vaishali, Samastipur, Bhagalpur, Banka, Darbhanga, Munger, Jamui, Gaya, Aurangabad, Nalanda, Patna, West Champaran, East Champaran, Kishangaj, Purnea, Araria, Katihar and Khagaria. The major vegetables grown on commercial scale in the state are Cauliflower, Potato, Okra, Brinjal, Onion, Chillies, Cabbage, Gourds, Peas, Cowpea and Melons 254. Irrigation Bihar has a net irrigated area of 34.61 lakh ha (61% of the net sown area of 56.65 lakh ha). Of the net irrigated area, 64% is irrigated by tubewells and 27% is irrigated by canals. Irrigation by tanks is less than 5%. The districts with the highest dependence on tubewells for irrigation (100%) are East Champaran, Samastipur, Madhubani, Araria, Kishenganj and Sivhar. Rohtas, Darbhanga and Bhojpur have less than 30% of their net irrigated area irrigated by tubewells. Canals account for more than 90% of the net irrigated area in Rohtas and for more than 70% area in Bhojpur 255. 250 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – Bihar. 251 2006-07. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 252 2006-07. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 253 National Horticulture Mission Annual Action Plan 2010-11, State Horticulture Mission, Bihar. 254 National Horticulture Mission Annual Action Plan 2010-11, State Horticulture Mission, Bihar. 255 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in Agro-chemicals As seen in Table A17-104, the use of nitrogenous fertilizers in Bihar is much higher as compared to the national average 256. Table A17-104: Use of Chemical Fertilizers 2008-09 (kg/ha) 257 N P K Total Bihar 123.77 33.37 21.83 178.98 India 77.9 33.69 17.1 128.58 In the year 2009-10, the consumption of N, P, K fertilizers was 8.94, 2.47 and 1.67 MT respectively making the N : P : K ratio 8.04 : 1.98 : 1 258 (the optimum nutrient ratio recommended for Indian soils is 4 : 2 : 1). The consumption of chemical pesticides in Bihar in 2006-07 was 890 MT 259. Table A17-105: Trend in Pesticide Consumption in Bihar 2002-2007 260 Year Consumption of Pesticides (MT – technical grade) 2002-03 1010 2003-04 860 2004-05 850 2005-06 875 2006-07 890 Livestock Bihar has 5.6% of Cattle, 5.9% of buffaloes, and 7.7% of the goat population of the country 261. About 35 percent of rural households in Bihar own cattle, 20 percent own buffalo, and 15 percent own sheep and goats. Of all rural households owning cattle and/or buffalo in Bihar, more than three-quarters are either landless or have less than 1 hectare of land. Sheep and goats tend to be even more concentrated among landless and marginal rural households 262. Table A17-106: Livestock population in Bihar (numbers in lakh) 263 India Bihar % of Bihar in India Milch cattle 1852 105 5.6 Buffaloes 979 58 5.9 Sheep 615 3.5 0.56 Goats 1244 96 7.7 256 Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2009. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 257 Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2009. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 258 Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar. http://krishi.bih.nic.in/fertilizer.html 259 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 260 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 261 17th Indian Livestock Census. All India Summary Report 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 262 BAMETI. Status of Agriculture in Bihar. www.bameti.org 263 17th Indian Livestock Census. All India Summary Report 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. Pigs 135 6 4.4 The estimated green fodder production from forests, permanent pastures, grazing lands and cultivated areas has declined from 13.77 lakh tonnes in 2000-2001 to 13.46 lakh tonnes in 2002-03. Dry fodder production (crop residue of cereals, pulses and oil seeds) over the same period declined from 195.23 lakh tonnes to 156.12 lakh tonnes 264. Table A17-107: Production of fodder in Bihar ('000 tonnes) 265 Year Dry Fodder Green Fodder Total Fodder 2000-01 19523 1377 20901 2001-02 19158 1361 20520 2002-03 15612 1346 16957 The potential of fishery in Bihar is high as the state is endowed with 69000 ha of ponds and tanks, 9000 ha of oxbow lakes, 7200 ha of reservoirs, 3200 km of rivers and 1 lakh ha of riverine and other flood plains. However, the annual fish production in the state is 2.61 lakh tonnes falling short of the demand of 4.56 lakh tonnes 266. Forests 267 Only about 6.87% of the geographical area (6473 sq km) of the state of Bihar is under forests. This consists of 76 sq km of very dense forests, 2951 sq km of dense forests and 2531 sq km of open forest. The forests of Bihar are of three types: Dry deciduous forest, Wet deciduous forest and Sub Himalayan and Tarai forest. The first type is found in and around Kishanganj district, the second type is found in the Kaimur district and along the northern slope of Chotanagpur plateau, the third type is found around the Someshwar hills in Paschim Champaran district. Bihar has 1 national park and 11 sanctuaries comprising a protected area of 3208.47 sq km. Table ___ gives details of the protected areas. Summary of key environmental issues Existing Issues Potential Interventions Water logging affecting over 1550 sq km Flood adaptation measures Over 70% of the area is flood-prone Water quality management Poor water quality in 24420 habitations (Iron, Flouride Improved irrigation efficiency and Arsenic) Soil testing and fertilizer scheduling High dependence on tubewells for irrigation Fodder management Imbalanced use of chemical fertilizers Declining fodder production 264 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 265 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 266 Road Map for Fisheries Development. Department of Agriculture. Government of Bihar. http://krishi.bih.nic.in/pdf/Road_Map_Eng/Fisheries_Eng.pdf 267 Environment and Forest Department, Government of Bihar. http://forest.bih.nic.in/ Map A17-21: Agroclimatic zones of Bihar 268 268 IGP – 4, sourced from http://www.gecafs.org/meetings_gecafs/2005_05_02/GECAFS%20IGP3%20Delhi%20Zone%204%20presentation.ppt, accessed on 27th August 2010. Table A17-108: Land use in Districts of Bihar (2006-07) 269 Area under Barren and Permanent Total Total non- non- Total land not pastures, uncultivated Area sown reporting agricultural cultivatable available for Grazing Tree Crops Culturable land (not Net area Total cropped more than area Forest uses land cultivation lands and Groves Wasteland fallows) Fallow lands Current fallow Total fallows sown area once GAYA 493774 77836 72173 27641 99814 2192 3831 3290 9313 11479 90722 102201 204610 261610 57000 JAMUI 305289 92855 39363 28891 68254 1715 2013 10461 14189 16602 48553 65155 64836 73328 8492 BANKA 305621 46310 41265 43075 84340 1698 7345 7954 16997 1204 2281 3485 154489 164758 10269 MADHUBANI 353498 0 85519 2324 87843 1436 22737 510 24683 3023 18133 21156 219816 291707 71891 SITAMARHI 221891 0 62164 1807 63971 1396 13862 135 15393 622 11713 12335 130192 210223 80031 SAHARSA 164559 0 28031 10880 38911 1163 4283 475 5921 3890 7973 11863 107864 189812 81948 CHAMPARAN (WEST) 484351 91745 93780 3015 96795 1160 6389 1317 8866 2603 4533 7136 279809 394471 114662 NAWADHA 248732 63775 35038 11291 46329 914 591 1144 2649 2716 30542 33258 102721 139586 36865 BHAGALPUR 254300 78 67519 22606 90125 635 6576 2337 9548 3211 7266 10477 144072 168727 24655 AURANGABAD 330011 18764 54179 16426 70605 573 612 1899 3084 7237 23842 31079 206479 283190 76711 CHAMPARAN (EAST) 431715 118 75408 8193 83601 464 26936 292 27692 3001 17316 20317 299987 375949 75962 PURNEA 313883 113 44787 12423 57210 439 8745 1159 10343 4780 32603 37383 208834 282024 73190 VAISHALI 201449 0 36362 24253 60615 360 9685 148 10193 326 3216 3542 127099 196724 69625 SUPAUL 238603 0 50542 20389 70931 276 3049 1556 4881 1565 16682 18247 144544 236551 92007 KATIHAR 291349 1785 56050 22274 78324 265 10983 789 12037 6092 23866 29958 169245 260113 90868 SARAN 264887 0 33224 18072 51296 238 8548 161 8947 3813 8233 12046 192598 237652 45054 KHAGARIA 149342 0 30651 13682 44333 233 2995 638 3866 7373 12341 19714 81429 126414 44985 KISHANGANJ 189080 354 33723 11382 45105 232 4982 1236 6450 3098 8465 11563 125608 170547 44939 JAHANABAD 94043 637 14692 3288 17980 231 1283 149 1663 998 5263 6261 67502 94686 27184 GOPALGANJ 203774 0 32275 5569 37844 211 7360 1422 8993 2396 8817 11213 145724 220495 74771 MONGHYR 139793 28524 31021 11498 42519 208 530 948 1686 1986 13861 15847 51217 62330 11113 SIWAN 224410 0 31008 8868 39876 164 8515 772 9451 1519 10641 12160 162923 246729 83806 ARVAL 62631 0 9802 2189 11991 152 872 98 1122 1641 6875 8516 41002 53453 12451 DARBHANGA 254077 0 60122 1379 61501 149 12186 155 12490 2197 15869 18066 162020 179043 17023 ARARIA 271712 838 50620 5083 55703 142 18918 564 19624 2993 9732 12725 182822 278420 95598 BHABHUA 342447 113039 33622 19264 52886 139 703 1390 2232 5101 8252 13353 160937 224345 63408 PATNA 317236 56 75223 13118 88341 117 962 764 1843 1582 23221 24803 202193 225873 23680 ROHTAS 390722 66723 46984 16942 63926 101 2848 1116 4065 805 1904 2709 253299 327711 74412 BHOJPUR 237339 0 33225 6879 40104 72 1953 626 2651 2579 5133 7712 186872 230856 43984 SAMASTIPUR 262390 0 62144 3927 66071 67 8208 0 8275 988 3137 4125 183919 237475 53556 LAKHISARAI 128602 13445 13747 7107 20854 57 256 719 1032 6411 18362 24773 68498 94472 25974 MADHUPURA 179589 0 30289 3946 34235 55 6996 0 7051 1065 10133 11198 127105 200746 73641 MUZAFARPUR 315351 0 62096 5281 67377 32 17151 330 17513 1498 30132 31630 198831 302141 103310 BUXAR 166999 0 16793 2270 19063 28 634 572 1234 610 3641 4251 142451 183625 41174 BEGUSARAI 187828 0 40785 18123 58908 16 3545 40 3601 863 6293 7156 118163 169697 51534 NALANDA 232732 4640 40482 1213 41695 4 1238 216 1458 191 2512 2703 182236 220573 38337 SIVHAR 43475 0 12410 415 12825 0 1941 27 1968 211 2002 2213 26469 45128 18659 SHEIKHPURA 62084 0 9770 1079 10849 0 255 240 495 1701 12332 14033 36707 57764 21057 269 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in Table A17-109: Wastelands of Bihar (2010) 270 Category Araria Aurangabad Banka Begusarai Bhabua Bhagalpur Bhojpur Buxar Darbhanga Gaya Gopalgunj Jamui Jehanabad Katihar Khagaria Kishanganj Lakhisarai Gullied &/or ravinous land (Medium) 0 0 11.97 0 3.92 0 0 0 0 6.04 0 30.69 0 0 0 0 0 Land with dense scrub 36.06 0.03 9.5 3.89 7.47 7.06 0.43 2.57 15.7 4.36 26.86 10.46 0.04 140.79 5.35 86 11.43 Land with open scrub 27.91 58.93 644.63 16.81 55.18 50.11 25.91 20.93 25.09 225.15 28.61 731.89 5.53 26.99 6.26 19.29 24.57 Waterlogged & Marshy land (Permanent) 4.4 2.77 0 31.6 0.17 14.69 0.21 0.43 16.45 0 27.24 0 0.09 47.51 12.27 5.19 0.32 Waterlogged & Marshy land (Seasonal) 11.86 14.95 0 12.08 0.26 29.99 0.33 6.54 21.62 0 21.29 0.74 3.67 78.92 13.3 5.26 0 Under-utilized/degraded forest (Scrub) 0 39.22 13.42 0 402.19 0 0 0 0 216.29 0 12.78 0 0 0 0 0 Under-utilized/degraded forest (Agriculture) 0 0.23 0.17 0 1.33 0 0 0 0 22.28 0 7.51 0 0 0 0 0 Degraded pasture/grazing land 0 31.38 0 0 0 0 5.6 1.82 1.76 0 1.71 0 0.75 0 0 0 0 Degraded land under plantation crops 0 0 0 0 5.24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sands – reverine 0 0 1.12 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 0 0 0.56 0.05 0 0 0 0 Industrial wastelands 0 0 0 0.25 0 5.27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barren rocky/stony waste 0 5.28 21.3 0 11.48 0.96 0 0 0 25.47 0 9.09 2.05 0 0 0 10.36 Total 80.23 152.79 702.11 64.63 487.24 108.08 32.48 32.29 80.67 499.59 105.71 803.72 12.18 294.21 37.18 115.74 46.68 Total Geographical Area 2792 3305 3018 1889 3369 2561 2474 1624 2279 4976 2033 3143 1569 3057 1482 1936 1882 % to TGA 2.87 4.62 23.26 3.42 14.46 4.22 1.31 1.99 3.54 10.04 5.2 25.57 0.78 9.62 2.51 5.98 2.48 270 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. Table A17-109 contd: Wastelands of Bihar (2010) 271 Category Madhepura Madhubani Munger Muzaffarpur Nalanda Nawada W Champaran Patna E Champaran Purnia Rohtas Saharsa Samstipur Saran Sitamarhi Siwan Supaul Vaishali Gullied &/or ravinous land (Medium) 0 0 0.4 0 0 6.93 0 0 0 0 11.88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Land with dense scrub 52.1 6.39 25.62 18.53 0 4.55 148.96 1.59 47.01 73.6 12.25 28.78 1.22 49.36 0.57 22.1 93.17 0.6 Land with open scrub 16.62 21.18 49.37 45.23 0.57 51.44 85.47 39.26 49.38 84.6 64.84 15.89 23.71 46.54 25.96 25.68 82.02 39.61 Waterlogged & Marshy land (Permanent) 1.96 5.3 1.47 81.33 0 0 8.43 1.43 32.37 11.96 0.07 17.37 14.41 129.26 5.07 114.49 14.98 91.41 Waterlogged & Marshy land (Seasonal) 124.02 7.39 1.44 24.44 1.3 0 12.04 4.52 33.74 129.17 0.51 110.63 9.01 17.3 5.25 37.78 28.31 101.75 Land affected by Slinity/Alkalinity – Strong 0 0 0 0.84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.63 0 0 1.52 0 0.84 0 0.15 Under-utilized/degraded forest (Scrub) 0 0 0 0 0.37 95.35 199.9 0 0 0 219.11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Under-utilized/degraded forest (Agriculture) 0 0 1.13 0 0 7.63 36.57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Degraded pasture/grazing land 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.61 8.19 0 0 5.29 0.03 1.49 0 0 0 0 0 Degraded land under plantation crops 0 0 0 0 0 0.11 0 0 0 0 6.19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sands – reverine 0 2.56 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.63 0 0 0 0 0 1.82 0 0.03 0 Mining wastelands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Industrial wastelands 0 0 0 0 0.84 0 0.14 0 0 0 0.15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barren rocky/stony waste 0 0 4.01 0 0.49 21.65 0 0 0 0 12.21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 194.7 42.82 83.44 170.37 3.57 187.66 494.34 54.99 163.13 299.33 333.13 172.7 49.84 243.98 38.66 200.89 218.51 233.52 Total Geographical Area 1792 3501 1397 3172 2367 2494 5228 3202 3968 3200 3844 1194 2904 2641 2643 2219 2980 2036 % to TGA 10.86 1.22 5.97 5.37 0.15 7.52 9.46 1.72 4.11 9.35 8.67 14.46 1.72 9.24 1.46 9.05 7.33 11.47 271 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. Map A17-22: Wastelands of Bihar 272 272 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. Table A17-110: Status of Soil Macronutrients in the districts of Bihar 273 Name of District N P K Araria NA NA NA Aurangabad L M H Banka NA NA NA Begusarai NA NA NA Bhabhua NA NA NA Bhagalpur NA NA NA Bhojpur M M M Buxar NA NA NA Darbhangha L M M East Champaran M M M Gaya L L L Gopalganj L M M Jamui NA NA NA Jehanabad, Arwal NA NA NA Katihar M L M Khagaria M M M Kishanganj NA NA NA Lakhisarai NA NA NA Madhepura NA NA NA Madhubani M M L Munger L M M Muzaffarpur M M L Nalanda M M M Nawadah M M M Patna M M M Purnia M L M Rohtas NA NA NA Saharsha L L L Samastipur M H M Sharan M L M Sheikhpura NA NA NA Sheohar NA NA NA Sitarmarhi M M M Sivan M L M Supaul NA NA NA Vaishali M M L West Champaran H M M 273 Indian Institute of Soil Science, ICAR. http://www.iiss.nic.in Table A17-110 contd: District-wise Normal and Actual Rainfall in Bihar (2007) 274 District Normal Rainfall Actual Rainfall 2007 1 Patna 973.1 1492.5 2 Bhojpur 1060.3 1373.2 3 Nalanda 977.9 1257.6 4 Buxar 1021.5 934 5 Rohtas 1096.8 977.1 6 Kaimur 1055.4 1045.6 7 Gaya 1086 1273.2 8 Jehanabad 1051.9 1292.1 9 Arwal 1027.6 1343.9 10 Nawada 1037.6 1178.5 11 Aurangabad 1176.7 1092.6 12 Saran 1074.9 1602.4 13 Siwan 1087.4 1385.7 14 Gopalganj 1170.9 1815.1 15 Muzaffarpur 1035.2 2271.9 16 Vaishali 1737.7 17 Sitamarhi 1267.1 1724.9 18 Sheohar 1357.8 1605.4 19 E.Champaran 1241.6 2042.3 20 W.Champaran 1510.4 2085.5 21 Darbhanga 1114.6 1610.6 22 Samastipur 1142 1695.4 23 Madhubani 1285.8 1804.6 24 Begusarai 1104.9 1592.2 25 Munger 1178.5 1109.4 26 Lakhisarai 1178.5 1449.8 27 Shekhpura 1087.9 1245.9 28 Jamui 1161.3 1183.4 29 Khagaria 1170.2 1472.4 30 Bhagalpur 1136.5 1248.9 31 Banka 1156.3 1616.8 32 Saharsa 1259.8 1270.7 33 Supaul 1344 1450.1 34 Madhepura 1230.5 1358.3 35 Purnia 1411.6 1403.2 36 Araria 1629.2 1714 37 Kishangaj 2141.7 2171.5 38 Katihar 1297.9 1223.6 274 Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar. http://krishi.bih.nic.in/Statistics.html Table A17-111: Probability of drought in districts of Bihar 275 Probability of Moderate Probability of District Drought (%) Severe Drought (%) Saran 19 0 Darbhanga 17 2 Patna 17 0 Muzaffarpur 16 0 Champaran 15 1 Monghyr 15 0 Gaya 13 0 Bhagalpur 12 0 Purnea 12 1 Saharsa 12 0 Shahabad 6 1 275 P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune. Table A17-112: Groundwater Resources in Districts of Bihar (2004) 276 276 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). Table A17-113: District-wise habitations affected by poor water quality in Bihar 277 District Flouride Arsenic Iron ARARIA 0 1 2069 ARWAL 0 0 0 AURANGABAD 30 0 0 BANKA 1812 0 681 BEGUSARAI 0 84 2206 BHAGALPUR 224 159 91 BHOJPUR(AARA) 0 30 0 BUXAR 0 385 0 DARBHANGA 0 5 1 E CHAMPARAN (MOTIHARI) 0 0 0 GAYA 129 0 0 GOPALGANJ 0 0 0 JAMUI 1153 0 0 JEHANABAD 0 0 0 KAIMUR (BHABUA) 81 0 0 KATIHAR 0 26 766 KHAGARIA 0 246 58 KISHANGANJ 0 0 1593 LAKHISARAI 0 204 5 MADHEPURA 0 0 1562 MADHUBANI 0 0 0 MUNGER 101 118 406 MUZAFFARPUR 0 0 0 NALANDA 213 0 0 NAWADA 108 0 0 PATNA 0 65 0 PURNIA 0 0 3505 ROHTAS 106 0 58 SAHARSA 0 0 2275 SAMASTIPUR 7 154 0 SARAN 0 37 0 SHEIKHPURA 193 0 0 SHEOHAR 0 0 0 SITAMARHI 0 0 0 SIWAN 0 0 0 SUPAUL 0 0 3397 VAISHALI 0 76 0 W CHAMPARAN 0 0 0 TOTAL 4157 1590 18673 277 National Rural Drinking Water Programme, Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Ministry of Rural Development. http://indiawater.gov.in Table A17-114: Net area irrigated source-wise in districts of Bihar (2006-07) 278 Canals Tanks Tubewells Other wells Other sources Total ARARIA 66906 66906 ARVAL 16592 19573 93 36258 AURANGABAD 97911 142 83519 3239 14498 199309 BANKA 33271 2665 43264 70 2051 81321 BEGUSARAI 1497 74839 76336 BHABHUA 83283 17747 55734 2320 159084 BHAGALPUR 2655 51799 54454 BHOJPUR 119410 125 39015 38 6175 164763 BUXAR 56066 49824 2034 107924 DARBHANGA 54430 16583 11791 82804 E CHAMPARAN 126986 126986 GAYA 6607 207 155967 522 8544 171847 GOPALGANJ 29137 68129 24 97290 JAHANABAD 4349 47708 6387 58444 JAMUI 4456 771 8502 1119 2552 17400 KATIHAR 8663 4540 71731 15927 100861 KHAGARIA 68779 1461 70240 KISHANGANJ 29510 29510 LAKHISARAI 27274 24251 3003 54528 MADHUBANI 79082 79082 MADHUPURA 3294 82067 85361 MONGHYR 18583 101 14760 99 121 33664 MUZAFARPUR 17977 36782 45282 100041 NALANDA 14973 5545 99232 4228 18386 142364 NAWADHA 13218 68952 9426 91596 PATNA 29096 79056 108152 PURNEA 18135 59050 77185 ROHTAS 237687 8588 11397 2542 260214 SAHARSA 7235 366 42879 5280 55760 SAMASTIPUR 97654 97654 SARAN 5745 4935 95125 105805 SHEIKHPURA 3885 10813 14570 3094 32362 SITAMARHI 2032 5848 54181 2439 64500 SIVHAR 16858 16858 SIWAN 7924 2176 96092 59 106251 SUPAUL 20348 45445 65793 VAISHALI 63177 8835 72012 W CHAMPARAN 63590 46848 382 110820 Total 950741 159933 2214326 11857 124882 3461739 278 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in Map A17-23: Forests of Bihar 279 279 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Table A17-115: Details of Protected Areas in Bihar Name of Park/Sanctuary District Type Barela SAZS Sanctuary Vaishali Sanctuary Bhimbandh Sanctuary Monghyr Sanctuary Gogabil Pakshi Vihar Katihar Closed Area Gautambuddha Sanctuary Gaya Sanctuary Kaimur Sanctuary Rohtas Sanctuary Kanwar Jheel Bird Sanctuary Begusarai Sanctuary Kusheshwarsthan Darbhanga Closed Area Nagi Dam Bird Sanctuary Jamui Sanctuary Nakti Dam Bird Sanctuary Jamui Sanctuary Rajgir Sanctuary Nalanda Sanctuary Sanjay Gandhi Botanical Garden Patna Botanical Garden Udaypur Sanctuary West Champaran Sanctuary Valmiki National Park West Champaran National Park Valmiki Sanctuary West Champaran Sanctuary Vikramshila Gangetic Dolphin Bhagalpur Sanctuary ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 JHARKHAND Jharkhand is located between 22º00′ and 24º37′N latitude and 83º15′ and 87º01′E longitude. It has an area of 79,714 sq km accounting for 2.4% of India's territory and a population of 2,69,09,428 with 338 persons per sq km 280. The state has 24 districts divided further into 211 blocks, 4562 Panchayats and 32615 villages 281. The state of Jharkhand can be broadly divided into 4 zones: Santhal Parganas Zone, Palamu- Hazaribagh Zone, Chottanagpur Zone and Singhbhum Zone 282. • Santhal Parganas region lies in the East and North East regions of Jharkhand and comprises of Dumka, Deoghar, Pakur, Jamtara, Sahebganj and Godda districts. Santhal, Mal Paharias, Sauria Paharias, Yadavs and Koiris are the major communities residing in the region. Rainfed agriculture (paddy, maize, pulses and oilseeds) including traditional slash and burn cropping, forest-based livelihoods (NTFP trading), and agricultural labour are the main livelihoods. • Palamu-Hazaribagh region lies in the North West and Western parts of the state and consists of Palamu, Latehar, Garhwa, Hazaribagh and Ramgarh districts. The communities residing in this region comprise of Primitive Tribal Groups (Pahariya and Korba, Bhuiya, Chamar, Korwar, Uraon, Koiri, etc.). Agriculture (with paddy, maize as the main crops) and forest-based livelihoods (NTFP trading, bamboo craft) as well as supplementary livestock rearing (piggery, goatery, poultry) are the main livelihood activities. • The Singhbhum region lies in the southern part of the state and is comprised of the districts of West Singhbhum, East Singhbhum and Seraikela-Kharsawan. The major communities residing in this region are Santhal, Ho, Oraon and Gopes. Paddy and pulses are major crops in this zone. The main livelihood activities are rainfed agriculture (paddy) and forest-based livelihoods. • The Chottanagpur region comprises of Dhanbad, Bokaro, Giridih, Chatra, Kodarma, Gumla, Lohardaga, Simdega, and Ranchi. This region has higher population density and literacy levels, and lower SC/ST population. In addition to largely rainfed agriculture (paddy, bajra, maize and pulses), mining and NTFP trading are the major livelihoods. Agroclimatic zones 283 The state falls in the agro-climatic zone VII – Eastern Plateau and Hills 284 and is divided into 3 agro-climatic sub-zones on the basis of rainfall and temperature – Central and North Eastern Plateau sub-zone (Zone IV), Western Plateau sub-zone (Zone V) and South Eastern Plateau sub- zone (Zone VI). The key features of the agro-climatic zones are described in Table A17-116. 280 Census of India, 2001. 281 Jharkhand – A Statistical Profile: 2006. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://desjharkhand.nic.in 282 Natural Resource Management Strategies to enhance Tribal Livelihood in Jharkhand under the Central India Initiative. Collectives for Integrated Livelihood Initiatives (CinI). Sir Ratan Tata Trust. http://www.cinicell.org 283 State of Environment Report Jharkhand 2005. Department of Forest and Environment. Government of Jharkhand. 284 This zone covers 65 districts in 6 states including Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, South-western districts of West Bengal, North coastal Orissa, and a few districts in Eastern Madhya Pradesh and Eastern Maharashtra. 