ࡱ>     7 bjbjUU 7|7|Hl4444"""8*#$N#e.$.$D$D$D$&&&1e3e3e3e3e3e3e$g iWe&&^&&&We144D$D$Ule111&v4lD$D$1e1&1e11[9^D,bD$"$ T-. "m- `&be0e/`fRj#0~Rjb14444Integrated Watershed Development. Case Study of MotaKakadiamba. AKRSP(I)-Netrang, Gujarat experiences. Contents: Introduction Study Objectives Context Salient features of MotaKakadiamba Best Practices Typical v/s Integrated watershed development Key constituents to integrated watershed development Process & Outcome of integration Lessons for replication Integrated development approach for - water, land, forest and cattle. AKRSP(I)-Netrang, Gujarat experiences. Introduction: The watershed approaches conventionally aimed at treating degraded lands with the help of low cost and locally accessed technologies such as in-situ soil and moisture conservation, afforestation and through close involvement of communities. Watershed Guidelines (1994) under Ministry of Rural Development in India emphasized on increasing production and enhancing productivity in cultivated areas-largely private. Attempts were made to enhance rural livelihood support systems for poor and needy. Though the guidelines were revised in 2001, the focus has retained. Revised Guidelines re-emphasised on participation of women, carrying out exit protocol, role of PRIs, establishing credit facility in 2001. However some of the projects in first batch (1996) have already incorporated some of these elements in their stride leading to successful and sustainable models of watersheds. At the same time some of the concepts like convergence, Twin Track Approach, Transparency were introduced at later stage to enhance the effectiveness of the program. These ideas emerged out of some of the best practices witnessed in the field. This document attempts to study some of such approaches. Aga Khan Rural Support Program India-AKRSP (I) is a non-profit organization and is part of Aga Khan Development Network. Established in 1983 in Gujarat with active involvement of Mr.Anil Shah as Chief Executive Officer to empower rural communities manage their environment and control their lives. Since then AKRSP-I focused more on empowerment based models of community development around land and water resources. All its activities are routed through Gram Vikas Mandals (village development associations) and Mahila Mandals (womens associations). Here people decide, execute and manage various development interventions. Its field operations spread in three different regions of Gujarat viz., Bharuch (tribal region), Surendranagar(Drought prone region) and Junagadh (Salinity prone region). AKRSP-I played active role in execution of watershed program under Ministry of Rural Development and this report studies one of the project villages MotaKakadiamba in Narmada District of Gujarat. Study Objectives To study and document best practices in integrated watershed management To document the approach of AKRSP-I to learn lessons for replication To study and document the challenges and alternatives in practice Context: Though initial focus was on natural resources such as water, land, forest and livestock AKRSP-I geared up to concentrate on livelihood based approaches through programmatic intervention Sustainable Community Based Livelihood Enhancement Program(SCALE) funded by European Commission. The process of community empowerment is corner stone for sustainable development of natural resources. And livelihood enhancement takes place through integrated approaches to resource development. Watershed approach is one such medium where community based livelihood enhancement could take place. This complex relationship is studied by Development Support Center in MotaKakadiamba watershed project under SCALE program. In this village watershed activity was undertaken by AKRSP-I. The project designed and funded under Watershed Guidelines 1994 under Ministry of Rural Development, Govt.of India. Salient Features of MotaKakadiamba: Physical characteristics Twenty Five percent area of MotaKakadiamba village is degraded forestland. About 6% cropland was under irrigation when watershed activities were initiated. Rest of the area under rainfed cultivation. Typically the productivity was very low and large numbers of families were out-migrating as daily wage labors. Undulating land topography resulted in high runoff and soil erosion further degrading the land productivity. A seasonal river flowing adjoining the village contributes to partial irrigation on riverbank. Forestland located on ridge is however degraded. Most of the nallas from here terminates to river. Severe soil erosion reported in these nallas. It is a typical watershed otherwise found in any corner of the country. Property regimes Farmers occupied village common lands for cultivation. Through there is free access collection of firewood, Tendu Patta and right to access forest resources is controlled by Forest Department. WA is actively involved in forest protection in post treatment scenario. Fallow land on riverbank is accessed by landless and were entitled. The composition of livestock witnessed see-through changes during watershed where number of draught animals reduced. People started owning new farm equipments, tools and assets that could be easily liquidated. Socioeconomic conditions The village is stratified with small and marginal farmers, artisans, landless and scheduled caste and scheduled tribe