You are on page 1of 128

Degraded Lands in Mid-hills of Central Nepal: A GIS Appraisal

in Quantifying and Planning for Sustainable Rehabilitation

Local Initiatives for Biodiversity, Research and Development (LI-BIRD)


2
Degraded Lands in Mid-hills of Central Nepal: A GIS Appraisal
in Quantifying and Planning for Sustainable Rehabilitation

Authors

Mohan K. Balla
Keshab D. Awasthi
Pratap K. Shrestha
Dil P. Sherchan
Diwakar Poudel

Local Initiatives for Biodiversity, Research and Development (LI-BIRD)


April 2000
4
Citation

Balla, M. K., Awasthi, K. D., Shrestha, P. K., Sherchan, D. P. and Poudel, D. (2000).
Degraded Lands in Mid-hills of Central Nepal: A GIS Appraisal in Quantifying and Planning
for Sustainable Rehabilitation.

Prepared by

Local Initiatives for Biodiversity, Research and Development


P.O. Box - 324
Pokhara, Nepal
Telephone/Fax: 00977-61-26834
E-mail: libird@mos.com.np
Internet: www.panasia.org.sg/nepalnet/libird

Type setting at
LI-BIRD Publication Unit

This paper has been reviewed by Dr. Anil Subedi, LI-BIRD, Nepal and Dr. Madhav Karki,
IDRC, India.

Cover photo: Andheri-Khahare Khola Watershed, Tanahu District (Bottom)


Kalikhola Watershed, Chitwan District (Top)
(Photograph: Mr. Pratap K. Shrestha)

6
Acknowledgement
LI-BIRD would like to express sincere gratitude to the IDRC for providing an opportunity to
carry out the study. Farm communities of both the watersheds of Kalikhola and Khahare-
Andheri Khola of Chitwan and Tanahu districts are gratefully acknowledged for their active
participation during the PRA exercises and their cooperation in the household survey. LI-
BIRD thankful to Dr. Madav Karki, Senior Programme Officer, IDRC, New Delhi for his
cooperation and advice support. LI-BIRD would also like to thank Mr. Parshu Ram BK and
Nawa Raj Chapagain for data compilation and statistical analysis and GIS analysis
respectively. Miss Muna Udas, Mr. Ramesh Shrestha and Ms Shashi Dhital are also thankful
for secretarial support. The Topographic Survey Branch, HMG/Nepal is also acknowledged
for supplying aerial photographs and topographic maps of the study area for GIS analysis.
Contents

1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background...................................................................................................................2
1.2 Rationale.......................................................................................................................2
1.3 Objectives.....................................................................................................................3
2 LITERATURE REVIEW......................................................................................................3
2.1 General features of the study area................................................................................5
2.1.1 Location......................................................................................................................5
2.1.2 Physiography and landscape.....................................................................................6
2.1.3 Climate.......................................................................................................................6
3 METHODOLOGY 11
3.1 Site selection...............................................................................................................11
3.2 Data sources................................................................................................................11
3.3 Application of GIS in analysing and quantifying land use changes...........................11
3.3.1 Hardware and software............................................................................................11
3.3.2 Acquisition and interpretation of aerial photographs.............................................12
3.3.3 Digitization of maps.................................................................................................13
3.3.4 Detailed analysis......................................................................................................13
3.3.5 Stream buffering.......................................................................................................16
3.3.6 Calculation of area..................................................................................................16
3.4 Socio-economic survey...............................................................................................16
3.4.1 Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)......................................................................17
3.4.2 Household Questionnaire Survey.............................................................................17
3.5 Soil Sampling and Analysis........................................................................................19
4 RESULT AND DISCUSSION............................................................................................20
4.1 Socio-economic Features of the Communities...........................................................20
4.1.1 Villages/settlements..................................................................................................20
4.1.2 Ethnic composition...................................................................................................21
4.1.3 Livelihood features...................................................................................................21
4.1.3.1 Sources of livelihood..........................................................................................21
4.1.3.2 Food sufficiency.................................................................................................21
4.1.3.3 Sources of cash income......................................................................................22
4.1.4 Standard of Living....................................................................................................23
4.1.4.1 Housing condition and surrounding environment..............................................23
4.1.4.2 Drinking water situation.....................................................................................24
4.1.5 Migration for work...................................................................................................24
4.1.6 Demographic Features.............................................................................................25
4.1.6.1 Family type.........................................................................................................25
4.1.6.2 Population composition......................................................................................25
4.1.6.3 Sex and age of farming decision-makers...........................................................25
4.1.6.4 Educational Status..............................................................................................26
4.2 Agriculture and Natural Resource Management........................................................26
4.2.1 Land type and ownership.........................................................................................26
4.2.2 Land tenure system...................................................................................................27
4.2.3 Irrigation facilities...................................................................................................27
4.2.4 Practice of shifting cultivation system (Khoria)......................................................28
4.2.5 Agriculture production.............................................................................................28
4.2.5.1 Cropping patterns...............................................................................................28

i
4.2.5.2 Food crops and crop productivity......................................................................31
4.2.5.3 Intervention of improved varieties and use of chemical fertilizers....................31
4.2.5.4 Crop productivity and soil fertility trends........................................................32
4.2.5.5 Vegetable cultivation.........................................................................................33
4.2.5.6 Fruit cultivation................................................................................................34
4.2.5.7 Livestock Rearing..............................................................................................34
4.2.5.8 Fodder and forage deficit months......................................................................35
4.2.6 Forest Resources and Environment........................................................................36
4.2.6.1 Forest vegetation................................................................................................36
4.2.6.2 Sources of cooking fuel.....................................................................................36
4.2.6.3 Sources of timber .............................................................................................37
4.2.7 Access to support services........................................................................................37
4.2.7.1 Training and tours..............................................................................................37
4.2.7.2 Participation in social organizations.................................................................37
4.2.7.3 Access to Information ......................................................................................37
4.3 Soil Fertility Status and Management.........................................................................38
4.3.1 Kali Khola Watershed..............................................................................................38
4.3.1.1 Physical properties of soils................................................................................38
4.3.1.2 Soil fertility status.............................................................................................38
4.3.1.3 Organic matter and total nitrogen......................................................................39
4.3.1.4 Available Phosphorus and Potash....................................................................39
4.3.1.5 Cations and Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC).................................................39
4.3.2 Andheri Khola Watershed........................................................................................39
4.3.2.1 Physical properties of soil.................................................................................39
4.3.2.2 Soil reaction (pH)...............................................................................................39
4.3.2.3 Organic matter and total nitrogen......................................................................40
4.3.2.4 Available phosphorus and potash......................................................................40
4.3.2.5 Cations and Cations Exchange Capacity (CEC) of soils....................................40
4.3.3 Sustainable Soil Fertility Management....................................................................40
4.3.3.1 Soil Fertility Status.............................................................................................40
4.4 GIS Information and Aerial Photo Interpretation.......................................................44
4.4.1 Kali Khola Watershed..............................................................................................44
4.4.1.1 Land use changes..............................................................................................44
4.4.1.2 Distribution of cultivated land by aspects.........................................................49
4.4.1.3 Distribution of cultivated land by slope ..........................................................53
4.4.1.4 Distribution of cultivated area along stream channel.......................................58
4.4.2 Andheri-Khahare Khola Watershed.........................................................................58
4.4.2.1 Land use changes..............................................................................................58
4.4.2.2 Distribution of cultivated land by aspects..........................................................63
4.4.2.3 Distribution of cultivated land by slope...........................................................67
4.4.2.4 Distribution of cultivated area along stream channel.......................................72
4.4.3 Land degradation and soil conservation measures in the watersheds....................72
5 RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS...............................................................73
6 CONCLUSION 75
6.1 Socio–economic Survey.............................................................................................75
6.2 Soil Sample Analysis..................................................................................................76
6.3 GIS Analysis...............................................................................................................77
7 REFERENCES 79
8 APPENDICES 82

ii
iii
Glossary

ADO Agriculture Development Officer/Office


CBS Central Bureau of Statistics
CEC Cation Exchange Capacity
DAP Di- Ammonium Phosphate
ESRI Environmental System Research Institute
FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation
GIS Geographic Information System
ICAR Indian Council for Agricultural Research
ICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development
IDRC International Development and Research Centre
JT Junior Technician
JTA Junior Technical Assistant
LRMP Land Resource Mapping Project
MPFS Master Plan for Forestry Sector
NA Not Available
NGO Non Government Organisation
PRA Participatory Rural appraisal
SALT Sloping Agriculture Land Technology
SAPROSC Support Activities for Poor Producers of Nepal
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
VDC Village Development Committee

iv
Executive Summary

1. This report presents a study on GIS based appraisal to quantify and establish information
database that could be used in planning for sustainable rehabilitation of degraded lands in
the Mid–hills of Central Nepal. This study was funded by the Eco-Himalayan
Rehabilitation Project of International Development and Research Centre (IDRC), New
Delhi.

2. The main objective of the study has been to identify degraded lands and associated socio-
economic conditions of the people for planning sustainable rehabilitation in the Mid-hills
of Nepal.

3. The study assessed the degree of degraded lands and dynamics of landuse changes with
the help of aerial photographs taken at different time interval, land utilisation map
prepared by LRMP (1986) as the base maps. Latter information was digitised and
different overlays were developed in order to interpret the results to see the land use
changes in the selected study area. The second most important part of the study was the
socio-economic situation and agriculture and soil fertility assessment in the study area.

4. Two sub-watersheds, namely the Kali Khola watershed and the Andheri-Khahare Khola
watersheds of Chitwan and Tanahu districts, were selected for the study. The geographic
area of the former watershed is 992.40 ha and the later 846.21 ha respectively. In the Kali
Khola watershed, agriculture and forest occupy 366.45ha and 436.96 ha in 1999 whereas
it was 194.90 ha and 537.36 ha in 1978 respectively. The shifting cultivation is practised
in 66.84 ha 88.02 percent increase in area under agriculture comes from conversion of
forest, shrub and shifting cultivation to agriculture.

5. Currently, in Andheri-Khahare watersheds, area under agriculture and forest are 257.61
ha and 320.92 ha whereas it was 243.94 ha and 477.63 ha in agriculture and forest in
1978 respectively. In overall, 32.81 percent of forestland has been converted into
agriculture, shrub and shifting cultivation. Area under shifting cultivation has also been
found increased from 104.73 ha to 238.24 ha. However, the study has also revealed that a
majority of the area under old shifting cultivation has been now permanently converted
into the agriculture land.

6. The Chepang, the tribal community of the area, is the dominant ethnic group. Other major
ethnic groups are Gurung, Magar and Tamang. Chhetri and occupational castes (Kami,
Damai, and Sarki) are minor ethnic groups. About 65 percent of the surveyed households
have nucleus type family, but despite this, the average family size is 7.24. Educational
status of the people is very low with 63.6 percent illiterates or just literate and of the
decision-makers in the family, 69.6 percent illiterates.

7. Agriculture is the main source of livelihood for the people in the study area. The average
land holding of registered land is 0.66 ha and that of unregistered land is 0.45 ha per
household. Most of these lands are Pakho Bari. About 54 percent of the households also
practice slash and burn or shifting cultivation, locally called Khoria, in the area. Khet land
is very limited in the area. The farming is highly subsistence oriented, largely rainfed and
marginal with low soil fertility. As a result food production is low and quite inadequate.
More than 85 percent of the households experience varying degree of food deficit for
three to nine months in a year.

v
8. Maize, fingermillet and blackgram are the main crops widely grown in both Pakho Bari
and Khoria. Rice is also grown in limited area. Other minor crops are upland rice (Ghiya),
niger, horsegram, buckwheat, ricebean, sorghum and sweetpotato. The varieties of these
crops are largely local and the productivity is quite low. Similarly, the production is
entirely dependent on animal manure. The use of chemical fertilizers is quite negligible.

9. A large number of vegetables and fruits are grown in the study area. The majority of the
households grow vegetable for their own consumption, while some of them sell in the
nearby road-head market outlets. Fruit types ranges from tropical to sub-tropical in
nature.

10. Livestock rearing is an integral and important part of agricultural production in the area.
Cattle, goat and buffalo are the major livestock raised by the farmers. Though small in
number, chicken is also kept by almost all households. The livestock are raised under
traditional management system characterised by poor feeding, housing and care. Forest is
the major source of grasses for the livestock. However, as a result of declining forest
resources, the livestock is decreasing in number over time.

11. The government forest is the main source of fodder/forage, grasses, leaf litters, firewood
and timber for the farming households in the area. The pressure on forest for these
resources is high, and this has resulted in accelerated deterioration of the forest resources
in the watersheds under study.

12. Soils are mainly derived from limestone, sandstone, shale, schist, quartzite and developed
on steep to very steep slopes whereas along the river course alluvium materials. Based on
the soil test values, the fertility level of Bari land soils is at satisfactory level but soils
under Khet land and forestland are poor in phosphorus in general. Soil fertility
maintenance largely depends upon compost and farm yard manure. The application of
chemical fertilizers is very much negligible. Majority of farmers reported have responded
that the overall soil fertility and crop productivity is declining in both the studied sites.

13. The GIS exercise has revealed that the area under forest is decreasing which might have
accelerated the erosion process, both surface erosion and mass movement and
consequently there has been a negative effect on crop productivity.

14. The majority of agriculture (66.56 percent) is practiced in areas with slope > 300 and
shifting cultivation is practiced in 70.55 percent of the area, which lies in slope category >
300 in Andheri-Khahare Khola watershed. About 68 ha of lands within 25 metres from the
centre of the stream channels is under agriculture and shifting cultivation. Similarly, in
Kali Khola watershed 77.1 percent land under agriculture and 80.38 percent under
shifting cultivation lies in slope category >300 and 69.36 ha of land under agriculture and
shifting cultivation within 25 m from the Centre of the stream channels. All these indicate
that most of the areas under agriculture and shifting cultivation are vulnerable to soil
erosion and overall degradation.

15. An integrated approach to watershed management, incorporating agriculture, forest and


soil and water management practices, has been suggested in the report. There is ample
scope for increasing food production in a more sustainable manner using different SALT

vi
technologies in the area. Cash generating enterprises such as fresh vegetable and
vegetable seed production, fruit farming, improved livestock rearing and use of NTFP,
could be integrated in the system to increase the incentive to adopt soil conservation and
watershed management activities.

16. People of the study area heavily depend on wild foods collected from the forest during the
food deficit months. These include Githa, Bhyakur, Tarul, asparagus and other leafy
vegetables, and wild fruits. Therefore, study and conservation of these wild foods is an
important dimension for the future research.

A number of studies have also been suggested to complement the findings of this study and to
plan and implement a sustainable integrated watershed management activities in the area.

vii
1 INTRODUCTION

The middle mountain region of Central Nepal occupies about 4.28 million ha of land. Of this,
the agricultural land occupies about 1.9 million ha including both level and slopping terraces
(MPFS, 1988). Cultivation in level and slopping terraces is a common feature of Nepalese
hill farming. This region has very limited productive land due to accelerated soil erosion and
land degradation and is facing serious problems due to the population pressure for food,
fodder, fuel, and shelter.

Land degradation is related to a decline in soil quality and is the adverse changes in soil
quality resulting in decline in productive capacity of land due to processes induced mainly by
human intervention (UNEP, 1992). Land degradation problem in Nepal has been documented
in a number of publications (Mahat, 1987; Ahmed, 1989; Applegate and Gilmore, 1987;
Mishra and Bista, 1998; Ives and Messerli, 1989). Nepal, having diverse topographical
features and most watersheds lying within steep to very steep slopes, has acute problem of
soil erosion. On top of that, to meet the demand of the growing human population the forest
resources are put under heavy pressure. Gradual depletion of forests and grazing lands,
expansion of agriculture into marginal lands and decrease in food and fodder supplies are
some of the indications of deteriorating watershed conditions (Thapa et.al.1992).

The present state of widespread deforestation, overgrazing, shifting cultivation, and


cultivation on the marginal lands have depleted the forest resources and soil productivity.
Shifting cultivation and cultivation in the very steep slopes are additional factors causing the
land degradations and environmental hazards in the middle hills of the Central Nepal. Due to
faulty agricultural practices and accelerated deforestation in the hills of Nepal, sediment in
the rivers is continuously increasing (Mishra and Bista, 1998). The annual soil loss through
the river systems of Nepal is estimated at 240 million cubic meters (CBS, 1994).

Like in the other part of the world, people in some parts of the middle hills of the central
Nepal do not shift after harvesting one or two crops but rotate the same chunk of land or
encroaches part of natural forest for slash and burn. Due to the short period (2 to 3 years)
rotation on the slashing and burning area, tree and palatable grass species have been
parentally extinct and the shrubs Eupatorium sp. (Banmara) have dominated the area. Each
year some additional natural land is put under slash and burn, which is causing shortage of
fuel, fodder and timber in the villages. The land use in mid-hills of central Nepal is changing
dynamically with the pace of time due to population pressure and development of
infrastructure and access to market.

Nepal has one of the world’s highest densities of population per ha of the arable land. On an
average, it is five persons per ha. (Shrestha, 1996). Majority of the people owns very small
parcels of land. Decreasing fertility and land fragmentation due to inheritance have resulted
in decreased productivity. Scarcity of food and other essential materials and lack of
employment opportunity have led farmers to migrate to towns and Terai plains for better
opportunities. Those, who could not escape from the rural poverty have remained in the mid-
hills and have exercised shifting cultivation to supplement their regular production from
permanent fields.

1
1.1 Background

The mid-hills, which provide multitude of natural resources, is being degraded by overuse
(over grazing, and exploitation for the fodder and fuel wood) and misuse (felling trees instead
of loping) of the available resources. The unstable nature of its geology renders the fragile
ecosystem of the mid-hills vulnerable to the overuse of the fodder, fuel wood, timber and
grass. Even a small disturbance caused by the abuse of resources precipitates changes in the
system in alarming proportions. One of the factors contributing to the problems is the shifting
cultivation, which is the focus of the study.

Shifting cultivation is practiced in the mid-hills of Nepal in different intensity and is one of
the causes of land degradation in many parts of the areas. Soil erosion during the monsoon
due to high run-off is a serious problem and this process has further been accelerated due to
the practice of shifting and slopping terrace cultivation in the hills and mountains of Central
Nepal. Additionally, overgrazing, deforestation, and mining are aggravating the soil erosion
and land degradation in this region.

In the mid-hills of Nepal, small farmers are the ones who suffer from land degradation. Given
their extremely poor resource base, it seems sensible to argue that small farmers do not
willingly destroy the basis of their survival. The search for solutions must, therefore, be made
from an understanding of land users' decision processes regarding the allocation of resources
(government, private and community land). Unfortunately, the knowledge base in this respect
is very poor. Unless better understanding is developed of the users' perspectives and the
options available, solutions are unlikely to be sustainable. A major focus of the program
should be to systematically identify and document the land degradation to make a
comparative study of farmers' options and to identify land rehabilitation alternatives in
different mountain ecological zones.

Systematic identification and documentation of the land degradation and identification of


land rehabilitation alternatives in different mountain ecological zones for watershed planning
and management always require a sound basis of systematically collected information. A
computerized Geographic Information System (GIS), a tool to store and analyze the data, has
been available for quite some time. GIS can help to organize, merge, analyze, store, distribute
data sets, and produce quality output very quickly. This enables decision-makers, planners,
project managers, students, and development practitioners to improve the management of
resources in the degraded watersheds.

Therefore, a study on GIS based appraisal in quantifying and establishing information


database that could be used for planning for sustainable rehabilitation and development of
degraded lands in the mid-hills of Nepal was carried out. This project is funded by Eco –
Himalayan Rehabilitation Project of International Development and Research Center (IDRC),
South Asia Regional Office, New Delhi, India.

1.2 Rationale

Conservationists, scientists and administrators have expressed the growing caution about the
rapid deterioration of the Himalayan environment over the past decades (Ives and Messerli,
1989). Deforestation, land sliding, flooding, uncontrolled population growth, increasing

2
poverty, malnutrition, polities, socio-economics and human processes are inter-linked and
pushing the middle mountains to the edge of environmental and socio-economic collapse.
Natural resources like farmland, forest and grazing lands are integral part of the household
economies in the hills of Nepal. Forest and grazing lands are sources of fuel wood and
fodder for the cooking and livestock respectively. Agriculture land supplies the different
varieties of the food crops to fulfil the food requirement and also supplements the
requirement of fuel wood and fodder. As off-farm employment opportunities are scarce in
Nepal, the farmers have to rely on those three types of natural resources for the household
economics (Thapa, 1990).