218 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-116: Agroclimatic zones of Jharkhand 285 Zone Districts Rainfall Cropping Crops Features Intensity Central Dumka, Deoghar, 1286 mm 1.12 Rice, Wheat, Low water retentive capacity of soil and North Godda, Sahebganj, Maize, Urad, particularly that of uplands. Eastern Pakur, Hazaribagh, Linseed Late arrival and early cessation of Plateau Koderma, Jamtara, monsoon, erratic and uneven distribution (Zone IV) Chatra, Giridih, of rainfall. Dhanbad, Bokaro and Lack of safe disposal of runoff water 2/3rd of Ranchi. during monsoon, water storage and moisture conservation practices for raising Rabi crops. Drying of tanks and wells by February resulting in no Rabi crop production. Western Palamau, Latehar, 1285 mm 1.12 Rice, Maize, Late arrival and early cessation of Plateau Lohardagga, Garhwa, Arhar, Gram, monsoon. (Zone V) Gumla, Simdega and Toria Erratic/uneven distribution of rainfall. 1/3rd of Ranchi. Low water retentive capacity of soils. Lack of soil and water conservation practices. South East Singhbhum, West 1308 mm 1.29 Rice, Maize, Uneven distribution of rainfall. Eastern Singhbhum, Saraikela- Niger Low water holding capacity. Plateau Kharsawa. Eroded soils. (Zone VI) Poor soil fertility. Land use 286 About 22% of the state's geographical area is cropped and about 29% is under forests. Only about 1% is under pastures and grazing land. Fallow lands account for about 27% of the area and about 15% of the net sown area is cropped more than once. Table A17-117: Land use in Jharkhand (2005) 287 Area in '000 ha Geographical area 7970.08 Forest area 2333.55 Land put to non-agricultural use 688.27 Barren and unutilised land 575.78 Pastures and grazing land 87.46 Cultivable wasteland 283.62 Land under misc trees 124.27 Fallows other than current fallow 751.61 Current fallow 1363.05 Net area sown 1762.47 Area sown more than once 263.04 285 Agriculture Situation of the State. State Agriculture Management and Extension Training Institute (SAMETI), Jharkhand. http://www.sameti.org; Sate Action Plan. Department of Agriculture and Cane Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://www.nfsm.gov.in 286 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://desjharkhand.nic.in 287 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://desjharkhand.nic.in 219 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Chart A17-8: Land use in Jharkhand (2005) 288 The table _ gives details of land use for the districts of Jharkhand. As seen, the districts of Chatra, Garhwa, Plamu, Latehar, Hazaribagh, Koderma, Saraikela and West Singhbhum have more than 40% of their geographic area under forests (Chatra has over 60% of its area under forests). The cropped area exceeds 30% of the geographic area only in the districts of Ranchi, Godda, Pakur, Dumka, Jamtara and Gumla. In the districts of Bokaro, Chatra, Koderma and East Singhbhum less than 15% of the geographic area is cropped. The cropping intensity ratio for the state is 1.14. Land degradation 289 Wastelands are spread over an area of 11,670 sq km in Jharkhand accounting for 14.64% of the state's geographic area. Of the total wasteland in the state, nearly half (about 5674 sq km) constitutes land with scrub. Degraded forests (scrub, agriculture) occupy about 4920 sq km. Map ___ provides details of the type and extent of wastelands in Jhakhand. Table A17-118: Wastelands of Jharkhand (2005-06) 290 Area in sq km % of geographical area Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 106.14 0.13 Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 0 0 Land with Dense Scrub 2074.06 2.6 Land with Open Scrub 3600.33 4.52 Waterlogged and marsh land-Permanent 0.36 0 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 4400.59 5.52 288 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://desjharkhand.nic.in 289 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 290 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 220 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 518.99 0.65 Mining wastelands 7.82 0.01 Industrial wastelands 0.29 0 Barren rocky area 961.56 1.21 Total 11670.14 14.64 Tables A17-118 and ___ gives details of wastelands in the districts of Jharkhand. The districts of Simdega, Giridih, Hazaribag, Ramgarh and Latehar have more than 20% of their area under wasteland. Pakur and Godda have the least area under wastelands (less than 6%). Land under degraded scrub forest is the highest in Chatra, Garhwa, Giridih, Hazaribag, Latehar, Palamu, and Simdega. Forest degradation due to agriculture is a significant problem in Giridih. Degraded scrubland is the highest in Giridih, Simdega, Singbhum W, and Latehar. Soils The main features of soils in Jharkhand are undulating topography with varied slopes; light to coarse texture with high permeability and poor water holding capacity; shallow soil depth, surface encrustation and susceptibility to soil erosion leading to gully formation; coarse texture, high bulk density and low available water holding capacity limiting optimum root ramification; acidity, low activity clay, richness in hydrated oxides of iron and aluminum leading to phosphate fixation and resulting in imbalance of nutrients (especially in Red and Lateritic soils); deficiency of Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Boron causing nutrient imbalance; Sulphur and Molybdenum deficiencies especially in red and lateritic soils291. Red and lateritic soils constitute 78% of the area while alluvium is present in 19% area. Soil acidity (ph < 5.5) is acute in 49% area (mainly in the districts of Dumka, East Singbhum, Khunti, Ranchi, Gumla and Garhwa 292). 66% soils are deficient in Phosphorus. Table A17-119: Soils of Jharkhand 293 Indicators Unit (%) Land typology Red and Lateritic 78.0 Upland and midlands Alluvium 19.0 Lowlands Soils with Phosphorus deficiency 66.0 Upland , midlands and lowlands Acid upland soils 71.0 Uplands pH (<5.5) 49.0 Mainly uplands pH (5.5 6.0) 22.0 Upland and midlands Slight (52%) to moderate (36%) soil erosion occurs (both sheet and gully erosion) since about 43% soils are located on very gentle slopes (1 to 3%) and 31% soils are on gentle slopes (3 to 8%). Out of 79 lakh ha geographical area of the state, about 23 lakh ha (29.1%) are subjected to severe erosion every year. But, erosion, moderate to severe taken together affect about 30 lakh hectares which is about 40 per cent of the geographical area 294. 291 State of Environment Report Jharkhand 2005. Department of Forest and Environment. Government of Jharkhand. 292 State of Environment Report Jharkhand 2005. Department of Forest and Environment. Government of Jharkhand. 293 Sate Action Plan. Department of Agriculture and Cane Development, Government of Jharkhand. Http://www.nfsm.gov.in 294 Agriculture Situation of the State. State Agriculture Management and Extension Training Institute (SAMETI), Jharkhand. http://www.sameti.org 221 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-119 gives details of the status of the soil macronutrients in the districts of Jharkhand 295. Soils in most districts (17 out of 22) have low Phosphorus status. All districts of the state except Lohargarh and Simdega have medium status with respect to soil Nitrogen. Dhanbad has low Potassium while Simdega, Dumka, Koderma, Deogarh and Latehar have high levels of this soil macronutrient. Water The total water resources (surface and ground water) of Jharkhand are estimated to be 31,200 MCM 296, of which about 24220 MCM are utilized. Agriculture accounts for 86% (21000 MCM) of the utilized water, domestic consumption for 8.25% (2000 MCM), thermal power generation for about 3% (720 MCM), industry for about 1.65% (400 MCM) and hydropower generation for about 100 MCM 297. The per capita water availability in the state is about 1069 cubic metres 298 – making it a water scarce state 299. Rainfall Jharkhand receives 1000-1600 mm annual rainfall (about 82% is received during the period June to September and the rest 13% in remaining months). It is estimated that out of the average annual precipitation of 10 million hectare meters in the state, about 20% is lost in the atmosphere, 50% flows as surface runoff and the balance 30% soaks into the ground as soil moisture and ground water 300. Table A17-120: Classification of districts based on average rainfall in Jharkhand 301 Average rainfall (mm) Number of districts Name of districts > 1500 1 Pakur 1200-1300 5 Ranchi, Dhanbad, Dumka, Deoghar, Sahebganj 1100-1200 1 Jamtara 1000-1100 6 Simdega, Lohardaga, Hazaribag, Giridih, Bokaro, Godda 900-1000 4 Gumla, East Singhbhum, West Singhbhum, Latehar 800-900 4 Palamau, Garhwa, Chatra, Koderma 700-800 1 Saraikela The districts of Palamau and Dhanbad have a higher probability of drought (10% or more). The other drought prone districts are Singbhum, Santhal Parganas, Ranchi and Hazaribagh 302. Surface water 295 Indian Institute of Soil Science, ICAR. http://www.iiss.nic.in 296 MCM = Million Cubic Meter 297 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://desjharkhand.nic.in 298 State of Environment Report Jharkhand 2005. Department of Forest and Environment. Government of Jharkhand. Calculated based on water availability of 287810 lakh cubic metres and population of 26909428. 299 Countries or regions are broadly considered water-stressed when the annual per capita availability is between 1000-2000 Cu.M. When water availability is below 1700 Cu.M, a region is deemed ‘water scarce’ and with less than 1000 Cu.M, it becomes ‘severe’. 300 Agriculture Situation of the State. State Agriculture Management and Extension Training Institute (SAMETI), Jharkhand. http://www.sameti.org 301 Sate Action Plan. Department of Agriculture and Cane Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://www.nfsm.gov.in 302 P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune 222 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Damodar, Swarnarekha, Ajay, Karo and Koyal are the important rivers in Jharkhand. The dependable yield from these rivers is 237890 lakh cubic metres. About 50% of this is utilized for irrigation. Table A17-121: Utilisation of water from different sources in Jharkhand 303 Surface water Ground water Lakh cubic metres % Lakh cubic metres % Municipal and Industrial use 49660 22.88 8950 17.93 Irrigation use (a) Major and medium irrigation projects 88780 37.32 (b) Minor irrigation projects 27450 11.54 32490 65.08 Release through power generation including 8430 3.54 committed utilisation by other states Release intro rivers including committed 63570 26.72 utilisation by other states Balance left 8480 16.99 Total 237890 100 49920 100 Ground water The annual replenishable ground water resource in the state is estimated to be 5.58 BCM 304. The net annual ground water availability is 5.25 BCM. The annual ground water draft is estimated to be 1.06 BCM making the stage of ground water development 20%. Of the 212 administrative divisions (called blocks) in the state, none are classified 305 as Over Exploited, Critical or as having Semi-critical groundwater status 306. As seen in Table A17-136, the stage of groundwater development ranges from 33% in Lohardaga to 6% in West Singbhum 307. Groundwater quality in parts of the state is affected by Iron, Fluoride, Arsenic and Nitrate. Of the 32,615 habitations in the state, the quality of drinking water is affected by Iron in 1446 habitations, by Flouride in 409 habitations and by Arsenic in 22 habitations 308. Tables A17-136 and A17-137 provide details of the districts and habitations affected by poor groundwater quality. 303 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://desjharkhand.nic.in 304 BMC = Billion Cubic Meters 305 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category 306 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 307 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 308 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in 223 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-122: Districts affected by poor groundwater quality 309 Contaminant Affected districts Fluoride (>1.5 mg/l) Bokaro, Giridih, Godda, Gumla, Palamu, Ranchi Iron (>1.0 mg/l) Chatra, Deoghar, East Singhbhum, Giridih, Ranchi, West Singhbhum Nitrate (>45 mg/l) Chatra, Garhwa, Godda, Gumla, Lohardega, Pakur, Palamu, Paschimi Singhbhum, Purbi Singhbhum, Ranchi, Sahibganj Agriculture About 28% of the state's geographical area is cultivated (22.3 lakh ha out of 79.70 lakh ha). Rainfed paddy is the predominant crop in the state. The other crops grown are wheat, maize, arhar, urad, gram, rapeseed and mustard, linseed and groundnut. The productivity of most crops in Jharkhand is less than that of the country. Table A17-123: Productivity of major crops in Jharkhand 310 Productivity in kg/ha (2006-07) Jharkhand India Wheat 1529 2708 Maize 1230 1912 Paddy 1828 2131 Gram 929 845 Red Gram 645 650 Rapeseed-Mustard 620 1095 The districts of Dumka, Gumla and West Singbhum have the highest rice production in the state while Latehar, Garhwa and Palamau have the lowest. The production of maize is the highest in Dumka, latehar and Godda while it is lowest in Saraikela-Kharsawan, Simdega and East Singbhum. Wheat production is highest in Godda, palamu and Garhwa and lowest in Dhanbad, West Singbhum and Bokaro. The details on area, production and yield/ha of the major crops in the state are provided in Table A17-138 311. Irrigation Only 10.6% of the net sown area in the state is irrigated. In the main cropping season of Aghani about 6.24% of the sown area is irrigated. In the Rabi and Summer cropping seasons 46% and 72% of the sown area is irrigated. However, the extent of area sown in Rabi and Summer are only about 14% and 1.5% of that sown in Aghani. 309 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – Jharkhand. 310 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 311 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://desjharkhand.nic.in 224 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-124: Season-wise irrigated area in Jharkhand Season Irrigated Non-irrigated Total sown Irrigated area as % area (ha) area (ha) area (ha) of total sown area Bhadai 1971.6 364758.3 366729.9 0.53 (sown in May) Aghani 68357.3 1026537.6 1094894.9 6.24 (sown by August) Rabi 74827.3 85571.2 160398.5 46.65 (Winter - October to April) Garma 12302.3 4716.2 17018.5 72.28 (Summer crop) Of the three agro-climatic zones, irrigated area is the highest in the Western Plateau – Zone V (9.65%) followed by Central and North Eastern Plateau – Zone IV (6.58%) and South Eastern Plateau – Zone VI (4.58%) 312. Table A17-125: Source-wise area irrigation in the agroclimatic zones of Jharkhand 313 Area irrigated in ha Canals Tanks Tubewells Wells and Others Total Central and North Eastern Plateau (Zone IV) 1888 3433 534 5516 11371 Western Plateau (Zone V) 3732 801 3228 14381 22142 South Eastern Plateau (Zone VI) 10211 2156 409 2733 15509 State 15831 6390 4171 22630 49022 As seen, canals account for 32.29% of the irrigated area in the state, tanks account for 13.03% and tubewells account for 8.5%. However, 46.16% of the irrigated area is served by wells and other sources including the traditional ahar-pynes. Agro-chemicals As seen in Table A17-126, the use of chemical fertilizers in Jharkhand is less than half of the national average. Compared to the desirable N:P:K ratio of 4 : 2 : 1 – the ratio in Jharkhand is 6.9 : 3.6 : 1. Table A17-126: Use of Chemical Fertilizers 2008-09 (kg/ha) 314 N P K Total Jharkhand 33.52 17.39 4.82 55.72 India 77.9 33.69 17.1 128.58 312 Agriculture Situation of the State. State Agriculture Management and Extension Training Institute (SAMETI), Jharkhand. http://www.sameti.org 313 Agriculture Situation of the State. State Agriculture Management and Extension Training Institute (SAMETI), Jharkhand. http://www.sameti.org 314 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 225 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 The consumption of chemical pesticides in Jharkhand is low (accounting for 0.15% of India's consumption of 37959 MT in 2006-07). However, it shows an increasing trend over the past 5 years – while 40 MT of pesticides were consumed in 2002-03, the consumption increased steadily to 70 MT in 2005-06 before dipping to 57 MT in 2006-07 315. Table A17-127: Trend in Pesticide Consumption in Jharkhand 2002-2007 316 Year Consumption of Pesticides (MT – technical grade) 2002-03 40 2003-04 56 2004-05 69 2005-06 70 2006-07 57 Livestock Jharkhand has about 8% of the pig, 4% of cattle, 4% of goat, 1% of buffalo, 1% of sheep, and about 3% of the poultry population of the country 317. Table A17-128: Livestock population in Jharkhand (thousands) 318 Jharkhand India Population in Jharkhand as % of India Cattle 7659 185181 4.14 Buffaloes 1343 97922 1.37 Sheep 680 61469 1.11 Goats 5031 124358 4.05 Pigs 1108 13519 8.20 Poultry 14429 489012 2.95 The production of fodder in the state over the period 2000-2003 shows an increase from 65.77 lakh tonnes to 75.42 lakh tonnes. Dry fodder production (crop residue of cereals, pulses and oil seeds) over the same period increased from 28.63 lakh tonnes to 38.39 lakh tonnes. However, the estimated green fodder production from forests, permanent pastures, grazing lands and cultivated 315 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 316 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 317 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 318 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 226 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 areas has declined from 37.13 lakh tonnes in 2000-2001 to 37.02 lakh tonnes in 2002-03. 319. Table A17-129: Production of fodder in Jharkhand ('000 tonnes) 320 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Dry fodder 2863 3430 3839 Green fodder 3713 3708 3702 Total fodder 6577 7137 7542 Forests Forests constitute nearly 30% of the geographic area of Jharkhand (23,605 sq.km.). This is comprised of, by legal status, 18.59% reserved forests, 81.27% protected forest and 0.14% un- classed forests. Table A17-130: Forest Area in Jharkhand 321 Area in sq km Geographical area 79714 Reserved forest 4387.20 Protected forest 19184.78 Unclassified forest 33.49 Recorded forest cover 23605.47 % of forest area to geographical area 29.61 The major forest types in the State are listed in Table A17-131. Table A17-131: Forest types of Jharkhand 322 S.No. Forest type Area (sq km) 1 Dry peninsular Sal 12700 2 Dry peninsular Sal with Acacia catechu 1722 3 Dry peninsular Sal with dry Bamboo 704 4 Moist Peninsular Sal (Singhbhum Valley) 3050 5 Northern dry mixed deciduous forests 364 6 Northern dry mixed deciduous forests Boswellia serrata 3374 7 Northern dry mixed deciduous forests with Bamboo 96 8 Northern dry mixed deciduous forests with Acacia catechu 1519 319 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 320 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 321 Jharkhand – A Statistical Profile: 2006. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://desjharkhand.nic.in 322 State of Environment Report Jharkhand 2005. Department of Forest and Environment. Government of Jharkhand. 227 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 9 Dry tropical Butea forests 76 Total 23605 The districts of Chatra, Palamau, Koderma have more than 40% of their geographical area under forests while the districts of Doeghar, Dhanbad and Dumka have less than 10% area under forests. The maximum extent of dense forest is found in the districts of Palamau (2616 sq km), West Singhbhum (2103 sq km) and Gumla (1231 sq km) 323. The forests of Jharkhand yield a range of non-timber forest produce. These include Kendu leaves (Diospyros melanoxylon); Sal (Shorea robusta) and Mahua (Madhuca longifolia) seeds; Anonla (Emblica officinalis); Katha/Kutch (Acacia catechu); Chiraunji (Buchanania latifolia); Lac (Laccifer lacca); Gond (Boswellia serrata); Sabai grass (Eulaliopsis binata); Mahua and Palash (Butea monosperma) flowers; Seeds of Karanj (Pongamia pinnata), Neem (Azadirachta indica) and Kusum (Schleichera oleosa); Silk; Honey; etc. The collection and sale of Kendu leaves, Sal and Mahua seeds in 2004-05 generated employment of 37 lakh person days and earned a net revenue of Rs. 6.51 crore 324. Jharkhand has 11 Wildlife Sanctuaries and 1 National Parks. Table A17-140 gives details of these protected areas (district, area, key faunal species). Mineral resources Jharkhand has over 30 types of minerals and is estimated to have 38% of the mineral resources of the country 325. Mining is carried out in all districts of the state. The total area under mining leases is 2297 sq km (about 3% of the geograhical area of the state). Extensive mining is carried out in Singhbum East and West, Palamau, Lohardaga, Gumla, Hazaribagh, Dhanbad, Giridih, Kodarma, Ranchi and Sahebganj 326. Summary of key environmental issues Existing Issues Potential Interventions Poor soil fertility Soil conservation Land degradation due to soil erosion SRI – paddy cultivation Land degradation due to mining Revival of traditional water harvesting systems (ahar- Pockets of slash and burn agriculture pyne) Increasing use of chemical pesticides Water harvesting (farm ponds) Poor water availability Sustainable NTFP extraction Pockets of poor water quality Fodder management Unsustainable extraction of forest produce Decreasing production of green fodder 323 Jharkhand – A Statistical Profile: 2006. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://desjharkhand.nic.in 324 Green Corridor. Department of Forests and Environment, Government of Jharkhand. 325 Annual Plan 2010-11. Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand. 326 State of Environment Report Jharkhand 2005. Department of Forest and Environment. Government of Jharkhand. 