communities. Higher number of small farmers and landless dominate village demography. Seasonal out migration as construction labor is common practice. Wealth ranking conducted during micro plan preparation also reinforces this fact. However in post watershed there is increase in number of small farmers, people with increased asset holdings and assured livelihood opportunities. The village is however known for its unity when boycotted legislative assembly elections demanding for an over bridge on the river to improve trade access. An old bridge was damaged long ago and disconnected the village from rest of the world. Protesting against administrative apathy community boycotted local elections indicating strong social network despite varying social strata. Best Practices: The success of watershed depends not only on classification of watershed problems, and integrating various activities into it but also on understanding processes from which communities and support staff can evolve workable solutions. This varies from site to site, region to region and institution to institution. It is therefore essential to understand the condition of resources, community interaction and plausible impact. The ultimate indicator of success is the ability of communities to take advantage of new opportunities and to what extent these benefits are sustained in the post project phase. Nevertheless best practices are by and large replicable with little modifications and adaptation to local conditions. Some of the practices are universally adaptable such as integrated development approaches in watershed. Though many attempted this approach-few succeeded. MotaKakadiamba watershed is one that integrated land, water, forest and livestock based approaches in planning process. Technologies like setting up Treadle Pumps, convergence in Community Irrigation Wells and sustained agriculture credit and inputs in post project period perhaps entrust unique status to this watershed. It is not run-of-the-mil kind of intervention visible in large-scale projects. Communities collectively designed needed and relevant interventions like treadle pumps, community wells and extensive soil and nalla conservation works during micro plan. By this, the program wisely exploited available ground water resources; surface water and even controlled soil erosion. When authorities rejected their plea for community wells, they took the pain to demonstrate its management and benefits to communities. One of the major constraints to the success of agricultural development and more specifically micro watershed development is high interest rates and lack of credit facilities for farmers. In general, small farmers turn to the informal lending market where interest rates of up to 60 per cent are charged (World Bank, 1987). Carefully crafted watershed associations sustained agriculture credit activity along with civil works even in post watershed period. Through the watershed project was over by 2001 lending activity continued in on-farm and off-farm sectors. As local communities gain awareness of their new rights and responsibilities in resource management, demands for legal, financial, technical and logistical support from the public sector increase. As the state is perennially understaffed the increasing demands are met by Project Implementing Agency in post project period. The sustained relationship between community and AKRSP-I even after withdrawal from project is a necessary condition here. Watershed Association is supported in legal, technical and financial planning for better convergence of development activities. Three check dams built under 80:20 cost sharing with minor irrigation department, horticulture orchards, vegetable kits mobilized with agriculture department are indicative. Four group wells came up as result of watershed interventions. Though the first one constructed under watershed plan remaining 3 were incorporated at a later stage. The water level earlier available at 30ft to 40 ft is now available at 15 to 20ft. And in sufficient quantity to irrigate 4-6 acres on each well benefiting more than 60 families. This has changed the cropping pattern, practices and productivity leading to new introduction of improve and new variety seeds, increased pump sets and farm mechanization. While evolving treatment plan soil-moisture conservation measures were restricted to soil conservation and nalla plugging. Works pending on drainage line were later carried out with funds mobilized from Tribal Area Sub Plan constructing small Check Dams. Convergence of schemes and programs in post watershed put the Association on track with development programs. At the same time fund constraint under initial program (watershed) no longer remained as a limiting factor to treat the entire watershed. Two treadle pumps were installed on riverside fallow land where landless farmers were given piece of land. The pumps are used to lift water and irrigate kitchen garden a major source of livelihood. The Pump is easy to install, requires little maintenance and can easily be repaired by the farmer. Though a small activity it is significant in light of its impact on livelihood of poor. A family is removed out of poverty with in a span of 3 years. Typical v/s Integrated Watershed development. Ideally the micro watershed concept aims to establish an enabling environment for the integrated use, regulation