In general, the studies carried out so far on the watershed management have mostly focused
on the socio-economic, forestry, and farmlands. Very few studies have been carried out in the
Mid hills of Nepal on the watershed basis for quantifying land use degradation and planning
for sustainable rehabilitation of such lands. This study was carried out aiming to quantify
degraded lands and to establish benchmark information and understand socio-economic
conditions of the people on the watershed basis in two watershed areas. This includes Kali
Khola in Chitwan District and Andheri and Khahare Khola in Tanahun District in the mid
hills of Central Nepal.

1.3 Objectives

The main objective of the study was to identify degraded lands and associated socio-
economic conditions of the people for planning sustainable rehabilitation in the mid-hills of
Nepal.

Specific objectives:

The study was conducted with the following specific objectives:

a. Quantifying the damage due to shifting cultivation, mining and other common
land uses, employing Geographical Information System (GIS) techniques.

b. Identifying changes in watershed conditions in the area over the past two
decades based on the available aerial photographs.

c. Assessing the causes of degradation of forest and related natural resources in


the program area.

d. Establishing information database and better understanding socio-economic


and ecological conditions in the program area.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Land degradation is defined as a loss of land productivity, qualitatively or quantitatively,


through various processes such as erosion, wind blowing, Salt affliction, nutrient loss, water
logging, deterioration to soil structure etc. (Dudal, 1981 cited in Das, 1986). Studies
undertaken in various parts of the hills of Nepal have presented adequate evidence that
watersheds have been undergoing continual degradation (Mahat et.al.1987; Mawdesly et.al.
1998). Almost all types of land degradation exist in Nepal. However, deforestation, mass

3
wasting, erosion, flooding and water logging are the major processes most prevalent in Nepal.
Besides, the rugged terrain, intense rainstorm during monsoon, the improper land use
practices in the hill and mountain slopes, the rapid growth in population, slow economic
growth and transformation, and inadequate construction of infrastructures have been the other
causes of watershed degradation in Nepal.

Eckholm (1976) rightly points out that “there is no better place to begin an examination of
deteriorating mountain environments than Nepal”. He further presents his view as “human
are – out of desperation, ignorance, short sightedness, or greed - destroying the basis of their
own livelihood as they violate the limits of natural systems".

The population pressure is the primary cause of man induced erosion on a limited land
resources which are being degraded to satisfy the demand for fuelwood, fodder, lumber, leaf
litter and other forest products and for agricultural expansion. These factors have accelerated
the process of soil erosion and are characterized by loss of topsoil. As the top soils become
eroded, the associated organic matter and plant nutrients are also being lost with the result
that soil fertility and land productivity decline (Joshy et.al.1997).

Shifting cultivation is an elusive term to define, since it is perceived and used by different
people in different contexts and in widely different ways (Upadhyaya, 1995). The essential
characteristics of shifting cultivation are; the area of forest is cleared, usually rather
incompletely, the debris is burnt, and the land is cultivated for a few years – usually less than
five – then allowed to revert to forest or other secondary vegetation before being cleared and
used again (FAO, 1984). It is described a slash and burn method of cultivation; another term
used is swidden agriculture. This system locally known as Jhum is being practiced for
thousands of years in the NorthEast (ICAR, 1983), as Tsheri in Bhutan (Upadhyaya, 1995)
and as Khoria in mid – hills of Nepal.

Shifting cultivation in the Mid – hills of the Central Nepal has a long history where it is still
being practiced. According to Shroeder (1985), there is evidence of forest fallow slash and
burn cultivation in the upper Arun River valley where at least ten years has passed between
periods of cultivation. He also points out that at Pumdi – Bhumdi near Pokhara and Rasuwa
slash and burn was common prior to World War I and ended by about 1957. Though the
shifting cultivation has been a sustainable agro-ecosystem in the past, it can not serve as a
model for the future. Regeneration of forests is crucial for the long – term productivity and
sustainability of swidden agro-ecosystems, but many farmers are no longer able to leave their
fields fallow for a reasonable period of time (Partap and Watson, 1994).

The rapid increase in population and a gradual degradation of land under such practice has
forced adoption of shorter fallow periods, which on the average, is 4 to 5 years at present as
compared to 25-30 years nearly 5-6 decades ago (Borthakur, 1981). In addition to population
pressure, the traditional shifting cultivators are increasingly being confined to limited areas
resulting again in shorter fallow periods. Resource degradation, low productivity, tendency to
encourage large family size and little or practically no scope for application of improved
agricultural production technology are some of the drawbacks in this system (ICAR, 1983).
Borthakur et.al., (1978) reported that the shortened fallow period due to increased population
pressure has also reduced the productivity of lands.

Besides tearing of and displacement of soil particles, some of the erosion types are having
significant loss of other natural resources, which are complex in process over time and space.

4
One of the land degradation problems especially in mid – hills of Central Nepal is shifting
cultivation where loss of genetic resources and land productivity is more serious. Large
quantity of forest vegetation is burnt in the process of shifting cultivation. As a result loss of
valuable wild life, wild plants of diverse gene pool and rare orchids have also been reported
in N – E region of India (Das, 1981 as cited in ICAR, 1983). Studies on soil erosion under
various stages of shifting cultivation have indicated that soil erosion from hill slopes under
first year, second year, abandoned Jhum (first year fallow) and Bamboo forest was estimated
to be 146.6, 170.2, 30.2 and 8.2 tons/ha/yr respectively. It indicated that the second year of
Jhum cultivation is more hazardous than the first year (ICAR, 1983). The LRMP (1986)
report also indicated comparatively high soil erosion rates under shifting cultivation in Nepal,
which is, presented in Table 1 below:

Table 1. Annual Soil Loss by Rainfall (Adopted from LRMP, 1986)


Land use Irrigated rice Level Sloping Shifting
land terraces terraces cultivation
Soil loss depth (mm) 0 0.4 1.6 8.0
Soil loss (tons/ha/ year) Insignificant 5 20 100

Remote sensing refers to an advance technique for identifying objects and their characters
(Sinha et.al.,1995) or for obtaining information about any object from a far distance (Tiwari
et.al., 1995). Using multi-date (1988 and 1992) remote sensing data, Rai and Krishna (NA)
quantified land use/land cover changes quite accurately as verified from present collatoral
data in Mamlay Watershed, Sikkim. Similar other studies have been conducted using remote
sensing technique. A land use/land cover maps for Sagwada Tehsil were prepared from
remote sensing data which were then used to identify location of extent of degraded lands
under different uses (Arun et.al.,1995). The land use change in Dun valley after 29 years was
studied by Sinha et.al., (1995) using aerial photographs and satellite imagery.

Geographical Information System (GIS) have made it much easier to integrate multi-theme
information on spatial scale obtained through remote sensing as well as those collated
through field sampling to derive information for planning and management. With the help of
GIS it became much easier to analyze the ecosystems and develop strategies of sustainable
management (Tiwari et.al., 1995). However, mountain areas present a great challenge for
application of GIS because of their diversity, marginality and strategic importance as well as
their different physical, biological, and societal systems. Trapp and Mool (1996), and
Heywood et.al.,(1994) pointed out that the physical characteristics of the mountain
environment being more complex and needs to be analyzed using a three – dimensional
approach or methodology in order to arrive at an approximate representation of the aspect,
slope, and topography of the mountains.

2.1 General features of the study area

2.1.1 Location

The area included in the study were Kali Khola watershed in Chandi Bhanjyang VDC of
Chitwan District, and Andheri Khola and Khahare Khola watersheds in Chhimkeswari VDC
and Ambu Khaireni VDC respectively in Tanahun District (Map 1 and 2). The outlets of
these watersheds are situated at about three and five kms from the Mugling Bazar on the
Gorkha – Narayanghat Highway. The Kali Khola watershed is located between 27048’43”
and 27050’26” N latitude and between 84032’59” and 84036’04” E longitude whereas the

5
Andheri and Khahare Khola watersheds are located between 27049’11” and 27051’54” N
latitude and between 84030’ and 84032’03” E longitude.

2.1.2 Physiography and landscape

The watershed areas lie in the Middle Mountain physiographic region of Nepal. However, the
areas can be considered a transition zone between the Siwalik region and the Middle
Mountain region. Locally, the area is called Mahabharat. Koli Khola watershed extends from
283m to 1837m elevation where as Andhei-Khahare watershed from 246m to 1586m
elevations. The area is very much complex and the major rock types are metamorphic and
sedimentary. Limestone rocks are dominant followed by sandstone. The metamorphic rocks
are schist and quartzite.

On the ridge generally, soils are deep with medium texture. But on the main slope, soil depth
is very shallow. Gravel and stones are more than 30 to 50 percent on the surface. In the Kali
Khola watershed, the terrace width is very narrow and unlike in other parts of the hill, the
bench terraces are not common. While in the Andheri Khola watershed, a convex type of
longer slopes is found. The soils are moderately deep. But on steep slopes the soils are
shallow and stony. Food crops are cultivated on moderately steep to steeply sloping land with
less than 300 slope. But in many places crops are grown on very steep slope with more than
300. These slopes are full of colluvial materials. Alluvium soils are found along the narrow
river course. The area under alluvial soil is negligible. The relief is very high and the rock
outcrops are very common.

2.1.3 Climate

In general, the climate of the study area is subtropical in nature. There are distinctly three
seasons; rainy (wet), cold winter and hot or humid summer season. There is no
meteorological station in the watershed area. Recently the ICIMOD has established a
meteorological station nearby at Paireni. One-year data recorded in the area (Table 2)
indicates the total annual rainfall of 2345.9 mm. Nearly 90 percent of the total rainfall occurs
from May to September and the rest is distributed in the remaining months. April, May, June
and July are the hot months and the monthly maximum air temperature is 37.70 C.
December, January and February are the cold months and the monthly minimum temperature
is 12.60 C.

6
7
8
Table 2. Meteorological Information Recorded at Paireni, Chitwan, which is Located
Nearby the Study Areas
Month Rainfall Maximum Minimum
(in mm) Temperature (in 0 C) Temperature (in 0 C)
January 0.0 17.0 12.6
February 15.0 23.0 16.6
March 53.0 27.0 19.8
April 74.0 32.0 24.8
May 138.0 35.0 28.9
June 274.0 35.6 26.4
July 732.0 32.6 26.9
August 741.0 37.7 26.0
September 253.9 33.1 26.8
October 64.0 31.0 24.6
November 0.0 27.8 19.6
December 1.0 19.2 14.0
Total/mean 2345.9 26.3 22.25
Source: Maskey, 1999.

Farmers' perception about the local weather conditions was also explored during the PRA
exercise conducted in both the study watersheds. Figure 1 and 2 clearly show that most of the
rainfall is concentrated in the monsoon period of May to September. This pattern closely
matches with the rainfall data presented in Table 3.

50

40

30 Rainfall
Hailstones
20 Strong wind

10

0
Apr/May
Jan/Feb

Sep/Oct
Mar/Apr

Jul/Aug

May/Jun
Nov/Dec
Oct/Nov
Feb/Mar

Jun/Jul
Aug/Sep
Dec/Jan

Months

Figure 1. Farmers' Perception about Climatic Condition in Kali Khola Watershed

9
40

30

Rainfall
20 Hailstones
Strong wind

10

May/Jun
Feb/Mar

Nov/Dec

Oct/Nov

Jun/Jul
Jul/Aug
Sep/Oct

Apr/May
Jan/Feb

Dec/Jan

Aug/Sep
Mar/Apr

Months

Figure 2. Farmers' Perception about Climatic Condition in Andheri Khola Watershed

10
3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Site selection

Maps were studied and key informants from nearby watersheds were consulted to identify
potential watersheds around Mugling area, Chitwan district, which is situated on the Prithvi
Highway. Based on the information, reconnaissance survey of six watersheds was conducted
out of which Kali Khola in Chitwan and Andheri and Khahare Khola watersheds in Tanahun
district were selected. The Andheri and Khahare Khola watersheds are adjacent to each other
and have been combined for the purpose of this study. Selection criteria used were:

1. Selected
watersheds are sub – watersheds of Trishuli River and are within one day's walk from
the highway.

2. The people
living in the watersheds belong to ethnic groups (Praja, Gurung, Magars etc.) who are
poor and deprived of opportunities for infrastructure development, education and
other services, and are practicing shifting cultivation in varying degree.

3. The
2
watersheds should be between 10 to 25 Km for better representation of the area for
planning and implementation of research, extension and developmental activities in
the future.

3.2 Data sources

Available secondary sources of data and information in the form of maps and photographs,
reports, journals and books were referred and used as per the requirement.

The maps and photographs used as the primary source for capturing the data in the digital
form are Land Utilization and Land System Maps (1:50,000) of 1978, Topographical Map
(1:25,000) of 1994 and Aerial Photographs of 1978 and 1994.

3.3 Application of GIS in analysing and quantifying land use changes

3.3.1 Hardware and software

Hardware used to accommodate and handle the software capable of data capturing,
management and analysis were:

• Processor
(CPU): Pentium 1st (133 MHz)
• Printer:
Canon BJC 5000
• Digitizer:
CalComp III Digitizing Tablet.

Software used to capture, manage and analyze the data is:

11
CartaLinx Version 1.0: CartaLinx was used to digitize the base maps, namely Land
Utilization Map, Land System Map and Topographical Map. CartaLinx is a Spatial Data
Builder that uses a vector graphics model for the digital description of spatial data. It allows
easy integration of attribute data with the spatial data. This digital map development tool
serves as a companion to a variety of popular Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and
Desktop Mapping software products, such as AnaLinx, IDRISI, Arc/Info,, ArcView,
MapInfo, and so on (Clark Labs, 1998).

ArcView 3.1: ArcView was used to store and manage the data. Additionally, it is the plot
form to ArcView spatial analyst and ArcView Image Analysis Packages. ArcView is one of
the latest extensions of the tradition of using maps to present and analyze geographic
information. ArcView comes with a useful set of ready – to – use data one can use
immediately to create hundreds of different maps. Additional data is available from ESRI,
from other organizations and Internet. One can use ArcView to access data stored in
ArcView’s own shapefile format, ARC/INFO format, and many other data formats. One can
also use ArcView to create his/her own geographic data. (ESRI, 1996).

ArcView Spatial Analyst: ArcView Spatial Analyst was used to analyze the spatial
relationships between land use changes, distance buffering, slope wise land uses, aspect wise
land uses etc. The ArcView Spatial Analyst helps to discover and better understand spatial
relationships in data, from viewing and querying the data to creating an integrated custom
application. In addition to the vector data, which ArcView GIS already supports, new types
of analysis are possible using the Spatial Analyst because it can be used to model raster data.
ArcView Spatial Analyst is one of the most popular GIS software for spatial modeling.

3.3.2 Acquisition and interpretation of aerial photographs

Aerial photographs of 1978 (No. 7935 – 164 to 7935 – 167 and 7938 – 74 to 7938 - 79) and
1992 (25 – 09 to 25 – 10 and 26 – 08 to 26 – 11) of the study area were acquired from the
HMG/N Topographical Survey Division, Department of Survey, Kathmandu, Nepal.

The aerial photographs were interpreted with the help of stereoscope and magnifying glasses
in the following order:

1. Loose
uncontrolled mosaic of photographs was prepared to have a general view of watersheds.

2. Watershed
boundaries were demarcated and annotation done on the photographs.

3. Principal
points were marked on the photographs and semi controlled maps prepared.

4. Different
land use patterns were demarcated and interpretation was carried out on tracing paper
under a stereoscope.

Data were then transferred to the enlarged LRMP topographic map of 1994. Aerial
photographs of 1992 were taken in the field and dully verified for interpreting the land use

12
changes. Hence, instead of land use map of 1992, it is named as land use map of 1999.
Finally, land use maps for both the years were prepared on 1:12,500 scale.

3.3.3 Digitization of maps

Land use maps in the scale of 1:12,500 prepared after interpretations of the aerial
photographs and the LRMP topographic map in the scale of 1:50,000 were transferred in the
digital format manually with the help of CartaLinx, digitizing software at the Institute of GIS
LaboRatory. After building the themes, all themes were exported to Arc View shape Forestry
files for detailed analysis in ArcView domain.

3.3.4 Detailed analysis

Detailed analysis was carried out in the ArcView spatial analyst. Land use maps were
pasteurised for further analysis. The size of the cell or grid was 17.891 m x 17.891 m for
Andheri-Khahare Khola Watersheds and 17.4033 m x 17.4033 m for the Kali Khola
watershed. The cell size was fixed by the system default to match the extent of the coverage,
so that no information is lost.

Slope map, aspect map and Digital Elevation Model (DEM) was created in raster format.
Buffering was done to find out different land uses nearby the streams. Map query function
was used to analyse the land use changes and find out areas under specific characteristic. The
process involved is outlined briefly below.

Creation of Digital Elevation Model (DEM) requires use of interpolation methods to create a
continuos surface of elevation from point data. In this study Spline interpolation method was
used. The Spline interpolator is a general-purpose interpolation method that fits a minimum-
curvature surface through the input points. Conceptually, it is like bending a sheet of rubber
to pass through the points, while minimizing the total curvature of the surface. It fits a
mathematical function to a specified number of nearest input points, while passing through
the sample points. This method is best for gently varying surfaces including elevation (ESRI,
1996b). Under the Spline interpolator, Regularized type of curve fitting was done to create a
smoother flowing surface of elevation. The toughness of the curve was set to the minimum
and number of input points – the nearest points around the cell being analyzed that will be
used to fit the curve – was set to 2.

13
Process of Creating Rasterized Land use Maps

Land use Map 1978 Land use Map 1999


(1:12500) (1:12500)

Manual Manual
Digitization Digitization
CartaLinx
Environment

Digital Land use Digital Land use


Map 1978 Map 1999

Build Polygons,
Build Polygons,
Export as ArcView
Export as ArcView
Shapefile
Shapefile

Load Load
Shapefile as Shapefile as
Theme Theme ArcView
Environment

Convert to Convert to
Grid Grid

Rasterized Land use Rasterized Land use


Map of 1978 Map of 1999

14
Process of Creating Digital Elevation Model (DEM), Slope Map and Aspect Map

Topographic Map 1994


(1:25000)

Manual Digitization
of Contours as Points
CartaLinx
Environment
Assign Elevation
Value to all Points

Export Nodes as
ArcView Shapefile

Load Shapefile as Theme

ArcView
Convert to Grid Environment

Digital Elevation Model (DEM)

Derive Slope Derive Slope

Slope Map Slope Map

15
Procedure of Map Query

Grid Map of Grid Map of Map files


Land use 1978 Land use 1999 consisting
Input Data

Land use 1978 = and Land use 1999 = Query


Agriculture Agriculture language

Evaluate

Output
Agriculture (no change)

Similar procedure was used to evaluate all the variables like agriculture in the different slope
classes, slash and burn in different slope category and aspect, change of the land use such as
agriculture to forest and shrubs, shrubs to forest and agriculture, Forest to shrub and
agriculture. All land use dynamics were evaluated using the Arc View Spatial Analyst.

3.3.5 Stream buffering

Streams from the topographic map (1994) of 1:50,000 scale were digitised and after building
the themes, exported to ArcView shape files for further analysis. The function, Find distance
from spatial analysis was used to create the distance map. The distance map so obtained was
reclassified to the desired distance classes and intervals of 0-25m and >25m. This gives the
25m distance from the centre of the stream to both sides of the streams or rivers (Map 9a and
9b).

3.3.6 Calculation of area

To calculate the area of different output maps and land use categories, the spatial function
Tabulate area was used. This function tabulates the area in terms of number of grids or cells.
Therefore, the area in desired unit, i.e. hectare, was obtained by multiplying the cell count
with the cell size in hectare.

