State of Environment and Natural Resources 2006 C M Shastri, Deepak M Shetti, G N Hegde, G T Hegde, Prabhakar R Bhat, S G Patgar, N H Ravindranath Uttara Kannada District, Karnataka Sirsimakki Village Ecosystem Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012 CES
28
Embed
State of Environment and Natural Resources 2006 - …ces.iisc.ernet.in/ravi/vnrm/pdf/Sirsimakk.pdfState of Environment and Natural Resources 2006 C M Shastri, Deepak M Shetti, G N
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
State of Environment and Na tural Resources 2006
C M Shastri, Deepak M Shetti, G N Hegde, G T Hegde,
Prabhakar R Bhat, S G Patgar, N H Ravindranath
Uttara Kannada District, Karnataka
Sirsimakki Village Ecosystem
Indian Institute of ScienceBangalore 560012
India Canada Environment FacilityNew Delhi 110066
Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012CES
State of Environment and
Natural Resources 2006
Sirsimakki Village Ecosystem
Uttara Kannada District, Karnataka
North Sahyadris and Western Karnataka Plateau
Centre for Sustainable Technologies,Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012
Sirsimakki Village Ecosystem; State of Environment and Natural Resources 2006
Centre for Ecological Sciences,
Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012
Published by
Centre for Sustainable TechnologiesIndian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012Karnataka, India.
Year of publication
2007
Team–CES
C M Shastri, Deepak M Shetti, G N Hegde, G T Hegde,Prabhakar R Bhat, S G Patgar
Team–CST
Deepa Kumar, Girish A C, Hameedulla Khan, Mythri D J, Sannadurgappa S D
Coordinated by
N H Ravindranath, Prabhakar R Bhat, Indu K Murthy, Rakesh Tiwari
Supported by
India Canada Environment FacilityNew Delhi 110066
Collaborating Institutions
Dr. Sandhya Rao, INRM Consultants Pvt. Ltd., New DelhiProf. K Kameshwar Rao, Andhra University, VisakhapatnamDr. Ramakrishna Parama, University of Agricultural Sciences, BangaloreDr. P Pramod, Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, CoimbatoreDr. Shailaja Ravindranath, Centre for Environment Education South, Bangalore
Contact
N H RavindranathCentre for Sustainable TechnologiesIndian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012Karnataka, [email protected]
Acknowledgement
The invaluable support provided by the people of Sirsimakki is deeply appreciated. The cooperation of GramPanchayat of Yadalli, Revenue Department, Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services Department and ForestDepartment of Sirsi is deeply acknowledged. We would also like to acknowledge the technical support extendedby Mr. Mariappa Raju and Mr. K R Thiruppathi. We thank Y Joshi for editing the draft report andMr. Rozario M Furtado for ably assisting us during field work.
Report available online: URL: http://ces.iisc.ernet.in/ravi/vnrm/Home.html
dung as manure (Table 3).Figure 12: Grazing practice of livestock
Table 3: Average dung production (fresh)(kg/day)
Animal type Average dung Total for
production/ a day
animal in kg in kg
Indigenous cow 7 581
Crossbred cow 19 1900
Bullock 6 96
Buffalo 11 671
Total 3023
15
6. Water
6.1. Irrigation Water
6.1.1. Current Irrigation Sources
• Open wells (44%), stream (34%), pond
(11%), borewell (3%) and others
(7%) are the sources of irrigation
water.
• 31 households use irrigation systems.
• People use flow (25%) or drip (12%)
or jet (63%) irrigation methods.
6.1.2. Trends
• Number of irrigation units has
increased in the last 5-10 years.
6.2. Drinking Water Sources
6.2.1. Current Status
• Open wells are the main source of
water for drinking as well as for
domestic usage.
• 53% households own open wells and
use water from these wells for
drinking.
• Public water supply system with
borewells as its water source meets
the demand of drinking water of 43%
of households.
6.3. Drinking Water Quality
6.3.1. Current
• In all the samples, pH is low and does
not conform with the BIS standards
(Table 4).