228 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-24: Wastelands of Jharkhand 327 327 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 229 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-132: Wastelands of Jharkhand (2010) 328 Category Bokaro Chatra Deghar Dhanbad Dumka Singhbhum E Garhwa Giridih Godda Gumla Hazaribag Jamtara Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 0 2.12 2.4 0 7.37 0 6.43 0.14 0 17.53 38.01 0.75 Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Land with Dense Scrub 19.95 16.42 48.93 6.76 16.12 81.85 76.74 12.93 9.9 165.97 52.19 13.17 Land with Open Scrub 146.23 138.41 226.1 109.45 146.11 204.67 220.85 318.51 46.85 104.13 201.2 118.88 Waterlogged and marsh land-Permanent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Scrub 115.44 388.97 67.67 68.18 97.2 198.89 385.9 398.72 32.94 136.38 440.97 48.46 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Agriculture 82.65 37.37 49.65 5.3 5.34 5.55 14.16 175.58 5.32 21.02 11.63 0.24 Mining wastelands 0.26 0.08 0.17 0 0 0.65 0 0 0.99 0 3.43 0 Industrial wastelands 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.06 0 0 Barren rocky area 16.91 119.37 48.63 20.81 35.64 32.88 38.52 199.51 6.05 149.46 29.26 18.61 Total 381.5 702.75 443.53 210.5 307.78 524.5 742.6 1105.39 102.05 594.56 776.69 200.11 TGA 2861 3706 2476 2996 4412 3533 4044 4029 2108 5321 3513 1800 % to TGA 13.33 18.96 17.91 7.03 6.98 14.85 18.36 27.44 4.84 11.17 22.11 11.12 328 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 230 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-133: Wastelands of Jharkhand (2010) 329 Category Khunti Koderma Latehar Lohardaga Pakur Palamau Ramgarh Ranchi Sahibganj Saraikela Kharsawan Simdega Singhbhum W Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 9.57 2.45 6.59 4.94 0.68 3.55 2.17 0.82 0 0 0.63 0 106.14 Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Land with Dense Scrub 164.04 16.21 252.86 3.03 12.82 19.62 96.75 193.97 31.88 91.13 292.72 378.08 2074.06 Land with Open Scrub 74.54 184.98 209.39 64.32 44.33 169.89 105.28 88.55 78.54 148.28 318.39 132.43 3600.33 Waterlogged and marsh land-Permanent 0 0 0 0 0.06 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0.36 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Scrub 98.14 67.91 398.55 25.27 11.35 399.62 88.97 227.49 36.88 74.96 384.67 207.05 4400.59 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Agriculture 4 3.61 2.29 4.81 2.59 23.77 8 25.42 4.13 5.48 5.95 15.12 518.99 Mining wastelands 0 0 0 0 0.32 0.07 0.87 0.63 0.34 0 0 0 7.82 Industrial wastelands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.17 0 0 0 0 0 0.29 Barren rocky area 9.32 1.31 3.21 8.98 30.33 47.72 11.18 33.91 3.61 20.25 49.38 26.7 961.56 Total 359.61 276.47 872.9 111.36 102.48 664.24 313.4 570.79 155.68 340.11 1051.75 759.38 11670.14 TGA 2630 2545 4250 1491 1805 4455 1400 5068 1600 2640 3756 7267 79706 % to TGA 13.67 10.86 20.54 7.47 5.68 14.91 22.39 11.26 9.73 12.88 28 10.45 14.64 329 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 231 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-134: Status of Soil Macronutrients in the Districts of Jharkhand 330 Name of the districts N P K Bokaro M L M Chatra M L M Deogarh M M H Dhanbad M L L Dumka M L H East Singhbhum M L M Garhwa M M M Giridih M L M Godda M L M Gumla M L M Hazaribagh M L M Jamtara M L M Koderma M L H Latehar M M H Lohargarh L H M Pakur M L M Palamu M L M Ranchi M M M Sahebganj M L M Sarailela M L M Simdega L L H West Singhbhum M L M 330 Indian Institute of Soil Science, ICAR. http://www.iiss.nic.in 232 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-135: District-wise Average and Actual Rainfall in Jharkhand (2001-08) 331 District-wise Average and Actual Rainfall in Jharkhand (2001-08) (in mm) Districts 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Average Rainfall Ranchi 1500.6 1504.5 1102 1502.8 1198.9 896.9 1306.4 1197.3 1276.18 Gumla 1335.9 1063.6 852.7 1167 941 743.9 906.9 1201.3 1026.54 Simdega 1758.8 1278.9 967.8 1167.3 826 995.6 1253.1 1271.5 1189.88 Lohardaga 1281.1 1126.5 805.6 1540.4 932.2 724.3 1398.5 926.7 1091.91 East Singhbhum 1321.6 1152.1 901.9 1170.9 834.2 858.2 1802.9 1667.3 1213.64 West Singhbhum 1330.7 877.5 890.4 1042.4 922.1 820.2 1396.8 1424.7 1088.1 Saraikela 1279.3 738.1 790.8 873.5 856.5 718.2 1413.5 1391.4 1007.66 Palamau 1163.4 1089.7 774.4 914.1 688.4 608.7 1040.5 850.1 891.16 Garhwa 1246.7 1109 876.2 1089 470.2 745.6 1140.5 687.2 920.55 Latehar 1196.5 1274.3 895.9 1148.4 756.6 670.8 1046.7 947.4 992.08 Hazaribag 1317.8 1288.7 951.7 1220.7 974.7 832.5 1413.4 1389 1173.56 Chatra 1192.6 1008.8 1009.7 1003.4 570.4 594.2 1325.9 1282 998.38 Koderma 1091.9 1071.2 1099.9 816.8 709 7125.3 1125.6 1417.4 1807.14 Giridih 1350 1311.1 1189.4 1121.8 859.5 637.7 1263.6 1597.4 1166.31 Dhanbad 1334.5 1533.8 1330.5 1486.4 945.8 778.4 1375.7 1666.4 1306.44 Bokaro 1550.4 1135 1337.3 1331 615.7 751.6 1359.6 1450.6 1191.4 Dumka 1378.7 1382.1 1591.5 1211.9 928.1 913.2 1976.4 1469.7 1356.45 Jamtara 1381.3 971.1 1476.6 1060.1 1067.8 1305.7 1480.1 1616.8 1294.94 Deoghar 1197.4 1600.2 1750.6 974.8 1108.6 734.2 1525.4 1520.5 1301.46 Godda 1101 1221.4 1219.6 1126.6 861.9 936.8 1320.8 1250.9 1129.88 Sahebganj 1230.9 1234.9 1595.8 1489.4 923.3 956.2 1331 1094.1 1231.95 Pakur 1708.8 1576.7 1912.6 1280 1425.6 1450 1946.1 1803 1637.85 Average 1206.8 1329.54 1206.78 1151.04 1169.94 882.57 1127.19 1370.43 1323.76 331 State Action Plan. Department of Agriculture and Cane Development, Government of Jharkhand. Http://www.nfsm.gov.in 233 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-136: Groundwater Resources in Districts of Jharkhand (2004) 332 332 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 234 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-137: District-wise habitations affected by poor water quality in Jharkhand 333 District Fluoride Arsenic Iron Nitrate BOKARO 38 0 101 0 CHATRA 37 0 10 0 DEOGHAR 13 0 72 0 DHANBAD 0 0 19 0 DUMKA 16 0 32 0 GARHWA 37 0 0 0 GIRIDIH 1 0 29 0 GODDA 12 0 50 0 GUMLA 10 0 32 0 HAZARIBAG 36 0 11 0 JAMTARA 0 0 155 0 KHUTI 0 0 115 0 KODERMA 24 0 23 0 LATEHAR 5 0 1 0 LOHARDAGA 6 0 47 0 PAKUR 5 0 63 0 PALAMU 129 0 0 0 W SINGHBHUM 5 0 482 0 E SINGHBHUM 6 0 49 0 RAMGARH 0 0 0 0 RANCHI 0 0 70 1 SAHIBGANJ 19 22 7 0 SAREIKELA AND KHARSAWAN 3 0 21 0 SIMDEGA 7 0 57 0 TOTAL 409 22 1446 1 333 National Rural Drinking Water Programme, Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Ministry of Rural Development. http://indiawater.gov.in 235 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-138: Productivity of major crops in districts of Jharkhand 334 Area Yield rate & Production of Different Crop 2005-06 (Area in Hectare, Yield rate in Kg/Ha, Production Mt.) Bhadai Maize Paddy Agahani Wheat Gram Arhar Rai sarso Name of District Area Yield Rate Production Area Yield Rate Production Area Yield Rate Production Area Yield Rate Production Area Yield Rate Production Area Yield Rate Production Bokaro 1675.32 558 934.83 16243.8 499 8105.66 358.34 474 169.85 32.97 714 23.54 91.07 1629 148.35 31.19 247 7.7 Chatra 3619.21 1352 4893.17 14629.77 508 7431.92 3445.5 982 3383.48 1242.21 686 852.16 1139.21 1008 1148.32 298.47 623 185.95 Deoghar 2530.1 646 1634.44 42757.54 288 12314.17 2621.47 1052 2757.79 210.07 1096 230.89 21.02 1459 30.67 11.54 835 9.64 Dhanbad 663.62 1320 875.98 16996.32 1118 19001.89 56.14 999 56.08 - - - 2.02 1645 3.32 - - - Dumka 9110.9 1259 11470.62 69111.7 1482 102423.54 2856.54 1367 3904.89 57 920 52.44 518.59 1459 756.62 550.83 1065 586.63 E.Singhbhum 597.98 1162 694.85 86438.35 785 67854.1 301.57 824 248.49 75.84 1055 80.01 115.04 936 107.68 4.42 931 4.12 Garhwa 8309.58 717 5957.97 11249.58 367 4128.6 6433.74 622 4001.79 2813.91 516 1451.98 3743.35 1016 3803.24 674.91 638 430.59 Giridih 5562.32 702 3904.75 49570.32 490 24289.46 3396.43 1170 3973.82 103.18 635 65.52 30.96 1645 50.93 - - - Godda 6926.14 1152 7978.91 36095.38 1802 65043.87 5409.41 1350 7302.7 1478.13 808 1194.33 769.2 1123 863.81 814.44 612 498.44 Gumla 1995.21 1299 2591.78 71097.9 1280 91005.31 1238.37 1212 1500.9 352.54 572 201.65 726.85 776 564.04 169.66 1046 177.46 Hazaribagh 6084.97 1170 7119.41 36356.25 1031 37483.29 2877.06 1225 3524.4 767.22 768 589.22 30.96 1629 50.43 67.72 398 26.95 Jamtara 2709.74 989 2679.93 33697.09 333 11221.13 1712.62 1481 2536.39 8.54 1227 10.48 13.48 1459 19.67 139.09 748 104.04 Kodarma 680.74 1030 701.16 9461.03 780 7379.6 1046.26 1191 1246.1 223.95 1018 227.98 261.79 1083 283.52 64.65 491 31.74 Latehar 6573.28 1388 9123.71 7222.98 469 3387.58 2352.68 953 2242.1 1245.39 671 835.66 2670.89 1449 3870.12 828.22 631 522.61 Lohardagga 1947.89 1171 2280.98 23219 609 14140.37 2091.52 1336 2794.27 261.51 712 186.2 567.88 1051 596.84 325.7 844 274.89 Pakur 2459.7 860 2115.34 44117.15 1360 59999.32 1579.41 936 1478.33 767.24 734 563.15 407.91 1768 721.18 472.64 466 220.25 Palamu 6803.88 857 5830.91 26965.14 231 6228.95 6562.67 664 4357.61 3021.85 621 1876.57 4080.58 1449 5912.76 590.01 519 306.22 Ranchi 2850.67 1051 2996.05 107993.93 703 57919.73 2391.13 1112 2658.94 582.2 699 407 1552.59 1849 2870.74 231.72 670 155.25 Sahebganj Saraikela 1178.42 984 1159.57 29486.43 1286 37919.55 2836.35 868 2461.95 660.97 757 500.35 242.76 955 231.84 712.2 722 514.21 Kharsawan 726.12 838 608.49 64673.18 671 43395.7 198.63 974 193.47 123.55 561 69.31 96.2 936 90.04 16.59 931 15.45 Simdega 447 1458 651.73 39815.68 938 37347.11 477.55 827 394.93 121.85 572 69.7 - - - 1.62 493 0.8 W.Singhbhum 1301.6 926 1205.28 117536.73 606 71227.26 82.84 914 75.72 224.48 479 107.53 144.83 936 135.56 - - - 334 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://desjharkhand.nic.in 236 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-25: Forest cover of Jharkhand 335 335 India State of Forest Report 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 237 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-139: District-wise forest cover in Jharkhand 336 (sq km) Geographical Sl.No. District Dense Forest Open Forest Total Percentage Scrub Area 1 Bokaro 1929 270 304 574 29.76 58 2 Chatra 3732 945 950 1895 50.78 35 3 Deoghar 2479 73 15 88 3.55 3 4 Dhanbad 2996 70 104 174 5.81 21 5 Dumka 6212 231 257 488 7.86 109 6 Garhwa 4092 670 705 1375 33.60 59 7 Giridih 4963 324 459 783 15.78 26 8 Godda 2110 163 227 390 18.48 22 9 Gumla 9077 1231 1255 2486 27.39 58 10 Hazaribagh 5998 909 1253 2162 36.05 66 11 Koderma 1435 229 387 616 42.93 3 12 Lohardagga 1491 392 165 557 37.36 11 13 Pakur 1571 79 215 294 18.71 17 14 Palamu 8657 2616 1244 3860 44.59 205 15 Paschimi Singhbhum 9907 2103 1624 3727 37.62 84 16 Purbi Singhbhum 3533 597 288 885 25.05 60 17 Ranchi 7698 735 997 1732 22.50 68 18 Sahibganj 1834 150 401 551 30.04 71 Total 79714 11787 10850 22637 28.40 976 336 Jharkhand – A Statistical Profile: 2006. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Jharkhand. http://desjharkhand.nic.in 238 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-140: Protected Areas of Jharkhand 337 National Park / Wildlife Area in sq District Key species of fauna Sanctuary km Betla National Park 231.67 Palamau Tiger, Leopard, Bison, Elephant, Chital, Sambhar, Nilgai, Sloth Bear, Wolf, Hyaena. Palamau Sanctuary 794.33 Palamau Tiger, Leopard, Sloth Bear, Nilgai, Elephant, Bison, Wild Boar, Sambhar, Wolf, Hyaena. Lawalong Sanctuary 207 Chatra Leopard, Nilgai, Barking Deer, Wild Boar, Langur, Sambhar, Chital. Dalma Sanctuary 193.22 Singhbum (East) Elephant, Leopard, Chital, Sambhar, Mouse Deer, Barking Deer, Giant Flying Squirrel, Monkey, Wild Boar. Hazaribagh Sanctuary 186.25 Hazaribagh Tiger, Leopard, Nilgai, Barking Deer, Chital, Wild Boar, Wild Dog, Hyaena. Kodarma Sanctuary 177.95 Kodarma Leopard, Nilgai, Barking Deer, Sambhar. Palkot Sanctuary 183.18 Gumla Leopard, Wild Boar, Jackal, Monkey, Porcupine, Hares. Gautam Buddha Sanctuary 100 Kodarma Mahuardanr Wolf 63.25 Palamau Wolf, Chital, Wild Boar, Hares, Mongoose, Squirrels. Sanctuary Parasnath Sanctuary 49.33 Giridih Tiger, Leopard, Nilgai, Barking Deer, Wild Boar, Hyaena, Sloth Bear, Chital, Giant Squirrel, Porcupine, Fox, Sambhar. Udhwa Lake Bird 5.65 Sahebganj Water fowl. Sanctuary Topchanchi Sanctuary 8.75 Dhanbad Chital, Leopard, Langur, Barking Deer, Wild Boar, Nilgai, Hyaena, Jungle Cat, Fox, Wild Dog, Mongoose. 337 Green Corridor. Department of Forests and Environment, Government of Jharkhand and State of Environment Report Jharkhand 2005. Department of Forest and Environment. Government of Jharkhand. 239 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 ORISSA Orissa is located between 17º49′ and 22º34′N latitude and 81º24′ and 87º29′E longitude. It has an area of 155707 sq km accounting for 4.74% of India's territory and a population of 36.81 million (3.57% of India's population) with 236 persons per sq km 338. The state is divided into 24 districts which are further organized into 211 blocks and 32615 villages. Agroclimatic zones 339 The state is divided into 10 agro-climatic sub-zones on the basis of rainfall and temperature. The key features of the agro-climatic zones are described in Table A17-141. Table A17-141: Agro Climatic Zones of Orissa 340 Agroclimatic Zones Agricultural Districts Climate Mean Annual Soils rainfall (mm) Northern Western Sundargarh, Hot & 1600 Red, Brown forest, Red & Yellow, Mixed Plateau parts of Deogarh, moist Red & Black. Sambalpur & subhumid Jharsuguda Northern Central Mayurbhanj, Hot & 1534 Lateritic, Red & Yellow, Mixed Red & Plateau major parts of moist Black. Keonjhar (except subhumid Anandapur & Ghasipura block) North Eastern Balasore and Moist 1568 Red, Lateritic, Deltaic alluvial, Coastal Coastal Plain Bhadrak subhumid alluvial & Saline. East and South Kendrapara, Khurda, Hot & 1577 Saline, Lateritic, Alluvial, Red and Mixed Eastern Coastal Plain Jagatsinghpur, part humid Red & Black. of Cuttack, Puri, Nayagarh & part of Ganjam. North Eastern Ghat Phulbani, Rayagada, Hot & 1597 Brown forest, Lateritic Alluvial, Red, Gajapati, part of humid Mixed Red & Black. Ganjam & small patches of Koraput. Eastern Ghat High Major parts of Warm & 1521.8 Red, Mixed Red & Black, Mixed Red & Land Koraput, humid Yellow. Nawarangpur. South Eastern Ghat Malkangiri & part of Warm & 1710.4 Red, Lateritic, Black. Koraput. humid Western Undulating Kalahandi, Nuapada Hot and 1352.3 Red, Mixed Red & Black, Black. moist sub- humid Western Central Bargarh, Bolangir, Hot and 1614 Red & Yellow, Red & Black, Black, Brown 338 Census of India, 2001. 339 State of Environment Report Orissa 2005. Centre For Environmental Studies. Forest & Environment Department. Government of Orissa. http://www.orienvis.nic.in 340 Ranjit Kumar. Ailing Agricultural Productivity in Economically Fragile Region of India: An Analysis of Synergy between Public Investment and Farmers’ Capacity. Research Report 2010/01. Indian Institute of Soil Science. 240 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table Land Boudh, Sonepur, moist sub- forest, Lateritic. parts of Sambalpur humid & Jharsuguda. Mid-Central Table Angul, Dhenkanal, Hot and 1350 Alluvial, Red, Lateritic, Mixed Red & Land parts of Cuttack & moist sub- Black. Jajpur. humid Land use 341 About 37% of the state's geographical area is under forests and about 36% is cropped. Only about 3% is under pastures and grazing land. Fallow lands account for about 5% of the area and about 60% of the net sown area is cropped more than once. Table A17-142: Land use in Orissa 342 Area in ha Reporting area for land utilisation statistics 15571000 Forests 5813000 Area under non agricultural uses 1298000 Barren and unculturable land 840000 Not available for cutivation 2138000 Permanent pastures and grazing lands 494000 Land under misc tree crops and groves 342000 Other uncultivated land 375000 Culturable waste land 1211000 Fallow lands 229000 Current fallows 556000 Total fallows 785000 Net area sown 5624000 Total cropped area 9015820 Area sown more than once 3391820 Chart A17-9: Land use in Orissa 343 341 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 342 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 343 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 241 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-142 gives details of land use for the districts of Orissa. As seen, the districts of Phulbani, Malkangiri, Gajapati, Sambalpur, Nayagarh, Deogarh and Sundargarh have the more than 50% of their area under forests (Phulbani has more than 71% under forests). The districts with the least are under forests are Bhadrak and Puri (with just about 4% of their area under forests). Bhadrak has the highest proportion of cropped area (69%) followed by Jagatsinghpur and Balasore. The forested districts of Phulbani, Gajapati and Deograh are also those with the least proportion of area under crops (less than 20%). The cropping intensity ratio for the state is 1.60. The districts with the highest cropping intensity are Puri (2.11), Deogarh (1.95) and Jagasinghpur (1.93) while Sundargarh has the lowest cropping intensity (1.27) 344. Land degradation Wastelands are spread over an area of 16648.27 sq km in Orissa accounting for 10.69% of the state's geographic area. Of the total wasteland in the state, degraded forest (scrub and agriculture) accounts for the largest proportion (6623.62 sq km). The area under current and abandoned shifting cultivation is about 1445 sq km of wasteland. The Map A17-26 depicts the spread of wastelands in the state. Table A17-143: Wastelands of Orissa (2010) 345 Area in sq km % of TGA Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 671.19 0.43 Land with Dense Scrub 5445.08 3.5 Land with Open Scrub 1383.29 0.89 Waterlogged and marsh land-Permanent 424.04 0.27 Waterlogged and marsh land-Seasonal 35.56 0.02 Land affected by Salinity/Alkalinity – Moderate 8.47 0.01 Land affected by Salinity/Alkalinity – Strong 23.09 0.01 Shifting Cultivation Area – Current Jhum 1023.83 0.66 Shifting Cultivation Area – Abandoned Jhum 421.61 0.27 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 4781.34 3.07 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 1842.28 1.18 Degraded land under plantation crops 1.88 0 Sands – Riverine 2.79 0 Sands – Coastal 34.15 0.02 Mining wastelands 7.9 0.01 Industrial wastelands 10.67 0.01 Barren rocky area 531.11 0.34 Total 16648.27 10.69 Total Geographic Area (TGA) 155707 Tables A17-156 and A17-157 gives details of wastelands in the districts of Orissa 346. The districts of Gajapati, Nayagarh and Malkangiri have more than 20% of their area under wasteland. Land under degraded scrub forest is the highest in Nayagarh, Malkangiri and Angul. Forest degradation due to agriculture is a significant problem in Nawarangpur, Malkangiri and Ganjam. Degraded scrubland is the highest in Koraput and Kandhamal. The districts with the 344 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 345 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 346 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 242 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 largest area under Jhum (shifting) cultivation are Gajapati (about 450 sq km), Malkangiri, Kandhamal, Korapur, Kalhandi and Ganjam (over 100 sq km). Land with medium gullies and ravines affects more than 100 sq km of land in Angul, Rayagada and Ganjam. Soils The State of Orissa is broadly divided in to 4 physiographic zones: Coastal Plains, Central Tableland, Northern Plateau and Eastern Ghats. The soil types in these zones are: fertile alluvial deltaic soils in the coastal plains, mixed red and black soils in Central tableland, red and yellow soils with low fertility in the Northern Plateau, and red, black & brown forest soils in Eastern Ghat region 347. The soils are low to medium in nitrogen and phosphate and medium in potassium content. Deficiencies of secondary nutrient like sulphur and of micronutrients like boron and zinc have been recorded in some parts of the state. 348 About 70% of the soils are acidic with the degree of acidity varying widely. Further about 4 lakh ha are exposed to saline inundation, 3.54 lakh ha to flooding and 0.75 lakh ha to water logging, particularly in the deltaic areas 349. Water Orissa receives annual precipitation of about 230.76 BCM 350 of water. Of the total precipitation, a part is lost by evaporation, transpiration and deep percolation and a part stored in the form of ground water reserve and the remaining is surface runoff. The groundwater reserve and surface runoff constitute the water resources of the state. Table A17-144 gives details of the water resources scenario of Orissa and India 351. Table A17-144: Water resource of Orissa 352 (Quantity in BCM) Description India Orissa Annual Precipitation 4000 230.76 Average Annual Water Resources 1869 141.408 Utilizable Water Resources (Surface & Ground) 1122 108.147 Utilizable Resources (% of precipitation) 28% 47% The average per-capita water availability (both surface and ground) in the state is 3359 cubic meter per year, as compared to the national average of 1820 cum. The water demand from agriculture, domestic and industry sectors is about 25.59 BCM. The bulk of this demand (88.65%) comes from agriculture (22.688 BCM). 347 Status of Agriculture in Orissa 2008. Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production, Government of Orissa. 348 S.K. Sahu and R.K. Nayak. 2007. Agricultural Development in Orissa. Orissa Review December 2007. Government of Orissa. http://www.orissa.gov.in/e-magazine/Orissareview/dec-2007/engpdf/48-55.pdf 349 Status of Agriculture in Orissa 2008. Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production, Government of Orissa. 350 billion cubic metres 351 An Overview of Water Resources of Orissa. Department of Water Resources, Government of Orissa. http://www.dowrorissa.gov.in 352 An Overview of Water Resources of Orissa. Department of Water Resources, Government of Orissa. http://www.dowrorissa.gov.in 243 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-145: Water demand from various sectors in Orissa 2001 353 (Quantity in BCM) Uses Surface water Ground water Total Domestic 0.798 1.198 1.996 Agriculture 18.00 4.688 22.688 Industry 0.606 0.100 0.706 Environment 21.00 8.40 29.40 Others 0.10 0.10 0.200 Total 40.504 14.486 54.99 Rainfall The average annual rainfall in the state is 1482 mm. It varies from about 1200 mm in the southern coastal plain to about 1700 mm in the northern plateau. About 78% of total annual rainfall occurs during the period from June to September and the balance 22% in the remaining period 354. Though the quantum of rainfall is quite high, its distribution during the monsoon period is highly uneven and erratic. Flood, drought and cyclone are a regular feature in the state varying only in intensity. The frequent occurrence of these natural calamities affects agricultural productivity and in severe cases leads to loss of life, property and infrastructure. Table A17-146 indicates the frequency of natural calamities in the state over the years 355. As seen 34 of the 47 years between 1961 and 2007 had occurance of flood, cyclone, drought or moisture stress. The districts of Keonjhar, Bolangir, Sambalpur and Sundergarh have a higher probability of drought 356. Table A17-146: Probability of Drought in Districts of Orissa 357 District Probability of Moderate Drought (%) Probability of Severe Drought (%) Balsore 08 00 Bolangir 19 00 Cuttack 10 00 Dhenkanal 09 00 Ganjam 09 00 Kalahandi 10 03 Keonjhar 21 00 Koraput 07 00 Mayurbhanj 06 00 Puri 08 00 Sambalpur 16 01 353 An Overview of Water Resources of Orissa. Department of Water Resources, Government of Orissa. http://www.dowrorissa.gov.in 354 An Overview of Water Resources of Orissa. Department of Water Resources, Government of Orissa. http://www.dowrorissa.gov.in 355 Status of Agriculture in Orissa 2008. Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production, Government of Orissa. 