3.4 Socio-economic survey

The methods used for the socio-economic study of the area included a blend of both
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) techniques and a detailed sample household
questionnaire survey. The PRA techniques were used to understand the general features of
the community, including trends in the farming systems and the underlying factors causing

16
such changes. The sample household survey, on the other hand, was targeted to understand
the specific features of the household within the study community. This approach of using a
combination of PRA and household survey methods helped to increase the efficiency, both in
terms of cost and volume, of information collection.

3.4.1 Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)

A number of PRA techniques were used during the socio-economic survey of the study areas.
These included:
• Focus Group Discussion with key informants
• Social / resource mapping
• Transact walk
• Time line study
• Seasonal calendars and diagrams
• Matrix ranking

The key informant farmers were informed and invited in advance for the PRA sessions. More
than 25 farmers turned out to participate in the PRA sessions. About 50 percent of these
participants were women. To speed up the process, farmers were divided into two groups.
One group of farmers participated in the Focus Group Discussion, which was conducted with
the help of a checklist prepared for the purpose (see Appendix 1). The second group of
farmers helped in constructing climate diagrams and social/resource maps showing changes
in farming and natural resources.

3.4.2 Household Questionnaire Survey

Sample-frame: The Kali Khola watershed selected for the study comprises communities and
land areas of wards 5 and 6 of Chandi Bhanjyang Village Development Committee.
Similarly, the Andheri-Khahare Khola watersheds include communities and land areas of
wards 3 and 9 of Chhimkeshwori and Anbu Khaireni Village Development Committee
respectively. A sample-frame for each of these watersheds was constructed by listing the
names of the household heads living in these areas with the help of the voter list and later
confirming this with key informants. The sample-frame for Kali Khola watershed consisted
of 149 households and that for Andheri-Khahare Khola consisted of 62 households. The
sample-frame for the study, therefore, includes 211 households from both watershed areas.

Sample size and sampling: Considering the need to capture the maximum variability
imposed upon by the altitude range, aspects and scattered communities in the selected
watersheds, 50 percent of the households listed in the sample-frame were selected for the
household questionnaire survey. The sample size for Kali Khola watershed is 83 and for
Andheri-Khahare Khola is 29 households. These households were selected using a random
sampling procedure. During sampling a stratified random sampling was conducted by using
villages as strata. However, the villages with less than 3 households were omitted during
sampling. This is because of logistic point of view. Sampling was done using random
numbers by using a calculator. 112 sample households were used for analysis of the results.

Interview schedule/questionnaire: A structured questionnaire covering household


information, various disciplines of agriculture and natural resource management and social
information was developed for household survey. This was first pre-tested in the target

17
Photograph 1. Researchers Discussing with a Farming Family in Andheri-Khahare Watershed

Photograph 2. Research Team Conducting PRA in Kali Khola Watershed

18
community and further refinements were done. The sample questionnaire is appended in the
report (Appendix 2).

Interviews and editing: The interview schedule was administered to the sample households
by well-trained survey enumerators. The interview was taken with the household-heads or
with their spouse. The members of the research team supervised the progress of the survey
through regular field visits. The questionnaires filled out were edited and the improperly
filled out questionnaires were re-administered.

Data Analysis: The data collected through PRA was summarized, tabulated and used directly
in the reports. The data collected through the household questionnaire survey was analyzed
using the SPSS PC+ software package. The figures, tables and diagrams synthesized using
some descriptive statistics have been used in the report.

3.5 Soil Sampling and Analysis

A total of twelve soil samples were taken from Andheri Khola and Kali Khola watershed
areas representing all land use types and altitude range. The main objective was to assess the
soil fertility status in the study areas and to find out the constraints in crop production from
soil fertility perspective. The soil samples represent only top soil (0 to 25 cm) and the soil
sample identification is presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Soil Sample Identification.


Sample No. Description of Soil Sample
1. Kali Khola, Bhoteswora, 1000-1200 m, Bari land, south aspect
2 Kali Khola, Raibung, 1000 m, Bari land, west aspect
3 Andheri Khola , Nantar 500-750 m, Bari land , south-east aspect
4 Andheri Khola, Kafle Danda, 1500 m, Bari land, south aspect
5 Andheri Khola, Khasarang Besi, 250-500 m, Khet land, south east
6 Andheri Khola, Khasary Majh Tola, 750 m, forest land, south aspect
7 Kali Khola , 250-500 m, Bari land, south aspect
8 Kali Khola, Adhamara, 650 m, forest land, north aspect
9 Kali Khola, Ikchha Kamana, 1250 m, forest land, west aspect
10 Kali Khola, Jaugera, 750-100 m, Khoria, south-west
11 Andheri Khola, Khasarang, 250-300 m, Khoria, south-west
12 Kali Khola, Saldanda, Kirsaura, 1000-1200 m, Khoria, south-west

The methods used to analyse the soil samples are given below:

1. Soil pH was determined using Orion pH meter. The ratio between soil to water was 1:2.5.
2. Soil Organic Matter was determined by Walkley and Black method.
3. Total Nitrogen was determined by Kjeldahl method.
4. Available phosphorus was determined by using Olsen_P (0.5 M NaHCO3).
5. Available potassium was determined by extracting soil by one normal ammonium acetate
solution (pH 7.0) and the filtrate was fed to the flame photometer directly to record
potash.
6. C.E.C.: Exchanged with one normal ammonium acetate and excess ammonium ions
removed by ethanol; and distilled with light Magnesium oxide.
7. Soil texture was determined by USDA method.

19
8. Extractable cations: Exchanged with one normal ammonium acetate solution; calcium and
magnesium were determined by EDTA titration method and sodium and potassium were
determined with the flame photometer.

4 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Socio-economic Features of the Communities

The study also included the use of a blend of both PRA techniques and a detailed sample
household survey with a structured questionnaire to gather baseline socio-economic
information from 50 percent of households in Kali Khola and Andheri – Khahare Khola
watershed areas. Following are the findings of the socio –economic survey:

4.1.1 Villages/settlements

The distribution of the villages/settlements in the study area is shown in the social map
appended to this report (Appendix 3). Most of the houses in the watershed are clustered in
different locations forming a village or settlement while some are scattered in isolated
locations (Map 11 and 20). The names of the major villages/settlements and the proportion of
the households located in these villages/settlements are presented in Table 4 and 5. The Kali
Khola watershed is larger than Andheri-Khahare Khola watershed both in terms of area and
number of households.

Table 4. Distribution of Sample Households by Villages/settlements in Kali Khola


Watershed
Villages/Settlements Households
No. Percent
Adhamara 16 19.3
Banel tar 5 6.0
Bhoteswara 8 9.6
Dhap Khola 3 3.6
Dhosghari 4 4.8
Jaugera 5 6.0
Kali Khola 17 20.5
Kitiswara 8 9.6
Madkena 3 3.6
Pam Danda 6 7.2
Raibung 5 6.3
Sal Danda 3 3.6
Total 83 100
Source: Household survey, 1999.

20
Table 5. Household Distribution by Villages/settlements in Andheri-Khahare Khola
Watershed
Villages/Settlements Households
No. Percent
Kafal Danda 5 17.2
Khasrang 13 44.8
Khola Gaun 8 27.6
Rasali 3 10.3
Total 29 100
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.1.2 Ethnic composition


The dominant ethnic groups in the Kali Khola and Andheri-Khahare Khola watershed areas
are of Tibeto-Burmese origin (Table 6). This includes Chepang, Gurung, Magar and Tamang.
Chepang, also called Praja, is the indigenous ethnic group inhabiting this area. Chepangs
constitute the single most numerous households in the study area. Chhetri and occupational
castes are other minor ethnic groups in the study area. The occupational castes include Kami,
Sarki and Damai and they are still treated as untouchables in the rural areas.

Table 6. Ethnic Composition in the Study Areas


Ethnic Groups Kali Khola Andheri-Khahare Khola Total
No. Percent No. Percent No. Percent
Gurung/Magar/ Tamang 34 41.0 19 65.5 53 47.3
Chepang 47 56.6 6 20.7 53 47.3
Chhetri 1 1.2 3 3.4 4 1.8
Occupational caste 1 1.2 1 10.3 2 3.6
Total 83 100 29 100 112 100
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.1.3 Livelihood features

4.1.3.1 Sources of livelihood


Agriculture is the main source of livelihood for families living in the Kali Khola and
Andheri-Khahare Khola areas. Farming is, however, highly subsistence oriented and the
agricultural produces are not adequate to sustain livelihood throughout the year. Majority of
the families have poor standard of living. In fact, Chepang represents poorest of the poor
ethnic groups in Nepal and in many locations in the region, some of them still live in the
caves. Most of the households depend on wage labour for additional income. These two,
therefore, are the main sources of living for people. A small proportion of the households also
earn their living from service and small-scale business. Business mainly includes petty shops
and tea- shops.

4.1.3.2 Food sufficiency


Food deficiency is the general feature of the farming households in the study area. Only 2.7
percent of the households in these watersheds are food self-sufficient. More than 85 percent
of the households experience varying degrees of food deficit for three to nine months (Table
7). These households adopt various kinds of copping strategies to meet their food
requirements during the deficit months. The main copping mechanisms are: buying food with
their own money earned from wage labouring - both in cash and kind, service and business,

21
and selling agricultural produce, including livestock and their products (Table 8). A majority
of the households also depend on wild foods, such as Gittha, Bhyakur (Dioscorea deltoidea
Wall), Tarul (Dioscorea bulbifera Linn) etc. collected from the forests and on the loan money
to purchase food from the market.
Table 7. Distribution of Households by Food Sufficiency Categories
Food Sufficiency Reporting Households
No. Percent
0-3 months 7 6.2
3-6 months 74 66.1
6-9 months 15 13.4
9-12 months 13 11.6
> than 12 months 3 2.7
Total 112 100
Source: Household survey, 1999.

Table 8. Coping Mechanisms Adopted by Families in Food-deficit Months (Multiple


Response)
Mechanisms Responding Households (n = 112)
No. Percent
Buy with own money 90 80.3
Collecting wild food 72 64.3
Buy with loan money 61 54.5
Get food grain on loan 15 13.3
Hunting/ fishing 6 5.4
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.1.3.3 Sources of cash income


The sources and opportunities for earning cash income in the villages are limited. A majority
of the households lack cash income required to maintain their livelihood. Agricultural
production is not adequate for Sale and the other opportunities are quite limited. Selling of
livestock and livestock products, fresh vegetables and fruits are some of the major on-farm
source of income in the areas (Table 9). About 15 percent of the households have also
reported to depend on selling firewood to meet cash income requirements of the family.
This figure, however, appears to be understated (for fear of legal implication) against the
observation of and discussion held with the farming communities during PRA survey. This is
also one of the major reason for accelerated deteriorating condition of the forest in the area.

Table 9. Sources of Cash Income from Agriculture


Sources Responding Households (n = 112)
No. Percent
Livestock Sale 87 77.6
Fresh Vegetables Sale 61 54.5
Livestock products Sale 42 37.5
Fruits Sale 26 23.2
Firewood Sale 16 14.3
Food grain (blackgram) 14 12.5
Wild vegetable Sale 2 1.8
Wooden products Sale 2 1.8
Crop by-products Sale 1 0.89
Source: Household survey, 1999.

22
The farming households of the study area have very limited access to off-farm sources of
cash income (Table 10). A majority of the households do wage laboring or work as porter
within and outside the village in the nearby market places like Mungling bazar. Services and
small-scale businesses also provide some cash income to the farmers of the study area. The
small-scale business includes petty shops, tea-stalls and selling Raksi (homemade liquor).
Ninety-three percent of the sample households have reported to make Raksi. Of these
households, 77.7 percent make it from fingermillet, 11.6 percent from maize and 3.6 percent
from fruits.

Table 10. Sources of Off-farm Cash Income


Sources Responding Households (n = 112)
No. Percent
Wage labouring/portering 64 57.1
Service 25 22.3
Business 10 8.9
Pension 2 1.8
Tempo driving 2 1.8
Source: Household survey, 1999.

A large proportion of the households (50 percent) in the area reported Tanking loans from
different sources to meet their cash requirements. These households take cash loans from
various sources like moneylenders, neighbours and relatives (Table 11). This shows that
farmers in the areas have low income and they have to depend on loan money for their
household expenditure.

Table 11. Sources of Off-farm Cash Income


Sources Responding Households
No. Percent
Money lenders 26 46.4
Village co-operative fund 15 26.8
Neighbours 7 12.5
Relatives 4 7.1
Bank 4 7.1
Total 56 100
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.1.4 Standard of Living

4.1.4.1 Housing condition and surrounding environment

The types of house-roof are often taken as a proxy indicator of wealth and living standard of
a particular family. About 90 percent of the households have their main living houses with
thatch roof. These roofs are made of thatch grasses, majority of which comes from the forest
and Khoria (land where shifting cultivation is practised). Very few households have stone
and iron sheet roofing. Similarly, about 92 percent households have their houses with
Kachcha wall, i.e. made of stone and mud (Table 12).

23
Table 12. Types of Roof and Wall of Main Living House
Types of Roof and Wall Reporting Households (n=112)
No. Percent
Types of Roof
Thatch 101 90.2
Stone slate 6 5.4
Iron sheet 5 4.5
Types of Wall
Stone + mud 103 92.0
Wood only 8 7.1
Wood + twigs 1 0.9
Source: Household survey, 1999.

In most of the houses living room and kitchen are combined. The ventilation in the house is
usually poor and the living rooms turn quite smoky during cooking. Only about 5 percent
respondents reported using smokeless cooking stoves in their kitchen.

4.1.4.2 Drinking water situation

Streams, mostly of spring origin, are the main sources of drinking water for majority of the
villages. The water is directly brought from these streams through polythene pipes and is
used without any treatment. This mode of drinking water has been termed as tap or pipe
water in this report. Four sources of drinking water, namely pipe/tap water, streams/rivers,
well and channel are in use. About 86 percent households use pipe water, and the rest fetches
water directly from streams, well and channel (Table 13).

Table 13. Sources of Drinking Water


Sources Reporting Households (n = 112)
No. Percent
Pipe water 97 86.6
Stream/rivers 12 10.7
Well 2 1.8
Channel 1 0.9
Source: Household survey, 1999.

In most of the villages, taps, wells or streams for fetching water are located at reasonable
distance. According to the survey, the average time taken to fetch water (walking distance to
and-from the fetching places) is about 12.68 ± 1.95 minute (range of 1 minute to 2 hours).

4.1.5 Migration for work

Seasonal migration for the off-farm income constitutes a major activity of the community of
the Kali Khola and Andheri-Khahare Khola watersheds. Family members from a
considerable number of households also migrate temporarily from their villages for more than
a year (annual migration) for off-farm work. About 55 percent of the households reported to
have their family members involved in seasonal migration from their villages to earn cash
income. This figure for annual migration outside their villages is 33 percent (Table 14).

24
Table 14. Family Members Involved in Migration Outside their Villages
Family Members No. of Reporting Households Family Member/household
Seasonal Annual Seasonal Annual
Male 57 34 1.24 1.26
Female 7 7 1.86 1.29
Children 4 3 3.00 2.75
Total 61 37 1.73 1.51
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.1.6 Demographic Features

4.1.6.1 Family type

Of the total households, 34.8 percent are joint1 family and the rest 65.2 percent are nucleus2
family. This shows that, in these communities, family splits when sons get married. The farm
resources are, therefore, fragmented in subsequent generations and get further smaller.

4.1.6.2 Population composition

The composition of population in the areas by age groups and sex is presented in Table 15.
Of the total population, 51.78 percent is male and the male to female ratio is 1:1.07. The
average family size is 7.24 persons, which is more than one and half point higher than the
national figure of 5.6 (CBS, 1998).

Table 15. Composition of Population by Age Group and Sex


Age Groups Male Female Total
No. Percent No. Percent No. Percent
1-12 138 32.8 136 34.8 274 33.7
13-15 33 7.8 33 8.4 66 8.1
16-60 213 50.7 186 47.5 399 49.2
61 + 36 8.8 36 9.3 72 9
Total 420 100 391 100 811 100
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.1.6.3 Sex and age of farming decision-makers

The male household heads are the main decision-makers about the farming activities in the
study areas. Out of the total surveyed households, 94.6 percent have male household heads as
the main decision- makers in the family. Distribution of the main farming decision-makers by
age group is presented in Table 16. About 46 percent of the farming decision-makers fall in
the age group of 26-45 years. Similarly, about 22 percent of the farming decision-makers are
old aged in the age group of more than 60 years.

1
Extended family with cousins and grand parents living together.
2
Small separated family consisting of husband and wife with their children.

25
Table 16. Distribution of Decision- Makers in the Family in Farming Activity by Age Group
and Sex
Age Groups Percent of households by Sex Total
(Years) Male Female Percent
< 25 4.5 0 4.5
26-45 41.1 4.5 45.5
46-60 26.8 0.9 27.7
Above 60 22.3 0 22.3
Total 94.6 5.4 100
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.1.6.4 Educational Status

A large proportion of the family members (56.3 percent) is illiterate (Table 17). Out of the
literate population, 35.4 percent only have school education. People with university education
are negligible. The education status of the main farming decision-makers is presented in
Table 18. About 70 percent of the farming decision-makers are illiterate and about 28 percent
are either just literate or have primary level education. This show that the educational status
of the main farming decision-makers is quite low (Table 18).

Table 17. Status of Education in the Community


Status of Education Male Female Total
(above 5 years) No. Percent No. Percent No. Percent
Illiterate 134 42.0 182 68.5 316 56.3
Just literate 26 8.7 15 5.6 41 7.3
School education 132 44.6 67 25.1 199 35.4
University education 4 1.7 2 0.8 6 1.0
Total 296 100 266 100 562 100
Source: Household survey, 1999.

Table 18. Status of Education of Main Farming Decision Makers in the Family
Status of Education Households
No. Percent
Illiterate 78 69.6
Literate/primary education 31 27.7
Secondary education 2 1.8
University education 1 0.9
Total 112 100
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.2 Agriculture and Natural Resource Management

4.2.1 Land type and ownership

Most of the farming households own cultivated land. Of the total surveyed households, 2.7
percent are landless. Two types of ownership of land have been reported. One is registered
land, legally registered with the District Land Revenue Office and the other is unregistered

26
but have ownership right through use. The majority of the registered land is Bari3 land
followed by Khoria4 and Khet5 land whereas, most of the unregistered land is under Khoria.

Table 19. Distribution of Land by Land Type and Registration


Land Type Reporting households Mean land holding (ha) Mean parcel
Registered Unregistered Registered Unregistered number
Khet 27 1 0.33 ± 0.15 0.07± 0.0 1.15 ± 0.09
Pakho Bari 98 5 0.49 ± 0.05 0.20 ± 0.08 2.46 ± 0.16
Khoriya 16 51 0.42 ± 0.17 0.20 ± 0.02 1.84 ± 0.15
Khar Bari 13 11 0.11 ± 0.02 0.24 ± 0.12 1.61 ± 0.25
Forest 3 10 0.29 ± 0.14 1.25 ± 0.64 1.13 ± 0.19
Average 0.66 ± 0.07 0.45 ± 0.13
Source: Household survey, 1999.

The farming households in the study areas are small landholders with an average registered
land holding of 0.66± 0.07 hectare. A majority of the households own Pakho Bari followed by
Khet and KharBari (private pasture land) (Table 19). Except for Pakho Bari, the land
fragmentation is low. The mean number of parcel of Pakho Bari is about 3.

4.2.2 Land tenure system

The land renting system in the areas is very small (Table 20). Only 10.7 percent households
reported to have rented in the cultivated land from others and 2.7 percent households reported
to have rented out the cultivated land to others. Renting of the Khoria land is also practiced in
the area. 11.6 percent households have reported to rent in Khoria land from others while 3.6
percent rented out to others. The renting in and out of Khoria land is locally called Nyauli,
and the rent for Nyauli is often a few Dokos (baskets) of maize cobs or a certain number of
chicken or goats, usually agreed in advance.