and treatment of water and land resources of a watershed based ecosystem to accomplish resource conservation and biomass production objectives (Jensen et al, 1996). However when we refer to available literature and observe couple of watersheds we find that a typical watershed largely demonstrates soil conservation works, couple of water harvesting structures and few user and self-help groups. Though this package gives impression of complete watershed it lacks integration and hence lower impact on resources and dependent communities. Empirical evidences suggest that end results in watershed are highly site specific and depend on physical characteristics of watershed, technical choice of resource development, nature of property regimes, its social structures and organization of community. However the approach of Project Implementing Agency largely determines the impact. The integrated approaches to watershed forgone either for lack of resources or PIAs are more project focused. Though rainfall pattern, intensity and hydrogeological characteristics of watershed such as runoff, ground water levels and land use pattern determines potential returns the comprehensive/integrated approach largely dictates end results. In areas like MotaKakadiamba where ground water availability is certain but lack of resources to tap this source limited their growth. Here the PIA & WC took keen interest in mobilizing additional resources from local programs and ensured the asset creation. Similarly land topography being undulating frequent runoff, erosion resulted in low yields (crop). Evidences suggest that regions receiving higher and certain rainfall employ complex technologies and institutional approaches compared to regions receiving poor rainfall. Here in this case communities preferred relatively known and certain approach and technologies. For example Group Wells a traditional practice that is far more economical and manageable is opted as alternative. Similarly nalla bunding (earthen) and contour bunding opted which generates employment as well retains topsoil. In a typical watershed one may find such soil conservation works but seldom integrated with other activities like irrigation and assured returns. Irrigated agriculture which is sustainable over time, economically justified, financially viable, socially acceptable and technically sound, without causing unacceptable impacts on the environment. A typical watershed stuck at creating water harvesting structures and seldom extends to invest in technologies that could enable small farmer to irrigate her/his land. Where as integrated watershed would equally emphasize on water harvesting and small-scale irrigation for food security & productivity. It would further extend to improvisation in cropping practices, cost effective irrigation technologies and market access.  Advantages of Treadle Pump: Minimal operating costs, as no fuel or electricity is required for operation. Effectively irrigates land holdings which are one hectare or less in size. Suitable for lifting water from bore wells and surface water bodies-rivers, ponds, lakes, canals, wells, tanks, etc. The pump is one of the cheapest irrigation systems currently available in the world. The treadle pump can also be used for draining waterlogged areas The integrated watershed development approach did not segregate interventions in rigid sectoral blocks like soil and water conservation, forestry or livestock. It targets overall productivity of the village and sustainable management of new regimes. A better return on sustainable basis is possible by adoption of right technology, crop and land use pattern, and economic diversification. This is observed in diversity of activities from Group Wells to Ice-cream Vending Machine to a landless farmer. A study conducted by Ninan and others found that integration of activities under watershed resulted in enhanced crop yields, income and employment. Followed by reduction in variability of dry crop yields, and better resilience of crop output to drought and other environmental stresses. Mota Kakadiamba reflects these elements as farmers switching to better seed variants in traditional crops, taking up crops like cotton & sunflower. In a typical watershed also we may find similar changes in cropping pattern and shift to commercial variants. But the changes hardly sustain. The Watershed Committee here in this case took up the responsibility of input supply and line up technical services (though with the support of PIA). Agricultural input needs to be sustained and reoriented as per demand to maximise the benefits from physical investment such as Group Wells. As benefits of integrated watershed activities are now visible the demand for new seed varieties, soil and crop management practices, off-farm livelihood alternatives would increase. This perhaps stimulates communities long-term engagement with external agencies. Unlike typical watershed where the PIA withdraws in post project scenario here AKRSP-I sustained its interaction albeit with a different approach. ApproachTypical WatershedIntegrated WatershedArea coveragePartialFullEmphasis on activitiesEither equal or differentialEquitable Community involvement Individual & GroupGroup & FederationPlanningSectoral & project basedIntegrated & beyond project phaseFundingProject basedProject & ConvergenceTechnology focusSite specific Site specific & user friendlyEnd resultsProject basedBeyond project phaseLivelihoodsProject centeredFamily centered Key constituents to integrated watershed development: Participatory appraisal & planning When the AKRSP-I team first visited the village to establish rapport and appraise village condition, people were reluctant to participate in any development activity. It was unbelievable for the community members that their village could get a sum like Rs.20 lakhs for village development. Only 60 members represented in the first Gram Sabha organsied to chalk out village development plan. Village resources were identified through mapping, transect and poorest of the poor were identified by employing wealth ranking. Drinking water, soil erosion, water scarcity, low productivity, poor markets were reported as major issues during this exercise. PRA exercise focused on various issues related to livelihoods, resource rehabilitation and community participation in managing the program. Formation of village institutions Gram Panchayat members too actively involved in the formation of watershed association. Village communities elected their own watershed committee through Gram Sabha where 3 members were from local Panchayat and 3 were women representatives. Over a period of time self help groups and user groups were also formed. Most of the self-help groups (10) formed around thrift and user groups confined to irrigation wells, Nalla buding, check dams and agriculture credit. WA regularly met during 4 years. Regular savings were also introduced as norm to participate in activities. Integration of activities At initial stage people were asked to contribute their share (variable & equitable) the activities came to stand still for about 1 year. It was hard time for watershed committee to motivate people for community contribution to Watershed Development Fund. Exposures, trainings and group discussion helped to convince people to contribute. Here PIA did not adopt short-cut approaches to raise contribution. They tread long route to convince people on importance of contribution. As in a typical watershed drinking water problem was addressed in entry point activity. Three hand pumps and a water tank with motor was constructed. Watershed Committee took up maintenance responsibility. Convergence Technical measures such as Kotar buding and contour bunding were prioritiesed. As a result cultivable area in the village has increased. As reported by user groups, increased moisture availability influenced crop yields. This however not measured. Most of the farmers shifted to sowing better seed varieties. Though most of the Kotars were treated the budget was not matching requirement. Additional funds were mobilized from Tribal Area Sub Plan-Narmada district and other Kotars were treated. Technologies With in the available resources landless were provided wage benefits, artisans were provided with Tool Kits related to their occupation. Some of the poor farmers who own very little patch of land were supported with treadle pumps. These are the farmers who could not afford expensive diesel pumps to lift water from river. Treadle pump is most economical and efficient option that was executed. Dy. Director-Watershed at District Rural Development Agency rejected the community well component from micro plan stating that it caters to few individuals and not entire community. But WC took officials to visit the village and understand how it impacts the entire community if incorporated in the plan. Though officials convinced about its impact they were worried about equitable distribution of resources among all stake holders. WC suggested for 40-50% cost sharing norm for community wells. As a result the more than 30% of the watershed area is under irrigation. Cost sharing Equity aspects were given high priority in cost sharing. Even in post watershed activities user contribution in irrigation wells varied from group to group. On 5 wells excavation works were part of user contribution, in another 4 wells user contribution collected in construction of distribution network, motor & pump. Prioritizing activities Livestock was given lesser priority, as community did not find it economically beneficial. They felt that infrastructure and markets should be developed before taking up livestock related activities. On the other hand mechanization replaced draught animals use in agriculture activities. For example tillage by tractors is much viable option to manual ploughing in small farms. Similarly in absence of road, diary could not be promoted. Communities included degraded forestland as part of watershed plan. However it was treated by Forest Department under Forest Working Schemes during the same period. Wisely WA with the permission of local authorities diverted this sum to construct irrigation wells. On completion of works on forestland the Association formed a Forest Committee to protect the land and regeneration. Communities were allowed to collect firewood and leaves. Process & Outcome of Integration: Social Community Participation Without panchayat support, NGOs (as temporary bodies within the village) and newly formed bodies such as WCs are unlikely to succeed. Here in case of MotaKakadiamba PIA ensured that WA and PRI are not pitched against each other. AKRSP-I ensured PRI membership on WA and also ensured Gram Sabha alive. It was however not all smooth sailing