356 P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune 357 P.G. Gore, Thakur Prasad and H.R. Hatwar, 2010. Mapping of Drought Areas over India. National Climate Centre Research Report No. 12/2010. India Meteorological Department, Pune 244 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Sundergarh 16 00 Surface water Orissa is drained by eleven river basins. The details of the rivers are presented in Table A17-147. Table A17-147: River basins of Orissa 358 Total Catchment Total Length Catchment in Orissa Length in Orissa (sq km) (sq km) (km) (km) Mahanadi 141134 65628 851 494 Brahmani 39116 22516 765 461 Baitarani 14218 13482 440 360 Rushikulya 8963 8963 175 175 Vansadhara 11377 8960 239 176 Nagavali 9275 4500 217 125 Kolab 20427 10300 343 270 Indravati 41700 7400 530 167 Bahuda 1118 890 96 74 Subarnarekha 19277 2983 446 81 Burhabaianga 4838 4838 199 199 Ground water The annual replenishable ground water resource in the state is estimated to be 23.09 BCM 359. The net annual ground water availability is 21.01 BCM. The annual ground water draft is estimated to be 3.85 BCM making the stage of ground water development 18%. Of the 314 administrative divisions (called blocks) in the state, none are classified 360 as Over Exploited, Critical or as having Semi-critical groundwater status 361. As seen in Table A17-159, the stage of groundwater development ranges from 45% or above in Bargarh and Bhadrak to less than 10% in Malkhangiri and Koraput 362. Groundwater quality in parts of the state is affected by Fluoride, Iron and Nitrate. Of the 47,529 habitations in the state, the quality of drinking water is affected by Iron in 15408 habitations, by 358 State of Environment Report Orissa 2005. Centre For Environmental Studies. Forest & Environment Department. Government of Orissa. http://www.orienvis.nic.in 359 BMC = Billion Cubic Meters 360 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category 361 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 362 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 245 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Salinity in 1593 habitations, by Flouride in 639 habitations and by Nitrate in 28 habitations 363. Tables A17-148 and A17-160 provides details of the districts and habitations affected by poor groundwater quality. Table A17-148: Districts affected by poor groundwater quality 364 Contaminant Affected districts Fluoride (>1.5 mg/l) Angul, Balasore, Bargarh, Bhadrak, Boudh, Cuttack, Deogarh, Dhenkanal, Jajpur, Keonjhar, Suvarnapur Iron (>1.0 mg/l) Balasore, Bargarh, Bhadrak, Cuttack, Deogarh, J.Singhpur, Jajpur, Jharsuguda, Kalahandi, Kandmahal, Keonjhar, Khurda, Koraput, Mayurbhanj, Nayagarh, Puri, Rayagada, Sambalpur, Sundergarh, Suvarnapur Nitrate (>45 mg/l) Angul, Balasore, Bargarh, Bhadrak, Bolangir, Boudh, Cuttack, Deogarh, Dhenkanal, Gajapati, Ganjam, J.Singhpur, Jajpur, Jharsuguda, Kalahandi, Kendrapara, Keonjhar, Khurda, Koraput, Malkangiri, Mayurbhanj, Nawapada, Nayagarh, Phulbani, Puri, Sambalpur, Sundergarh, Suvarnapur Agriculture About 36% of the state's geographical area is cultivated (56.24 lakh ha out of 155.71 lakh ha). The Kharif Paddy is the main crop. Most of the paddy area is cultivated under un-irrigated conditions during the Kharif season (thus, food grain production in the state is highly dependent on rainfall). The other crops grown in the state are Maize, Ragi, Biri, Mung, Arhar, Kulthi, Sesamum, Niger, Groundnut, Cotton, Mesta, Mustard, Jute, Sugarcane and Vegetables. Table A17-149: Production of major crops in Orissa (2006-07) 365 Kharif Rabi Annual Total % of % of % of total total total Area area Area area Area Area area Rice 41.36 67 3.14 13 44.5 50 Other Cereals 4.08 7 0.3 1 4.38 5 Pulses 7.08 12 12.43 50 19.51 22 Oilseeds 4.39 7 3.96 16 8.35 9 Fibres 1.03 2 1.03 1 Sugarcane 0 0.41 2 0.41 0 Vegetables 2.7 4 3.85 15 6.55 7 Spices 0.72 1 0.74 3 1.46 2 Others 0 0.04 3.37 3.41 4 Total 61.36 100 24.87 100 3.37 89.6 100 The productivity of Paddy in Orissa is less than that of the country. 363 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in 364 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – Orissa. 365 Orissa Agricultural Statistics 2006-07. Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production, Government of Orissa. 246 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-150: Productivity of major crops in Orissa 366 Productivity in kg/ha (2006-07) Orissa India Paddy 1534 2131 Bajra 510 859 Red Gram 803 650 Groundnut 1113 866 Jute and Mesta 983 2019 Sugar cane 63403 69022 The districts of Ganjam, Borgarh and Mayurbhanj have the highest cereal production in the state while Deograh, Gajapati and Phulbani have the lowest. The production of pulses is the highest in Kalahandi, Ganjam and Cuttack while it is lowest in Jharsuguda, Balasore and Deogarh. The details on area, production and yield/ha of cereals and pulses in the state are provided in Table A17-161 367. Irrigation Only 33% of the net sown area in the state is irrigated in Kharif 368. Canals are the source of irrigation for about 66% of the irrigated area, tubewells account for 14% and other wells account for about 5%. Malkangiri has over 90% of its irrigation coming from canals followed by Ganjam and Sonepur (over 80%). The district with the highest dependence on tubewells for irrigation is Balasore (58%), followed by Jajpur and Jagatsinghpur (both over 30%). Agro-chemicals As seen in Table A17-151, the use of chemical fertilizers in Orissa is just about half of the national average. Compared to the desirable N:P:K ratio of 4 : 2 : 1 – the ratio in Orissa is 3.3 : 1.6 : 1. Table A17-151: Use of Chemical Fertilizers 2008-09 (kg/ha) 369 N P K Total Orissa 34.32 17.05 10.28 61.64 India 77.9 33.69 17.1 128.58 The consumption of chemical pesticides in Orissa is low (accounting for 2.81% of India's consumption of 37959 MT in 2006-07). However, it shows an increasing trend over the past 4 years – while 682 MT of pesticides were consumed in 2003-04, the consumption increased steadily to 1068 MT in 2006-07 370. 366 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 367 Orissa Agricultural Statistics 2006-07. Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production, Government of Orissa. 368 Status of Agriculture in Orissa 2008. Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production, Government of Orissa. 369 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 370 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 247 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-152: Trend in Pesticide Consumption in Orissa 2002-2007 371 Year Consumption of Pesticides (MT – technical grade) 2002-03 1134 2003-04 682 2004-05 692 2005-06 963 2006-07 1068 Livestock Orissa had 7.51% of Cattle, 1.42% of buffaloes, 2.64% of sheep, 4.67% of goats and 4.9% of pig population of the country. The poultry population is 3.6% of the country’s total poultry population 372. Table A17-153: Livestock Population in Orissa ('000) 373 1993 2003 % change Crossbred cattle 912 1063 16.56 Indigenous cattle 12898 12840 - 0.45 Total cattle 13810 13903 0.67 Buffaloes 1388 1394 0.43 Total Bovines 15198 15297 0.65 Sheep 1765 1620 -8.22 Goats 5772 5803 0.54 Pigs 602 662 9.97 Others 1 9 Total Livestock 23338 23391 0.23 Over the period 1997-2003, the crossbred cattle increased by 16.6% but the indigenous cattle decreased marginally by 0.5%. The buffalo, goats and pigs population also increased to some extent. The total livestock in the state has increased from 23.338 million to 23.391 million between showing an increase of 0.2%. The production of fodder in the state over the period 2000-2003 shows an decrease from 161.36 lakh tonnes to 141.48 lakh tonnes. While the green fodder production from forests, permanent pastures, grazing lands and cultivated areas has more or less remained the same, the dry fodder 371 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 372 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 373 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 248 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 production (crop residue of cereals, pulses and oil seeds) shows a deep decline 374. Table A17-154: Production of fodder in Orissa ('000 tonnes) 375 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Dry fodder 7280 10564 5267 Green fodder 8856 8868 8881 Total fodder 16136 19432 14148 Forests 376 Orissa ranks fourth in the country in terms of area under forest cover. The total forest area of the State is 58,135 sq km which is 37.34% of the State’s geographical area (and about 7.66% of country’s forests). About 45% of the state's forests are classified as reserved forests, 27% as protected forests and 28% as unclassed forests. The forest types in the state are Tropical Semi Evergreen, Tropical Moist Deciduous, Littoral and Swamp, Tropical Dry Deciduous. Mangrove forests are found in the districts of Balasore, Bhadrak, Jagatsinghpur and Kendrapara. Table A17-163 gives details of the forest cover in the districts of Orissa (also see Map A17-27). As see, the districts with the maximum forest cover are Khandamal and Sundargarh. Mayurbhanj and Sundargarh have the maximum area under very dense forest while Khandamal and Sundargarh have the largest area under moderately dense forest 377. The Protected Areas in Orissa comprises of 18 sanctuaries and 2 National Parks (Bhitarkanika and Simlipal). These constitute 5.11% of the geographical area of the State. Simlipal Toger Reserve covers 2200 sq km and is part of the Simlipal Biosphere Reserve. The Gahirmatha Wildlife Sanctuary, a mangrove ecosystem, is a well-known nexting ground of the Olive Ridley sea turtles. Chilika, a brackish water lake covering an area of 0.11 million ha is a Ramsar site 378. Table A17-164 gives details of the protected areas of Orissa. Summary of key environmental issues Existing Issues Potential Interventions Poor soil fertility Integrated nutrient management Land degradation due to shifting cultivation Sustainable agriculture practices Floods, drought and cyclone prone Disaster mitigation Poor water quality in 17668 habitations (Iron, Salinity, Water quality management Flouride) Sustainable NTFP extraction Unsustainable extraction of forest produce Fodder management Decreasing production of dry fodder 374 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 375 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 376 State of Environment Report Orissa 2005. Centre For Environmental Studies. Forest & Environment Department. Government of Orissa. http://www.orienvis.nic.in 377 India State of Forest 2009. Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 378 India State of Forest 2009. Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 249 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-155: Land use details of districts in Orissa 2007-08 379 (area in ha) Reporting Area under Not Permanent Land under area for land non Barren and available pastures and misc tree Other Total Area sown utilisation agricultural unculturable for grazing crops and uncultivated Culturable Fallow Current Total Net area cropped more than statistics Forests uses land cutivation lands groves land waste land lands fallows fallows sown area once ANGUL 638000 272000 48000 7000 55000 36000 23000 19000 78000 17000 19000 36000 197000 330980 133980 BALASORE 381000 33000 33000 10000 43000 16000 25000 9000 50000 5000 37000 42000 213000 330900 117900 BHADRAK 250000 10000 33000 1000 34000 11000 3000 11000 25000 5000 3000 8000 173000 240170 67170 BOLANGIR 657000 154000 53000 23000 76000 46000 4000 18000 68000 13000 19000 32000 327000 467870 140870 BOUDH 310000 128000 21000 12000 33000 17000 19000 20000 56000 4000 8000 12000 81000 133450 52450 BURAGARH 584000 122000 47000 20000 67000 20000 5000 15000 40000 6000 56000 62000 293000 441820 148820 CUTTACK 393000 79000 83000 10000 93000 11000 11000 10000 32000 1000 10000 11000 178000 325160 147160 DEOGARH 294000 156000 51000 6000 57000 5000 1000 6000 12000 2000 11000 13000 56000 109090 53090 DHENKANAL 445000 174000 42000 5000 47000 8000 6000 4000 18000 20000 21000 41000 165000 267460 102460 GAJAPATTI 433000 247000 12000 68000 80000 12000 8000 4000 24000 6000 0 6000 76000 145450 69450 GANJAM 821000 315000 21000 20000 41000 20000 22000 11000 53000 6000 25000 31000 381000 687960 306960 JAGATSINGPUR 167000 13000 13000 13000 26000 7000 4000 6000 17000 7000 9000 16000 95000 182900 87900 JAJPUR 290000 72000 51000 5000 56000 4000 4000 4000 12000 5000 3000 8000 142000 271050 129050 JHARSUGDA 208000 20000 39000 17000 56000 20000 6000 15000 41000 3000 21000 24000 67000 108870 41870 KALAHANDI 792000 254000 35000 57000 92000 23000 8000 21000 52000 16000 5000 21000 373000 598250 225250 KEDRAPARA 264000 25000 49000 5000 54000 8000 5000 6000 19000 14000 7000 21000 145000 265520 120520 KEONJHAR 830000 310000 77000 93000 170000 20000 6000 26000 52000 4000 4000 294000 433150 139150 KHURDA 281000 62000 46000 15000 61000 5000 10000 8000 23000 6000 11000 17000 118000 212780 94780 KORAPUT 881000 188000 54000 210000 264000 45000 17000 44000 106000 19000 18000 37000 286000 388880 102880 MALKANGIRI 579000 335000 23000 38000 61000 21000 1000 4000 26000 15000 5000 20000 137000 214220 77220 MAYURBHANJ 1042000 439000 58000 16000 74000 28000 41000 10000 79000 13000 48000 61000 389000 516430 127430 NAWAPARA 385000 185000 3000 2000 5000 2000 1000 2000 5000 1000 26000 27000 163000 270340 107340 NAWORANGPUR 529000 246000 44000 9000 53000 8000 13000 15000 36000 8000 13000 21000 173000 276840 103840 NAYAGARH 389000 208000 25000 6000 31000 4000 6000 5000 15000 1000 8000 9000 126000 223700 97700 PHULBANI 802000 571000 9000 30000 39000 10000 34000 14000 58000 6000 6000 12000 122000 187020 65020 PURI 348000 14000 115000 8000 123000 9000 9000 3000 21000 1000 52000 53000 137000 288830 151830 RAYAGADA 707000 281000 124000 38000 162000 26000 18000 22000 66000 5000 34000 39000 159000 253340 94340 SAMBALPUR 666000 363000 38000 18000 56000 13000 4000 19000 36000 17000 27000 44000 167000 280070 113070 SONEPUR 234000 41000 22000 12000 34000 13000 3000 8000 24000 7000 26000 33000 102000 194950 92950 SUNDARGARH 971000 496000 29000 66000 95000 26000 25000 16000 67000 0 24000 24000 289000 368370 79370 State 15571000 5813000 1298000 840000 2138000 494000 342000 375000 1211000 229000 556000 785000 5624000 9015820 3391820 379 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 250 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-156: Wastelands of Orissa 2010 380 (area in sq km) Category of Wasteland Angul Baleshwar Baragarh Bhadrak Bolangir Boudh Cuttack Deogarh Dhenkanal Gajapati Ganjam Jagatsinghpur Jajpur Jharsuguda Kalahandi Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 123.68 2.04 8.18 0 9.79 0 3.31 30.57 34.58 21.83 75.67 0 0.15 1.05 20.87 Land with Dense Scrub 98.77 41.94 87.7 0.06 190.12 135.01 117.57 68.72 138.56 159.07 342.59 0.82 49.51 90.52 198.42 Land with Open Scrub 84.85 3.31 22.48 6.44 45.59 61.46 36.46 19.88 1.52 334.6 76.28 0.07 52.19 89.44 84.61 Waterlogged and marsh land-Permanent 2.24 9.26 0.6 27.31 1.32 0 41.99 0.22 0.43 0.3 27.16 14.23 39.25 0.28 0.44 Waterlogged and marsh land-Seasonal 0 5.78 0 0 0 0 2.71 0 0.07 1.71 0 0 14.1 0 0 Land affected by Salinity/Alkalinity – Moderate 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.47 0 0 0 Land affected by Salinity/Alkalinity – Strong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14.99 0 0 0 Shifting Cultivation Area – Current Jhum 0 0 0 0 0 1.31 0.05 0 0 318.77 88.05 0 0 0 92.7 Shifting Cultivation Area – Abandoned Jhum 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 130.07 33.77 0 0 0 55.63 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Scrub 326 37.67 317.2 0 161 147.5 121.49 89.41 46.25 62.92 298.27 0.74 65.98 38.41 261.5 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Agriculture 26.28 5.75 10.02 0 89.85 6.28 12.13 80.21 126.8 26.87 152.89 0.1 20.7 2.7 97.35 Degraded land under plantation crops 0.84 0 0.03 0 0 0 0 0.06 0 0 0 0.01 0.01 0 0 Sands – Riverine 0 0.32 0 0.5 0 0 0.16 0 0 0 0 0.08 0.05 0 0 Sands – Coastal 0 2.92 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14.15 1.66 0 0 0 Mining wastelands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.66 1.53 0 Industrial wastelands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.85 0.19 0 Barren rocky area 0.82 1.79 8.04 0 42.61 6.35 2.11 9.77 8.41 25.94 37.54 0 1.87 0.47 76.91 Total 663.48 110.78 454.25 34.31 540.28 359.51 337.98 298.84 356.62 1082.08 1146.37 41.16 250.32 224.6 888.43 TGA 6375 3806 5837 2505 6575 3098 3932 2940 4452 4325 8206 1668 2899 2081 7920 380 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 251 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-157: Wastelands of Orissa 2010 381 (area in sq km) Category of Wasteland Angul Baleshwar Baragarh Bhadrak Bolangir Boudh Cuttack Deogarh Dhenkanal Gajapati Ganjam Jagatsinghpur Jajpur Jharsuguda Kalahandi Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 123.68 2.04 8.18 0 9.79 0 3.31 30.57 34.58 21.83 75.67 0 0.15 1.05 20.87 Land with Dense Scrub 98.77 41.94 87.7 0.06 190.12 135.01 117.57 68.72 138.56 159.07 342.59 0.82 49.51 90.52 198.42 Land with Open Scrub 84.85 3.31 22.48 6.44 45.59 61.46 36.46 19.88 1.52 334.6 76.28 0.07 52.19 89.44 84.61 Waterlogged and marsh land-Permanent 2.24 9.26 0.6 27.31 1.32 0 41.99 0.22 0.43 0.3 27.16 14.23 39.25 0.28 0.44 Waterlogged and marsh land-Seasonal 0 5.78 0 0 0 0 2.71 0 0.07 1.71 0 0 14.1 0 0 Land affected by Salinity/Alkalinity – Moderate 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.47 0 0 0 Land affected by Salinity/Alkalinity – Strong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14.99 0 0 0 Shifting Cultivation Area – Current Jhum 0 0 0 0 0 1.31 0.05 0 0 318.77 88.05 0 0 0 92.7 Shifting Cultivation Area – Abandoned Jhum 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 130.07 33.77 0 0 0 55.63 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Scrub 326 37.67 317.2 0 161 147.5 121.49 89.41 46.25 62.92 298.27 0.74 65.98 38.41 261.5 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Agriculture 26.28 5.75 10.02 0 89.85 6.28 12.13 80.21 126.8 26.87 152.89 0.1 20.7 2.7 97.35 Degraded land under plantation crops 0.84 0 0.03 0 0 0 0 0.06 0 0 0 0.01 0.01 0 0 Sands – Riverine 0 0.32 0 0.5 0 0 0.16 0 0 0 0 0.08 0.05 0 0 Sands – Coastal 0 2.92 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14.15 1.66 0 0 0 Mining wastelands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.66 1.53 0 Industrial wastelands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.85 0.19 0 Barren rocky area 0.82 1.79 8.04 0 42.61 6.35 2.11 9.77 8.41 25.94 37.54 0 1.87 0.47 76.91 Total 663.48 110.78 454.25 34.31 540.28 359.51 337.98 298.84 356.62 1082.08 1146.37 41.16 250.32 224.6 888.43 TGA 6375 3806 5837 2505 6575 3098 3932 2940 4452 4325 8206 1668 2899 2081 7920 381 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 252 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-26: Wastelands of Orissa 2010 382 382 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 253 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-158: Occurance of Floods and Drought in Orissa (1961-2007) 383 Normal Rainfall Actual Rainfall Year (mm) (mm) 1961 1502.5 1262.8 1962 1502.5 1169.9 1963 1502.5 1467 1964 1502.5 1414.1 1965 1502.5 997.1 Severe drought 1966 1502.5 1134.9 Drought 1967 1502.5 1326.7 Cyclone & Flood 1968 1502.5 1296.1 Cyclone & Flood 1969 1502.5 1802.1 Flood 1970 1502.5 1660.2 Flood 1971 1502.5 1791.5 Flood, Severe Cyclone 1972 1502.5 1177.1 Drought, flood 1973 1502.5 1360.1 Flood 1974 1502.5 951.2 Flood, severe drought 1975 1502.5 1325.6 Flood 1976 1502.5 1012.5 Severe drought 1977 1502.5 1326.9 Flood 1978 1502.5 1261.3 Tornados, hail storm 1979 1502.5 950.7 Severe drought 1980 1502.5 1321.7 Flood, drought 1981 1502.5 1187.4 Flood, drought, Tornado 1982 1502.5 1179.9 Severe flood, drought, cyclone 1983 1502.5 1374.1 1984 1502.5 1302.8 Drought 1985 1502.5 1606.8 Flood 1986 1502.5 1566.1 1987 1502.5 1040.8 Severe drought 1988 1502.5 1270.5 1989 1502.5 1283.9 1990 1502.5 1865.8 Flood 1991 1502.5 1465.7 1992 1502.5 1344.1 Flood, drought 1993 1502.5 1421.6 1994 1502.5 1700.2 1995 1502.5 1588 1996 1502.5 990.1 Severe drought 1997 1502.5 1493 1998 1502.5 1277.5 Severe drought 1999 1502.5 1435.7 Severe Cyclone 2000 1502.5 1035.1 Drought & Flood 2001 1482.2 1616.2 Flood 2002 1482.2 1007.8 Severe drought 2003 1482.2 1663.5 Flood 2004 1482.2 1256.7 Moisture stress 2005 1451.2 1497.7 Moisture stress 2006 1451.2 1682.8 Moisture stress, Flood 2007 1451.2 1583.2 Flood 383 Status of Agriculture in Orissa 2008. Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production, Government of Orissa. 254 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-159: Groundwater status in districts of Orissa (2004) 384 384 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 255 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-160: Habitations affected by poor water quality in Districts of Orissa 385 District Name Total Fluoride Iron Salinity Nitrate 1 ANUGUL 1195 26 1168 1 0 2 BALANGIR 16 15 1 0 0 3 BALESHWAR 602 5 308 289 0 4 BARGARH 244 13 231 0 0 5 BAUDH 91 11 80 0 0 6 BHADRAK 327 0 293 34 0 7 CUTTACK 1017 12 1004 1 0 8 DEBAGARH 87 0 87 0 0 9 DHENKANAL 139 0 139 0 0 10 GAJAPATI 166 0 166 0 0 11 GANJAM 127 0 83 17 27 12 JAGATSINGHAPUR 285 0 269 16 0 13 JAJAPUR 1212 0 942 270 0 14 JHARSUGUDA 74 0 74 0 0 15 KALAHANDI 30 12 18 0 0 16 KANDHAMAL 378 0 378 0 0 17 KENDRAPARA 721 0 592 129 0 18 KENDUJHAR 1013 0 1013 0 0 KHORDHA 19 (BHUBANESWAR) 962 18 905 39 0 20 KORAPUT 1566 0 1566 0 0 21 MALKANGIRI 603 0 603 0 0 22 MAYURBHANJ 1808 0 1808 0 0 23 NABARANGAPUR 150 0 148 1 1 24 NAYAGARH 661 39 622 0 0 25 NUAPADA 488 488 0 0 0 26 PURI 2262 0 1466 796 0 27 RAYAGADA 1066 0 1066 0 0 28 SAMBALPUR 29 0 29 0 0 29 SONAPUR 111 0 111 0 0 30 SUNDARGARH 238 0 238 0 0 TOTAL 17668 639 15408 1593 28 385 Department of Drinking Water Supply, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://ddws.nic.in 256 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-161: District-wise Annual Production of Cereals and Pulses in Orissa (2006-07) 386 [area in '000 ha, yield in kg/ha, production in '000 MT) Cereals Cereals Cereals Pulses Pulses Pulses Area Yield Production Area Yield Production Balasore 252.24 1448 365.32 19.92 459 9.15 Bhadrak 170.96 1774 303.22 24.12 597 14.41 Balangir 226.09 1458 329.66 130.88 343 44.88 Sonepur 133.91 2095 280.55 34.18 488 16.67 Cuttack 139.76 1507 210.55 108.01 489 52.84 Jagatsingpur 93.08 1495 139.12 51.37 414 21.25 Jajpur 135.9 1353 183.85 63.25 402 25.44 Kendrapara 136.53 1126 153.8 74.3 456 33.9 Dhenkanal 117.13 1432 167.73 65.58 371 24.35 Angul 117.46 1350 158.58 99.61 408 40.68 Ganjam 334.52 1895 633.83 216.58 437 94.71 Gajapati 61.42 1505 92.45 30.68 568 17.42 Kalahandi 283.16 1111 314.66 177.72 642 114.08 Nawapara 119.35 1086 129.65 88.59 403 35.74 Keonjhar 219.86 1312 288.4 74.64 416 31.03 Koraput 228.41 1342 306.61 36.17 428 15.47 Malkangiri 104.32 1318 137.47 33.33 412 13.73 Nawarangpur 214.12 1641 351.35 33.54 510 17.12 Rayagada 105.17 1462 153.72 49.12 583 28.64 Mayurbhanj 333.75 1554 518.81 60.64 522 31.63 Phulbani 75.24 1359 102.23 26.61 387 10.3 Boudh 72.59 1593 115.65 36.73 500 18.35 Puri 180.18 1369 246.75 57.65 269 15.52 Khurda 122.77 1635 200.75 52.07 427 22.21 Nayagarh 107.1 1476 158.03 77.66 300 23.29 Sambalpur 146.47 2021 295.98 52.93 389 20.58 Bargarh 302.18 2040 616.47 73.34 391 28.67 Deogarh 55.68 1266 70.49 24.92 400 9.97 Jharsuguda 63.22 1851 117.03 19.67 422 8.31 Sundargarh 235.9 1227 289.41 57.58 443 25.52 TOTAL 4888.47 1520 7432.12 1951.39 444 865.86 386 Orissa Agricultural Statistics 2006-07. Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production, Government of Orissa. 