Table 20. Lands Rented in and out by Land Type


Tenure Khet Bari Khoria
System No. of Mean No. of Mean No. of Mean Area
Households Area (ha) Households Area (ha) Households (ha)
Rent in 2 0.12 ± 9 0.15 ± 13 5.25 ± 6.09
0.05 0.03
Rent out 2 0.06 ± 1 0.10 ± 0.0 4 1.75 ± 1.77
0.01
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.2.3 Irrigation facilities

The irrigation in the study area is available only to the Khet land. The cultivation of food
crops in Pakho Bari and Khoria is done largely under rainfed condition. Out of the total Khet
land, only 3.51 hectare (38.7 percent) has year- round irrigation facility. The mean Khet area
under this system is 0.27 ± 0.13 hectare. The rest of the Khet land has seasonal irrigation,
3
Bari land refers to the upland rainfed cultivated land, where maize or Ghaiya (upland rice) based cropping patterns is
practised.
4
Land under slash and burn shifting cultivation.
5
Khet land refers to relatively low lying and irrigated (seasonal or year round) cultivated land, where puddle rice is
cultivated.

27
which is limited to during rainy season only and remains functional up to the end of Asoj
(September/October). About 28 percent of the households also have year-round irrigation in
their Bari land. This is mainly through pipe irrigation. The mean Bari area under this system
is 0.36 ± 0.12 hectare. This shows that irrigation is one of the main constraints for crop
production in the area.

4.2.4 Practice of shifting cultivation system (Khoria)

Shifting cultivation of growing food crops, locally known as Khoria farming, is commonly
practiced in both Kali Khola and Andheri-Khahare watersheds. The farmers in the area have
been practicing shifting cultivation for about one hundred or more years. This practice is
relatively more common in Kali Khola than in Andheri-Khahare watershed area. Of the total
surveyed households, about 65 percent in Kali Khola and 45 percent in Andheri- Khahare
watersheds have reported to practice the shifting cultivation.

Shifting cultivation involves slash and burn of forest area, usually adjacent to the permanent
farming lands, and then cultivation of crops on such land in rotation with fallow period of a
few years (Photographs 3 and 4). The year in which crops are grown following the slash and
burn of the forest land is locally called Khoria while the years in which the land is kept
fallow for shrubs and trees to grow is called Lhose. The Lhose is, therefore, the interval of
rotation for shifting cultivation.

The Lhose period depends on the land holding of the farmers and ranges from one year to
fifteen years. The average Lhose period has been reported to be 3.62 ± 3.00 years. During
PRA sessions, farmers mentioned that, about 20 years ago, the Lhose period used to be of 10
to 15 years. The Lhose period has gradually shortened over time. This has been largely due to
declining area of the forest as well as due to the need for an intensive cultivation to grow
more food for the increased population. Another reason is that the area under shifting
cultivation per farming household has also decreased due to the increase in the number of
households in the area.

4.2.5 Agriculture production

4.2.5.1 Cropping patterns

A number of cropping patterns is in practice in the area. The cropping patterns followed in
Khet, Bari and Khoria land are presented in Table 21. The cropping patterns in Khet land are
rice – based, and rice – rice - wheat and maize – rice – fallow are the dominant cropping
patterns. In areas with year-round irrigation, vegetables have also been found integrated with
the cropping pattern in the Khet land. The cropping patterns in Pakho Bari land are maize -
based and are much diverse than that in the Khet. The maize followed by blackgram and
maize relayed with fingermillet are the major cropping patterns in Pakho Bari. The cropping
patterns in Khoria land are also maize-based. The maize is followed by blackgram or
horsegram or niger. Some farmers also reported to grow only niger in Khoria land but this
practice is in negligible area.

28
Table 21. Cropping Patterns in Khet, Pakho Bari and Khoria Land
Cropping Pattern by Land Type Percentage households Percentage area

Khet
Early rice- rice-wheat 50 20
Maize- rice- Fallow 50 80
Pakho Bari
Maize/Fingermillet - Fallow 100 25
Maize- Blackgram-Fallow 100 75
Maize –maize - Fallow 20 5
Maize/Niger - Fallow 20 5
Khoria
Maize- Blackgram or Horsegram- Fallow 100 90
Niger only - 10
Source: PRA conducted for the study, 1999.

29
Photograph 3. Burning of the Area under Shifting Cultivation

Photograph 4. Khoria land under Maize and the Adjacent Lhose Area

30
4.2.5.2 Food crops and crop productivity

A wide range of similar food crops are grown in both Kali Khola and Andheri-Khahare
watersheds (Table 21). A slightly different crops are grown in Khet, Pakho Bari and Khoria.
Some of the crops are, however, commonly grown in all three types of the cultivated land.
The normal season rice and spring maize are the most commonly grown crops in Khet land.
A small number of farmers also grow Chaite (early) rice and wheat in Khet. Relatively, a
large types of food crops are grown in the Pakho Bari. Among these, summer maize and
fingermillet are the most widely grown crops A wide variety of legumes and minor crops
like niger and upland rice are also grown by the farmers. Though in small area, and therefore
not mentioned in Table 21, farmers also grow other minor crops like foxtail millet, sorghum,
mustard, cassava and sweetpotato. In Khoria land, maize and blackgram are widely grown by
the farmers. Some farmers have also reported to grow horsegram.

Table 22. Area and Yield of Major Food Crops Grown in Khet, Pakho Bari and Khoria Land
Food Crops Reporting Area (ha) Mean Yield
Households Total Mean (ton/ha)
Khet Land
Chaite (early) rice 6 1.23 0.21± 0.07 0.69 ± 0.22
Normal rice 28 9.47 0.34± 0.14 1.35 ± 0.99
Wheat 5 1.89 0.38± 0.20 0.95 ± 0.26
Spring maize 17 8.00 0.47± 0.23 0.95 ± 0.10
Pakho Bari Land
Summer maize 104 49.05 0.47± 0.04 2.02 ± 0.91
Spring Maize 12 2.84 0.24± 0.10 1.01± 0.28
Finger millet 88 18.23 0.21± 0.02 1.85 ± 1.07
Upland rice 6 0.40 0.07± 0.01 0.84 ± 0.09
Black Gram 31 5.47 0.18± 0.04 0.61± .15.0
Niger* 16 1.48 0.09± 0.02 .211 ± .05
Horsegram* 17 1.55 0.09± 0.02 .317 ± .282
Buckwheat 42 4.01 0.01± 0.01 0.32 ± 0.04
Ricebean* 21 2.09 0.01± 0.02 .211 ± .183
Khoria Land
Maize 52 9.45 0.18 ± 0.02 1.05 ± 0.10
Blackgram 14 2.37 0.17 ± 0.05 0.50 ± 0.13
Horsegram 6 0.58 0.10 ± 0.03 0.56 ± 0.22
Note: The mean yield of niger, horsegram and ricebean is in Kg/hectare.
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.2.5.3 Intervention of improved varieties and use of chemical fertilizers

The majority of households in the study areas grow local varieties of food crops. The use of
improved crop varieties by the farmers is very limited. The number of households reported to
grow improved varieties of crops is one for rice, four for maize and two for fingermillet. For
the rest of crops, only local varieties are grown

The major sources of plant nutrients for the production of food crops in the study areas are
compost and farm yard manure. The use of chemical fertilizers is quite negligible. Only two
households reported that they have applied chemical fertilizers in normal rice and spring

31
maize in Khet land. In the Khoria system, slash and burn is the main practice for fertilizing
the land, which improves fertility through the addition of ash and organic matters. However,
due to shorter rotation period being adopted by the farmers, the fertility of soil under Khoria
system is declining.

4.2.5.4 Crop productivity and soil fertility trends

The majority of the farmers reported that the crop productivity of the Khet, Pakho Bari and
Khoria in the areas is decreasing over the last 20 years (Table 23). The farmers' perception
about declining crop productivity is however, highest in Pakho Bari, followed by Khoria and
Khet. The major cause behind this is the decrease in soil fertility or removal of top- soil by
run-off water during rainy season. Decrease in compost application is another reason of
declining crop production (Table 24). A small number of farmers mentioned that
deteriorating genetic quality of crops and shortage of family labour were other reasons for
declining crop productivity.

Table 23. Trends in Crop Productivity by Land Type


Land Type Responding Households (n = 112)
Same Increased Decreased
Khet 10 3 17
Bari 19 4 85
Khoria 13 1 58
Source: Household survey, 1999.

Table 24. Major Reasons for Decline in Productivity (Multiple Response)


Major Reasons Responding Households (n = 112)
Number Percent
Decreasing soil fertility 61 54.5
Declining genetic quality of crops 6 5.4
Lack of enough compost 52 46.4
Shortage of family labour 4 3.6
Source: Household survey, 1999.

The majority of the farmers have also reported that the soil fertility in the Khet, Pakho Bari
and Khoria in the areas is decreasing over the last 20 years (Table 25). The farmers'
perception about declining soil fertility is however, highest in Pakho Bari, followed by
Khoria and Khet. Again, the erosion of top soil is regarded as one of the major reason
(reported by about 69 percent households) for the declining trend in soil fertility in the study
area (Table 26). The decrease in the amount of application of compost has been stated to be
another reason for this trend. During PRA exercise, farmers mentioned that livestock number
has drastically declined over the last ten years, largely because of shrinking forest areas and
deteriorating forest conditions. As a result, animal manure has decreased.

32
Table 25. Trends in Soil Fertility by Land Type
Land Type Responding Households (n = 112)
Same Increased Decreased
Khet 8 4 20
Pakho Bari 15 2 92
Khoria 10 1 55
Source: Household survey, 1999.

Table 26. Major Reasons for Decline in Soil Fertility (Multiple Response)
Major Reasons Responding Households (n = 112)
Number Percent
Increased cropping intensity 6 5.4
Decreased application of compost 46 41.1
Erosion of top soil 77 68.8
Source: Household survey, 1999.

The measures to increase soil fertility are grossly lacking (Table 27). A majority of the
surveyed farmers mentioned that they do not use any new methods except the application of
farmyard manure. Only one farmer reported to use green manure and two farmers used
chemical fertilizers to increase the soil fertility in their cultivated land.

Table 27. Measures Adopted to Increase Soil Fertility


Fertility Enhancing Measures Responding Households (n = 112)
Number Percent
Use of chemical fertilizer 2 1.80
Use of green manure 1 0.01
None 45 40.2
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.2.5.5 Vegetable cultivation

Out of the total households, 86.6 percent grow vegetables of some kind. About 57 percent of
these households grow vegetables in semi-commercial or commercial scale and sell part of
their produce to earn additional cash income in the nearby market along the Gorkha –
Narayanghat highway as well as in Mugling bazar. The rest 43 percent grow vegetables in
kitchen garden scale entirely for home consumption (Table 28). A wide range of vegetables is
grown in the area. A majority of them are predominantly local varieties. In Kali Khola
watershed SAPROSC, a national NGO, has introduced a number of improved varieties of
vegetables in the community. The vegetables widely grown are presented in the transect
prepared during the PRA, which is appended in the report (Appendix 4 A, B and C). Since
both the watershed areas are close to the road-head, there is a good scope to include fresh
vegetable cultivation as an income generating activity in the overall integrated watershed
management plan for the areas.

33
Table 28. Distribution of Vegetable Growing Households by Scale of Production
Scale of Production Households
No. Percent
Kitchen garden 41 42.3
Semi-commercial 50 51.5
Commercial 6 6.2
Total 97 100
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.2.5.6 Fruit cultivation

Regarding fruit cultivation, 67 percent of the households reported to have fruit trees. The fruit
trees are usually grown scattered around their houses. Large commercial fruit orchard is
almost non-existent. The communities in the area grow a wide variety of fruits ranging from
tropical to sub-tropical types. (Table 29). Banana, orange and guava are the most common
fruits grown by most of the households. Other important fruit species are citrus, peach, plum,
pear, mango and pineapple.

Table 29. Type and Number of Fruit Trees (Multiple Response)


Types of Fruit Trees Responding Households Number of Fruit Trees
(n = 112)
No. Percent Total Mean
1. Banana 55 49.1 1748 31.78 ± 10.87
2. Orange 39 34.8 355 9.10 ± 1.79
3. Guava 33 29.4 209 6.33 ± 3.00
4. Lime 27 24.1 103 3.81 ± 1.09
5. Lemon 20 17.8 49 2.45 ± 0.35
6. Mango 18 16.1 48 2.67 ± 0.68
7. Peach 14 12.5 33 2.36 ± 0.46
8. Pear 9 8.0 34 3.78 ± 2.16
9. Papaya 5 4.5 5 1.00 ± 0.00
10. Litchi 5 4.5 6 1.20 ± 0.20
11. Plum 3 2.7 7 2.33 ± 0.33
12. Pineapple 3 2.7 59 19.67 ± 7.79
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.2.5.7 Livestock Rearing

Livestock rearing is an integral and important part of agricultural production system in the
areas. It provides milk, meat and eggs for family nutrition; draft power for tilling land; dung
for manuring crop fields; and cash income to meet household cash requirements. The types of
livestock reared by the community are presented in Table 30. In terms of the economic
importance, cattle are ranked first by majority of the households followed by goats/sheep and
buffalo. Chicken, though in small number are kept by majority of the households. Pigs are not
very common and are only kept by Magars. The breeds of these livestock are mostly local
with low production potentials.

34
Table 30. Distribution of Livestock by Type
Livestock Reporting No. of Livestock Mean Number
Households Adult Young Total
Cattle 100 250 41 291 2.91 ± 0.22
Goat/Sheep 93 172 39 211 2.27 ± 0.19
Buffalo 83 123 50 173 2.09 ± 0.12
Pig 9 12 1 13 1.44 ± 0.18
Chicken/duck 99 302 568 8700 8.79 ± 0.83
Source: Household survey, 1999.

The livestock are raised under traditional management system characterised by poor feeding,
housing and care. Stall feeding, free grazing and/or combined are the major ways of rearing
livestock (Table 31). The combination of stall-feeding and free grazing is the most common
practice of rearing livestock (reported by about 70 percent of households) in the study areas.
Due to difficult terrain for grazing, stall-feeding has also been reported by a large number (20
percent) of farmers. Forage grasses (ground cover or surface grasses) and fodder grasses (tree
fodder) collected from the government forests is the most important source of livestock feed.
The other sources of grasses are terrace risers of cultivated land (Table 32). Crop by-products
are also important constituents of the livestock feed.

Table 31. Livestock Rearing System


Livestock Rearing System Reporting Households
No. Percent
Stall-feeding 21 19.4
Free-grazing 12 11.1
Both/ combined 75 69.4
Source: Household survey, 1999.

Table 32. Ranking of Sources of Forage and Fodder Grass


Sources Overall Ranks
Forage Grass Fodder Grass
Government forest 1 1
Terrace risers of Khet and Pakho Bari 2 2
KharBari (Pasture land) 3 3
Community forest 4 4
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.2.5.8 Fodder and forage deficit months

About 97 percent of households reported that the deficit of fodder and forage is more in the
months of Falgun (February/March), Chaitra (March/April), Baishakh (April/May) and Jeth
(May/June). Their own source of fodder and forage is very poor. The main feeds used by
farmers during the period of scarcity are maize stover, straw, dry leaves of Sal (Shorea
robusta) and other trees, dry stem of Sisnu (Stinging nettle, Artica dioca), crop-bi-products of
black gram and finger millet and cereal concentrate (Kundo).

35
Figure 3. Fodder/forage Grass Deficit Months
120
100
80
60
40
20
0

h
sir

th
h

r
h

itr

sa
ak
ag

u
us

Je
g

ag

A
ish
M
Po
an

Ch
Ph
M

Ba
4.2.6 Forest Resources and Environment

4.2.6.1 Forest vegetation

Sub-tropical mixed hardwood type of vegetation is found in the study area with Sal (Shorea
robusta), Adina cordifolia, Bombax ceiba etc. as the main species in lower elevation whereas
in the higher elevation Pinus roxburghii, Schima wallichii, Castanopsis, Alnus nepalensis etc.
are found. The riverain species found in the areas are Saccharum munja, Spontaneum and
Imperata species. The vegetation in the areas has been heavily destroyed in the recent past
and most of the forest areas look like shrub land with scattered trees. The decline in forest
area has accelerated in the last 20 years, especially after the opening of Prithvi highway and
Gorkha-Narayanghat highway. This is also evident in social/resource maps presented in
Appendix 3 a, b, c and d. The excessive use and encroachment of forest for agricultural land
and for timber and firewood are the main reasons behind this. The opening of roads gave
people an access to the market for their timber and firewood and helped to earn urgently
needed cash income to sustain their livelihood.

Natural forest is the main source of firewood, timber, fodder and forage grasses, leaf litters
and other forest products like wild foods and medicinal herbs. Forest is also one of the main
sources of wild foods for the people in the study area, especially during food deficit months.
The farming households in the area collect a wide variety of wild foods from the forest.
These include Githa, Bhyakur (Dioscorea deltoidea Wall), Tarul ( Dioscorea Bulbifera Linn),
asparagus and a variety of green leafy vegetables. The sources of these wild foods are now
rapidly decreasing due to shrinkage and over exploitation of forest areas.

4.2.6.2 Sources of cooking fuel

Firewood is the prime source of fuel/energy for cooking. All households have reported to use
firewood for cooking their meals. The Government forest is the primary source of the

36
firewood for all households. About 37 percent of the households also reported to use
firewood from their own sources.

4.2.6.3 Sources of timber

The Government forest is the primary source of the timber for all households. About 13
percent of the households also reported to use timber from their own sources. However, only
5 percent households have good supply of timber from their own sources and the rest depend
on the Government forest.

4.2.7 Access to support services

4.2.7.1 Training and tours

Farmers' training plays an important role in imparting skills and knowledge about new and
improved technology in agriculture and natural resource management. Similarly, farmers'
observation tours to research stations and places with development interventions help
increase their awareness about the new technologies. Farmers from about 21.4 percent
households have participated in the training on one or more subjects. Participants included
12.5 percent male participants, 6.3 percent female and 2.7 percent both sex in the training.
The training was mostly on food and vegetable production and soil and water
conservation/management (Table 33).

Table 33. Types of Training Received by Reporting Households


Types of Training Responding Households (n = 112)
No. Percent
Cereal and vegetable production 10 8.9
Soil and water conservation/management 5 4.5
Livestock rearing 1 0.89
Forest management 1 0.89
Cottage industries 1 0.89
Source: Household survey, 1999.

Farmers' participation in agricultural tours is also low. Only 9.9 percent have reported to
participate in the agriculture tour organized by one or the other organisation. Of this, 6.3
percent is male and 3.6 percent is female.

4.2.7.2 Participation in social organizations

There are a number of social organizations operating in Kali Khola and Andheri-Khahare
watersheds. These organizations include: Aama Samuha (mothers' group), saving and credit
groups, health care committees, forest users committee, drinking water committee and school
development committee. In Kali Khola, many of these social organizations have been
initiated by SAPROSC. Out of total surveyed households, 40.2 percent are directly associated
with one or the other social organizations through membership.

4.2.7.3 Access to Information

The access to information on technologies related to cereal and vegetable production is


relatively better than in other subject areas. Of the total responding households, 35.7 percent

37
has received information from external sources. The farming households receiving
information on soil and water conservation/management, livestock rearing, forest
management and cottage industries are less than 10 percent for each of these (Table 34). The
main sources of information in these subject areas are the neighbours and radio (Table 35).

Table 34. Types of Information Received by the Reporting Households


Types of Information Responding Households (n = 112)
No. Percent
Cereal and vegetable production 40 35.7
Soil and water conservation/management 11 9.8
Livestock rearing 10 8.9
Forest management 8 7.1
Cottage industries 3 2.6
Source: Household survey, 1999.

Table 35. Sources of information


Sources Responding Households (n =112)
No. Percent
Neighbours 13 11.6
Radio 12 10.7
JT/JTA/ADO Office 4 3.50
Relatives 1 0.89
Source: Household survey, 1999.

4.3 Soil Fertility Status and Management

4.3.1 Kali Khola Watershed

4.3.1.1 Physical properties of soils

Soils are brown in colour and are shallow in depth on sloping terraces but on stable slopes
and on the ridges they are deep. The texture of Pakho Bari land is loam. The clay varies from
13.4 to 19.8 percent. Khoria soil also falls under the same textural class but the soil contains a
higher sand (51 percent) and lower percent of clay. The textural class of forest soils is sandy
loam (Table 36). The surface stoniness is more in the Khoria than in Pakho Bari land.