• Higher concentration of iron was
found in waters from hand pumps.
6.3.2. Factors Contributing
• Turbidity and pH can be attributed
to the geological sources and salts.
• Turbidity can also be due to
dissolved calcium, magnesium or
iron, attributable to geological
sources.
6.3.3. Implications
• Iron imparts unpleasant odour and
colour to water, rendering the water
less acceptable for drinking and
domestic usage.
Table 4: Drinking water quality
Parameters Desirable Permissible Taps Open wells Hand pumps
limit* limit*
pH 6.5-8.5 - 6.38 5.39 5.44
Total dissolved solids# 500 2000 81.67 104.76 75.00
Chloride# 250 1000 5.91 12.22 3.54
Sulphate# 200 400 16.93 25.85 10.00
Total hardness as CaCO3
# 300 600 43.67 30.14 20.00
Total Alkalinity as CaCO3
# 200 600 71.25 28.29 25.00
Iron# 0.3 1 1.71 0.08 12.28
Nitrate# 45 100 0.12 3.48 12.68
Fluoride# 1.9 1.5 0.05 0.12 0.04
#mg/L
*Bureau of Indian Standards
16
6.4. Microbial Load
• About 14% of the open well samples
and hand pumps conformed to
standards and none of the tap
water samples met the standards.
• 38% of open well samples and 67%
of the tap samples had total coliform
count ranging from 11 to 100.
• 14%, 3% and 7% of open well samples
had total coliform count ranging
from 201 to 300, 301 to 400 and 400
to 500 respectively. None of the tap
water samples fell under this range
of total coliform count.
• 24% of the samples had total MPN
count greater than 500.
• About 33% of the tap water samples
had total coliform load ranging
from 301 to 400.
6.4.1. Factors Contributing
• As most of the sampled sources were
open wells, the contamination may
be due to improper lining (insulation)
and presence of manure pits close
to water sources.
• The presence of coliforms can also
be due to contamination by birds,
animals and rotten leaves.
6.4.2. Implications
• If the coliforms are pathogenic,
they are expected to cause
diseases.
17
7. Soil
7.1. Soil Quality
7.1.1. Current Status
• Soils are lateritic, red brown in colour
and acidic in nature with pH 4.5 to 6.
• The organic carbon content in these
less disturbed soils is very high.
• In soils of paddy land the organic
carbon content was high (1.34%)
compared to soils collected from
low rainfall areas showing high
fertility of soils.
Table 5: Organic carbon status in differentland-use systems
Land category % organic carbon
Areca garden 1.75
Coconut garden 1.8
Paddy 1.34
Betta 2.25
Betta plantation 2.25
• In plantation soils, organic carbon
ranges from 1.15% to 1.8% which is
very high, indicating high fertility of
soils.
• In betta lands, OC is 2.5% at shallow
depth (0-15 cm) and at lower depth
(15-30 cms) 0.75-1.0%.
7.1.2. Factors Contributing
• Large quantity of organic manure
(FYM) is used for plantation
croplands and paddy fields.
• Betta lands support lot of trees,
shrubs and herbs from which organic
matter get mixed in soils.
7.1.3. Implications
• Shallow depth soils are very fertile
due to accumulation of leaf litter
and are undisturbed.
18
8. Birds, Large Mammals and Fish Resources
• The village has a rich variety of wild
fauna especially birds.
• The key habitats for fauna include
forests, betta (grazing lands), wet
lands (tanks, stream) and croplands,
• Birds, which are mainly terrestrial
birds are found in all habitats
distributed throughout the village.
• Some habitat specialist birds such
as hornbills, woodpeckers are also
found in the village.
8.1. Large Mammals
• Wild boars, mongoose, and hares are
occasionally hunted for meat.
8.1.1. Trends
• There is no major change in the
population of wild fauna over the
years.
• According to people’s perception,
there is marginal increase in the
population of wild boars and
monkeys in the recent past .