257 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-162: Area irrigated (Sourcewise) in Districts of Orissa 2007-08 387 (area in ha) Area Irrigated (Sourcewise) in Districts of Orissa 2007- 08 (ha) Canals Tube Wells Other Wells Other Sources Total ANGUL 22620 2710 6060 14380 45770 BALASORE 28450 56580 0 13260 98290 BHADRAK 75310 22280 0 14620 112210 BOLANGIR 23570 13650 14950 9630 61800 BOUDH 34410 1840 2100 5690 44040 BURAGARH 111600 10330 6350 15390 143670 CUTTACK 81580 19140 2600 14900 118220 DEOGARH 11730 1150 1170 4890 18940 DHENKANAL 30220 2570 6050 9840 48680 GAJAPATTI 15130 1540 0 6570 23240 GANJAM 201340 9950 15150 12530 238970 JAGATSINGPUR 34770 20100 240 11480 66590 JAJPUR 30830 20020 540 3960 55350 JHARSUGDA 5180 1460 2730 4600 13970 KALAHANDI 108350 8980 5340 13620 136290 KANDHAMAL 10800 4020 3730 14620 33170 KEDRAPARA 46720 10500 0 12690 69910 KEONJHAR 48990 5480 6300 13650 74420 KHURDA 41480 7060 1250 7780 57570 KORAPUT 48770 9620 0 22480 80870 MALKANGIRI 42650 2210 0 1890 46750 MAYURBHANJ 65810 24400 1950 24650 116810 NAWAPARA 25520 3360 2330 9900 41110 NAWORANGPUR 9570 6680 0 12350 28600 NAYAGARH 27220 5250 3510 7570 43550 PURI 77010 9360 560 10950 97880 RAYAGADA 26560 5240 280 8780 40860 SAMBALPUR 46350 3510 5030 6740 61630 SONEPUR 58190 6280 2380 3610 70460 SUNDARGARH 28820 10480 10720 18460 68480 Total 1419550 305750 101320 331480 2158100 387 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 258 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-163: Forest cover in districts of Orissa 388 388 India State of Forest 2009. Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 259 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Map A17-27: Forest cover in Orissa 389 389 India State of Forest 2009. Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 260 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-164: Protected areas of Orissa 390 Protected Area Area in sq km District Key species Bhitarkanika 672.00 Kendrapara Leopard Cat, Fishing Cat, Jungle Cat, Hyena, Wild Boar, Spotted Deer, Sambar, Porcupine, Python, Dolphin, (Sanctuary) King Cobra, Saltwater Crocodile, Water Monitor Lizard, Terrapins, Marine Turtles, Kingfishers, Wood 145.00 Peckers, Hornbills, Bar-Headed Geese, Brahminy Ducks, Pintails, White Bellied Sea Eagles, and a variety of (National Park) resident and migratory birds Similipal 2200.00 Mayurbhanj Tiger, Leopard, Chowsingha, Hyena, Jungle Cat, Wildpig, Spotted Deer, Sambar, Wolf, Chital, Mouse Deer, (Sanctuary) Gaur, Elephant , Giant Squirrel, Peafowl, Hill Myna, Marsh Crocodile, Monitor Lizard etc. 845.70 (National Park) Satakosia Gorge 795.52 Angul, Leopard, Tiger, Striped Hyena, Sambar, Wild Dog or Dhole, Indian Wolf, Sloth Bear, Chital, Barking Deer, Nayagarh, Mouse Deer, Chowsingha, Nilgai, Wildpig, Gaur, Elephant, Gharial, Mugger, Monitor Lizard, Chameleon, Phulbani Terrapins, snakes and varieties of resident and migratory birds etc, Hadagarh 191.06 Keonjhar Leopard, Wild Dog, Spotted Deer, Wildboar, Elephant, Nilgai, Migratory ducks and Mugger Crocodiles in Hadgarh Reservoir. Nandankanan 4.37 Khurda Sambar, Spotted Deer, Rhesus Monkey, Hanuman Langur etc. Baisipalli 168.35 Nayagrh Leopard, Tiger, Sambar, Spotted Deer, Bear, Elephant etc. Kotagarh 399.05 Phulbani Tiger, Leopard, Gaur, Elephant, Sambar, Spotted Deer, varieties of birds (Peacock, Red Jungle Fowl etc.) & reptiles. Chandaka- 193.39 Khurda, Elephant, Spotted Deer, Barking Deer, Mouse Deer, Ratel, Sloth Bear, Leopard, Crested Serpent Eagle, etc. Dampada Cuttack Khalasuni 116.00 Sambalpur Leopard, Tiger, Elephant, Gaur, Sambar, SpottedDeer, barking Deer, mouse Deer and Wild Dog, varieties of birds (Peafowl, Red Jungle Fowl, Hornbill etc.) and reptiles. Balukhand- 71.72 Puri Spotted Deer, Blackbuck, Stripped Hyena, Jungle Cat, etc. Konark Kuldiha 272.75 Balasore Elephants, Gaur, Sambar, Giant squirrel, Leopard, varietieis of birds, Hill Myna, Peacock, Hornbills and reptiles (Land Monitor, Cobra, Viper & Pythons). Debrigarh 346.91 Sambalpur Tiger, Leopard, Hyena, Gaur, Sambar, Spotted Deer, Chowsingha, resident & migratory birds, Monitor Lizard, Chameleon etc. Lakhari Valley 185.78 Ganjam Tiger, Leopard, Bear, Hyena, Wildboar, Spotted Deer, Elephant, etc. 390 State of Environment Report Orissa 2005. Centre For Environmental Studies. Forest & Environment Department. Government of Orissa. http://www.orienvis.nic.in 261 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Chilika (Nalaban) 15.53 Khurda, Puri, Chilika is rich in estuarine/marine fauna. Attracts 95 species of migratory birds. Varieties of reptiles (snakes, Ganjam lizards) and aquatic mammals like Irrawadi Dolphins & Olive Ridley Turtles in sea coast near Chilika lake. Badrama 304.03 Sambalpur Tiger, Leopard, Hyena, Wildboar, Spotted Deer, Elephant etc. Sunabeda 500.00 Nuapada Tiger, Leopard, Hyena, Barking Deer, Chital, Gaur, Sambar, and varieties of birds (Hill Myna, Peafowl, Partridge, etc.) and reptiles (snakes and lizards). Karlapat 147.66 Kalahandi Tiger, Leopard, Elephant, Wildpig, Gaur, Sambar, Nilgai, Barking Deer, Mouse Deer, varieties of colourful birds, and reptiles (snakes & lizards). Gahirmatha 1435.00 Kendrapara Sea turtles, Dolphins, Jackals, Hyena, Fishing Cat, Crocodile, Water Monitor Lizard, Terns, Vultures, winter (Marine) migrants such as Sea Gulls, etc. 262 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 MAHARASHTRA Maharashtra is located between 16º and 22º N latitude and 72º and 80º E longitude. It has an area of 307,713 sq km and is the third largest state in the country after Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. The state has a coastline of 720 km. Maharashtra has a population of 96.7 million (9.42% of India's population) with 314 persons per sq km 391. The state is divided into 35 districts which are further organized into 353 tehsils and 41,095 villages. On the basis of its physical features, Maharashtra is divided into three parts: Maharashtra Plateau, the Sahyadri Range and the Konkan Coastal Strip 392: • Maharashtra Plateau: The major physical characteristics of the state include many small plateaux and river valleys. In the north the plateau is flanked by Satpuda ranges, which run in the East-West direction in Maharashtra. The river Narmada flows along the north boundary of Maharashtra, and other major rivers like Krishna, Godavari, Bhima, Penganga-Wardha, and Tapi-Purna have carved the plateau in alternating broad river valleys and intervening highlands. • The Sahyadri Range: The Western Ghats of Maharashtra known as the Sahyadri mountain ranges have an average elevation of 1000-1200 m above the MSL. The Sahyadri hills run parallel to the seacoast, with many offshoots branching eastwards from the main ranges (Satmala, Ajanta, Harishchandra, Balaghat and Mahadeo). The special features are the hills of Trimbakeshwar, Matheran and the Mahableshwar plateau. Most of the rivers in Maharashtra originate in the Sahyadri and then divide to join the eastward and westward flowing rivers. These ranges are also characterised by a number of ghats, the important ones being Thal, Bor, Kumbharli, Amba, Phonda and Amboli. • The Konkan Coastal Strip: The narrow strip of coastal land between the Sahyadri and the Arabian Sea is called the Konkan coastal strip. It is about 50 km in width, wider in the north and narrowing down in the south. River creeks and branches of the Sahyadri, which reach right up to the coast, dissect this coastline. The important creeks in Konkan are Terekhol, Vijaydurg, Rajapuri, Raigad, Dabhol, Daramthar, Thane and Vasai. The rivers of Konkan rise from the cliffs of Sahyadri and have a short swift flow into the Arabian Sea. Some important rivers are Ulhas, Savitri, Vashishthi and Shastri. Agroclimatic zones 393 The state is divided into 9 agro-climatic sub-zones on the basis of rainfall, temperature, soil type and vegetation. The key features of the agro-climatic zones are described in Table A17-165. Table A17-165: Agro Climatic Zones of Maharashtra 394 Agroclimatic Districts Climate Average Soils Crops Zones Annual rainfall (mm) South Konkan Ratnagiri and Daily temperature 3105 mm in Laterite. Acidic Rice is the major crop Coastal Zone Sindhudurg. Area of above 20 C through 101 days. with pH 5.5-6.5. covering 39% of the (very high the zone is 13.20 out the year. May is Rainfall due Poor in cultivated area. Ragi is rainfall zone lakh ha and the area the hottest with to South phosphorous, rich the second most with laterite under culivation is temperature above West in nitrogen and important crop with 0.45 391 Census of India, 2001. 392 State of Environment Report: Maharashtra. Indian Gandhi Institute of Development Research. 393 Department of Agriculture, Government of Maharashtra. http://www.mahaagri.gov.in 394 Ranjit Kumar. Ailing Agricultural Productivity in Economically Fragile Region of India: An Analysis of Synergy between Public Investment and Farmers’ Capacity. Research Report 2010/01. Indian Institute of Soil Science. 263 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 soils) 3.5 lakh ha. 33 C. monsoon potassium. lakh ha under cultivation. from June to Vari is a minor hillmillet September. grown on slopes, pulses like horsegram are grown on residual moisture. Oilseeds include Niger/ Sesamum. Horticultural crops include Mango, Coconut, Arecanut, Cashewnut, Jackfruit, Banana and Pineapple. Spices include Clove, Nutmeg and Black pepper. North Konkan Thane and Raigad Average daily 2607 mm in Coarse and Rice is the major crop Coastal Zone districts. Area of the temperature is 22 to 87 days. 41% shallow. Acidic covering 40,600 lakh ha. (very high zone is 16.59 lakh ha 30 C. Minimum of the rainfall with pH 5.5 to 6.5. Vari covers 19,600 ha. rainfall zone with net sown area of temperature is 17 to is received in Rich in nitrogen, Other crops grown are with non- 4.69 lakh ha. 32% of 27 C. July. poor in Pulses (udid/ tur), laterite soils) land in this zone is phosphorus and Vegetables (brinjal, under forest. potassium. tomato), Oilseeds (sesamum, niger) and Fruits (banana, chicoo). Western Ghat Narrow strip Maximum 3000 to 6000 Warkas i.e., light 25% area is under forest. Zone extending from temperature ranges mm. laterite and reddish The principal crops are North to South along from 29-39 C. brown. Distinctly rice/ragi/ kodra and other the crest of the Minimum acidic, poor cereals, rabi jowar, Sahyadri ranges. temperature ranges fertility, low gram, groundnut, niger, Includes hilly terrain from 13-20 C. phosphorous and sugarcane. Area under of Kolahapur, Satara, potash content. spices is 353 ha and that Pune, Ahmednagar under fruits and and Nasik, and a vegetables is 2933 ha. small area of Sindhudurg. Altitude varies from 1000- 1900 m. Sub Montane Located on eastern Average maximum 700-2500 Soils are reddish Mainly dominated by Zone/ slopes of Sahyadri temperature is mm. Rains brown to black, kharif cereals, groundnut Transition ranges. Spreads over between 28-35 C received tending to lateritic. & sugarcane. Rabi crops Zone 1 19 tahsils of Nasik, and minimum 14-19 mostly from pH 6-7. Well are taken where there are Pune, Satara, Sangli C South West supplied in deep soils and moisture and Kolhapur. The monsoon. nitrogen, but low holding capacity. area of the zone in phosphorous Vegetables include measures 10,289 sq and potash. potato, onion, chillies, km. tomato and brinjal. Fruits include mango, banana, guava, cashew and grapes. Western It is a strip running Maximum Well Topography is The zone is Maharashtra parallel on the temperature is 40 C distributed plain. Soils greyish predominantly a kharif Plain Zone Eastern side of the and the minimum rainfall. 700 black. Moderately tract suitable for a single /Transition-2 Sub Montane Zone. temperature is 5 C. to 1200 mm. alkaline with pH rainfed crop. Principal This zone includes 7.4- 8.4. The crops grown are kharif tahsils of Dhule, lowest layer is and rabi jowar, bajra, Ahmednagar, Sangli 'Murum' strata. groundnut, wheat, and the central tahsils Fair in NPK sugarcane, udid, tur gram of Nasik, Pune, content. Well & ragi. Satara and Kolhapur. drained and good The geographical for irrigation. 264 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 area is 17.91 lakh ha and the net area sown is 8.86 lakh ha. Western This zone covers Very low rainfall Less than 750 General As the rainfall has Maharashtra geographical area of with uncertainty and mm in 45 topography is bimodal distribution, Scarcity Zone/ 73.23 lakh ha. The ill-distribution. days. Two having slope there are two cropping Scarcity Zone gross and net Occurance of peaks of between 1-2%. systems. During kharif, cultivated area is drought once in rainfall - Infiltration rate is shallow and poor 58.42 and 53.0 lakh three years. Dry June/July and 6-7 mm/hr. The moisture retentive soils ha respectively. spell varies from 2- September. soils are vertisol are cultivated. Medium 10 weeks. Water Bimodal with high content deep soils with moisture availability is for pattern of of clay. They are holding capacity are 60-140 days which rainfall. poor in nitrogen, diverted to rabi cropping. is affected due to low to medium in The crops grown include delayed onset and phosphate and bajra, jowar, groundnut, early cessation of well supplied in safflower, pulses, etc. monsoon. The potash. Productivity is rather low maximum in both the seasons. temperature is 41 C and the minimum is 14-15 C. Central Parts of Aurangabad, Maximum 700 to 900 Soil colour ranges Jowar is a predominant Maharashtra Jalna, Beed, temperature 41 C. mm. 75 % from black to red crop occupying 33% of Plateau Zone Osmanabad, Minimum rains received and the soil types gross cropped area. The /Assured Parbhani, Akola, temperature 21 C. in all districts include vertisols, other major crops are Rainfall Zone Amravati, Yavatmal, of the zone. entisols and cotton (22.55%), oilseeds Jalgaon, Dhule and inceptisols. The (5.17%) and pulses Solapur. Nanded, pH is 7-7.5. (7.63%). The other crops Latur, Buldhana. include kharif Area of this zone is jowar/bajra, followed by about 75 lakh ha with gram, safflower, pulses gross cropped area of (tur, mung, udid, gram 67.8 lakh ha. 9.90 % and lentils), oilseeds of the geographical (groundnut, sesamum area in this zone is safflower, niger), forest. sugarcane. Summer crops are taken depending on availability of irrigation. Central Wardha, parts of Maximum 1130 mm. Black soils. Cropping pattern Vidarbha Nagpur, Yavatmal, temperature 33-38 Medium to heavy involves Cotton, Kharif Zone /Zone of Chandrapur and C. Minimum in texture. Jowar, Tur, Wheat, other Moderate Aurangabad, Jalna, temperature 16-26 Alkaline. Low Pluses and Oilseeds. Rainfall Parbhani and C. lying areas are rich Nanded. This is the and fertile. largest agro climatic zone encompassing 49.88 lakh ha geographical area with 35.73 lakh ha net cropped area. Eastern Includes entire Mean maximum 950 to 1250 Soils are brown to Paddy is the predominant Vidharbha Bhandara and temperature varies mm on Red in colour. pH crop in Bhandara. Paddy Zone/ High Gadchiroli and parts from 32 to 37 C. Western side. 6 to 7. is followed by Rabi Rainfall Zone of Chandrapur and Minimum 1700 mm on Jowar, Pulses and Nagpur districts. temperature 15 to 24 extreme Oilseeds. Geographical area is C. Eastern side. 32.7 lakh ha with almost 50% under 265 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 forest. Gross crop area is 10.8 lakh ha. Land use 395 About 57% of the state's geographical area is cropped. Fallow lands account for about 8% of the area. Only about 13% of the net sown area is cropped more than once. Forests cover 17% of the state and only about 4% is under pastures and grazing land. Table A17-166: Land use in Maharashtra 396 Land use Area in ha Reporting area for land utilization statistics 30758300 Forests 5212200 Area under non-agricultural uses 1406900 Barren and unculturable land 1719800 Pastures and grazing land 1252400 Tree crops 248800 Cultivable wasteland 913700 Fallow land 1204100 Current fallows 1327100 Net sown area 17473300 Area sown more than once 2273800 Chart A17-10: Land use in Maharashtra 397 Table A17-166 gives details of land use for the districts of Maharashtra. Gadchiroli has 10,99,200 ha of forests (74% of its area). Thane, Chandrapur, Nandurbar, Nasik and Amravati each have more than 3,00,000 ha under forests. The districts with the least area under forests are Latur, Osmanabad, Jalna, Ratnagiri and Parbhani (with just about 1% of their area under forests). Akola and Parbhani have the highest proportion of cropped area (80% and 77%). The forested districts of Gadchiroli and Thane along with Raigad, Sindhudurg and Ratnagiri have the least proportion of area under crops (between 11 and 30%). The cropping intensity ratio for the state is 1.10. The districts with the highest cropping intensity are Parbhani (1.65) and Osmanabad (1.62) 395 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 396 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 397 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 266 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 while Ratnagiri, Nandurbar, Thane, Nasik, Dhule, Raigad and Buldhana have the lowest cropping intensity. Sindhudurg, Osmanabad and Ratnagiri have more than 20% of their area under fallows 398. Land degradation Wastelands are spread over an area of 38262.82 sq km in Maharashtra accounting for 12% of the state's geographic area. Of the total wasteland in the state, land with open scrub and dense scrub accounts for the largest proportion (64%) of the wasteland. Degraded forest (scrub) accounts for 26%. The map ___ depicts the spread of wastelands in the state. Table A17-167: Wastelands of Maharashtra (2010) 399 % of total Area in sq. km. wasteland area Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 547.03 1% Land with Dense Scrub 11251.44 29% Land with Open Scrub 13242.14 35% Waterlogged and Marshy land-Permanent 59.03 0% Waterlogged and Marshy land-Seasonal 1.76 0% Land affected by salinity/alkalinity-Moderate 41 0% Land affected by salinity/alkalinity-Strong 26.36 0% Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub dominated 10026.96 26% Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Agriculture 1189.18 3% Degraded pastures/grazing land 149.72 0% Degraded land under plantation crops 21.25 0% Sands-Riverine 3.65 0% Sands-Coastal 29.48 0% Mining wastelands 30.45 0% Industrial wastelands 0 0% Barren rocky area 1643.37 4% Total Wasteland 38262.82 100% Total Geographic Area 307690 Table A17-167 gives details of wastelands in the districts of Maharashtra 400. The districts of Pune (3522.99 sq km), Dhule, Nashik, Ahmednagar and Rayagad have more than 2000 sq km under wasteland. Soils Maharashtra’s soils are highly deficient in nutrients – phosphorous (P), potassium (K) and nitrogen (N). Excessive use of water for irrigation leading to increasing salinity of soils is a problem in certain areas (for example, due to irrigated sugarcane cultivation in the Kolhapur region where the fine-grained black soils do not allow penetration of water, leading to a build up of salinity). About 96.4 per cent of the state’s geographic area is subjected to various degrees of erosion. The soil profile reveals that the incidence of severe erosion is the highest in the Western Ghats (53.1 398 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 399 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 400 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 267 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 percent), followed by lower Maharashtra (11.5 percent). It is estimated that the quantum of soil erosion/ year in Maharashtra is 773.5 million tonnes 401. Water The highly variable rainfall in Maharashtra ranges from 400 to 6000mm and occurs in a four month period between June - Sept with the number of rainy days varying between 40 and 100. 40% of the state’s area is drought prone while about 7% of the area is flood prone. The estimated average- annual availability of water resources in Maharashtra consist of 164 km3 of surface water and 20.5 km3 of subsurface water 402. Rainfall Major portion of the state of Maharashtra is semi arid with three distinct seasons of which rainy season comprises of July to September. There are large variations in the quantity of rainfall within different parts of the state. Ghat and coastal districts receive an annual rainfall of 2000 mm but most part of the state lies in the rain shadow belt of the ghat with an average of 600 to 700 mm 403. The districts of Osmanabad, Beed and Wardha have the highest probability of moderate drought in the state (>20%). Surface water The quantity of inland water resources in Maharashtra is about 3.39 lakh ha, which accounts for only 4.93 per cent of the total inland water resources in the country. Since the state has more than 9 per cent of the country’s population, it indicates that the per capita water availability in the state is lower than the national average. Rivers and lakes are the main sources of surface water in the State. The water flow of two major river basins (Krishna and Godavari) in the state is below the national average. While the average annual surface water potential for an Indian river is 1869 km3/year, it is only 110.54 km3/year for the Godavari basin and 78.12 km3/year for the Krishna basin. Table A17-168: Major and Minor Rivers originating in Maharashtra Area Length (km) Catchment Area (km2) Major Rivers Godavari Nashik 1465 312812 Krishna Mahabaleshwar 1401 258948 Minor Rivers Vaitarna Nashik 171 3637 Dammanganga Nashik 143 2357 Ulhas Raigad 145 3864 Savitri Pune 99 2899 Sastri Ratnagiri 64 2174 Washishthi Ratnagiri 48 2239 Ground water The annual replenishable ground water resource in the state is estimated to be 32.96 BCM 404. The net annual ground water availability is 31.21 BCM. The annual ground water draft is estimated to be 15.09 BCM making the stage of ground water development 48%. Of the 353 administrative 401 State of Environment Report: Maharashtra. Indian Gandhi Institute of Development Research. 402 Maharashtra Water Resources Regulatory Authority, Government of Maharashtra. 