4.3.1.2 Soil fertility status

Soil reaction (pH) of Pakho Bari land is slightly acidic to neutral (6.45 to 6.80). While soil
reaction of the forest land at high and mid altitude is moderately acidic (5.45) but at low
altitude, the soil reaction is acidic. Similarly, the soil pH in Khoria land type is also slightly
acidic (Table 36). In general, in the hills and mountain regions of Nepal soil acidity increases
with the increasing altitude due to increase in rainfall. The land use is influencing the soil
reaction strongly than the altitude in the study area. There is a potential danger that if the
application of chemical fertilizers increases then the present level of soil reaction may go
further down. However, the application of chemical fertilizer is quite negligible and use of
compost and farmyard manure is continuing. Therefore, the buffering nature of organic
manure may play a vital role in maintaining the soil pH at acceptable level.

38
4.3.1.3 Organic matter and total nitrogen

A strong relationship between organic matter and total nitrogen content has been seen (Table
36). Forest soil contains medium to very high amount of organic matter and nitrogen. In
general, the soils of Pakho Bari land are medium except the soil of Bhoteswara, which is very
high in nitrogen and organic matter. The reason could be the nearness of sampling site to
homestead where farmers generally apply higher amount of compost and farmyard manure.
The soil in Khoria land contains slightly low nitrogen and medium organic matter.

4.3.1.4 Available Phosphorus and Potash

The available phosphorus in cultivated land is at high range. But the status of phosphorus in
Khoria and forest land are at low range from 7.76 kg/ha to 20.6 kg/ha (Table 36). High
availability of phosphorus in cultivated land could be due to suitable soil pH level in the soil
and increasing use of DAP fertilizer to some extent. It can be expected that crop response to
applied phosphate fertilizer could be insignificant. The forest and Khoria soils are low in
available phosphorus that indicates poor soil in P inherently.

Available potash is at high range with more than 470 kg/ha irrespective of land use types. It
indicates that potash will not be a limiting plant nutrient for crop production.

4.3.1.5 Cations and Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC)

Cation exchange capacity of soil is the indicator of nutrient holding and exchanging
properties. The clay content of soils has strongly indicated that higher the clay content higher
the CEC values. There is no relationship between the land use type and organic matter
content. Despite high organic matter content in forest soils, the CEC is at very low range
(10.5 m.e./100g). Similarly, the soil of Khoria lands is also at low range (Table 36). Medium
to high level of CEC indicates that the type of clay material is smectite. Since the soils are
mainly derived from basic rocks, one can expect expanding type of clay minerals in these
soils. In general, the cultivated lands are rich in cations such as calcium, magnesium and
potassium but the forest soils and Khoria soils are poor in cations.

4.3.2 Andheri Khola Watershed

4.3.2.1 Physical properties of soil

In general, soils are brown and shallow in depth. The broad textural class of Pakho Bari soils
is sandy loam to loam. The clay content is 15.8 percent and sand 50.8 percent to 60.8 percent
(Table 37). While the Khet land are light in texture with loamy sand textural class since, the
soils of Khet land is the result of deposition of sediments carried by the stream. Therefore,
they are very sandy in texture. Both in Pakho Bari and Khoria land, surface stoniness is
around 50 percent rendering land preparation one of the major constraints.

4.3.2.2 Soil reaction (pH)

Both Pakho Bari and Khet land soils have neutral to slightly alkaline soil reaction ranging
from 6.8 to 7.75. Since soils are mainly derived from dolomite limestone, the soils are
towards neutral side. Forest and Khoria soils are moderately acidic. Because of better status
of organic matter in the forest one can expect leaching of cations due to organic acid

39
produced by high amount of organic mater. As a result the soils are towards acidic side
despite major rocks are limestone. The total rainfall is more than 2000 mm and very much
intense. Therefore, the strong leaching effect of infiltrating rainwater might have influenced
the soil pH.

4.3.2.3 Organic matter and total nitrogen

The soils in Pakho Bari land in the Andheri Khola watershed are medium in organic matter
ranging from 1.29 to 1.90 percent . The nitrogen content also follows similar pattern. The
Khet lands are poor in organic matter and nitrogen content. Organic matter and nitrogen
content are 0.56 percent and 0.03 percent respectively (Table 37). Forest soils are rich in
organic matter and nitrogen content because of continuing deposition of leaf litter and also
due to less surface erosion as compared to the cultivated land (Table 37).

4.3.2.4 Available phosphorus and potash

The available phosphorus is very high in Pakho Bari and forest land. The soils in Khoria are
also at medium level (43.84 kg/ha). But the soils in Khet land are poor in phosphorus content
(19.39 kg/ha). Available potash is very high irrespective of the land use (Table 37).
Therefore, both the major plant nutrients are adequately available to crops.

4.3.2.5 Cations and Cations Exchange Capacity (CEC) of soils

Cations are at adequate levels except in the forest land. The CEC of soils in Pakho Bari land
is also at medium level (20.98 to 25.52 m.e./100 g) and is strongly related to the amount of
clay content. In Andheri Khola despite low percent of clay in the Khet land, CEC is at
medium level that indicates clay type to be of smectite group. However, a correct information
is not available on the type of clay at the moment.

4.3.3 Sustainable Soil Fertility Management

The fertility level of soils in Pakho Bari lands is better in both the watershed areas. But in
general, soils in Khoria, Khet land and Forest land are poor because of poor status in major
plant nutrients content and their presence in imbalance form mainly due to poor status of
available phosphorus. The declining fertility status of the forest area is due to continued
removal of the forest litters for compost preparation however, exceptionally at some pocket
areas the fertility of forest soils is better.

Based on soil test information it can be concluded that in agricultural land particularly Pakho
Bari land, the soil fertility status is at satisfactory level. But the Khet land in the Kali Khola
watershed where phosphorus is at very low range and the status of organic matter is also at
low range. These can therefore, limit crop production. However, soils are rich in potash
irrespective of land use type in both the watersheds. Therefore, the soil test values are not
very alarming though the values are at boarder line. Farmers have responded that the
declining soil fertility and crop productivity are serious problems (Table 23 and 25).

4.3.3.1 Soil Fertility Status

Based on soil test information it can be concluded that in agricultural land particularly Pakho
Bari land, the soil fertility status is at satisfactory level. But the Khet land in the Kali Khola

40
watershed where phosphorus is at very low range and the status of organic matter is also at
low range. These can therefore, limit crop production. The soils are rich in potash irrespective
of land use type.

The cultivation practice is on steep to very steep slopes in both the watershed areas. Bench
terraces are not common on steep slopes. The strong features of erosion such as presence of
gravel and stoniness and shallow depth of soil are undesirable characteristics, which indicates
that soil erosion is the main constraint for crop production. However, the soil test values are
not very alarming though the values are at boarder line. Soil fertility issue should also be
linked with the moisture management in the area. Therefore, there is a need to understand
farmers' management strategies regarding nutrient management. Information on soil erosion
is not available from these areas at the moment, though ICIMOD has established erosion
plots to test SALT models nearby the watersheds.

The positive aspect of the stoniness on the surface is that it protects the soil from the splash
erosion. The mass movement during the rainy season could be a major problem rather than
the surface erosion in the areas since during rainy season, the land coverage is found
satisfactory. Therefore, there is a need to conduct in-depth study regarding the erosion
process that occurs in the watersheds.

From the PRA and GIS exercise it revealed that majority of people depend upon the Bari
land. Therefore attention should be given to improve the soil fertility condition of Bari land
since farmers have expressed that the declining soil fertility and crop productivity are more in
Bari land.

GIS exercise has also indicated that a large portion of forestland has been converted into
permanent agriculture and shifting cultivation. Therefore, there is definitely a shortage of
forest leaf litters for the production of compost and fodder for animals. The PRA survey has
also revealed that the application of chemical fertilizers in the area is negligible. Farmers
should have an easy access to the chemical fertilizers. Though, majorities of farmers are poor
and can not afford to buy chemical fertilizers but in order to improve the fertility status of
soil, both chemical fertilizers and organic manure should be applied. The area under Khet
land is insignificant but from the point of view of cereal grain production, it is important.
Under intensive farming the fertility of the Khet land should be maintained through adequate
input of plant nutrients. Therefore, the traditional green manuring practices, which are not
popular among the communities in the watersheds, should be popularised.

41
Table 36. Physico-Chemical Properties of Soils in Kali Khola Watershed
Site Land Total Soil O.M Avl. P Avl. K Cations (m.e./100 g) C.E.C. Particle Size Distribution Textural
Type N% pH % kg/ha kg/ha Class
Ca Mg Na K m.e./ Sand Silt % Clay %
100g %
Kali khola, Pakho 0.08 6.80 1.46 59.46 475 11.28 4.57 .005 2.75 28.92 36.8 43.4 19.8 Loam
Raibung Bari
Kali Khola Pakho 0.12 6.45 2.39 47.8 470 2.88 1.44 .006 2.14 11.6 47.6 38 14.4 Loam
Bari
Kali Khola, Forest 0.12 6.65 2.45 9.05 441 5.52 2.24 .006 1.22 15.48 61.6 28.0 10.4 Sandy
Adhamara land loam
Kali Khola Forest 0.24 5.45 4.81 7.76 470 2.24 1.22 .008 1.02 10.51 59.6 32.0 8.4 Sandy
Ikchha land loam
Kamana
Kali Khola Khoria 0.09 6.25 1.83 20.68 470 3.36 2.84 0.96 1.58 14.62 45.6 38.0 16.4 Loam
Jaugera
Kali Khola, Khoria 0.10 5.75 1.92 10.34 470 2.08 1.2 .006 1.07 8.69 51.6 34 14.4 Loam
Saldanda,
Kirsaura
Bhoteswora Pakho 0.48 6.75 9.42 94.46 475 12.64 1.20 .004 1.07 22.16 40.8 45.4 13.8 Loam
Bari

42
Table 37. Physico - chemical Properties of Soil in Andheri Khola Watershed
Site Land type Total Soil OM Avl. P Avl. K Cations m.e./100g C.E.C. Particle Size Textural
N% pH % kg/ha kg/ha Distribution Class
Ca Mg Na K m.e./ Sand Silt clay
100g % % %
Andheri Pakho 0.07 7.75 1.29 55.58 475 10.8 3.6 1.13 3.36 25.52 60.8 23.4 15.8 Sandy
Khola, Bari loam
Nantar
Andheri Pakho 0.09 6.80 1.92 38.78 475 5.28 2.64 1.13 3.26 20.9 50.8 33.4 15.8 Loam
Khola, Kafle Bari
danda
Andheri Khet land 0.03 7.20 0.56 19.39 441 6.0 2.16 5.05 0.008 20.98 78.8 15.4 5.8 Loamy
Khola, sand
Khasarang
Besi
Andheri Forest 0.4 5.55 8.0 73.6 470 2.8 1.6 3.62 .0008 16.8 54.8 29.4 15.8 Sandy
Khola, land loam
Khasary
Majh Tola
Andheri Khoriya 0.10 5.90 1.8 43.94 470 2.90 1.24 1.38 .008 10.70 59.6 26.0 14.4 Sandy
Khola, loam
Khasara

43
4.4 GIS Information and Aerial Photo Interpretation

Analysis was done using GIS tools and aerial photo interpretation for quantifying land
degradation and for comparing the land degradations during the last two decades 1978 to
1999. Following are the results obtained from the GIS analysis.

4.4.1 Kali Khola Watershed

4.4.1.1 Land use changes

Kali Khola watershed lies in Chandi Bhanjyang VDC of Chitwan District. Total area of the
watershed is 992.4 ha. Of the total watershed area, 336.44 ha was found under agriculture and
436.96 ha under forest during 1999 whereas it was 194.90 ha and 537.36 ha during 1978
(Table 38). Areas under shrub land, forest and shifting cultivation have shrunk where as area
under agriculture has been found increased by 88.02 percent. Table 39 and Figure 4 shows
that there is little shift from agriculture land to forest and shifting cultivation but 89.6 percent
of the land originally under agriculture remains unchanged. On the other hand, 18.32 percent
of forest, 26.47 percent of shrub land and 48.95 percent of areas under shifting cultivation
have been converted to agriculture. The land use changes from 1978 to 1999 is also presented
in Figure 5. Farmers in this watershed have cleared the slopes up to 80.50 and are using such
land for cultivation of agricultural crops. The output maps for land use and land use changes
are presented in Map 3, 4 and 5.

Table 38. Changes in Land use Status in Kali Khola Watershed from 1978 to 1999
Land Use Class 1978 1999 Change (%) % of Total
Area (ha) Area (ha) Watershed
Agriculture 194.90 366.45 88.02 17.28
Forest 537.36 436.96 -18.68 -10.12
Shifting cultivation 111.19 66.85 -39.88 -4.47
Shrub 146.99 119.09 -18.98 -2.81
Boulder 2.06 3.15 52.94 0.11
Total 992.49 992.49

44
Figure 4. Land use Status in Kali Khola Watershed in 1978 and 1999

Agriculture Land Use in 1999


Land Use in 1978
Forest

Shifting
cultivation
Shrub

Boulder

Table 39. Land use Changes in Kali Khola Watershed from 1978 to 1999
Land Use Change Area (ha) % Change
Agriculture no change 174.64 89.60
Agriculture to Shrub 6.51 3.34
Agriculture to Forest 12.69 6.51
Agriculture to Shifting cultivation 1.06 0.54
Sub-total 194.90 100.00
Forest no change 383.74 71.41
Forest to Agriculture 98.46 18.32
Forest to Shrub 41.62 7.74
Forest to Shifting cultivation 13.42 2.49
Forest to Boulder 0.12 0.02
Sub-total 537.361 100.00
Shrub no change 69.42 47.22
Shrub to Agriculture 38.92 26.47
Shrub to Forest 32.38 22.02
Shrub to Shifting cultivation 6.27 4.26
Sub-total 146.99 100.00
Shifting cultivation no change 46.10 41.46
Shifting cultivation to Agriculture 54.43 48.95
Shifting cultivation to Forest 8.15 7.32
Shifting cultivation to Shrub 1.54 1.38
Shifting cultivation to Boulder 0.97 0.87
Sub-total 111.19 100.00
Boulder no change 2.06 100.00
Sub-total 2.06 100.00
Total 992.49

45
46
47
48
AGRICULTURE

(No change =
174.64 ha)

38.92

98.46
12.69
6.57
54.43

FOREST SHRUB

(No change = 32.38 (No change =


383.74 ha) 69.42 ha)
41.62

1.06 0.2
1.54
8.15

13.42 6.27

SHIFTING BOULDER
CULTIVATION
0.97 (No change =
(No change = 46.10
2.06 ha)
ha)

Figure 5: Land Use dynamics in Kali Khola Watershed from 1978 to 1999 (in ha)

4.4.1.2 Distribution of cultivated land by aspects

Agriculture land was found scattered in all aspects but the distribution in Southern and South-
Western, Western, Northern, and North-Western aspects is significant (Table 40). Similarly,
farmers are found practising shifting cultivation in all aspects but about 25 percent of total
area under shifting cultivation was found in the South- eastern aspect of the watershed (Table
41). The output maps for aspects of cultivated land are presented in the Map 6 and 7.

49
Table 40. Aspect Vs Agriculture Output in Kali Khola Watershed
Aspect Class Agricultural area
Area (ha) Percentage
Northern 34.619 9.45
North Eastern 18.869 5.15
Eastern 12.600 3.44
South Eastern 22.292 6.08
Southern 79.414 21.67
South Western 85.017 23.20
Western 58.546 15.98
North Western 55.093 15.03
Total 366.448 100.00

Table 41. Aspect Vs Shifting Cultivation Output in Kali Khola Watershed


Aspect Class Area under Shifting Cultivation
Area (ha) Percentage
Northern 9.329 13.96
North Eastern 18.051 27.01
Eastern 5.967 8.93
South Eastern 8.147 12.19
Southern 5.482 8.20
South Western 8.026 12.01
Western 5.088 7.61
North Western 6.754 10.10
Total 66.844 100.00

50
51
52
4.4.1.3 Distribution of cultivated land by slope

Major slope classes are assigned as per the classification of the LRMP (1987) and as
suggested by FAO (1979). To look at the wider range of the distribution of agricultural
practices in varying slope categories, major slope classes are further divided into the sub
classes as shown in Table 42. According to the land use classification of 1999, 366.44 ha of
land in Kali Khola watershed is under different agriculture practices, of which 77.10 percent
lies within the slope category >300. In this sub class of >300, about 55 percent of the total
agriculture area in the watershed lies between 30 0 to 450 slopes.

Total area under shifting cultivation in Kali Khola watershed is 66.844 ha, 80.38 percent of
which falls in the slope category >300. Similarly, 44 percent of the total area under shifting
cultivation lies within the slope range of 300 to 450, whereas 36 percent of area falls under >
450 slope category (Table 43). ). The output maps for slopes of cultivated land and shifting
cultivation are presented in Map 8 and 9.

Table 42. Slope Vs Agriculture Output in Kali Khola Watershed


Slope Class Agriculture area
Area (ha) Percentage
0-5 degree 4.36 1.19
5-30 degree 79.53 21.70
> 30 degree 282.55 77.10
Total 366.44 99.99
Sub Classes (5-30 degree)
5-15 degree 16.35 4.46
15-25 degree 31.46 8.59
25-30 degree 31.71 8.65
Sub total 79.53 21.70
Sub Classes (>30 degree)
30-45 degree 198.80 54.25
> 45 degree 83.74 22.85
Sub total 282.55 77.10

Table 43. Slope Vs Shifting Cultivation Output in Kali Khola Watershed


Slope Class Shifting Cultivation
Area (ha) Percentage
0-5 degree 0.818 1.22
5-30 degree 12.297 18.40
> 30 degree 53.730 80.38
Total 66.844 100.00
Sub Classes (5-30 degree)
5-15 degree 3.5739 5.35
15-25 degree 5.0580 7.57
25-30 degree 3.6648 5.48
Sub total 12.297 18.40
Sub Classes (>30 degree)
30-45 degree 29.4091 44.00
> 45 degree 24.3209 36.38
Sub total 53.730 80.38

53
54
55
56
57
4.4.1.4 Distribution of cultivated area along stream channel

Significant area of about 57 ha under agriculture in the watershed falls within a distance of 25
m from the centre of streams. This area is highly sensitive and prone to chronic erosion,
flooding, and sliding. Keeping this area under forest or grass cover would help maintain the
biodiversity, fulfil the needs of fodder and fuel wood for the farmers, and reduce the effect of
stream bank erosion, flooding and landslide along the stream channel (Table 44). ). The
output map for cultivated area and shifting cultivation along the stream channel is presented
in Map 10.

Table 44. Agriculture and Shifting Cultivation within 25 m. Distance from Stream Center in
Kali Khola Watershed

Landuse Area (ha) % of Total Watershed


Agriculture 56.9102 5.73
Shifting Cultivation 12.4482 1.25
Total 69.358 6.99

4.4.2 Andheri-Khahare Khola Watershed

4.4.2.1 Land use changes

Andheri-Khahare Khola watersheds are located in Tanahun district. The total area of the
watershed is 846.21 ha. Of the total watershed area, 257.61 ha was found under agriculture,
320.92 ha under forest and 238.24 ha under shifting cultivation during 1999, whereas it was
243.94 ha, 477.63 ha, and 104.73 ha respectively in 1978 (Table 45). Area under forest has
shrunk by 32.81 percent from that of 1978, whereas area under agriculture, shifting
cultivation and shrub have been found increased by 5.60 percent, 127.48 percent, 66.37
percent respectively.

Table 46 and Figure 5 shows that there is a significant shift from agriculture to forest (14.39
percent) and shifting cultivation (21.97 percent). 63.23 percent of the area originally under
agriculture remains unchanged whereas 18.89 percent of forest, 19.37 percent of shrubland
and 9.87 percent of area under shifting cultivation have been converted to agriculture. 21.00
percent of the forest area has been converted to shifting cultivation, averaging 1.06 percent of
deforestation per year, which is associated only with slash and burn for shifting cultivation.
Farmers in this watershed have cleared the slopes up to 71.430 and are using such areas for
cultivation of agricultural crops.