when SHGs split on political grounds couple of years ago. Local Panchayat elections voted against existing Sarpanch. But that did not affect WA functioning. In a study Mosse (1996) reports that, even in tribal areas, villages are far from homogenous units. Social relationships are determined inter alia by inter-hamlet or inter-clan conflicts, related dependency, mortgage relations and the operations of brokers or guarantors for moneylenders and land disputes. Village institutions are often dominated and sometimes manipulated by powerful leaders and apparent social homogeneity of villages conceals inequalities of power. The existence of trust serves to lower transaction costs and serves as a social lubricant. Trust is also developed within an institutional context and is furthered by the actions of societal norms, political organisations, regulation, professional standards and networks (Williamson, 1993). AKRSP-I ensured that it would sustain its relationship with WC and WA to further the activities in post watershed scenario. WC members were thoroughly trained to commit and execute activities with understanding. When differential contribution raised in Gram Sabha WC members took initiative explaining its logic to community members. Similarly when the Forest Department refused to a lot forestland for treatment under watershed it waited for 3 years to re-approach for protection rights. In a typical watershed village institutions are focused and trained to manage interventions as per guidelines. As the goals are project based they tend to ignore factors beyond project framework. At the same time gender and equity considerations are used as lubricants to short term project execution. Integrated watershed development looks beyond project phases and engages long- term objectives. Gender Gender issues were given weightage in all training programs and awareness camps. However SHGs/women groups split on political interests. There is however need for conscious efforts to sustain women groups. On the other hand Joint Forest Management Committee allowed free grazing of cattle in forestland. As it emphasized on re-generation (main species is Teak-non-grazing variety) open grazing was not detrimental to forest growth. This has rendered great relief to women who generally burdened by forest conservation norms at community level. In a study Turton et al (1997) noted that access restrictions imposed on common grazing areas encourage a shift to stall feeding systems. Women, who have to spend extra time cutting and carrying feeding materials, undertake the main bulk of work. On the contrary typical watershed takes up blue print approach to JFM in watershed. By and large treatment in upper ridges carried out against state permission. Equity Some of the research studies suggest that the overall returns to investments in watershed development to be generally high, with cost benefit ratios ranging from one to greater than two. What is not clear however is who are the winners and losers in the development process? If social capital is a resource available though social networks, the resources that some individuals claim come at the expense of others (Portes and Landolt,1996). Hence it becomes inevitable for PIA to ensure that WC takes decisions in Gram Sabha and prioritizes needs of poor and vulnerable. A school of thought believes that soil conservation works are more equitable than water resource development activities as the later benefits limited number of families. Nonetheless inequitable distribution of resources, benefits would lead to collapse of institution/social capital. The contribution of common pool resources is especially critical for the rural poor. Surveys conducted show that three quarters of the rural poor in the watershed areas depend on common pool resources for fuel, fodder and some food (KAWAD, 1995). In absence of public wastelands, Group Wells, riverside fallow lands, forest department land represents common property regimes. Small farmers were organized around these resources. New assets created at differential contribution levels to ensure equitable distribution of common fund. In-group wells 50% contribution rose from users in the form of labor & materials. Wealth ranking conducted during PRA has helped WA to identify poorest of the poor and accordingly differentiate contribution levels. Fernandez (1993) identifies four groups in particular who do not seem to benefit from watershed development; the landless, families in the upper levels of catchments, women and marginalised tribal groups. Out of the total project cost, Rs.50,000 earmarked as revolving fund for income generation activities. Of this 50% again reserved for the poorest of the poor and asset less. Loans were extended to families surviving on occupations like sewing, carpentry etc. 4 landless families were provided with hand pump repairing equipments along with training. 