403 Department of Agriculture, Government of Maharashtra. http://www.mahaagri.gov.in 404 BMC = Billion Cubic Meters 268 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 divisions (called blocks) in the state, 7 are classified 405 as Over Exploited, 1 as Critical and 23 as having Semi-critical groundwater status 406. As seen in Table A17-_, the stage of groundwater development ranges from 74% or above in Amravati, Sangli and Akola to 9% in Gadchiroli and 16% in Chandrapur 407. Groundwater quality in parts of the state is affected by Salinity, Fluoride, Iron and Nitrate. Of the 98098 habitations in the state, the quality of drinking water is affected by Iron in 901 habitations, by Salinity in 570 habitations, by Flouride in 1426 habitations and by Nitrate in 1225 habitations 408. Table A17-169 provides details of the districts and habitations affected by poor groundwater quality. Table A17-169: Districts affected by poor groundwater quality 409 Contaminant Affected districts Salinity (EC > 3000 µS/cm Akola, Buldhana,Jalna, Jalgaon ,Nasik, Satara at 25 ° C) Fluoride (>1.5 mg/l) Amravati, Chandrapur, Dhule, Gadchiroli, Gondia, Jalna, Nagpur, Nanded Iron (>1.0 mg/l) Ahmednagar, Amravati, Beed, Buldana, Chandrapur, Dhule, Gadchiroli, Jalna, Kohlapur, Latur, Nandurbar, Nashik, Osmanabad, Parbhani, Ratnagiri, Satara, Thane, Wardha, Washim, Yavatmal Nitrate (>45 mg/l) Ahemnagar, Akola, Amravati, Auragabad, Beed, Bhandara, Buldana, Chandrapur, Dhule, Gadchiroli, Gondia, Hingoli, Jalgaon, Jalna, Kohlapur, Latur, Nagpur, Nanded, Nandurbad, Nashik, Osmanabad, Parbhani, Pune, Sangli, Satara, Solapur, Wardha, Washim, Yavatmal Agriculture About 57% of the state's geographical area is cultivated (174.73 lakh ha out of 307.58 lakh ha). The main crops grown are Jowar, Rice, Bajri, Wheat, Pulses, Cotton and Sugarcane. Food grains account for about 64% of the gross cropped area. The productivity of crops in Maharashtra is less than that of the country. The districts of Aurangabad, Pune and Nashik have the highest production of cereals in the state. The production of pulses is the highest in Latur, Yawatmal and Amravati. The details on area, production and yield/ha of cereals and pulses in the state are provided in Table A17-170 410. 405 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category 406 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 407 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 408 Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, National Rural Drinking Water Programme, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://indiawater.gov.in/IMISWeb 409 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – Maharashtra. 410 Handbook of Basic Statistics of Maharashtra State 2006. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Maharashtra. http://mahades.maharashtra.gov.in. 269 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-170: Production of major crops in Maharashtra (2005-06) 411 Area Production (thousand ha) (thousand M tons) Rice 1515 2694 Wheat 933 1300 Jowar 4740 2713 Bajri 1434 932 Pulses 3432 2005 Sugar cane 501 38853 Cotton 2875 3160 Groundnut 442 410 Table A17-171: Productivity of major crops in Maharashtra 412 Productivity in kg/ha (2006-07) Maharashtra India Rice 1680 2131 Wheat 1325 2708 Jowar 817 844 Cotton 253 421 Red Gram 726 650 Groundnut 889 866 Sugar cane 74898 69022 Irrigation Only about 18% of the net sown area in the state is irrigated413. Wells are the source of irrigation for about 68% of the irrigated area while canals are the source of irrigation for about 31% area. Agro-chemicals As seen in the Table A17-172, the use of chemical fertilizers in Maharashtra is a little less than the national average. Compared to the desirable N:P:K ratio of 4 : 2 : 1 – the ratio in Maharashtra is 2.8 : 1.56 : 1. Table A17-172: Use of Chemical Fertilizers 2008-09 (kg/ha) 414 N P K Total Maharashtra 59.41 33.12 21.17 113.69 India 77.9 33.69 17.1 128.58 411 Handbook of Basic Statistics of Maharashtra State 2006. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Maharashtra. http://mahades.maharashtra.gov.in 412 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 413 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 414 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 270 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 The consumption of chemical pesticides in Maharashtra was about 8% of India's consumption of 37959 MT in 2006-07. However, it shows a decreasing trend over the past 5 years – while 3724 MT of pesticides were consumed in 2002-03, the consumption decreased to 3193 MT in 2006-07 415. Table A17-173: Trend in Pesticide Consumption in Maharashtra 2002-2007 416 Year Consumption of Pesticides (MT – technical grade) 2002-03 3724 2003-04 3385 2004-05 3030 2005-06 3198 2006-07 3193 Livestock Maharashtra had 8.8% of Cattle, 6.28% of buffaloes, 5.03% of sheep, 8.59% of goats and 3.25% of pig population of the country. The state has the sixth highest buffaloes’ population in the country. The poultry population is 7.76% of the country’s total poultry population, which is fourth in rank 417. Table A17-174: Livestock Population in Maharashtra ('000) 418 1997 2003 % change Crossbred cattle 2457 2776 12.98 Indigenous cattle 15615 13527 -13.37 Total cattle 18072 16303 -9.79 Buffaloes 6073 6145 1.19 Total Bovines 24145 22448 -7.03 Sheep 3368 3094 -8.14 Goats 11434 10684 -6.56 Pigs 567 439 -22.57 Others 117 98 -16.24 Total Livestock 39631 36763 -7.24 Over the period 1997-2003, the crossbred cattle increased by about 13% but the indigenous cattle decreased by the same proportion. The population of small ruminants also declined during this period. The total livestock in the state has decreased from 39.6 million to 36.76 million showing a decrease of 7.24%. The production of fodder in the state over the period 2000-2003 shows a increase from 1239.28 415 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 416 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 417 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 418 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 271 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 lakh tonnes to 1325.56 lakh tonnes. While the green fodder production from forests, permanent pastures, grazing lands and cultivated areas has increased during this period, the dry fodder production (crop residue of cereals, pulses and oil seeds) shows a decline 419. Table A17-175: Production of fodder in Maharashtra ('000 tonnes) 420 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Dry fodder 43915 44193 42390 Green fodder 80013 88363 97683 Total fodder 123928 132556 140073 Forests 421 The actual forest cover of the State is 50,650 sq km (recorded forest cover is 61,939 sq km) which is about 16.46% of its geographical area. About 79% of the state's forests are classified as reserved forests, 13% as protected forests and 7% as unclassed forests. The forest types in the state are Tropical Semi Evergreen, Tropical Moist Deciduous, Littoral and Swamp, Tropical Dry Deciduous, Tropical Thorn and Sublittoral Broad leaved Hill Forests. Table A17_ gives details of the forest cover in the districts of Maharashtra (also see Map A17_). As seen, the districts with the maximum forest cover are Gadchiroli and Ratnagiri. Gadchiroli, Chandrapur and Amravati have the maximum area under very dense forest 422. The Protected Areas in Maharashtra comprises of 35 sanctuaries and 6 National Parks. These constitute 5.01% of the geographical area of the State.The state has 3 Tiger Reserves (Melghat, Tadoba-Andhari and Pench) covering an area of 1660 sq km 423. Table A17- gives details of the protected areas of Maharashtra. Summary of key environmental issues Existing Issues Potential Interventions Poor soil fertility Soil and water conservation Soil salinity due to excessive irrigation Integrated nutrient management Water induced soil erosion Sustainable agriculture practices Low per capita water availability Water quality management Drought-prone areas Poor water quality in 4122 habitations (Iron, Salinity, Flouride, Nitrate) 419 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 420 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 421 India State of Forest 2009. Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 422 India State of Forest 2009. Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 423 India State of Forest 2009. Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 272 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 GUJARAT Gujarat is located between 20º1′ and 24º7′ N latitude and 68º4′ and 74º4′ E longitude. It has an area of 195,984 sq km. The state has a coastline of 1663 km – the longest of all states in India. Gujarat has a population of 50.05 million (less than 5% of India's population) with a density of 258 persons per sq km 424. The state is divided into 25 districts which are further organized into 170 blocks and 18,539 villages. Agroclimatic zones 425 The state is divided into 8 agro-climatic sub-zones on the basis of rainfall, temperature, soil type and vegetation. The key features of the agro-climatic zones are described in Table A17-176. Table A17-176: Agroclimatic zones of Gujarat Agroclimatic Districts Average Soils Crops Zones Annual rainfall (mm) South Area south of river 1500 and Deep black with few patches of coastal Cotton, Jowar, Paddy, Gujarat Ambika, Dangs, part of more alluvial, laterite and medium black soils. Vegetables, Horticultural (Heavy Valsad and Surat 0 to 25 cm (shallow to moderately deep) Crops, Sugarcane and Rainfall in hilly forest, 45 to 150 cm (deep to very Hill millets. Area) deep) in slope & flood plain alluvial area. Poor in Nitrogen, medium in Phosphorus and Potash. South Area between rivers 1000- Deep black clayey soils. 0 to 25 cm Cotton, Jowar, Wheat, Gujarat Ambica and Narmada, 1500 (shallow to moderatly deep) in hilly Sugarcane, Horticultural part of Valsad, Surat and forest. 45 to 150 cms (deep to very deep) Crops. Bharuch in predominant slope and flood plain alluvial area. Poor in Nitrogen, medium in Phosphorus and Potash. Middle Area between rivers 800-1000 Deep black, medium black to loamy sand Cotton, Bajra, Tobacco, Gujarat Narmada and (Goradu) soils. Poor in Nitrogen, medium Pulses, Wheat, Paddy, Vishwamitri including in Phosphorus and high in Potash. Maize, Jowar and Panchmahals, Vadodara, Sugarcane. part of Bharuch and Kheda North Area between rivers 625-875 Sandy loam to sandy soils. Deep to very Tobacco, Wheat, Jowar, Gujarat Vishwamitri and deep (more than 90 cm). Poor in Minor Millet, Sabarmati, part of Nitrogen, medium in Phosphorus and Vegetables. Spices and Ahmedabad, Mehsana, Potash. Condiments, Oil Seeds. Banaskantha, Sabarkantha and Kheda. Bhal and Area around the gulf of 625-1000 Medium black, poorly drained and saline. Groundnut, Cotton, Coastal Area Khambhat and Bhal, Deep to very deep (more than 90 cm). Bajra, Wheat, Pulse, and coastal region in Poor in Nitrogen, medium in Phosphorus Jowar. Bharuch and Surat, part and Potash. of Ahmedabad, Bhavnagar, Surendranagar. South Junagadh, part of 625-750 Shallow medium black Groundnut, Cotton, Pulse Saurashtra Bhavnagar, Amreli, calcareous soils. Moderate to deep (25-75 s, Wheat, Bajra, Jowar Rajkot cm). Medium to high in Nitrogen, low in and Sugarcane. 424 Census of India, 2001. 425 Agriculture and Cooperation Department, Government of Gujarat. http://agri.gujarat.gov.in/informations/state_agri_profile.htm 273 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Phosphorus and high in Potash. North Jamnagar, part of Rajkot, 400-700 Shallow, medium black. Moderately deep Groundnut, Cotton, Saurashtra Surendranagar, to deep 30 to 80 cm. Nitrogen medium to Wheat, Bajra, Jowar Bhavnagar high, phosphorus low, Potash low to and Sugarcane. medium. North West Kutch, part of Rajkot, 250-500 Sandy and saline soils. Moderate to deep Cotton, Jowar, Zone Surendranagar, Mehsana, (25 to 75 cm). Low in Nitrogen, Groundnut, Bajra and Banaskantha and Phosphorus and Potash. Wheat. Ahmedabad Land use 426 About 51.65% of the state's geographical area is cropped. Fallow lands account for about 3.4% of the area. Only about 20.47% of the net sown area is cropped more than once. Forests cover 9.71% of the state and only about 4.51% is under pastures and grazing land. Table A17-177: Land use in Gujarat (2006-07) 427 Land use Area in ha Reporting area for land utilization statistics 18866200 Forests 1833400 Area under non-agricultural uses 1163200 Barren and unculturable land 2595000 Pastures and grazing land 852500 Tree crops 3500 Cultivable wasteland 1975800 Fallow land 19200 Current fallows 622700 Net sown area 9800900 Area sown more than once 2006500 Chart A17-11: Land use in Gujarat (2006-07) 428 Table A17-177 gives details of land use for the districts of Gujarat. Kachch has the largest extent of land under forests (306800 ha amounting to 7% of the district area). Junagarh has 175900 ha of 426 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 427 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 428 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 274 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 forest (20% of its area) and the Dangs has 159800 ha of forested area (70% of its area). The districts with the least area under forests are Anand, Gandhinagar, Mehsana and Kheda. Mahsana, Kheda, Gandhinagar, Amreli, Banaskantha and Ahmedabad have the highest proportion of cropped area (more than 70%). The districts of Kachchh (14%) and the Dangs (25%) have the least proportion of area under crops. The cropping intensity ratio for the state is 1.20. The districts with the highest cropping intensity are Anand (1.58), Jungarh (1.46) and Dahod (1.44) while the Dangs (1.02) and Valsad (1.04) have the lowest cropping intensity 429. Land degradation Wastelands are spread over an area of 21350.38 sq km in Gujarat accounting for 11% of the state's geographic area. Of the total wasteland in the state, land with open scrub and dense scrub accounts for the largest proportion (85%) of the wasteland. Degraded forest (scrub) accounts for 7%. The map ___ depicts the spread of wastelands in the state. Table A17-178: Wastelands of Gujarat (2010) 430 % of total Area in sq. km. wasteland area Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 392.02 2% Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 1.73 Land with Dense Scrub 11614.83 54% Land with Open Scrub 6658.03 31% Waterlogged and Marshy land-Seasonal 80.59 0% Land affected by salinity/alkalinity-Moderate 696.55 3% Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub 1413.86 7% Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Agriculture 155.35 1% Degraded pastures/grazing land 44.19 0% Degraded land under plantation crops 53.06 0% Sands-Coastal 75.38 0% Mining wastelands 15.29 0% Barren rocky area 149.49 1% Total Wasteland 21350.38 100% Total Geographic Area 196024 Table A17-178 gives details of wastelands in the districts of Gujarat 431. The district of Kachch has the largest extent of wasteland in the state (7651.1 sq km). The districts of Bhavnagar, Rajkot, Surendranagar, Valsad, Jamnagar and Bharuch have more than 1000 sq km under wasteland. Mehsana, Kheda, Dangs and Gandhinagar have the least extent of wasteland in the state (less than 500 sq km). Soils Only about 20 per cent of the state has a soil depth of over 150 cm, while another 15 percent or so has a soil depth of 100 to 150 cm. Coastal alluvial soil appears in very narrow bands in Southern Gujarat and on the south-eastern and south-western coasts of the Saurashtra peninsula. The texture of the soil is predominantly sandy, but silt of marine alluvial origin is also present. These areas are mostly used as grazing grounds. Black soil is the most common, especially in Saurashtra. The soils face erosion, stoniness and salinity as the major constraints for their development and conservation in various landforms and physiographic units. 429 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 430 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 431 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 275 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 The soil resources of Gujarat are poor, with most of the talukas categorised as having low productivity. About 41.5% of the state’s geographical area is degraded (8133 out of 19602 thousand ha). Of this, 5207 thousand ha are affected by water erosion and 443 thousand hectares by wind erosion. Water logging affects 523 thousand ha while salinity/alkalinity affects 294 thousand ha 432. Gujarat’s soils are highly deficient in nutrients – the majority of the state has poor status of Nitrogen, low/medium status of Phosphorous and medium/high status of Potassium 433. Water 434 Water resources in Gujarat are concentrated primarily in the southern and central part of the mainland. Saurashtra and Kutch in the northern mainland, with exceptionally high irrigation needs, have limited surface and groundwater resources 435. The estimated total fresh water availability in the State of Gujarat is 54,593 MCM per year. South and Central Gujarat account for 69.5 per cent of the total renewable freshwater of the state, while Saurashtra, North Gujarat and Kachchh account for 17, 11.2 and 2.3 per cent respectively. The per capita freshwater availability is 1137 m3 per year for the whole state, while on a regional basis it is 1,933 m3 in South and Central Gujarat, 734 m3 in Saurashtra, 875 m3 in Kachchh and 427 m3 in North Gujarat. Rainfall 436 Most of the rain (90-95% of the annual total) falls during the period of June to September, when the southwest monsoon prevails. There are wide variations in mean annual rainfall. It varies from a minimum of about 300 mm in the western part of Kachchh to nearly 2000 mm in the Dangs, with Saurashtra and North Gujarat averaging about 600 to 700 mm. The incidence and distribution of rainfall, particularly in Saurashtra and Kutch regions and in the northern part of Gujarat region, is highly erratic. As a result, these regions are very often subject to drought. In south Gujarat region, rainfall distribution is more or less uniform, with occasional heavy rainfall. Surface water Surface water flows contribute to about two-thirds of the total fresh water potential of the state. The flows are concentrated in the relatively short monsoon season. There are large fluctuations in annual flows. The Gujarat mainland has 17 rivers, Suarashtra has 71 and Kuchchh has 97 rivers. Ground water The annual replenishable ground water resource in the state is estimated to be 15.81 BCM 437. The net annual ground water availability is 15.02 BCM. The annual ground water draft is estimated to be 11.49 BCM making the stage of ground water development 76%. Of the 223 administrative divisions (called talukas) in the state, 31 are classified 438 as Over Exploited, 12 as Critical, 69 as 432 National Bureau of Soil Survey & Land Use Planning, Nagpur, 2005. 433 Indian Institute of Soil Science. www.iiss.nic.in 434 State Environmental Action Programme – Gujarat. Executive Summary. The Gujarat Ecology Commission (GEC), Government of Gujarat, 2003. World Bank assisted Environment Management Capacity Building – Technical Assistance Project. 435 State Agriculture Profile. Agriculture and Cooperation Department, Government of Gujarat. 436 State Agriculture Profile. Agriculture and Cooperation Department, Government of Gujarat. 437 BMC = Billion Cubic Meters 438 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category 276 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Semi-critical and 97 as having Safe groundwater status. 14 talukas are affected with salinity 439. As seen in Table A17-179, the districts with the highest groundwater development are Gandhinagar (184%), Mehsana (151%), Patan (135%), Banaskantha (118%) and Amreli (108%). The districts with the lowest groundwater development are the Dangs (21%), Narmada (32%), Surat (37%), Valsad (44%) and Navsari (47%) 440. Groundwater quality in parts of the state is affected by Salinity, Fluoride, Chloride, Iron and Nitrate. Of the 34415 habitations in the state, the quality of drinking water is affected by Flouride in 186 habitations, by salinity in 170 habitations and by Nitrate in 191 habitations 441. Table A17-179 provides details of the districts and habitations affected by poor groundwater quality. Table A17-179: Districts affected by poor groundwater quality 442 Contaminant Affected districts Salinity (EC > 3000 µS/cm at 25 ° C) Ahmdabad, Amreli, Anand, Bharuch, Bhavnagar, Banaskantha, Dohad, Porbandar, Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kachchh, Mehsana, Navsari, Patan, Panchmahals, Rajkot, Sabarkantha, Surendranagar, Surat, Vadodara. Fluoride (>1.5 mg/l) Ahemdabad, Amreli, Anand, Banaskantha, Bharuch, Bhavnagar, Dohad, Junagadh, Kachchh, Mehsana, Narmada, Panchmahals, Patan, Rajkot, Sabarkantha, Surat, Surendranagar,Vadodara. Chloride (> 1000 mg/l) Ahmedabad, Amreli, Bharuch, Bhavnagar, Banaskantha, Porbandar, Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kachchh, Dohad, Patan, Panchmahals, Sabarkantha, Surendranagar, Surat, Vadodara, Rajkot. Iron (>1.0 mg/l) Ahemdabad, Banaskantha, Bhavnagar, Kachchh, Mehsana, Narmada. Nitrate (>45 mg/l) Ahemdabad, Amreli, Anand, Banaskantha, Bharuch, Bhavnagar, Dohad, Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kachchh, Kheda, Mehsana, Narmada, Navsari, Panchmahals, Patan, Porbandar, Rajkot, Sabarkantha, Surat, Surendranagar,Vadodara, Agriculture About 51.65% of the state's geographical area is cultivated (98 lakh ha out of 188.66 lakh ha). The main crops grown are Wheat, Paddy, Sugarcane, Ground nut, Cotton, Castor, Bajra, and Pulses together covering 7449176 ha (63% of the gross cropped area) in the Kharif and Rabi seasons 443. Table A17-180: Production of major crops in Gujarat (2006-07) 444 Area Production (million ha) (million tons) Paddy 0.73 1.39 Wheat 1.20 3.00 Jowar 0.12 0.10 439 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 440 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 441 Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, National Rural Drinking Water Programme, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://indiawater.gov.in/IMISWeb 442 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – Gujarat. 