Change in land use patterns in this watershed is little different from that in the Kali Khola
watershed. In Kali Khola, most of the areas under other land uses have been converted to
agriculture land use where as in the Andheri-Khahare Khola watersheds most of the natural
forests have been converted in to the shifting cultivation during the last two decades. The
areas under shifting cultivation have increased from 104.73 ha in 1978 to 238.24 ha in 1999
corresponding to a net gain of 127.48 percent. The output maps for land use and land use
changes are presented in Map 12, 13 and 14. The landuse changes from 1978 to 1999 is also
shown in Figure 7.

58
Table 45. Changes in Land use Status in Andheri-Khahare Khola Watersheds from 1978 to
1999
Land use Class 1978 1999 Change (%) % of total
Area (ha) Area (ha) watershed
Agriculture 243.94 257.61 5.60 1.62
Forest 477.63 320.92 -32.81 -18.52
Shifting cultivation 104.73 238.24 127.48 15.78
Shrub 14.37 23.91 66.37 1.13
Rock 5.54 5.54 0.00 0.00
Total 846.21 846.21

Agriculture
Land Use in 1978 Land U se in 1999
Forest

Shifting
cultivation
Shrub

Rock

Figure 6. Land use Status in Andheri – Khahare Khola Watershed in 1978 and 1999

Table 46. Land use Changes in Andheri - Khahare Khola Watersheds


Landuse Changes Area (ha) % Change
Agriculture no change 154.25 63.23
Agriculture to Shrub 0.96 0.39
Agriculture to Forest 35.11 14.39
Agriculture to Shifting cultivation 53.61 21.97
Sub-total 243.94 100.00
Forest no change 264.14 55.30
Forest to Agriculture 90.23 18.89
Forest to Shrub 22.95 4.80
Forest to Shifting cultivation 100.32 21.00
Sub-total 477.634 100.00
Shrub to Agriculture 2.78 19.37
Shrub to Forest 7.71 53.67
Shrub to Shifting cultivation 3.87 26.94
Sub-total 14.37 100.00
Shifting cultivation no change 80.44 76.80
Shifting cultivation to Agriculture 10.34 9.87
Shifting cultivation to Forest 13.96 13.32
Sub-total 104.73 100.00
Boulder no change 4.54 100.00
Sub-total
Total 846.21 100.00

59
60
61
62
AGRICULTURE

(No change =
154.25 ha)

90.23 2.78

35.11 10.34
0.96

FOREST SHRUB

(No change = 7.71 (No change =


264.14 ha) 0.00 ha)
22.95

13.96

53.61
3.87
100.32

SHIFTING BOULDER
CULTIVATION
(No change = (No change =
80.44 ha) 4.54 ha)

Figure 7: Land use dynamics in Andheri - Khahare Khola Watersheds from 1978 to 1999 (in
ha)

4.4.2.2 Distribution of cultivated land by aspects

Agriculture land was found scattered in all aspects of the watersheds but the distribution in
Southern and South-western, South-eastern, Western, North-eastern, Eastern, and North-
western aspects is significant (Table 47). Similarly, farmers are found practicing shifting
cultivation in all aspects but Southern and South-eastern aspects were found most preferable
where about 49 percent of total shifting cultivation was practised (Table 48). The output
maps for aspect of cultivated land and shifting cultivation are presented in Map 15 and 16.

63
Table 47. Aspect Vs Agriculture Output in Andheri - Khahare Khola Watersheds
Aspect Class Agricultural Area
Area (ha) Percentage
Northern 9.47 3.67
North Eastern 28.26 10.97
Eastern 41.48 16.10
South Eastern 33.16 12.87
Southern 68.24 26.49
South Western 57.52 22.32
Western 16.48 6.39
North Western 2.97 1.15
Total 257.60 100.00

Table 48. Aspect Vs Shifting Cultivation Output in Andheri - Khahare Khola Watersheds
Aspect Class Area under Shifting Cultivation
Area (ha) Percentage
Northern 9.123 3.829
North Eastern 22.054 9.257
Eastern 37.258 15.639
South Eastern 49.326 20.704
Southern 66.930 28.094
South Western 31.113 13.059
Western 19.077 8.008
North Western 3.361 1.411
Total 238.241 100.000

64
65
66
4.4.2.3 Distribution of cultivated land by slope

Considering wider range of distribution of the agricultural practices in varying slope


categories, major slope classes are further divided into the sub classes as presented in Table
49. According to the land use classification of 1999, 257.61 ha of land in Andheri-Khahare
Khola watershed are under different agricultural practices, of which 66.563 percent of
agriculture land lies in the slope category >300. In sub classes of >300, majority of
agricultural land of about 55.29 percent of the total land under agriculture in the watershed
lies between the range of 30 0 to 450 slopes.

Total area under shifting cultivation in the Andheri – Khahare Khola watersheds is 238.241
ha, 70.55 percent of which falls in the slope category >300. Similarly, 55.96 percent of the
total area under shifting cultivation lies within the slope range of 300 to 450, whereas 14.59
percent of area falls under > 450 slope category (Table 50). The output maps for the aspects
of cultivated land and shifting cultivation are presented in Map 17 and 18.

Table 49. Slope Vs Agriculture Output in Andheri - Khahare Khola Watershed


Slope Class Agriculture Area
Area (ha) Percentage
0-5 degree 4.929 1.914
5-30 degree 81.206 31.523
> 30 degree 171.471 66.563
Total 257.607 100.000
Sub Classes (5-30 degree)
5-15 degree 17.893 6.946
15-25 degree 34.217 13.283
25-30 degree 29.096 11.295
Sub total 81.206 31.523
Sub Classes (>30 degree)
30-45 degree 142.439 55.293
> 45 degree 29.032 11.270
Sub total 171.471 66.563

Table 50. Slope Vs Shifting Cultivation Output in Andheri - Khahare Khola Watersheds

Slope Class Area under Shifting Cultivation


Area (ha) Percentage
0-5 degree 4.257 1.787
5-30 degree 65.906 27.664
> 30 degree 168.078 70.550
Total 238.241 100.000
Sub Classes (5-30 degree)
5-15 degree 12.547 5.267
15-25 degree 26.663 11.192
25-30 degree 26.695 11.205
Sub total 65.906 27.664
Sub Classes (>30 degree)
30-45 degree 133.317 55.959
> 45 degree 34.762 14.591
Sub total 168.078 70.550

67
68
69
70
71
4.4.2.4 Distribution of cultivated area along stream channel

Significant area of about 68 ha under agriculture in the watersheds falls within a distance of
25 m from the centre of the streams. This area is highly sensitive and prone to chronic
erosion, flooding, and sliding. Keeping this area under forest or grass cover would help
maintain the biodiversity as well as fulfil the needs of fodder and fuelwood for the farmers
(Table 51). The output maps for distribution of cultivated and shifting cultivation area along
the stream is presented in Map 19.

Table 51. Agriculture and Shifting Cultivation within 25 m Distance from Stream Center in
Andheri - Khahare Khola Watersheds
Land use Area (ha) % of Watershed Total
Agriculture 26.087 3.08
Shifting cultivation 41.611 4.92
Total 67.699 8.00

4.4.3 Land degradation and soil conservation measures in the watersheds

Currently the degree of land degradation in both the watersheds is very serious. The features
of landslide are very common in both the watersheds. The past and current farming practices
are the main cause for land degradation. Since 1978, there is a gain of 17.28 % land under
agriculture in the Kali Khola watershed. The contributions are 10.12%, 4.47% and 2.81%
from forest, shifting cultivation and shrub to the permanent agriculture respectively. Whereas
in the Andheri-Khahare Khola a large portion of forestland has been converted into the
shifting cultivation and there is only 1.62% more land under agriculture since 1978. The
conversion of forest land into agriculture or to the shifting cultivation is largely from an area
which are not suitable for arable farming from soil conservation point of view. This could be
one of the reasons why the area is degraded.

In the Kali Khola and Andheri-Khahare watersheds only 4.36 ha and 4.93 ha of agriculture
lands fall in the slope category below 5 degree slope respectively which can be considered
safe for arable farming and are suitable for a wide range of agricultural use. The agriculture
land in the slope category above 30 degree slopes in the Kali Khola and Andheri_Khahare
Khola watersheds are 282.55 ha and 171.47 ha respectively (Table 42 and 49). These lands
are unsuitable for arable farming and must be converted into the natural forest. From the soil
conservation point of view, this category of land is highly potential for surface soil erosion
and mass wasting since the longer and steep slopes are responsible for a greater concentration
of volume of surface runoff with high velocity.

In the Kali Khola and Andheri_Khahare Khola watersheds, the areas under agriculture in the
slope class 5 to 15 degree are 16.35 ha and 17.89 ha respectively (Table 42 and 49).
Considering the general farming practice in the hill agriculture these areas can be considered
moderately suitable for farming but requires soil conservation measures. The agriculture
lands lying between 15 to 25 degree slope are 31.46 ha and 34.22 ha in the Kali Khola and
Andheri_Khahare Khola respectively (Table 42 and 49). These lands are conditionally
suitable for arable farming.

Any mechanical soil conservation measures like terrace improvement or re-terracing is highly
undesirable looking at the nature of farming communities and biophysical condition of land
and soil. The vegetative measures of soil conservation could be one of the viable and

72
appropriate options. The use of hedgerows or the SALT technology could be introduced in the
area. However, attention should be given to identify plant species that are suitable in the local
condition and are also acceptable to the people for their use.

5 RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

1. For a sustainable planning, it is important to know the existing stock of the natural
resources within the watershed. At the same time it is also important to know the net
demand of the people within the watersheds. The demand is estimated from the base line
household survey data analysis, but the data on production potential of the existing forests
in the area (supply) to meet the demand of the people for forest products is lacking.
Therefore, forest inventory of the existing forests must be carried out for estimating the
total existing bio-mass and the production potential on an annual basis.

2. Though an attempt was made on a limited scale to analyse some soil sample during the
study, a detail information on soil fertility status in the watershed areas is lacking. For
making sustainable rehabilitation plans, these variables play an important role in
determining suitability of lands for different uses. For example, a land not suitable for
agriculture may be suitable for fruit tree plantation depending on the soil depth and soil
nutrient content. Cash crops should be promoted and given high priority in pocket areas
depending on the soil type and the climate.

3. Moisture availability at right time is again a crucial factor in the study area. Farmers have
reported that the amount of total rainfall is decreasing and the rainfall events are erratic.
Most of the rainfalls is distributed during the three to four months of monsoon. Change to
the cultivation of new maize or cereal crop varieties especially that are drought resistant
could play a significant role in increasing food production. Water assessment needs to be
done in the watershed areas both for the sustainable agriculture and for the supply
purposes. Water being an important component, the quantity and quality of water
available in the watershed areas should be assessed for planning different options.

4. The communities included in the study area are highly food deficit. More than 85 percent
of the farmers have food produced on their farm sufficient only for three to nine months.
To improve the food availability to the farming community, better crop varieties suitable
to the area and the promotion of income generating enterprises, including cash crops
should be introduced through the active participation of farmers.

5. During food deficit months, a majority of farming households in the study area depend on
wild foods, such as Githa, Bhyakur, Tarul, asparagus, other leafy vegetables, and wild
fruits from the forest to sustain their life. Therefore, study and conservation of these wild
foods is an important dimension for the future research.

6. Food production is one of the major challenges in the watersheds under study but
unfortunately, the land capability is so poor that the food demand can not be met from the
production from their own land. Therefore, an integrated watershed management
approach and strategy should be adopted. Along with improved soil and water
management practices, high value crops and income generating activities such as fresh
vegetable and vegetable seed production, planting various kinds of fruits, bee-keeping
and livestock rearing could be promoted in the area. SAPROSC has already initiated

73
some of such activities. However, water is the main constraint in promoting cash crops,
especially fresh vegetables, vegetable seed production and fruit farming. Some water
harvesting technologies tried elsewhere could be pilot tested in these areas. The drip
irrigation techniques which, is already popular in some part of Nepal can also be
introduced. This may require both the technical input and capital support for the initial
implementation.

7. For income generation of the farmers, non-timber forest products (NTFP) are of great
importance. Status of the NTFPs should be explored for applying integrated management
approach.

8. Forest fires occurring naturally or set deliberately is destroying seeds, seedlings and leaf
litters and even trees in the watersheds destroying the biodiversity and environment as a
whole. Awareness campaign and the research should be conducted on different aspects of
forest fires like cause and effect and means or ways of preventing them in the watershed
level.

9. Farmers are cultivating lands up to the steepest slopes of 80.50 in these watersheds, which
is considered highly vulnerable to erosion and landslide and chances of environmental
hazard increases. Therefore for the sustainable management of resources in the
watersheds, the lands above 450 must be left in their natural condition or must be brought
to natural conditions.

10. The SALT technology can be introduced in the study areas to minimise soil erosion rates
on steep sloping lands. Efforts should be made to identify plant species that are suitable
for multipurpose use. The demonstration on SALT technology established close to the
study watersheds has aroused lots of interest among the farmers in the areas. The
technology could, therefore, be easily pilot tested in these watersheds. Other interventions
could be agroforestry and horticulture. Planting suitable multi-purpose tree species
(MPTS) could be encouraged in the private lands for supplementing fodder, fuelwood and
timber demand.

11. The area within 25 metres of the stream channels should be left in the natural condition to
save or maintain the biodiversity and to protect the adjoining lands from stream bank
erosion, flooding and landslide along the stream channel.

12. Initial interventions should be made and developmental activities carried out considering
the social norms, traditions, customs, manners and religions without provoking the local
people’s social and religious matters.

13. The key factor in order to improve and maintain soil fertility level could be maintenance
of organic matter content since it is at marginal level. Compost and farmyard manure are
the main source of plant nutrients in the traditional agriculture and the application of
mineral fertilizer is not common. Therefore, attention should be given to increase the
biomass so that the production of compost and farm yard manure can be increased.

14. Though the area under Khet land is very minor, the crop intensity in Khet land is high
compared to Pakho Bari. Phosphorus has been found to be very low in Khet land.
Therefore, nutrient management could be a crucial factor in Khet lands and phosphate

74
fertilizers or DAP fertilizer can play important role to get quick response. If farmers have
easy access to it.

15. Areas under Khoria are also poor in available phosphorus and nitrogen status is at
marginal level between medium to low level. The time interval between fallowing of
Khoria land plays an important role in soil fertility. The old practice of keeping Khoria
land fallow for more than 6 to 7 years could definitely be sustainable and should be
promoted if Khoria is to be practised.

16. To improve the productivity of major crops, the major issues are integrated use of plant
nutrients. Organic fertilizers are major sources therefore, the traditional farming system
including the linkage of livestock, forests and agriculture should be well balanced. Apart
from the traditional practice of maintaining soil fertility, the application of chemical
fertilizers in the form of an integrated plant nutrient management could be important
innovation in the study areas because, improving the status of N and P is very important.

17. Considering the various existing constraints and problems and the opportunities in
different aspects of socio-economic development, different needs of the people can be
identified. These needs are both, production oriented needs and service or community
oriented needs (Balla, 1993). A group approach with the liability of each group member
for effective implementation of the activities related to these needs should be encouraged
to ameliorate the socio-economic condition of the people in these watershed areas.

6 CONCLUSION

The study was carried out to quantify and establish information database on degradation of
lands basically due to conversion of forest and shrub lands to agriculture and shifting
cultivation and socio-economic dynamics of the people in the Mid-hills of Central Nepal. The
study involved interpretation of aerial photographs and application of Geographic
Information Systems (GIS), household survey and analysis of soil samples.

The study areas are Kali Khola watershed in Chandi Bhanjyang VDC, Chitwan District and
Andheri and Khahare Khola watersheds in Chhimkeswari and Ambu Khaireni VDCs
respectively in Tanahun Districts.

6.1 Socio–economic Survey

Out of the total 211 households in both the watershed areas, 149 households are in Kali
Khola and the rest 62 in Andheri – Khahare Khola watershed area.

The Tibeto-Burmese ethnic group is the most dominant in the study area. Chepang (Praja)
constitutes the single most dominant ethnic group in the area. The other major ethnic groups
are Gurung, Magar and Tamang.

Almost all the households are farming households with an average family size of 7.24
persons. Most of the households are of a nuclear type. Educational status of the people is very
low with 63.6 percent illiterates or just literate and of the decision-makers in the family, 69.6
percent illiterates.

75
Agriculture is the main source of livelihood for the people in the study area. However, the
farming is highly subsistence. The farming is largely rainfed and land is marginal with low
soil fertility. As a result food production is low and quite inadequate. About 85 percent of the
households experience varying degree of food deficit for three to nine months. Most of them
resort to different coping strategies to meet their food requirements during deficit months.

The average land holding of registered land is 0.66 ha and that of unregistered land is 0.45 ha
per household. Most of these lands are Pakho Bari. About 54 percent of the households also
practice slash and burn shifting cultivation (Khoria) in the area. Khet land is very limited in
the area.

The usual cropping pattern consists of maize/finger millet – fallow in Pakho Bari land and
rice – rice – wheat and maize – rice – fallow in Khet land. The cropping patterns in Khoria
land are maize – black gram or horse gram – fallow with and average rotation period of 3.62
± 3.00 years.

The people also grow fruit trees of different types usually grown scattered around their
houses. The most common fruit trees are orange, guava and banana. Different vegetables
mostly of local varieties are grown in semi-commercial scale for Sale in the nearby market or
kitchen – garden scale for own consumption.

The livestock raising is done in the traditional way with local breeds and is characterised by
poor feeding, housing and care. A Majority of households have kept cattle followed by
sheep/goat and buffalo. A combination of stall feeding and grazing is the major system of
livestock rearing is the study area.

People depend on forests for their supply of fodder, firewood, timber and other forest
products. Most of the households experience some shortage of fodder and forage in the
months of Falgun (February/March), Chaitra (March/April) and Baisakh (April/May).
Firewood is the main source of household energy, which is collected primarily from the
government forest.

Drinking water is fetched from sources like stream, springs and piped water system. About 86
percent households have access to the tapped drinking water system. About 90 percent of the
families live in houses with thatch roof and wall constructed of stone and mud.

The use of improved crop varieties is very limited and of chemical fertilizers quite negligible
in the watershed areas. The crop productivity has been decreasing mainly due to the decrease
in soil fertility or removal of topsoil by rainwater. These indicate that there is the potentiality
of increasing crop production but not much has been done in this regard. Very limited
households have had chances of participating in the training and agriculture tour to learn
improved agriculture techniques and soil and water conservation/management.

6.2 Soil Sample Analysis

A total of twelve soil samples (seven from Kali Khola and five from Andheri Khola
watersheds) representing all land use types and altitude range were analysed. Analysis of
soils from the Kali Khola watershed indicates that Pakho Bari land and Khoria soils are
mostly loam but the forest soils are sandy loam. Pakho Bari and Khoria soils are slightly
acidic to neutral and contain medium organic matter. Available phosphorus in Pakho Bari,

76
Khoria and forest lands is in high and low range respectively whereas available potassium is
in high range irrespective of land use types.

In the Andheri Khola watershed, Pakho Bari land soils is sandy loam to loam and Khet land
is loamy sand. Pakho Bari and Khet land soils are neutral to slightly alkaline because of
dolomite limestone parent material. Forest and Khoria soils are moderately acidic. Pakho
Bari land has medium organic matter while Khet land is poor in organic matter content.
Available phosphorus in Pakho Bari land and forest soils is very high, medium in Khoria and
poor in Khet land whereas available potassium is very high irrespective of land use.

Based on the results of soil analysis, conclusion can be made that Pakho Bari land soils are
better in fertility status in both the watersheds whereas Khoria, Khet land and forest land soils
are poor because of poor status in major nutrients especially poor status of available
phosphorus. Soils are however, rich in available potassium in both the areas irrespective of
land use types. In a PRA exercise farmers reported that soil fertility and crop productivity are
declining at a rapid rate in Bari land.