6 families were provided with treadle pumps where they cultivate 1/2acre (each) fallow land. Such initiatives are generally missing in typical watershed as they exactly doesnt fit project framework. Economic Productivity In a study of pasture development projects in Rajasthan, Kerr (1996) found that so-called undeveloped degraded common pastures were in fact quite productive when compared to managed and protected pastures. The case is similar in MotaKakadiamba. Fallow lands on river slops/banks are generally ignored as unproductive lands. However asset less entrepreneurs like Devabhai and Bhamatiben turned these lands to productive entities. Similar the case with other farmers who installed Treadle pumps as part of watershed intervention. They changed the so-called degraded fallow lands to productive entities. Now there are 110 dug wells in village where water levels are at 15-20ft. However 50% families irrigate from river Dodhan. On the other hand, Watershed Committee held meetings every month deliberating on loan applications, proposals, skills of applicant, return on investment etc. WC members accompany in procurements to ensure proper utilization of loan amount. Timely payments are ensured. The committee offered group and individual loans. Purposes vary from carpentry, tailoring, fishing, dairying, selling vegetables etc. Maximum disbursal is in non-farm sectors. More than 80 thousand was disbursed and recovered among 45 members in 3 years time. SectorsAmount%Category of familiesNo.of familiesAmountAgriculture1950024Landless3140900Animal Husbandry65008Marginal farmers516000Fishery40005Small farmers718000Non-farm5090063Medium farmers26000Some of the enterprises like flourmill generated round the year income. Migration during off-seasons reduced. Cash flow is an important aspect in rural economy. The activities boosted needed cash flows to the families. By providing much needed capital through micro finance route-revolving fund, capital loans, and operational loans poor, landless families are integrated into watershed program. Multi-sectoral integration achieved to sustain the impact of watershed. Watershed Committee reported that 15 to 20 acres cultivated land added as a result of watershed works. Thirty percent productivity improvement reported in Paddy, Juvar (Sorghum), Tuver (Lentil) and Kapas (Cotton) crops in post watershed scenario. Cropping pattern changed due to easy access to irrigation water, timely and cost effective input services by WC and guidance from PIA. For example farmers adopted plantation-sowing method in Paddy replacing aerial sowing due to increased land availability for Paddy cultivation. Farmers adopted new seed (6201,1160) varieties in Paddy and Sorghum and Lentil sowing area reduced by 25%. Cotton, Black Gram and Guvar replaced these varieties in Rabi (second sowing) season. Number of small pump sets increased from 7 to 35 in post watershed period. About 60 acres is actively covered under group wells. Sunflower and Red Chilies are new commercial crops being introduced as a result of increased land productivity and availability of water. Wealth ranking exercise if carried again at the end of the project would suggest increase in well off families and reduction in poor. Substantiating this argument WC member said that post watershed there are 8 motorcycles in the village. Farmers are increasingly adopting tractor for agriculture operations. Out migration reduced among poor. Landless found new occupations to survive and younger generations are provided training in livelihood related activities. The over all confidence levels increased and social capital has visible impact. Sustainability Putnam (1993) argues that working together is easier in a community blessed with substantial stock of social capital, defined as features of social organisation such as network, norms and trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit. But this does not come as gift to PIA. It has to be nourished with in the community processes investing resources over a period of time. Micro watershed projects are not exempt from the wide-ranging effects of macro-economic policy changes and distortions. It is the interplay of appropriate technologies, social infrastructure and economic incentives that govern the productivity and ultimately the sustainability, of watershed projects. For example lack of access road or irregular electricity supply is hindering the potentials of MotaKakadiamba. Though community groups are strong, activities are technically sound it is severely hindered by the above road blocks. In near future these blocks need to be removed. Even where groups for joint action have been formed successfully over a period, remain vulnerable to external shocks. These include the emergence of political conflict within the group as members ally themselves differently to political parties in local elections or conflicts with other villages over management of the shared resources. Here in this case shared resources are limited except forests where the access is limited. On the contrary Group Wells could be termed as shared resources where the group size is small and manageable. This would undoubtedly sustain the intervention. The approach to integrated watershed in MotaKakadiamba reveals that the communities are graduated from handling large chunk of external resources at the beginning of the project with the support of PIA. However by end of 4 years they learnt to manage their own credit, assets, produce and benefits. Systematically convergence was introduced where external agencies, government departments, networks increasingly involved with WC. This helped the Committee to independently plan and approach for resources. Role of AKRSP-I here is more of a guide rather an active partner. Lessons for replication: Strong inter-linkages between government and non-government institutions are a