443 Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of Gujarat. http://agri.gujarat.gov.in/informations/sap_final.pdf 444 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 277 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Maize 0.52 0.36 Bajra 0.94 1.02 Sugarcane 0.21 15.63 Groundnut 1.77 1.44 Cotton 2.39 8.79 The productivity of Bajra and of cash crops such as cotton and sugarcane in Gujarat is higher than the average for the country. Table A17-181: Productivity of major crops in Gujarat 445 Productivity in kg/ha (2006-07) Gujarat India Rice 1894 2131 Wheat 2498 2708 Bajra 1088 886 Maize 698 1912 Jowar 831 844 Cotton 625 421 Groundnut 809 866 Sugar cane 13037 69022 The details on area, production and yield/ha of cereals and pulses in the state are provided in Table A17-181. Irrigation About 36.33% (3567579 ha) of the cultivated land is irrigated. Anand has 89.49% of land under ‘irrigated’ category. However, the irrigation facility is very poor in Jamnagar (15.67%), Panchmahal (17.28%) and Surendranagar (17.62%) districts 446. Wells are the source of irrigation for about 78.03% of the irrigated area (tubewells 26.74%, other wells 51.29%). Canals contribute to 18.62% of the irrigated area. Tanks are the source of irrigation for less than 1% of the irrigated area 447. Agro-chemicals As seen in Table A17-182, the use of chemical fertilizers in Gujarat is more than the national average. Compared to the desirable N:P:K ratio of 4 : 2 : 1 – the ratio in Gujarat is 5.8 : 2.5 : 1. Table A17-182: Use of Chemical Fertilizers 2008-09 (kg/ha) 448 N P K Total Gujarat 87.59 38.12 15.00 140.71 India 77.9 33.69 17.1 128.58 445 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 446 Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of Gujarat. http://agri.gujarat.gov.in/informations/sap_final.pdf 447 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 448 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 278 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 The consumption of chemical pesticides in Gujarat was about 7% of India's consumption of 37959 MT in 2006-07. However, it shows a decreasing trend over the past 5 years – while 4500 MT of pesticides were consumed in 2002-03, the consumption decreased to 2670 MT in 2006-07 449. Table A17-183: Trend in Pesticide Consumption in Gujarat 2002-2007 450 Year Consumption of Pesticides (MT – technical grade) 2002-03 4500 2003-04 4000 2004-05 2900 2005-06 2700 2006-07 2670 Livestock Gujarat had 4.01% of Cattle, 7.29% of buffaloes, 3.35% of sheep, 3.65% of goats and 2.6% of pig population of the country. The poultry population is 1.67% of the country’s total poultry population 451. Table A17-184: Livestock Population in Gujarat ('000) 452 1997 2003 % change Crossbred cattle 342 639 86.84 Indigenous cattle 6406 6785 5.92 Total cattle 6748 7424 10.02 Buffaloes 6285 7140 13.60 Total Bovines 13033 14564 11.75 Sheep 2158 2062 -4.45 Goats 4386 4541 3.53 Pigs 198 351 77.27 Camels 65 53 -18.46 Others 89 84 -5.62 Total Livestock 19929 21655 8.66 Over the period 1997-2003, the crossbred cattle increased by about 87%. The population of sheep decreased by 4.45% while that of goats increased by 3.53%. The total livestock in the state has increased from 19.9 million to 21.6 million showing an increase of 8.66%. The production of fodder in the state over the period 2000-2003 shows an increase from 686.02 lakh tonnes to 728.94 lakh tonnes. While the green fodder production from forests, permanent pastures, grazing lands and cultivated areas has increased during this period, the dry fodder production (crop residue of cereals, pulses and oil seeds) does not show a consistent increase 453. 449 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 450 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 451 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 452 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 453 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 279 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-185: Production of fodder in Gujarat ('000 tonnes) 454 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Dry fodder 12444 21515 15250 Green fodder 56158 56895 57643 Total fodder 68602 78411 72894 Forests 455 The actual forest cover of the State is 14,620 sq km (recorded forest cover is 18,927 sq km) which is about 7.46% of its geographical area. About 74.61% of the state's forests are classified as reserved forests, 2.53% as protected forests and 22.86% as unclassed forests. The forest types in the state are Tropical Moist Deciduous, Littoral and Swamp, Tropical Dry Deciduous and Tropical Thorn Forests. Table A17- gives details of the forest cover in the districts of Gujarat (also see Map A17-). As seen, the districts with the maximum forest cover are the Dangs, Narmada and Valsad. The Protected Areas in Gujarat comprises of 24 sanctuaries and 4 National Parks. These constitute 8.84% of the geographical area of the State.The Gir forests in Saurashtra are home to the endangered Asiatic Lion. Table A17- gives details of the protected areas of Gujarat. Summary of key environmental issues Existing Issues Potential Interventions Poor soil fertility Soil and water conservation Soil salinity Integrated nutrient management Soil erosion Sustainable agriculture practices Forest degradation Water quality management Pollution of water bodies Overexploitation of ground water Poor water quality in 547 habitations ( Salinity, Flouride, Nitrate) 454 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 455 India State of Forest 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 280 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 WEST BENGAL West Bengal is located between 21º20′ and 27º32′ N latitude and 85º50′ and 89º52′ E longitude. It has an area of 88,752 sq km. West Bengal has a population of 80.22 million (7.8% of India's population) with a density of 904 persons per sq km456. The state is divided into 19 districts, 341 blocks and 40,782 villages. Agroclimatic zones The state is divided into 8 agro-climatic sub-zones on the basis of rainfall, temperature, soil type and vegetation. The key features of the agro-climatic zones are described in Table A17-186. Table A17-186: Agroclimatic zones of West Bengal Zone Climate Districts Covered Soil Brief Description Northern Sub-tropical Darjeeling Acidic. Soils on steep hill Top hill section is mostly under Hill humid with (excluding Siliguri slopes are shallow with poor forest, midhill section is occupied rainfall varying sub-division) and water retention capacity and by tea plantations and patchy from 2500-3500 the northern fringe excessively drained with agricultural cultivation on narrow mm. of Jalpaiguri. Total high potential for erosion. terraces. Cultivation on table top area falling under Soils of foothill slopes and bench terraces extends down from Maximum and this zone is valleys are moderately deep midhill upto the valley. About 30 minimum approximately and well drained with per cent of the land in this region is temperature is 2,42,779 ha. moderate erosion. available for cultivation. 19.5ºC and Agriculture is rainfed. Despite 4.8ºC (annual). moderately good soil fertility, crop yields are poor due to soil acidity, high runoff and limiting soil depth. Terai- Hot, moist, sub- Alluvial plain of Moderate to strongly acidic. The zone is composed of a strip of Teesta humid with Jalpaiguri and Soil is deep, fine to medium high terraces of older alluvium in Alluvial rainfall between Cooch Behar, in texture, turns lighter with the north followed by extensive 2000 to 3000 Siliguri subdivisiondepth, and contains moderate recent alluvium in flood plains of mm. of Darjeeling and level of organic matter the rivers Teesta, Mahananda, Islampur sub- without appreciable Jaldhaka, Torsa. About 20 per cent Maximum and division of North mineralization. pH range of the land is prone to inundation minimum Dinajpur. from highly acidic to and water logging. Sand deposition temperature alkaline. The soil is low in is a problem. Agriculture of the 32.3ºC and nutrients such as Phosphate, region is mostly rainfed, 12.8ºC (annual). Potash, and certain micronutrients. Gangetic Tropical humid Nadia and parts of Mostly neutral. Soil is very This zone is composed of alluvium Alluvial with rainfall Burdhaman, deep, fine to medium in carried by river Ganga and its between 1350 to Dakshin Dinajpur, texture, neutral to mildly tributaries and can be broadly 1650 mm. Hooghly, Malda, alkaline high, Nitrogen- classified into Ganga upland with Murshidabad and Phosphorous status medium relatively matured alluvial soil, Maximum and North and South 24 to low and Potash status Ganga flat land with matured soil minimum Parganas. The total medium to high, external and Ganga upland with relatively temperature area covered within drainage is medium to slow fresh-alluvium. 35ºC and 15.6ºC this zone is and internal drainage is (annual). approximately moderate. 15,30,415 ha. Vindhya Hot moist sub- Western parts of Acidic to neutral. Soils here The zone is broadly composed of Alluvial humid type with Murshidabad and are generally deep and almost level to gently sloping old rainfall between Hooghly, eastern texture is medium fine and terraces of original Vindhiya rivers. 1500-2000 mm parts of Birbhum mostly acidic in soil About 10 per cent of the area is and Bankura, reaction. pH of the soil susceptible to flooding. Rice is the 456 Census of India, 2001. 281 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Maximum and central parts of increases with depth. The major crop. In addition, some of the minimum Burdhaman and soil of the zone is more akin best potato growing land in all of temperature Medinipur and to Vindhiya Alluvial Zone, India is located in this region. 35.37ºC and northern parts of however, eastern fringe of 15.16ºC Howrah. The total Malda district and some (annual) area covered under sporadic areas of Dinajpur this zone is are of red and laterite soil. approximately The soil has organic matter 17,53,757 ha. and phosphate and moderate potash. Coastal Moist, sub- Howrah and Saline (pH 7 to 8.5). Soil is The zone is primarily low lying, Saline humid having Medinipur, fine textured with varying drainage congested delta flat facing rainfall between Southern portions grades of soil salinity, which Bay of Bengal. Large section of this 1600-1800 mm of North and South increases with depth. It is region is chronically affected by 24 Parganas. The internally poor to saline seawater intrusion through Maximum and total area of this imperfectly drained, and, tidal inflow. This is primarily a minimum zone is external drainage is very mono-cropped area (rice). temperature approximately slow. The soil has significant 37ºC and 22.7ºC 14,56,879 ha. presence of Magnesium and (annual) Potassium content makes soil become hard, dry and non-porous when wet impeding drainage. Undulating Hot moist sub- Part of the Gangetic Upland soils prone to acidity The region is primarily undulating Red and humid and hot Plain covering the and are deficient in nutrients. with mounds and valleys. In some Lateritic dry sub-humid districts of Malda areas, upland soils are prone to with rainfall (small pockets), acidity and poor in organic matter. ranging from West Dinajpur and The lands in lower situations are 1100-1400 mm western parts of fertile whereas those in higher Burdhaman, situations are deficient in available Maximum and Birbhum, Bankura, plant nutrients and susceptible to minimum Purulia and erosion hazards. Due to poor temperature Medinipur. The rainwater retention capacity, there is 27ºC and 14.8ºC total area of this severe runoff and soil loss in upland (annual) zone is situations. Agriculture of the region approximately is mostly rain dependent. Rice is the 24,84,244 ha. major crop. Land use 457 About 61% of the state's geographical area is cropped. Fallow lands account for about 4% of the area. About 84.13% of the net sown area is cropped more than once. Forests cover 14% of the state. Table A17-187: Land use in West Bengal (2007-08) 458 Land use Area in ha Reporting area for land utilization statistics 8684113 Forests 1173669 Area under non-agricultural uses 1761918 Barren and unculturable land 21519 Pastures and grazing land 6105 Tree crops 61315 Cultivable wasteland 32853 Fallow land 20183 Current fallows 310778 Net sown area 5295773 Area sown more than once 4455735 457 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 458 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 282 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Chart A17-12: Land use in West Bengal (2007-08) 459 Table A17-187 gives details of land use for the districts of West Bengal. The districts with the largest proportion of area under forests are South 24 Parganas (45%), Darjeeling (58%) and Jalpaiguri (29%). The districts of South 24 Parganas, Murshidabad, Burdwan and Midnapur North have the highest area under crops (more than 3,50,000 ha). The cropping intensity ratio for the state is 1.8. The districts with the highest cropping intensity (more than 2.4) are Nadia, Murshidabad and Hooghly while Purulia, Darjeeling and South 24 Parganas have the lowest cropping intensity (less than 1.5) 460. Land degradation Wastelands are spread over an area of 1994.41 sq km in West Bengal accounting for 2.25% of the state's geographic area. Of the total wasteland in the state, land with open scrub and dense scrub accounts for the largest proportion (65%) of the wasteland. Degraded forest (scrub) accounts for 26.6%. Table A17-188: Wastelands of West Bengal (2010) 461 Area in sq. km. % of TGA Gullied and/or ravinous land-Medium 20.56 0.02 Gullied and/or ravinous land-Deep 0.58 0 Land with Dense Scrub 497.68 0.56 Land with Open Scrub 802.46 0.9 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Permanent 12.55 0.01 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Seasonal 7.37 0.01 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land-Scrub dominated 534.85 0.6 Degraded land under plantation crop 2.4 0 Sands-Riverine 16.1 0.02 Sands-Coastal 7.94 0.01 Mining wastelands 25.09 0.03 Industrial wastelands 2.72 0 Barren rocky area 64.12 0.07 Total 1994.41 2.25 Total Geographic Area (TGA) 88752 459 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 460 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 461 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 283 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-188 gives details of wastelands in the districts of West Bengal 462. The districts with the largest extent of wastelands are Puruliya (604.55 sq km), Bankura (533.55 sq km) and Mednipur (392.48 sq km). Soils 463 Laterite and lateritic soils occur in the districts of Birbhum, Burdwan, Bankura and Midnapur. The land is undulating and soil erosion varies from slight to very high. The soils are acidic (pH 5.5 to 6.5), poor in calcium, organic matter, and available phosphate. The top soils are poor in iron due to leaching and accumulation takes place in deep subsoils. These soils are responsive to manuring with phosphate and nitrogenous fertilisers. Red soils occur in Birbhum, Burdwan, Bankura, Midnapur, Malda and West Dinajpore. The soils are coloured red or brown and have variable thickness. These soils are mildly acidic (pH 6.0 to 6.6), poor in calcium, organic matter, and available phosphate. Iron is poor on the top and increases with depth. Soil responds well to nitrogenous and phosphatic manuring. Alluvial soils originated from Ganga or Vindhya alluvium. They are found in Murshidabad, Birbhum, Bankura, Burdwan, Hooghly, Midnapore, Malda, 24 Parganas and Nadia. The pH status ranges from neutral to midly alkaline. Coastal soils are of tidal origin. They are rich in plant nutrients. They include saline soils, non- saline alkali soils, saline alkali soils and degraded alkali soils and are found in the districts of 24 Parganas, Midnapore and Howrah. Terai soils are derived from the Himalayan region and are brought down by the hilly rivers (Teesta, Mahananda, Torsa, Jaldaka). They are found in Jalpaiguri, Darjeeling and Cooch Behar. These soils are light in texture and are highly porous. Due to severe leaching by rain and presence of good amount of organic matter, the soils are acidic (pH 4.7 to 5.8) and are poor in plant nutrients. Colluvial and Skeletal soils are derived from the hills which are extension of the Chottanagpur plateau. They contain large amounts of coarse sand and gravel. They occur in the western part of Birbhum and Bankura – an area with undulating topography. Water Rainfall The average annual rainfall in the state is 2074 mm. Annual rainfall is higher in the mountain region in the north of the state. The northern districts of Darjeeling and Jalpaiguri usually record a rainfall of 4000-5320 mm. The drier western region, with the districts of Purulia, Bankura and Birbhum record a rainfall of 1300 mm. Most of the rainfall is during the summer months, i.e. from June to September. The coastal areas of the State experience fierce cyclonic storms during pre and post monsoon periods. Droughts of different intensity are common in some areas while floods are regular phenomena in others. Surface water About 13.29 mham (million hectare meter) of surface water is available in West Bengal. Since most of the rivers are dependent on rain, a poor monsoon leads to water scarcity in the state especially during summer season. Out of the total quantity only 5.31 mham is utilisable for various purposes such as agriculture, industrial, domestic, etc. Apart from rivers, the state has a total of 5.45 lakh hectare of inland water resources which include a large number of ponds, reservoirs, lakes, etc. 462 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 463 P. Chakravarti and S. Chakravarti. Soils of West Bengal. 1959. 284 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-189: Amount of surface water by basins of West Bengal 464 Basin Sub-basin Surface Water (MCM) % of Total Ganges 61532 46.30 Left Bank Tributaries 14855 11.18 Mahananda 13334 10.03 Punarbhaba 1034 0.78 Atrai 487 0.37 South Bengal Distributaries 21279 16.01 Jalangi 3707 2.79 Bhagirathi 13643 10.26 Tidal Rivers 3929 2.96 Right Bank Tributaries 25398 19.11 Pagla-Bansloi 591 0.44 Brahmani-Dwarka 1957 1.47 Mayurakshi 2590 1.95 Ajoy 2509 1.89 Damodar 8924 6.71 Darakeswar 3330 2.51 Silabati 2068 1.56 Kangsabati 3233 2.43 Kaliaghai 818 0.62 Rupnarain 1188 0.89 Haldi 327 0.25 Rasulpur 401 0.30 Pichabhanga 462 0.35 Brahmaputra 52063 39.17 Sankosh 1365 1.03 Raidak 6666 5.02 Torsa 11908 8.96 Teesta 32124 24.17 Subarnarekha & Subarnarekha 3645 2.74 Dolong Total 132905 100.00 Ground water The annual replenishable ground water resource in the state is estimated to be 30.36 BCM 465. The net annual ground water availability is 27.46 BCM. The annual ground water draft is estimated to be 11.65 BCM making the stage of ground water development 42%. Of the 341 administrative divisions (called block) in the state, none are classified 466 as Over Exploited, 1 as Critical, 37 as 464 http://cgwb.gov.in 465 BMC = Billion Cubic Meters 466 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category 285 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Semi-critical and the rest as having Safe groundwater status 467. As seen in Table A17-190, the districts with the highest groundwater development are Nadia (88%), Murshidabad (88%) and North 24 Parganas (71%). The districts with the lowest groundwater development are Jalpaiguri (4%) and Darjeeling (5%) 468. Groundwater quality in parts of the state is affected by Salinity, Fluoride, Chloride, Iron, Nitrate and Arsenic. Of the 95394 habitations in the state, the quality of drinking water is affected by Flouride in 959 habitations, by Arsenic in 3316 habitations, by Iron in 3546 habitations, and by salinity in 513 habitations 469. The Table A17-190 provides details of the districts and habitations affected by poor groundwater quality. Table A17-190: Districts affected by poor groundwater quality 470 Contaminant Affected districts Salinity (EC > 3000 µS/cm at 25 ° C) Haora, Medinipur, S 24 Parganas Fluoride (>1.5 mg/l) Bankura, Bardhaman, Birbhum, Dakhin Dinajpur, Malda, Nadia, Purulia, Uttar Dinajpur Chloride (> 1000 mg/l) S-24 Parganas, Haora Iron (>1.0 mg/l) Bankura, Bardhaman, Birbhum, Dakhin Dinajpur, E. Midnapur, Howrah, Hugli, Jalpaiguri, Kolkatta, Murshidabad, N 24 Parganas, Nadia, S 24 Parganas, Uttar Dinajpur, West Midnapur Nitrate (>45 mg/l) Bankura, Bardhaman Arsenic (>0.05 mg/l ) Bardhaman, Hooghly, Howrah, Malda, Murshidabad, Nadia, North 24 Parganas, South 24 Parganas Agriculture West Bengal possesses about 14 percent of the nation’s rice cultivation area. The other major crops grown include high value commercial crops like jute and tea, potato, and significant amount of fruits and vegetables. About 61% of the state's geographical area is cultivated (52.95 lakh ha out of 86.84 lakh ha). Table A17-191: Production of major crops in West Bengal (2006-07) 471 Area (million ha) Production (million tons) Paddy 5.69 14.75 Wheat 0.35 0.80 Maize 0.09 0.25 Rapeseed and Mustard 0.42 0.34 Jute 0.61 8.51 Sugarcane 0.02 1.27 Potato 407.9 (‘000 ha) 5052 (‘000 ha) Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category 467 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 468 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 469 Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, National Rural Drinking Water Programme, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://indiawater.gov.in/IMISWeb 470 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – West Bengal. 471 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 286 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 The productivity of Rice, Maize, Jute and Sugarcane in West Bengal is higher than the average for the country. Table A17-192: Productivity of major crops in West Bengal 472 Productivity in kg/ha (2006-07) West Bengal India Paddy 2593 2131 Wheat 2282 2708 Maize 2968 1912 Rapeseed and Mustard 803 1095 Jute 2528 2170 Sugarcane 76307 69022 Potato 12385 14903 The details on area, production and yield/ha of cereals and pulses in the state are provided in Table A17-192 473. Irrigation About 56.76% (3006000 ha) of the cultivated land is irrigated. Tubewells are the source of irrigation for about 56% of the irrigated area. Canals contribute to 22.35% of the irrigated area. Tanks are the source of irrigation for 9.6% of the irrigated area 474. Agro-chemicals As seen in Table A17-193, the use of chemical fertilizers in West Bengal is more than the national average. Compared to the desirable N:P:K ratio of 4 : 2 : 1 – the ratio in West Bengal is 1.7 : 1 : 1. Table A17-193: Use of Chemical Fertilizers 2008-09 (kg/ha) 475 N P K Total West Bengal 72.47 43.12 42.10 157.69 India 77.9 33.69 17.1 128.58 The consumption of chemical pesticides in West Bengal was about 10% of India's consumption of 37959 MT in 2006-07. It shows an increasing trend over the past 5 years – while 3000 MT of pesticides were consumed in 2002-03, the consumption increased to 3950 MT in 2006-07 476. 472 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 473 Handbook of Basic Statistics of Maharashtra State 2006. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Maharashtra. http://mahades.maharashtra.gov.in. 474 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 475 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 476 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 287 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-194: Trend in Pesticide Consumption in West Bengal 2002-2007 477 Year Consumption of Pesticides (MT – technical grade) 2002-03 3000 2003-04 3900 2004-05 4000 2005-06 4250 2006-07 3950 Livestock West Bengal had 10.21% of Cattle, 1.11% of buffaloes, 2.48% of sheep, 15.1% of goats and 9.63% of pig population of the country. The poultry population is 12.4% of the country’s total poultry population. The state ranks first in goats and third in poultry population among the states 478. Table A17-195: Livestock Population in West Bengal ('000) 479 1997 2003 % change Crossbred cattle 936 1119 19.55 Indigenous cattle 16895 17794 5.32 Total cattle 17831 18913 6.07 Buffaloes 1233 1086 -11.92 Total Bovines 19064 19999 4.90 Sheep 1462 1525 4.31 Goats 15648 18774 19.98 Pigs 805 1301 61.61 Others 18 18 0.00 Total Livestock 36997 41617 12.49 Over the period 1997-2003, the crossbred cattle increased by about 20% while indigenous cattle breeds decreased by 5%. The population of buffaloes also decreased by about 12%. The goat and sheep population increased remarkably. The total livestock in the state has increased from 36.9 million to 41.6 million showing an increase of about 12.5%. The production of fodder in the state over the period 2000-2003 shows an increase from 216.95 lakh tonnes to 235.3 lakh tonnes. While the green fodder production from forests, permanent pastures, grazing lands and cultivated areas has decreased during this period, the dry fodder production (crop residue of cereals, pulses and oil seeds) shows an increase 480. 