6.3 GIS Analysis

Total area of Kali Khola watershed is 992.4 ha of which agriculture and forest occupied
336.449 ha and 436.985 ha in 1999 whereas it was 194.90 ha and 537.36 ha in 1978
respectively. Shifting cultivation is practised in 66.845 ha. Significant increase in areas under
agriculture (88.2 percent) over a period from 1978 to 1999 is observed and this increase
comes from converting forests, shrubland and areas under shifting cultivation.

People are cultivating lands with a slope of up to 80.50 and the majority of agriculture (77.1
percent) is in land areas with slope >300 whereas 80.38 percent of shifting cultivation has
been found in the slope category > 300. Similarly, the area under agriculture and shifting
cultivation within a distance of 25 m from the centre of stream channels is about 79 ha.

Total area of both the Andheri and Khahare Khola watersheds is 846.21 ha, of which
agriculture and forest occupied 257.61 ha and 320.92 ha in 1999 whereas it was 243.94 ha
and 477.63 ha in 1978 respectively. The area under shifting cultivation increased from 104.73
ha in 1978 to 238.24 ha in 1999. 32.81 percent of forest area is found to decrease due to
conversion mainly to agriculture and shifting cultivation. The increase in areas under shifting
cultivation also is attributed to conversion of forest, shrub and agricultural lands.

The majority of agriculture (66.56 percent) is practised in areas with slope > 300 and shifting
cultivation is practised in 70.55 percent of the area, which lies in slope category > 300. About
68 ha of lands within 25 m from the centre of the stream channels is under agriculture and
shifting cultivation. All these indicate that most of the areas under agriculture and shifting
cultivation are vulnerable to soil erosion and overall degradation.

Comparison between two areas indicate that conversion to agriculture land within a period
from 1978 to 1999 was much higher (17.28 percent of total area) in Kali Khola as compared
to 1.62 percent in Andheri – Khahare Khola watersheds. The change is attributed to
conversion of forest, shrub and lands under shifting cultivation. The area under shifting
cultivation in Kali Khola decreased from 111.19 ha to 66.85 ha with a percentage change of
total area by – 4.47 percent whereas it increased by 15.78 percent in Andheri – Khahare

77
Khola watersheds. This is due to the fact that most of the area under shifting cultivation in
Kali Khola was converted to permanent agriculture.

Percentage of total area falling under the slope category > 300 is higher (77.1 and 80.4
percent) in Kali Khola as compared to 66.6 and 70.6 percent in Andheri – Khahare Khola
watersheds. This is perhaps due to the steeper terrain in Kali Khola than in Andheri – Khahre
Khola watersheds.

Considering the land degradation problems due to improper land use and land use changes
and declining soil fertility/soil productivity coupled with natural courses and the poor socio-
economic status of the people in the watershed areas, an integrated watershed management
approach needs to be planned and implemented in the areas. The approach should incorporate
agriculture, horticulture and livestock development activities, forest and soil and water
management practices and other income generating activities as outlined in the
recommendation. Also, a number of detail studies related to natural resources need to be
conducted to compliment the findings of this study. The information and data base gathered
could be used to plan and implement integrated watershed management activities in a
sustainable way in the areas.

78
7 REFERENCES

Ahmed, A. E., 1989. Land Restoration and Revegetation, Role of Forestry in Combating
Desertification, FAO Conservation Guide 21, FAO, Rome.

Applegate, G. E. and D. A. Gilmore, 1987. Operational Expenses in Forest Management


Development in the Hills of Nepal, ICIMOD Occasional Paper No 6, ICIMOD,
Kathmandu.

Arun, G., S. Kothari and T. P. Singh, 1995. Application of Remote Sensing in Mapping and
Management of Land Degradation: A Case Study of Sagwada Tehsil, Dungarpur, In
B. Sahai et.al., Edt., Proceedings of ISRS Silver Jubilee Symposium 1994 – 1995,
Indian Society of Remote Sensing, Dept. of Space, Government of India.

Balla, M. K., 1993. A Need Assessment Study in Praja Development Programme Area, Praja
Developent Programme/NCAR/SNV - Nepal, Kathmandu.

Borthakur, D. N., A. Singh, R. P. Awasthi and R. N. Rai, 1978. Shifting Cultivation in North
Eastern Region, Proceedings of National Seminar on Resources Development and the
Environment in the Himalayan Region, Dept. of Science and Technology,
Government of India.

Borthakur, I. K., 1981. The Himalaya: Crisis in the Evolution of Policy and Programmes, In
J. S. Lal edt. The Himalaya Aspect of Change, Oxford University Press, Delhi.

Carson, B., P. B. Shah and P. L. Maharjan, 1978. Land System Report, The Soil of Nepal,
LRMP Report, Kentig Earth Science Ltd., LRMP, Kathmandu.

CBS, 1994. Statistical Data of Nepal, HMG/N, Central Bureau of Statistics, Kathmandu.

Clark Labs, 1998. CartaLinx: The Spatial Data Builder, User’s Guide, Clark University,
Worcester, USA.

Das, D. C., 1986. Watershed Degradation: Assessment and Management: Perspective in the
Hindu Kush – Himalayas, Paper presented at the Regional Workshop on Erosion and
Sediment Transport Processes, Bangladesh University for Engineering and
Technology, Dhaka.

Eckholm, E. P., 1976. Loosing Ground: Environmental Stress and World Food Prospects, W.
W. Norton and Co. Inc., New York.

Espinosa, E.J., 1975. General Soil Survey of the Bagmati and Narayani Zones, Technical
Report 1, FAO/ UNDP, Rome.

ESRI, 1996. Using ArcView, Environmental Systems Research Inc., Redlands, USA.

ESRI, 1996. Using the ArcView Spatial Analyst, Environmental Systems Research Inc.,
Redlands, USA.

79
FAO, 1984. Improved Production Systems as an Alternative to Shifting Cultivation, Soils
Bulletin No. 53, FAO, Rome.

ICAR, 1983. Shifting Cultivation in North East India, ICAR, Shillong, Meghalaya.

Ives, J. D. and B. Messerli, 1989. The Theory of Himalayan Environmental Degradation:


What is the Nature of the Perceived Crisis? The Himalayan Dilemma: Reconciling
Development and Conservation, Routeledge, New York.

Joshy, D., S. P. Pandey and R. B. Maskey, 1997. Status of Land Degradation in Nepal, In
Combating Desertification, Report of the National Seminar on Desertification and
Land Improvement (Edt. M. P. Ghimire and B. K. Uprety), Ministry of Population
and Environment/UNCCD, Kathmandu.

Karim, Z. and R. M. Tamrakar, 1993. Application of GIS for Shivapuri Watershed Project,
Remote Sensing Applications to Planning and Management of the Environment,
Natural Resources and Physical Infrastructure, ICIMOD Training Course Papers,
ICIMOD, Kathmandu.

Mahat, T. B. S., 1987. Forestry - Farming Linkages in the Mountains, Occasional Paper No.
7, ICIMOD, Kathmandu.

Mahat, T. B. S., D. M. Griffin and K. R. Shepherd, 1986. Human Impact on Some Forests of
the Middle Hills of Nepal, Mountain Research and Development, No. 6, University of
California Press, Berkeley, California.

Mawesley, K. J., B. P. Tripathi and R. A. Gardner, 1998. Quantitative Indicators of Soil


Erosion on Upland Bari land in the Mid-Hills of Nepal, LARC Seminar Paper No.
98/7, Lumle Agriculture Research Centre, Lumle, Kaski.

Mishra, S. B. and S. Bista, 1998. Soil Erosion, In Compendium on Environmental Statistics


Nepal, HMG/N, NPC Secretariat, Central Bureau of Statistics, Kathmandu.

MPFS, 1988. Master Plan for Forestry Sector Nepal, Ministry of Forest and Soil
Conservation, Kathmandu.

Maskey, 1999. NCI Country Project Report of Nepal, Appropriate Technology for Soil
Conservation Farming System Project.

Partap, T. and H. R. Watson, 1994. Sloping Agricultural Land Technology (SALT): A


Regenerative Option for Sustainable Mountain Farming, Occasional Paper No. 23,
ICIMOD, Kathmandu.

Rai, S. C. and A. P. Krishna, (NA). Application of Remote Sensing Techniques for


monitoring and Mapping of Land – use/ Land Cover from the Mamlay Watershed of
Sikkim Himalaya, In R. Singh and D. K. Mishra (edits). Development and
Environmental Change in India, APH Publishing Corporation, New Delhi.

80
Shrestha, B. D., 1996. Only 13 percent of Soil Degradation in Nepal is Human Induced,
Asian WATMANET, Issue No. 6, PWMTA of UNDP/FAO (RAS/93/062),
Kathmandu.

Shroeder, R. F., 1985. Himalayan Subsistence Systems: Indigenous Agriculture in Rural


Nepal, Mountain Research and Development, Vol. 5, No.1, University of California
Press, Berkeley, California.

Sinha, T. K., D. N. Tripathi and R. S. Singh, 1995. Study of Land Use Change of Head water
Region in Dun Valley by Remote Sensing, In B. Sahai et.al. Edt. Proceedings of ISRS
Silver Jubilee Symposium 1994 – 1995, Indian Society of Remote Sensing, Dept. of
Space, Government of India.

Thapa, G. B., 1990. Integrated Watershed Management in the Upper Pokhara Valley Nepal,
Doctoral Thesis, Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand.

Thapa, G. B., K. E. Weber and Z. Aung, 1992. GIS Assisted Watershed Management: The
Upper Pokhara Valley Nepal, Human Settlement Development Research Paper 29,
Division of Human Settlements Development, AIT, Bangkok.

Tiwari, A. K., M. Kudrat and M. L. Manchanda, 1995. Remote Sensing and GIS for
Management of Himalayan Ecosystems, In Sustainable Reconstruction of Highland
and Headwater Regions, Proceedings of Third International Symposium on
Headwater Control, Oxford and IBH Publications, New Delhi.

Trapp, H. and P. Mool, 1996. Lamjung District Information System for Local Planning and
Assessment of Natural Resources using GIS and Remote Sensing Technology,
MENRIS Case Study Series No. 4, ICIMOD, Kathmandu.

UNEP, 1992. World Atlas of Desertification, Edward Arnold, London.

Upadhyaya, K. P., 1995. Shifting Cultivation in Bhutan: A Gradual Approach to Modifying


Land Use Patterns, Community Forestry Case Study Series 11, FAO, Rome.

81
8 APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Checklist for PRA

GIS Project
LI-BIRD/IDRC

Site: ………………….
VDC:………………….

1. General information of the site:

1.1. Draw social/resource map of the community using key informants.

1.2. Draw transect map of the study community.

1.3. Household information: No.of households by ethnicity, family size etc.

1.4. Location specification of the site: name of the surrounding villages, distance from the
district centre and nearest market/road head.

1.5. Institution: health-post, post-office, police station, schools, irrigation structures, food
processing mills, market place, co-operatives, banks, farmers groups etc.

1.6. Physiographic features of the site:

a. Catchment/drainage systems:
• Streams and rivers passing through the area.
• Altitude range of the area in relation to different types of land.

b. Information on climate: draw climate map based on farmers' perception indicating followings.
• Rainfall: very wet months
wet months
dry months
very dry months
• Hail: hail months and frequency/severity
• Frost: frost months and frequency/severity
• Wind: very windy months, problems if any
• Flood if any

c. Information on soil types (based on farmers' categorisation):


• Different soil types by fertility status, physical outlook and colour.
• Percentage distribution under different soil types.

d. Information on housing conditions:


• Number/percentage of households by types of housing – kachcha or pakka .
• Number/percentage of households by types of roofs – khar, tiles or iron sheet.

82
2. HisTorical events/changes in the community in different time period (trend analysis)

2.1. Time line of hisTorical events/changes.

Time line Events/changes occurred Reasons/explanation


(years) (settlement/agri./forest etc.)

2.2. Migration patterns in the community in different time period.


Time period# No.of hhs Characteristics of hhs* Reasons for migration
a. Migration in:
1. Before1965

2. 1965 to 1978

3. 1978 to 1994

b. Migration out:
1. Before1965

2. 1965 to 1978

3. 1978 to 1994

Note: # Time period – fix different time period, which the community members can remember.
1. Before 1965: Before Panchayat Kal
2. 1965 to 1978: After Panchayat Kal until referendum of 2036
3. 1978 to 1994: After referendum untill announcement of multi-party system
* Characteristics of hhs – in terms of resources (rich/poor) and ethnicity.

83
2.3. Changes in cultivated land area in the study community.
Time period Land type Changes* Reasons
1. Before1965 1. Khet
2. Bari
3. Khoriya
2. 1965 to 1978 1. Khet
2. Bari
3. Khoriya
3. 1978 to 1994 1. Khet
2. Bari
3. Khoriya
Note: * Changes – cultivated land area increased (↑), decreased (↓) or remained same (= ).

2.4. Changes in forest cover and tree number in the study community.
Time period Land type Changes* Reasons
1. Before 1965 1. Forest areas

2. Trees on
private land
2. 1965 to 1978 1. Forest areas

2. Trees on
private land
3. 1978 to 1994 1. Forest areas

2. Trees on
private land
Note: * Changes – cultivated land area increased (↑), decreased (↓) or remained same (= ).

2.5. Changes in livestock number


Time period Land type Changes* Reasons
1. Before 1965 1. Buffalo

2. Cattle

3.Goat/sheep

4. Pigs

2. 1965 to 1978 1. Buffalo

2. Cattle

3.Goat/sheep

4. Pigs

3. 1978 to 1994 1. Buffalo

2. Cattle

3.Goat/sheep

4. Pigs

Note: * Changes – cultivated land area increased (↑), decreased (↓) or remained same (= ).

84
2.6. Changes in cropping intensity (no. of crops per unit area) in the study community.
Land type Changes* Reasons
1. Khet

2. Bari

3. Khoriya

Note: * Changes – cultivated land area increased (↑), decreased (↓) or remained same (= ).

2.7. Changes in soil fertility (based on farmers' perception) in the study community.
Land type Changes* Reasons
1. Khet

2. Bari

3. Khoriya

Note: * Changes – cultivated land area increased (↑), decreased (↓) or remained same (= ).

3. Agricultural production:

3.1. Cropping patterns practised by farmers in different types of land

a. Khet land:
Cropping patterns % area % hhs Remarks
occupied involved
1.
2.
3.
4.

b. Bari land:
Cropping patterns % area % hhs Remarks
occupied involved
1.
2.
3.
4.

85
c. Khoriya land:
Cropping patterns % area % hhs Remarks
occupied involved
1.
2.
3.
4.

3.2. Land holding and tenure systems:

a. Number of landless households. What do these households do to make living.

b. Which types of land (khet, Bari and/or Khoriya) are rented in/out in the area.

c. What are the land renting in/out systems (e.g. share cropping, contracting etc.) prevailing in
the area.

d. What are the paying back systems (e.g. fixed proportion of crop produce, cash etc.) for rented
in/out land.

3.3. Information on slash and burn cultivation (Khoriya) system prevailing in the area.

a. Estimated household and area under slash and burn practice at the study site (percentage or
proportion of total cultivated land in the area).

b. Reasons/causes for slash and burn practices in the area (explore with the key informants).
Reasons Ranks

c. Time interval (years) adopted in slash and burn practice.


At present:
10 years ago:
20 years ago:

d. Crops performing good and bad under slash and burn cultivation practices (farmers
perception).
Good crops:
Bad crops:

e. Any special practices (like manuring etc.) undertaken in slash and burn systems.

e. Problems of slash and burn practices (farmers perception) and their local solutions adopted
by the farmers.

86
f. Ownership systems of land under slash and burn practice.
Ownership systems %age or proportion area
Own (registered):
Own (unregistered):
Others (specify):

3.4. Information on livestock and livestock rearing systems.

a. Extent of use of improved breeds in the study community.

b. Livestock rearing systems in terms of feeding


Feeding systems Livestock under the systems Remarks (grazing months/reasons)
1. Stall feeding
2. Semi-stall feeding
3. Grazing (complete)

c. Major livestock feeds used by the community members.


Livestock feeds %age contribution or ranks
1. Forage grass (bhuin ghans) -
2. Fodder grass (dale ghans) -
3. Crop by-products -
4. Concentrates (grains/flour) -

d. Composition of different livestock feeds.


Major forage grasses:
Forage grasses Sources* %age or ranks Ranks
(in terms of feeding) (in terms of preference)
1.
2.
3.
4.
*Note: Souces of forage grasses: 1 = private land; 2 = community paster land; 3 = Community
forest.
Major fodder grasses:
Fodder grasses Sources* %age or ranks Ranks
(in terms of feeding (in terms of preference)
1.
2.
3.
4.
*Note: Souces of forage grasses: 1 = private land; 2 = community paster land; 3 = Community forest.

87
Major crop by-products:
Crop by-products %age or ranks Ranks
(in terms of feeding (in terms of preference)
1.
2.
3.
4.

Major concentrates (grains/flour) with relative ranks (in terms of quantity fed):

e. Sources and conditions of forage/fodder grasses in the study community.

Sources Forage grasses Fodder grasses


Sources Conditions Sources Conditions
1. Forest/Com. Forest
2. Community pasture
3. Private pasture (KharBari)
4. Private land (khet/Bari)
5. Others (specify)
Note: Sources: put one (*) to three (***) star for minor, medium and major source
Conditions: 1 = very poor; 2 = poor; 3 = fair; 4 = good; 5 = very good (in terms of availability)

f. Which are forage and fodder grass deficit months?

Forage grass deficit months:


Fodder grass deficit months:

d. Private plantation of trees for forage and fodder grasses, species preferred and willingness to
plant such species with reasons.

4. Forest resources

4.1. Information on fuelwood used in the study community.

a. What are the major sources of fuelwood in the study community?


Sources %age contribution or ranks Seasons used for
1. Forest/Com. Forest
2. Community pasture
3. Private pasture (KharBari)
4. Private land (khet/Bari)
5. Crop by-products
6. Purchase from others
5. Others ………

88
b. Tree species used and preferred for fuelwood.
Tree species Rank for quantity used* Rank for preference*
1.
2.
3.
4.
*Note: Rank 1 = used in highest quantity and most preferred species.

c. Name of crop by-products used as fuelwood (in order of rank):


Crop by-products Ranks

4.2. Information on timber/poles used in the study community.

a. What are the major sources of timber/poles in the study community?


Sources %age contribution or ranks
1. Forest/Com. Forest
2. Community pasture
3. Private pasture (KharBari)
4. Private land (khet/Bari)
5. Crop by-products
6. Purchase from others
5. Others ………

b. Tree species used and preferred for timber/poles.


Tree species Rank for quantity used* Rank for preference*
1.
2.
3.
4.
*Note: Rank 1 = used in highest quantity and most preferred species.

4.3. Information on forest situation.

a. Types of forest (government, community) in use.

b. Systems of access to the forest for forest resources (how decisions are made and resources
are shared/distributed?).

c. Distance to forest in different seasons for different purposes/resources.


Purposes/resources Distance (minutes)
Grazing animals -
Fodder/forage grasses -
Fuelwood -
Timber/poles -

89
d. Private plantation of trees for fuelwood and timber/poles, species preferred and willingness to
plant such trees with reasons.

e Wild foods, collection time/seasons and methods.

Wild food consumption season and preparation methods:

Trends (increasing/decreasing) in collection and consumption of wild foods with associated


reasons:

5.1. Soil and water conservation:

5.1. Do people perceive soil erosion and land slides as problem? How do they express their
perception?

5.2. Major reasons for soil erosion and landslides (if any) with relative ranks:

5.3. Local methods used to control soil erosion and landslides in the study area:

5.4. Local methods used to increase soil fertility such as use of compost, green manuring,
mulching etc.

90
6. Seasonal calendars:

6.1. Cropping patterns (under different land types)


Land types Ba Je As Sh Bh As Ka Ma Pu Ma Fa Ch Remaks
Khet
Bari
Khoriya

6.3. Activity calendar


Activities Ba Je As Sh Bh As Ka Ma Pu Ma Fa Ch Remaks
1. Peak labour demand for farm work (also indicate farm
work in brackets).
2. Peak oxen demand for farm work.
3. Months engaged in off-farm work within the village.
4. Months for seasonal migration for off-farm employment
outside the village.
5. Food deficit months.
6. Selling of agri. produce – crop produce
– livestock+products
7. Months of most loan transactions.
8. Livestock grazing months – buffalo
– cattle/goats
9. Seasonal sources of forage grass – forest
– private land
10. Scarcity months for forage grasses.
11. Seasonal sources of fodder grass – forest
– private land
12. Scarcity months for fodder grasses.
13. Seasonal sources of firewood – forest
– private land
14. Scarcity months for firewood.
15. Drinking water shortage months.
16. Pollution of drinking water.
17. Months when soil erosion is most obvious

91
7. Labour situation:

7.1. Systems of labouring - exchange (Perma) and hiring in terms of cash and kind and their
prevalence in terms of use.

7.2. Shortage and surplus months:

7.3. Wage rate - for different crops/operations/seasons.


- for different age groups and sex.