necessary condition to realize end results in watershed development. Promotions of low cost local technologies like Treadle Pumps are best alternative for small farm irrigation on riverside fallows. Landless families could be effectively be rehabilitated under this alternatives who are otherwise receive inequitable share of development resources. Small-scale community irrigation should be part of integrated watershed development to sustained impact in post project period. Group wells are highly successful alternative under watershed to enhance crop production, increase productivity and ensure sustained group interaction around manageable assets. Small groups (user) around decentralized assets/resources sustain longer and individual share of inputs are minimal and manageable. Resulting into vibrant and self-sustaining groups in post project scenario. Integrated watershed development would influence property regimes (common and private) leading to new set of management practices. It is interesting to note here that number of pump sets in the village increased and draught animals decreased. Communities shifted to mechanization in farming brushing aside complexities related commons. However PIAs should constantly guide communities on commons and its management. Communities are often dominated by local political elites prone to using their powers for patronage rather than broad based equitable change. Only active WC could handle these factors provided they are not subjected to political interests. Evidence from other areas suggests that migrant households (both seasonal and occupational) are often losers in development activities carried by village institutions. But a conscious and innovative approach would ensure benefits to migrant households. Strong commitment is however needed on the part of PIA and WC to explore and execute alternatives for poor. When Forest Department reluctant to treat degraded forestland under watershed, ensure that it would be treated under forest working schemes. As second step motivate WC to take up JFM on this site with the approval of Divisional Forest Officer. PIA has to conduct an exit protocol to ensure that the responsibilities are transferred and Watershed Committee remains accountable for all works in post project period. While prioritizing gender concerns in integrated watershed, committee should take decision to allow village cattle openly graze in forestland (when trees are grown up) so that women are relieved from the additional burden of harvesting and collecting fodder grass. Having couple of educated (preferably graduates) members on Watershed Committee would help in maintaining records (Bhaidas bhai is a graduate and Secretary of WC). The community does not prefer livestock interventions especially when common property regimes are uncertain and other support structures are in bad condition. In fact cattle population reduced in post watershed period. It is important for WC to conduct saving and credit activities to reduce dependency on moneylenders. Moneylenders finance social events like marriages and non-productive/consumptive loans at differential interest rates. WCs should be more dynamic and compete with markets in lending. Lack of adequate capital at the disposal of WC is another hurdle in extending consumptive loans. Integrated watershed should look beyond project cycle and short-term goals. WC proposed use of Watershed Development Fund to credit productive activities but this proposal was not accepted by DRDA stating that WDF should only be used for maintenance works. References: An Assessment of European - aided Watershed Development Projects in India from the Perspective of Poverty Reduction and the poor, CDR Working Paper 98.3, January 1998 K.N.Ninan Dharmedra Chandurkar, Jairam Rabari and Kishore Kamani. Revolving Fund; Evolving Livelihoods. The case of MotaKakadiamba watershed development project, AKRSP-I Sagbara, Narmada. 2002 Government of India. 1994. Guidelines for Watershed Development. Ministry of Rural Areas and Employment, New Delhi. GOI, 2003; Hariyali Guidelines Ministry of Rural Development, New Delhi. GOI, 2001; Revised Watershed Guidelines, Ministry of Rural Development, New Delhi, GOI, 1994; Watershed Guidelines, Ministry of Rural Areas and Employment, New Delhi. GOK (1997) Panchayati Raj in Karnataka: Contours of Decentralised Governance, Department of Rural Development & Panchayati Raj. Government of Karnataka: Bangalore. Groundwater Markets and Small Farmer Development: An Argument and Evidence from India, in United Nations book Groundwater Economics, edited by Dr.A.Gurgui, published by Elsevier, London.1987. Integrated Rural Development (Rapporteur's Report) in proceedings of the International Seminar on IRD: Lessons from Experience in Asia, Sponsored by Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok and the Institute for Social Studies, The Hague, held at ISEC, Bangalore, July 7-9, 1988. (KNN) John Farrington and P.Baumann 2000; Panchayati Raj and natural resource management-how to decentralize management over natural resources ODI London. John Kerr 2000; Evaluation of a portfolio of Indian Watershed Projects; Michigan State University. Kerr, J., Pangare G., Pangare, L.V., and George, P.J. 1998. The Role of Watershed Projects in Developing Rainfed Agriculture in Semi-Arid Tropics. Draft. ICAR/World Bank Research Project on Rainfed Agricultural