• Barking deer, varanus and hare have
decreased over the years.
• Population of civets, squirrels,
mongoose, foxes and bats has
remained stable (Table 6).
8.1.2. Implications
• Wild boars and monkey have
become pests to crops such as
paddy, sugarcane, banana and
young coconut, causing loss in the
yields (Table 7).
Table 7: Major vertebrate pests
Pests Crop affected
Wild boar Paddy, sugarcane,
young coconut trees,
young areca trees,
banana plantations
Hanuman langur Cardamom plants
and fruits, banana,
areca nuts
Bonnet Macaque Cardamom plants
and fruits, banana,
areca nuts
Fox Sugarcane
Rat Paddy crop and
Paddy/rice in houses
Peafowl Paddy
Table 6: Changes in population of birds and mammal species
Animals / birds Trend Reason
Vulture Decreased Scarcity of food
House sparrow Decreased Pesticides used in the houses (Domestic
pollution), habitat loss
Wild boar Increased Protection under Wildlife Protection Act
Monkeys Increased Protection under Wildlife Protection Act
8.2. Birds
8.2.1. Trends
• Number of vultures and house
sparrow has decreased.
19
8.3. Fish resource
• Fishing is carried out in tanks and
stream.
• No professional fishing is carried out
in Sirsimakki.
• About 10 major fish species have
been recorded.
• The dominant fish species are Dania
eaquipinnatus, Garrha gotla
stenorhynchus, Puntius sophore and
Rasbora daniconius.
• Currently, 25% of households
consume fish.
8.3.1. Trends
• Fish catch has come down over the
years.
• There is 15% increase in the fish
consuming families.
8.3.2. Factors contributing
• Sedimentation in the tanks lowers
the depth of the water which leads
to stunted growth of fish, and
eventually decreases yield.
Table 8: Major birds sighted
Ashy wren warbler
Barn owl
Black drongo
Blue jay
Common peafowl
Crimson breasted barbet
Crow-Pheasant
Egrets
Golden oriole
Grey wagtail
Hoopoe
Indian golden backed woodpecker
Indian myna
Jungle crow
Koel
Large grey babbler
Lorikeet
Magpie robin
Malbar grey hornbill
Malbar pied hornbill
Red vented bulbul
Red wattled lapwing
Red whiskered bulbul
Rockettailed drongo
Rose ringed parakeet
Rufous backed shrike
Small green barbet
Small green bee-eater
Small minivet
Spotted dove
Tailor bird
Whit breasted water hen
White breasted kingfisher
Yellow wagtail
20
9. Energy and Sanitation
9.1. Energy Sources
9.1.1. Current Status
• Firewood is the main source of
energy for about 82% of the
households.
• The main energy requirements are
for household cooking, processing
of horticultural and agricultural
produce.
• Biogas is an important alternate
source of cooking energy with 34%
of the households using it mainly for
cooking. This can be linked to dung
section.
• In addition, 7 (4%) households use
LPG for cooking.
• There are 39 (24%) households
where fuel efficient improved
(ASTRA) stoves are used for
cooking.
• 25-50% fuel saving with improved
stoves has been reported by
people.
• People use crop residue also as fuel.
• About 79% households are
electrified and use it as the main
source of lighting.
• Among them 72% use various
electrical appliances.
9.1.2. Trend
• Number of fuel efficient stoves and
alternate source of energy such as
biogas units and LPG have
increased since last two decades by
almost100%.
9.1.3. Implication
• ASTRA stoves, biogas units and LPG
have reduced pressure on forests for
firewood since forests are the main
source of firewood.
9.2. Sanitation
9.2.1. Current Status
• Only 52% households have toilets in
their house and 100% of them use
regularly.
• 70% of these toilets are septic tanks
and remaining is pit type.
• Only 50% households have taps in
toilets.
• All households with cattle have
separate cattle shed.
9.2.2. Implication
• 48% of households do not have
toilets in their houses and continue
to defecate in open and hence
pose the risks of affecting the health
of the communities.