8. Draft power situation (for land preparation):

8.1. Power sources for different operations and ownership of draft power (ox)

.
8.2. Shortage and surplus months:

8.3. Hiring rates:

9. Credit/loan system:

9.1. Proportion/percentage of households Tanking loans:

9.2. Purposes of Tanking credit/loan:

9.3. Sources of credit/loan:

8.4. Loan repayment systems with interest rate:

92
9. Cash income to the farming households:

9.1. Sources of on-farm cash incomes with relative ranks:

9.2. Sources of off-farm cash incomes with relative ranks:

10. Marketing systems of agricultural and non-agricultural products – types of products,


marketing place (within and/or outside the village, prices and pricing systems etc.

10. Awareness about family planning and use of family planning measures/means.

11. Sources of agriculture, forest, and soil and water conservation information.

12. Main problems of agricultural production, forest resource management, and soil and
water conservation with their relative ranking.

93
Appendix - 2. Household Survey Questionnaire

Geographical Information System (GIS) Project


Social-Financial Survey Questionnaire
LI-BIRD/IDRC
Household survey number:
1. Description of Household Head
Name:
Sex:
Caste: Symbol: 1= Male; 2= Female
2. VDC:
3. Ward No:
4. Village/Tole:
5. Description of the decision maker in agriculture:
Name:

Relation with the household head:


Sex: Symbol: 1= Male; 2= Female
Age: Years
Education: Symbol: 1= Illiterate 2= General education/Primary education
3 = 6- 10 class; 4= Above class 10
6. Description of the main decision maker in agriculture (field work):
Name:
Relation: Symbol: 1= Husband; 2= Wife
Sex: Symbol: 1= Male; 2= Female

Age: Years
Occupation: Symbol: 1= Agriculture; 2= Non-agriculture
Education: Symbol: 1= Illiterate 2= General education/Primary education
3 = 6- 10 class; 4= Above class 10

Recently staying at: Symbol: 1= within village; 2= Out side village


(Seasonal); 3= Outside (More than a year

7. Financial status: Symbol: 1= Very good; 2=; Medium 3= Poor

Name of the interviewer:


Date:

94
(A) Family description:

8. Type of the family: Symbol: 1= Nuclear (Husband, Wife and Children)


Joint (With parents, brother and sisters)

9. Family number according to the age of the family.

Age Family Number


Male Female
Below 12 years
12-15 years
16-60 years
Above 60 years
Total

10. How many of the family members work in the fields?

Male Female Children None

11. How many work outside when there's no work in the fields?

Male Female Children None

12. How many of the family members work outside the village (more than 9 months)?

Male Female Children None

13. Information about the family education of those who are above 5 years?

Education Family Number


Male Female
1. School education (Class 1-10)
2. University education (Above class 10)
3. Only literate
4. Illiterate

(B) Resources and livelihood


14. Have you got your own land? Symbol: 1= Yes; 2= No

14. If yes, what type of land


Type of land Area (Ropani/Kattha) No of parcel*
Registered Unregistered
1. Khet
2. Bari (a) Permanent/Pakho Bari
(b) Khoriya Bari/Lose
3. Khar Bari
4. Forest

95
! 6. Have you rented others khet/Bari? Symbol: 1= Yes; 2= No

17. If yes, what is the area of the land?

Khet Ropani/Kattha

Bari Ropani/Kattha

18. Have you given khet /Bari in rent? Symbol: 1= Yes; 2= No

19. If yes, what is the area of the land?

Khet Ropani/Kattha

Bari Ropani/Kattha

20. How do you irrigate your land (own and rented)?

(a) Area of the land that is irrigated throughout the year:


(b) Area of the land that is irrigated during the monsoon:

21. From how long are you practicing the slash and burn farming?

Years have not practiced

22. If you are practicing slash and burn farming, What is the time interval

Years

23. Do you have taken Khoria Bari in ‘Nayoli’ ?

Yes No

24. If yes what is the area of that Khoriya Bari?

Ropani/Kattha/Doko

25. Do you have given Khoria Bari in “Nyali” ?

Yes No

26. 26. If yes what is the area of that Khoriya Bari?

Roapni/Kattha/Doko

96
(C) Information of agricultural Products
27.Give the description of the cereal crops you planted last year.

Cereal crops Total area Total Best variety Use of manures


production Farmyard Chemical
manure fertilizers
a) Khet
Chaite dhan
Barshe dhan
Wheat
Basanta
Maize
b) Bari
Barshe maize
Hiunde
maize
Millet
Ghaiya
Blackgram
Jhuse til
Gahat
Buckwheat
Ricebean
Others
c) Khoriya
Maize
Blackgram
Gahat
Others

28. What is the productivity of different crops in different types of land as compared to past?
(Production /Katha or ropani)

Type of land Symbol 1= Same; 2= Increases; 3= Decreased

a) Khet

b) Bari

c) Khoriya

29. If the production has decreased then why ?

a) Due to the decrease in soil fertility


b) Due to the decrease in genetic quality of the crops
c) Less quantity of farmyard manure
d) Decrease in efforts and labour
e) Other (please mention) .........

97
30. What is the situation of soil fertility as compared to past?

Land type Symbol 1= Same; 2= Increased; 3= Decreased

a) Khet

b) Bari

c) Shifting cultivation

31. If soil fertility is declining, then what are the reasons?

a) Increased cropping intensity


b) Decreased FYM and compost application
c) Soil erosion
d) Others (specify)

32. What are the measures adopted by farmers to increase soil fertility?

a) Chemical fertilizer

b) Green manure

c) Compost

d) No measures

e) Others specify

33. How many months you are surviving from your production from own field?

a) ......................... months
b) More than 12 months

34. How do you survive during food deficiency months?

a) Purchase from earned cash money

b) Purchase from loan money

c) Food borrowed from neighbours

d) Wild fruits such as gittha, bhyakur

e) Hunting/Fishing

f) Others (specify)

98
35. Have you done vegetable cultivation?

Yes No

36. If yes, in which scale.

a) Kitchen garden

b) Semi-commercial

c) Commercial

37. Have you planted fruit trees?

Yes No

38. If yes, give the number of plant of different fruits?

Type of fruits No of plant


1. peach
2. Plum
3. Orange
4. Lime
5. Lemon
6. Pear
7. Banana
8. Papaya
9. Guava
10. Pomegranate
11. Mango
12. Lichi
13. Pineapple
15. Others (specify)

39. Have you reared livestock/chicken?

Yes No

40. If yes, give descriptions.

Type of animal Number Improved animals*


Large Small
1. Buffalo
2. Cattle
3. Sheep/Goat
4. Pig
5. Chicken/duck
*If reared give tick mark

99
41. What is the livestock rearing system?

a) Stall feeding
b) Free grazing
c) Both combined
d) Others (specify)

42. What are the sources of forage for livestock?

Sources Rank

a) Ridge of khet/Bari

b) Pasture land (kharBari)

c) Community forest

d) Government forest

e) Others (specify)

43. What are the sources of fodder for livestock?

Sources Rank

a) Khet/Bari

b) Pasture land

c) Community forest

d) Government forest

e) Others (specify)

44. Which are the fodder and forage deficiet months ?

a) ..........................

b) ..........................

c) ..........................

d) ..........................

e) ...........................

100
45. What do you feed during fodder/forage scarctiy period?

a) ................................

b) .................................

c) ...............................

46. What is the situation for fodder and forage availability for your own source (on the basis
of requirement)

Symbol: 1= Very good; 2= Good; 3=Fair; 4= Worse; 5= Worst

47. What is the production of compost?

Doko

D. Fuel wood and Timber supplement

48. What do you use for cooking

a) Firewood

b) Kerosene

c) Gober gas

d) Others (specify)

49. If firewood is used for cooking, what are the sources?

a) Wood from own land

b) Community forest

c) Government forest

d) Purchased wood

50. What are the sources of timber for your use?

e) Wood from own land

f) Community forest

g) Government forest

101
h) Purchased wood

51. what is the situation of timber from your own sources ( on the basis of fulfilment of
requirement)

Symbol: 1= Very good; 2= Good; 3=Fair; 4= Worse; 5= Worst

E. Livelihood or cash Income

52. What is your house-wall made up of ?

a) Wood and twigs

b) Wood only

c) Mud and stone

d) Mud only

e) Others (specify)

53. What is your house roof made up of ?

a) Straw/khar

b) Stone slate

c) Iron sheet

d) Others (specify)

54. Do you use smokeless cooking stoves?

Yes No

55. What is the sources of drinking water?

a) Pipe

b) Well

c) Stream

102
d) Others (specify)

56. How much time do you spend while fetching drinking water to and for ?

Minute/hours

57. What are the on-farm cash income sources?

a) Cereal Sale

b) Vegetable Sale

c) Fruit

d) Livestock

e) Livestock product

f) Straw/straw Sale

g) Mild vegetable (Kurilo, Niuro)

h) Firewood

i) Timber

j) Timber product (theki)

k) Others (specify)

58. What are the off- farm cash income sources?

a) Portering

b) Service/job

c) Business

d) Industry

e) Pension

f) Contract work

g) Other (specify)

103
59. From what you make wine?

a) Fingermillet

b) Fruits

c) Others (specify)

d) No wine preparation

60. Have you taken loan for home expenses?

Yes No

61. If yes, what are the sources of loan ?

a) Money lender

b) Neighbours

c) Relatives

d) Bank

e) Others (specify)

F. Agriculture/Forestry Extension

62. Have any of your family members participated in any trainings till now?

a) Food/vegetable production

b) Livestock

c) Soil conservation and management

d) Forestry management

e) Cottage industry

f) Not participated

63. If yes, male/female who have participated?

Symbol: 1= Male; 2= Female

104
64. Have your family members participated in agricultural visit?

Yes No

65. If yes, male or female?

Symbol: 1= Male; 2= Female

66. Have any of your family members become the member of village level committee?

Yes No

67. If yes, male of female?

Symbol: 1= Male; 2= Female

68. If you have become the member of the Village Level Committee, give the name of your
group?

...................................................

...................................................

69. Have you received any information about technology till now?

Yes No

70. If you have then from where?

a) Neighbors

b) Relatives

c) Shops

d) JT/JTAs

e) Agricultural magazines

f) Radio

Others (specify

105
Appendix - 3

106
107
108
109
Appendix 4a. Transact Map Prepared during the Field Visit at Chandi Bhyanjyng VDC
Raibung
Gotheri
Dhapkhola

Adhamara

Villages/Al
titude 1200 m 1000 m 950 m 800 m (APP)
Khet/Bari Bari:25% Bari:15% Bari:10% Bari:20%
Khoriya Khoriya: 20% Khoriya: 10% Khoriya: 8% Khoriya: 20%
Forest Forest: 25% Forest/Bhir: 75.% Forest: 75% Forest Bhir: 60%
Stone Bhir: 30% Stone:7%
Soil type Kalo, Rato mato Phusro and Phusro mato Kalo mato with
Kalegi some Phusro
mato
Landraces Maize, F/ Millet, Maize, Millet, F/Millet, Maize, Maize, Millet,
Garlic, Ghaiya, Buckwheat (less) Horsegram Garlic,
Ricebean Buckwheat
Vegetables Potato, Rayo, Rayo, Cucumber, Potato (less), Rayo, Potato,
Cucumber, Beans, Cucumber, Cucumber,
Spongegourd, Spongegourd, Spongegourd, Spongegourd
Beans Potato (less) Rayo
Fruits Orange, Citrus, Citrus, Pear, Citrus, Pear, Orange, Citrus,
Pear, Apple Junar Junar Pear, Junar
(upper part)
Pomegranate,
Junar
Fodder Tanki, Kutmiro, Tanki, Kutmiro, Tanki, Kutmiro, Tanki, Kutmiro,
Grass Gogan, Bamboo, Gogan, Bamboo, Gogan, Gogan, Bamboo,
Khanayo, Khanayo, Bamboo, Khanayo,
Badhahar, Badhahar, Khanayo, Badhahar,
Nibaro Nibaro Badhahar, Nibaro
Nibaro
Wood Sal, Chilaune, Sal, Chilaune, Sal, Chilaune, Sal, Chilaune,
Champ, Katush Champ, Katush Champ, Katush Champ, Katush

Note: See appendix 6 for scientific names of tree species.

110
Appendix 4b. Transact Map Prepared at during the Field Visit at Chandi Bhyanjyng VDC
Bhoteswara
Baneltar Pamdanda
Kirsaura
Jaugera
Madkewa/Saldanda/
Dhosghari
Chilaune Danda Kalikhola

Height 1600 m 1450m 1150m 9000m 900m 850m 700 m


Bari/Forest: 100% Pakho: 50% Pakho:80% Pakho: 50% Pakho: 75% Forest: x Forest: 7% Pakho: 45%
Bhir Forest: 25% Bari: 13% Forest: 20% Bari: 10% Pakho: 85% Bari: 15% Bari: 20%
Bari: 12.5% Khoriya: 7% Bari: 15% Khoriya: 10% Bari: 7.5% Khoriya: 10% Forest: 5%
Khoriya: 12.5% Khoriya: 15% Forest: 5% Khoriya: 7.5% Pakho: 68% Khoriya: 30%
Soil type Phusro/ Kalo Phusro/ Kalo Rato mato, Phusro, Kalo and Gegar Kalo, Gegar Rato and Gegar Gegar and Phusro
Gegar
Food Crops Millet, Maize, Millet, Maize, Millet, Maize, Millet, Maize, Beans, Ghaiya, Millet, Maize, Millet, Maize, Millet, Maize,
Beans, Ghaiya, Beans, Beans, Ricebean, Soyabean, Blackgram, Blackgram, Blackgram,
Ricebean, Ghaiya, Ghaiya, Horsegram Ricebean, Ricebean, Soyabean, Ricebean, Soyabean,
Soyabean, Ricebean, Ricebean, Soyabean, Horsegram Horsegram
Horsegram Soyabean, Soyabean, Horsegram
Horsegram Horsegram
Fruits Pear, Orange, Pear, Orange, Pear, Orange, Citrus, Pear, Orange Citrus, Guava Mango, Guava, Mango, Citrus,
Citrus Citrus Citrus, Lemon Citrus Guava, Papaya
Vegetables Bean, Spinach, Bean, Bean, Bean, Pea, Potato, Cucumber, Bean, Pea, Potato, Spinach, Bean, Spinach, Bean,
Potato, Spinach, Spinach, Spongegourd, Pumpkin, Spongegourd, Potato, Spongegourd, Potato,
Cucumber, Potato, Pea, Potato, Pea, Bittergourd Pumpkin, Pumpkin, Bittergourd Spongegourd,
Spongegourd, Cucumber, Cucumber, Bittergourd Pumpkin,
Pumpkin, Spongegourd, Spongegurd, Bittergourd
Bittergourd Pumpkin, Pumpkin,
Bittergourd Bittergourd
Fodder Grass Gogan, Bamboo, Gogan, Bamboo, Tanki, Kutmiro, Badahar Tanki, Kutmiro, Tanki, Kutmiro, Tanki, Kutmiro,
Tanki Bamboo, Tanki, Badahar Badahar Badahar
Tanki, Kutmiro,
Kutmiro, Badahar
Katush
Wood Chilaune, Chilaune, Sal, Chilaune, Sal, Chilaune, Katush, Sal, Chilaune, Sal, Chilaune, Sal, Chilaune,
Katush, Champ Katush, Katush, Champ Katush, Champ Katush, Champ Katush, Champ
Champ Champ
Appendix 4c. Transact Map Prepared during the Field Visit at Andheri Khola Watershed Area

111
Bansapani
Kaphaladanda, Raseli
Majhatole,
Aapdanda, Sirantole
Kholagaun
GaihraBari,
Budhiaap, Pataghar
Salbutte
Khasrang
Bensi

Height 250m asl 540 m asl 700m asl 750 m asl 850m asl 1269m asl 1350m asl
Khet/ Bari/ Khet PakhoBari PakhoBari PakhoBariya Stones PakhoBari (95%) PakhoBari
Khoriya (75%) PakhoBari Khoriya (5%)
Khoriya 25%) (Few)
Soil Sandy Soil Red Soil Khyangre Soil Khyangre Soil Khyangre Khyangre Soil Khyangre Soil
(Dry, Stony Soil), (Stony Soil) Soil (Stony (Stony Soil) (Stony Soil)
Water Demanding Soil)
Crops Rice, Maize Maize, Maize, Maize, Maize, Maize, Maize,
Fingermillet, Fingermillet, Black Fingermillet, Fingermillet, Fingermillet, Black Fingermillet,
Pigeon Pea, Gram, Niger Black Gram, Black Gram Gram, Niger Buckwheat,
Black Gram, Niger Tori, Niger
Niger
Fruits Banana, Banana Banana, Peach, Banana, Banana Pear
Pineapple Pineapple Pineapple
Vegetables Cucumber, Ladies Finger, Cucumber, Sponge Sponge Guard, Cucumber, Cucumber, Sponge Cucumber,
Pumpkin, Pumpkin Guard, Rayo, Snake gourd Sponge Guard, Snake Snake gourd
Radish, Rayo, Radish, Ladies Guard, Biter gourd , Radish, Rayo, Radish
Sponge Guard Finger, Chilly Gourd Snake Rayo
gourd
Daleghas Tanki, Kutmiro, Barro, Saj, Barro, Sal, Kutmaro, Barro, Saj, Barro, Dar, Kaula, Gogan, Putta,
Gidari, Kabro, Siris, Tanki, Phusro Tanki, Saj, Saj, Chiuri, Kutmiro, Gogan, Tanki, Dar (Less)
Thotne, Gayo, Khanayo, Sal, Khanayo Kamle (less) Khanayo,
Kamle Phusro, Tanki Kamle(more)

112
Appendix 5: Soil Fertility (nutrient rating class)

Total N %

Low Less than 0.075%


Medium 0.075 – 0.15%
High More than 0.15 %

O. M. %

Low Less than 1.0%


Medium 1.0 - 2.0 %
High 2.1 - 3.0%
Very high More than 3.0%

Available P kg/ha

Very low Less than 10 kg/ha


Low 10 - 20 kg/ha
Medium 21 - 50 kg/ha
High 51 – 180 kg/ha
Very high More than 180 kg/ha

Available K kg/ha

Very low Less than 50 kg/ha


Low 50 – 100 kg/ha
Medium 101 – 250 kg/ha
High 251 – 450 kg/ha
Very high More than 450 kg/ha

113
Appendix 6. List of Trees and their Scientific Names

Lical Name Scientific Name

1. Tanki Bauhinia purpurea


2. Kutmiro Litsea monopetala
3. Gogan Saurauia nepalensis
4. Bamboo Bamboosa sp.
5. Khanayo Ficus cunia
6. Badahar Artocarpus lakoocha
7. Nibaro Ficus roxburghii
8. Sal Shorea robusta
9. Chilaune Schima wallichii
10. Champ Michelia Champaca
11. Katush Castonopsis indica
12. Gidari Pieris formosa
13. Kabro Ficus lacor
14. Thotne Ficus hispida
15. Gayo Bridelia retusa
16. Kamle
17. Barro Terminalia chebula
18. Saj Terminalia alata
19. Siris Albizia sp.
20. Phusro Grewia subinaequalis
21. Chiuri Aaesandra butyracea
22. Dar Boehmeria regulosa
23. Kaula Machilus odoratissima
24. Putta

GIS/gisreportfinal

114

You might also like