477 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 478 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 479 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 480 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 288 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-196: Production of fodder in West Bengal ('000 tonnes) 481 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Dry fodder 19806 23173 21646 Green fodder 1889 1887 1885 Total fodder 21695 25060 23530 Forests 482 The actual forest cover of the State is 12,994 sq km (recorded forest cover is 11,879 sq km) which is about 14.64% of its geographical area. About 59.38% of the state's forests are classified as reserved forests, 31.75% as protected forests and 8.87% as unclassed forests. The forest types in the state are Tropical Semi Evergreen, Tropical Moist Deciduous, Littoral and Swamp, Tropical Dry Deciduous, Subtropical Broadleaved Hill, Montane Wet Temperate, Himalayan Moist Temperate, and Sub-Alpine Forest. The Table A17- gives details of the forest cover in the districts of West Bengal (also see Map A17- ). As seen, the districts with the maximum forest cover are Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri and South 24 Parganas. The Protected Areas in West Bengal comprises of 15 sanctuaries and 5 National Parks. These constitute 3.26% of the geographical area of the State.The state has 2 tiger reserves – the Sundarbans and Buxa, and, 2 elephant reserves – East Duars and Mayur Jharna. Summary of key environmental issues Existing Issues Potential Interventions Soil erosion Soil and water conservation Imbalanced use of chemical fertilizers Sustainable agriculture practices Increasing use of chemical pesticides Water quality management Decreasing green fodder availability Overexploitation of ground water Poor water quality in 8334 habitations ( Salinity, Flouride, Nitrate, Arsenic, Iron) Wildlife – human conflict in and around protected areas Cyclone and flood-prone areas Drought prone areas 481 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 482 India State of Forest 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 289 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 ASSAM Assam is located between 24º7′ and 28º00′ N latitude and 87º42′ and 96º02′ E longitude. It has an area of 78,438 sq km. Assam has a population of 26.66 million (about 2.6% of India’s population) with a density of 339 persons per sq km 483. The state is divided into 27 districts and 26,312 villages. Agroclimatic zones The state is divided into 6 agro-climatic sub-zones on the basis of rainfall, temperature, soil type and vegetation. The key features of the agro-climatic zones are described in Table A17-197. Table A17-197: Agroclimatic zones of Assam 484 Zone Climate Districts Covered Brief Descriptionof Physiography and soils Zone (A) Average rainfall of 1000 Lakhimput, Dhemaji, This zone can be divided in to 3 parallel belts: (1) in North Bank mm and high humidity of Darrang and Sonitpur the foothills of Himalayas, alluvial soils are found with Plains more than 80%. The with an area of dense forests. On the south of this belt there are small maximum temperature 14421 km2 tea plantations extending from Subansiri river to river rises upto 37°C in July- Barnadi; (2) the central belt comprises old alluviums August and the minimum which are acidic. Near the river banks there are new falls to 5°C in January. alluvials which are either neutral or less acidic; and (3) Fifty per cent of total the low lying riverine belt lies by the side of rainfall comes during 7 Brahmaputra. The low lands grow deep water rice month period of the rainy known as bao and on the eastern side of the belt in the season. Darrang district jute is grown extensively. Zone (B) High rainfall, i.e., more Sivasagar, Jorhat, The topography slopes down gradually from the hills Upper than 2000 mm per annum Golaghat, Dibrugarh towards the Brahmaputra. It has got half a dozen Brahmaputr and high humidity (more and Tinsukia with an important tributaries of the Brahmaputra. These a Valley than 80%). The maximum area of 16,192 km2 tributaries start in the hills of Nagaland and Arunachal temperature rises up to Pradesh and traverse the zone rapidly to join in the 37°C in July-August and Brahmaputra. The soils are mostly new alluvium near minimum falls to 5°C in the Brahmaputra and old alluvium in the central belt of January. the zone. Zone (C) About 30% of the area in Nagaon and This zone is situated in the center of the State and is Central this zone comes under rain Morigaon with an encircled by hills on all sides, except on the north Brahmaputr shadow belt where the area of 5561 km2 where it is bounded by the Brahmaputra. Because of a Valley rainfall is much lower its physiography, this zone is like a basin and is (600 mm) than other areas inundated during the monsoon. A number of rivers of the Assam plains (1600 traverse through this zone. These rivers start in the mm). The maximum Karbi Anlong and flow into the Brahmaputra. Both temperature rises upto new alluvial and old alluvial soils are found here. 38°C in July-August and Compared to lower Brahmaputra Valley, soils here are minimum falls to 8°C in lighter in texture and are not underlain by rocks and January. aquifers. Zone (D) The average rainfall in the Kamrup, Dhubri, On the north of this zone lie the Himalayas, and in the Lower zone is about 1700 mm Bongaigaon, Nalbari, south lies the Shillong plateau. The Brahmmaputra Brahmaputr per annum. Rainfall in the Barpeta, Kokrajhar flows through the zone. The northern part of the zone a Valley south-eastern part of the and Goalpara with an is characterized by small hillocks and some low lying zone is low and it area of 20148 km2 areas. Flood plains of Brahmaputra extending up to the increases towards the river Jinjiram bordering Meghalaya, constitute the north and the west. The southern part of the zone. The shallow rivers flowing maximum temperature from the Bhutan hills with torrential currents cause rises upto 31°C in July- enormous loss of animal lives, property and crops August and minimum falls every year. Soils of this zone consist of new alluvium to 10°C in January. on both the banks of the Brahmaputra and old alluvium towards the foot hills. Soils are mostly sandy and 483 Census of India, 2001. 484 Directorate of Extension Education, Assam Agricultural University. http://www.aau.ac.in/dee/annexture6.php 290 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 sandy loam in texture. Soils of the zone are acidic, though a large area is also covered by nearly neutral soils. Zone (E) The climate is Cachar, Hailakandi, This zone is separated from the Brahmaputra Valley Barak characterized by high Karimganj with an by the two hill districts viz., Karbi Anlong and North Valley rainfall (more than 2000 area of 6922 km2 Cachar. It is bounded in the north by North Cachar mm), high temperature hills, in the east by Manipur hills, in the south by the and high humidity. hills of Mizoram, and in the west by Bangladesh and Maximum temperature Tripura. The zone is characterized by undulating rises up to 370C in July- topography. The hills and hillocks, locally known as August and minimum falls ‘tillas’ dominate the land surface. The plains have a to 90C in January. great deal of marshy lands. There are two important rivers, viz., Barak and Kushiara in this zone. Alluvial soils in the flood plains are fertile. Red loam soils in the submontane tracts are relatively more deficient in plant nutrients. The Barak plains have a great deal of low marshy lands. Organic soils are found in the swampy ‘bheels’. Most of the soils are acidic in nature. Zone (F) Rainfall and temperature Karbi Anlong and Both the districts of the zone are characterized by Hills Zone differ substantially among North Cachar Hills undulating topography. The North Cachar hills are the different parts of the with an area of high and steep. In Karbi Anlong the hills have gentle zone due to varying 15322 km2 slopes. The predominant soils in this zone are lateritic altitudes and location of on the slopes and red loams in the valleys. The soils hills and valleys. The total developed in the plateau vary greatly in age and rainfall is about 1,144 mm composition. In Karbi Anlong district there are in North Cachar hills and considerable plains areas on the north adjoining the 600 mm in Karbi Anlong. districts of Golaghat and Nagaon. Here the soils are The maximum mostly old alluvial. temperature goes upto 370C and minimum to 90C at Haflong. Land use 485 About 35% of the state's geographical area is cropped. Fallow lands account for about 2% of the area. About 39.43% of the net sown area is cropped more than once. Forests cover 24% of the state. Table A17-198: Land use in Assam (2007-08) 486 Land use Area in ha Reporting area for land utilization statistics 7850005 Forests 1853260 Area under non-agricultural uses 1217503 Barren and unculturable land 1408042 Pastures and grazing land 159968 Tree crops 195840 Cultivable wasteland 76631 Fallow land 59394 Current fallows 126388 Net sown area 2752979 Area sown more than once 1085753 485 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 486 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 291 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Chart A17-13: Land use in Assam (2007-08) 487 Table A17-198 gives details of land use for the districts of Assam. The districts with the largest area under forests are Karbi-Anglong (319,294 ha), Kokrajhar (161,195 ha) and Golaghat (156,905 ha). The districts of Nagaon (234969 ha), Darrang (198917 ha), Barpeta (180947 ha) have the highest proportion of their area (>55%) under crops. The cropping intensity ratio for the state is 1.39. The districts with the highest cropping intensity (1.9 and less) are Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur and Bongaigaon while Dibrugarh, Barpeta and Sibsagar have the lowest cropping intensity (1.08 and less) 488. Land degradation Wastelands are spread over an area of 8778.01 sq km in Assam accounting for 11.19% of the state's geographic area. Of the total wasteland in the state, forest land degraded due to agricultural activity accounts for the largest proportion (24%) of the wasteland. Shifting cultivation has created about 240 sq km of wasteland. Land with open scrub and dense scrub accounts for 40% of the wasteland. Degraded scrub dominated forest accounts for about 15%. The map ___ depicts the spread of wastelands in the state. Table A17-199: Wastelands of Assam (2010) 489 Area in % of sq. km. TGA Land with Dense Scrub 1956.8 2.49 Land with Open Scrub 1626.68 2.07 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Permanent 494.69 0.63 Waterlogged and Marshy land-Seasonal 1025.46 1.31 Shifting cultivation area-Current Jhum 160.15 0.2 Shifting cultivation area-Abandoned Jhum 79.41 0.1 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Scrub dominated 1300.8 1.66 Under utilised/degraded notified forest land- Agriculture 2132.5 2.72 Sands-Riverine 0.01 0 Total 8778.01 11.19 Total Geographic Area (TGA) 78438 487 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 488 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 489 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 292 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-199 gives details of wastelands in the districts of Assam 490. The districts with the largest extent of wastelands are Karbi-Anglong (2669.79 sq km) and North Cachar Hills (1489.42 sq km). Soils 491 Assam has a wide variety of soils. Soil in the Central and Lower Brahmaputra valley varies from alluvial to sandy loam. The Upper Brahmaputra valley and Barak valley consist of clayey loam, alluvial and red alluvial soils, while in the hill districts it is laterite. The soil condition in most parts of the state is acidic. The distribution of acidic soils in different parts of Assam is estimated to range between 75 per cent to 100 per cent. Such highly acidic conditions combined with poor nutrient status, particularly in the Upper Brahmaputra valley, limits the crop varieties that can be cultivated. Water Rainfall 492 Bulk of the water in the State, both surface and groundwater is obtained from rainfall. Assam experiences the predominant influence of the south-west tropical monsoon which reigns from April to October with occasional winter showers. The southwest monsoon causes heavy rainfall in the southern part of Assam, in the Brahmaputra valley and towards the foothills of the Himalayas. The approach of the monsoon is marked by strong winds, occasional thunder showers, hailstorms and cyclones during April and May and heavy showers occur in June. The average annual rainfall in the State varies from 1780 to 3050 mm. Surface water 493 Water resources of the State as a whole are substantial. About 8251 sq km, which is 10.5% of the total geographical area of the State, is occupied by surface water bodies. Of this about 6503 sq km is occupied by the river systems including the mighty Brahmaputra and 1748 sq km by natural wetlands including seasonal and permanent waterlogged and marshy areas and man-made reservoirs and tanks of size more than 2.5 ha. In addition there are innumerable tanks and ponds, mostly man- made, which are smaller than 2.5 ha in size. The total surface water resource of the State is estimated at about 600 billion cubic metre. Ground water The annual replenishable ground water resource in the state is estimated to be 27.23 BCM 494. The net annual ground water availability is 24.89 BCM. The annual ground water draft is estimated to be 5.44 BCM making the stage of ground water development 22%. Of the 219 administrative divisions (called blocks) in the state, none are classified 495 as Over Exploited, Critical, or Semi- critical – all have Safe groundwater status 496. 490 Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and NRSC, ISRO, Department of Space, Government of India. Wasteland Atlas of India 2010. 491 State Development Report Assam. Planning Commission. 492 State Water Policy of Assam (Draft), Government of Assam. http://www.ielrc.org/content/e0706.pdf 493 State Water Policy of Assam (Draft), Government of Assam. http://www.ielrc.org/content/e0706.pdf 494 BMC = Billion Cubic Meters 495 Stage of groundwater development is less than or equal to 70% or is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% and shows no significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Safe category Stage of groundwater development is more than 70% but less than or equal to 90% or is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre or post monsoon) – Semi-critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 90% and less than or equal to 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and post monsoon) – Critical category Stage of groundwater development is more than 100% and shows significant long term decline (pre and/or post monsoon) – Over-exploited category 496 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 293 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 As seen in Table A17-200, the districts with the highest groundwater development are Bongaigaon (56%) and Morigaon (52%). The districts with the lowest groundwater development are Cachar (2%), Hailakandi (3%) and Karimganj (4%) 497. Groundwater quality in parts of the state is affected by Fluoride, Arsenic and Iron. Of the 86976 habitations in the state, the quality of drinking water is affected by Flouride in 248 habitations, by Arsenic in 719 habitations, by Iron in 17692 habitations 498. Table A17- provides details of the districts and habitations affected by poor groundwater quality. Table A17-200: Districts affected by poor groundwater quality 499 Contaminant Affected districts Fluoride (>1.5 mg/l) Goalpapra, Kamrup, Karbi Anglong, Nagaon, Iron (>1.0 mg/l) Cachar, Darrang, Dhemaji, Dhubri, Goalpapra, Golaghat, Hailakandi, Jorhat, Kamrup, Karbi Anglong, Karimganj, Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur, Morigaon, Nagaon, Nalbari, Sibsagar, Sonitpur Arsenic (>0.05 mg/l ) Dhemaji Agriculture About 35% of the state's geographical area is cultivated (27.52 lakh ha out of 78.50 lakh ha). Rice is the most important crop in Assam followed by rapeseed and mustard, and tea. The extent of area under wheat, pulses, jute and mesta, and sugarcane shows a marginal decline over time while potato, banana, arecanut and chillies have gained importance. Assam is not just the largest producer of tea in the country (accounting for over half the country’s output), but it accounts for about 14 per cent of the world’s tea output 500. Table A17-201: Production of major crops in Assam (2006-07) 501 Area Production (million ha) (million tons) Paddy 2.19 2.92 Rapeseed and Mustard 0.24 0.12 Wheat 0.06 0.07 Jute 0.06 0.58 Sugarcane 0.03 1.06 Potato 78 (‘000 ha) 505 (‘000 tons) The productivity of most crops in Assam is lower than the average for the country. 497 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 2006. Dynamic Grounwater Resources of India (as on March 2004). 498 Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, National Rural Drinking Water Programme, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. National Habitation Survey – 2003. http://indiawater.gov.in/IMISWeb 499 Central Groundwater Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. State Profile – West Bengal. 500 Assam State Development Report, Planning Commission, Government of India. 501 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 294 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Table A17-202: Productivity of major crops in Assam 502 Productivity in kg/ha (2006-07) Assam India Paddy 1332 2131 Wheat 1117 2708 Rapeseed and Mustard 487 1095 Jute 1667 2170 Sugarcane 39074 69022 Potato 6474 14903 The details on area, production and yield/ha of cereals and pulses in the state are provided in Table A17-202 503. Irrigation About 5% (140345 ha) of the cultivated land is irrigated. Canals contribute to 23.76% of the irrigated area. Tubewells are the source of irrigation for about 1.5% of the irrigated area. Tanks are the source of irrigation for 2.43% of the irrigated area 504. Agro-chemicals As seen in Table A17-203, the use of chemical fertilizers in Assam is less than half the national average. Compared to the desirable N:P:K ratio of 4 : 2 : 1 – the ratio in Assam is 2 : 1 : 1. Table A17-203: Use of Chemical Fertilizers 2008-09 (kg/ha) 505 N P K Total Assam 32.43 13.58 16.09 62.09 India 77.9 33.69 17.1 128.58 The consumption of chemical pesticides in Assam was less than 0.5% of India's consumption of 37959 MT in 2006-07. It also shows an increasing trend over the past 5 years – while 181 MT of pesticides were consumed in 2002-03, the consumption decreased to 165 MT in 2006-07 506. Table A17-204: Trend in Pesticide Consumption in Assam 2002-2007 507 Year Consumption of Pesticides (MT – technical grade) 2002-03 181 2003-04 175 2004-05 170 2005-06 165 2006-07 165 502 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 503 Handbook of Basic Statistics of Maharashtra State 2006. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Maharashtra. http://mahades.maharashtra.gov.in. 504 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 505 Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in 506 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 507 Pesticide and Documentation Unit, Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. http://dacnet.nic.in/ppin/home.html 295 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 Livestock Assam had 4.56% of cattle, 0.69 % of buffaloes, 0.28 % of sheep, 2.4% of goats and 11.42% of pig population of the country. Around 2.85% of the livestock of the country is in the state 508. Table A17-205: Livestock Population in Assam ('000) 509 1997 2003 % change Crossbred cattle 369 440 19.24 Indigenous cattle 7727 7999 3.52 Total cattle 8096 8439 4.24 Buffaloes 728 678 -6.87 Total Bovines 8824 9117 3.32 Sheep 84 170 102.38 Goats 2717 2987 9.94 Pigs 1082 1543 42.61 Others 12 12 0.00 Total Livestock 12719 13829 8.73 Over the period 1997-2003, the crossbred cattle increased by about 20%. The population of buffaloes decreased by about 7%. The sheep population increased remarkably. The total livestock in the state has increased from 12.7 million to 13.8 million showing an increase of about 8.73%. The production of fodder in the state over the period 2000-2003 shows a decrease from 95.18 lakh tonnes to 91.17 lakh tonnes. While the green fodder production from forests, permanent pastures, grazing lands and cultivated areas has remained the same during this period, the dry fodder production (crop residue of cereals, pulses and oil seeds) shows a decrease from 61.46 lakh tonnes to 57.45 lakh tonnes 510. Table A17-206: Production of fodder in Assam ('000 tonnes) 511 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Dry fodder 6146 5962 5745 Green fodder 3372 3372 3372 Total fodder 9518 9334 9117 Forests 512 The actual forest cover of the State is 27,692 sq km (recorded forest cover is 26,832 sq km) which is about 35.3% of its geographical area. About 66.58% of the state's forests are classified as reserved forests and 33.42% as unclassed forests. The forest types in the state are Tropical Wet Evergreen, Tropical Semi Evergreen, Tropical Moist Deciduous, Tropical Dry Deciduous, and Subtropical Pine Forest. Table A17- gives details of the forest cover in the districts of Assam (also see map A17-). As seen, the districts with the maximum forest cover are North Cachar Hills, Karbi Anglong, Hailakandi and Cachar. 508 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 509 17th Indian Livestock Census 2003. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Mininstry of Agriculture. Government of India. 510 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 511 Agricultural Research Databook 2009. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, ICAR. http://www.iasri.res.in 512 India State of Forest 2009. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. 296 ANNEX | Environment Assessment and Environment Management Framework for the NRLP / February 2011 The Protected Areas in Assam comprises of 18 sanctuaries and 5 National Parks. These constitute 4.98% of the geographical area of the State. Summary of key environmental issues Existing Issues Potential Interventions Soil erosion Soil and water conservation Land degradation due to shifting cultivation Sustainable agriculture practices Poor agricultural productivity Fodder management Imbalanced use of chemical fertilizers Water quality management Decreasing dry fodder availability Poor water quality in 18,659 habitations (Flouride, Arsenic, Iron) Wildlife – human conflict in and around protected areas Flood-prone areas 297