21
Fuelwood Conservation - Effect of ImprovedStoves and Biogas PlantsSirsimakki is a biomass-based village. People use a large quantity of biomass collected
mainly from the forests as fuel for various purposes such as cooking, bathwater heating,
processing agriculture products such as cardamom and areca, and drying clothes
during monsoon. About 55% of the total fuelwood consumed is for cooking purposes.
People have been using traditional stoves of different types for biomass combustion.
Traditional stoves have been found to be less efficient with only about 12-15% of the
total heat generated being utilized for heating and rest being wasted. Increase in
population has lead to increased pressure on forest for biomass resources. On an average
about 2 to 2.25 kg of fuelwood is used per person daily.
Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore introduced fuel-efficient ASTRA stoves in Sirsimakki
during 1983. Since then 39 stoves have been installed in the village. People have
reported overall efficiency of 25-50% with these stoves.
The annual biomass consumption, which was 534 tonnes during 1980, has now reduced
to 166 tonnes, a 69% decrease. This reduction is mainly due to increase in the number of
improved stoves. Use of improved stoves has drastically reduced biomass consumption
to about 294 tonnes. Further, 54 biogas plants have been installed in Sirsimakki since
1980 in 54 households (34% of total), which has also reduced the demand for biomass by
128 tonnes. Introduction of LPG has also contributed to reducing pressure on forest for
biomass.
The dependence on forest for biomass
resources has reduced drastically in
Sirsimakki, owing to reduction in
population, and adoption of fuel
efficient stoves and LPG. Community
initiative and adaptation of improved
technology have positively impacted
the forest resource. Apart from saving
the forests, improved stoves which emit
less smoke have improved the health
of women involved in cooking activities.
Num
ber
of h
ouse
hold
s
160
120
80
40
01980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Without biogas plantWith biogas plant
600
450
300
150
0
Bio
mas
s in
ton
nes
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2006*
Annual biomassrequired/consumed in theabsence of improvedstoves
Annual biomassconsumed withintroduction of improvedstoves
* 34% shift to LPG incorporated
22
10. Summary
Sirsimakki, which represents a hilly
village ecosystem, is endowed with
rich natural resources. Soil, water and
forest resources that provide fodder,
fuelwood, green and dry leaves, small
timber, NTFPs, medicinal plants form the
basic and most important natural
resources that people are dependent
upon.
The land use including cropping pattern
of the village has more or less stabilized
with Paddy and Areca being the major
crops. Different high yielding varieties
of crops have been introduced. The
agricultural practices are largely
organic with mulching of areca gardens
with green leaves from soppinabetta.
The croplands also support rich tree
cover dominated by traditional species.
Forests which occupy significant part of
the total geographic area of the village
have undergone marginal changes in
area over the past decade, with
conversion of a part of the area to
acacia plantation. Soppinabetta, which
is a managed forest, serves as a source
of leaf litter, fuelwood as well as some
fruits and timber.
Livestock composition has changed to
a significant extent with introduction of
crossbred cows. This in turn has led to
increased milk production and
therefore income. On the other hand,
the demand for grass has increased with
decrease in population of indigenous
cows and increase in crossbred cows.
The village receives high rainfall and
over the past decade, rainfall has been
consistent. The groundwater is high due
to this constant recharge and therefore
households have adequate drinking as
well as irrigation water all through the
year.
Effective management, traditional
agricultural practices and policy
decisions by the communities at the
local level have helped maintain the
soil quality as well as sustained use of
resource over the years.
State of Environment and Na tural Resources 2006
C M Shastri, Deepak M Shetti, G N Hegde, G T Hegde,
Prabhakar R Bhat, S G Patgar, N H Ravindranath
Uttara Kannada District, Karnataka
Sirsimakki Village Ecosystem
Indian Institute of ScienceBangalore 560012
India Canada Environment FacilityNew Delhi 110066
Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012CES