Development, New Delhi. Koppen, van B. 1999. Sharing the last drop: water scarcity, irrigation and gendered poverty eradication. IIED Gatekeeper Series 85 IIED, London. Malhotra, K.C. and Poffenberger, M. (eds). (1989) Forest Regeneration through Community Protection: The West Bengal Experience. West Bengal Forest Department: Calcutta. Mukherjee, K. (1998) Peoples Participation in Watershed Development Schemes in Karnataka: Changing Perspectives. National Workshop on Watershed Approaches to Wastelands Development. Korten, D. (1980) Community Organisation and Rural Development: A Learning Process Approach. Public Administration Review. Vol.40, No.5. Ostrom, E. (1990) Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. Pari Baumann 1998; Panchayati Raj and Watershed in India; constraints and opportunities ODI London "Water Users' Associations in India: Lessons for Watershed Management" and Integrated Watershed Management: Scaling Up with Sustainability", papers presented in the Workshop to Produce a Resource Book on Strategies, Appraoches and Institutional Issues in Integrated Micro-Watershed Management in India, February 28 to March 12, 2000, held at New Delhi. Rural development: Learning from experience in Indias watersheds; south Asia brief; Rebeca Robboy & Geetanjali Chopra World Bank 2004. Rhoades, RE. 1998. Participatory watershed research and management: where the shadow falls. IIED Gatekeeper Series 81. IIED, London. Sustainable Development - The Case of Watershed Development in India, in Proceedings of the International Symposium on `Models of Sustainable Development - Exclusive or Complementary Approaches of Sustainability?, Universite Paris I Pantheon Sorbonne and AFCET, Paris, held at Paris, France from March 16-18, 1994, Vol.I, pp.468-473, (With S Lakshmikanthamma). (KNN) Shah,T, Alam, M., Kumar, M.D., and Singh, M. (1999). Pedal Pump and the Poor: Social Impact of a annual Irrigation Technology in South Asia: International Development Enterprises, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Turton, C., Coulter, J., Farrington, J and Shah, A. 1998. Participatory Watershed Development in India: Impact of the new guidelines. Overseas Development Institute, London. Integrated development approach for - water, land, forest and cattle. AKRSP(I)-Netrang, Gujarat experiences. Page  PAGE 1 J. Ravi Shanker. The equity aspect is best illustrated by a small case of Raju Vasava a landless agriculture labor who used to migrate 5-6 months in a year to Surat Town as wage labor. In 1999, Raju availed Rs.1500 from revolving fund and purchased a bicycle and ice cream storage box. He started selling ice-creams during summers covering 2 villages in a day. Earning up Rs.80 with as little working capital of Rs.50 was indeed good business. He paid back his loan in daily installments instead of monthly. Now he sells ice cream through out the year. Devabhai and Bhamatiben purchased a small calf and tried to cultivate riverside fallow land. The thin stream tempted them to cultivate some Pigeon pea that could be bartered for bowl of rice. Both used to lift water from riverbed through buckets and irrigate small patches of scattered land. The turning point was however a Treadle Pump. After its installation they collectively graded the slope, leveled the land and reinforced with stone bunds. Fair portion of fallow turned into rich cultivable land. They could harvest vegetables, develop small orchard and even paddy. As a result they were elevated to purchased buffalo and sold milk and earned up to Rs.80 per day. They also sent their child to schooling. When Devabhai paid Rs.500 contribution to buy Treadle Pump, he was not very sure how it could benefit him. They earn from selling vegetables & milk in the village. Now roughly 2 acres is under irrigation. Treadle pump changed the concept of cultivable land and irrigation. It sustained the livelihood of poor farmers like Devabhai and Bhamatiben. ijtu&'<=>_`axydm 5""#9#$$%%'f((t,p-q--- CJ^JaJB*^JaJph6]^JaJ^J^JaJ6B*]ph B*ph5\^JaJ5CJOJQJ\5CJ\^JaJ 5\^J CJOJQJ5\?"#ABijtu'=> & F hh^h`hh^h & F$a$\>`ayz{01 = >  !cd ! 8h^h & Fdmn  #56OBC45 ""$$'7$8$H$ & F''))++p-q-r---1020113366H9J9K9g99:v: & F$If $$Ifa$$If7$8$H$ !--...102051112p334]5C6667G9H9I9J9g999 ;;;<)>??yA B>BCCCD DDD]GGIILLMMjNqNNNP[RhRᨾ܎܎܎6B*]ph6]5\5B*\phy( 5CJ\ CJOJQJCJOJQJ^JCJjCJUmHnHuB*^JaJph^JaJ B*phB*^JaJph6]^JaJ^JaJCJOJQJaJ8v:: ;;; = =?? B BB(B=Bqqq$& #$/Ifb$7$8$H$m$$Ifl 04$064 lal & F$If =B>BLBTBYBapRRR$& #$/Ifb$$$Ifl^FZ Z / X   6 06    4 lale4YBZBqBBBBBBBBBBvgggvgggvgg$& #$/Ifb$$$Ifl^FZ Z / X 6 06    4 lale4 BCC%C3CICJC[CjCCCCggg$$Ifl^FZ Z / X 6 06    4 lale4$& #$/Ifb$ CCCCCCCCCD DDDggeee` & F$$Ifl^FZ Z / X 6 06    4 lale4$& #$/Ifb$ DD\G]GGIIIKKLLLNNNPPZR[RhRSSSwUxU1W2WTWUW7$8$H$ & FhRSS1W2WTWUWvW~WWXX5Y=YYY__b$bcccggiiijkm`ooottuuu,vzzzzU|~~+-.I݃/0MP謾B*^JaJph B*^Jph5\^JaJCJ B*phCJOJQJaJjU^JaJmHnHujU^JmHnHu^J6]^JaJ5\^JaJ6]>UW\W]WvWhYiYA[B[f\g\R^S^___ b bcccggiiqkrkl7$8$H$7$8$H$ & Fh^h & Flllmmooqqqqqqr!r(r$If7$8$H$ & F & F(r)r$$Ifl4֞\ b$y!nW`RU (064 lal)r5r;r>r?rHrKrQr$IfQrRr$$Ifl4֞\ b$y!nW RU (064 lalRrcrhrjrkr|r~rr$Ifrr$$Ifl4֞\ b$y!nW RU (064 lalrrrrrrrr$Ifrr$$Ifl4֞\ b$y!nW RU (064 lalrrrrrrrr$Ifrrt$$Ifl4֞\ b$y!nW RU (064 lalttuuuuvvwwxxxxzzzT|U|~~-.HI7$8$H$ & F & F & F7$8$H$I݃ރ./OP,-IJ7$8$H$7$8$H$mn&'9:34 7$8$H$=cnɒ%&'34e>ƝǝNP֞GH>?EFGHYZwխչդ}^J0JCJmHnHu0JCJj0JCJUCJCJOJQJaJB*CJ^Jph^JaJ CJ^JaJ CJ^JaJ CJ^JaJ CJ^JaJ CJ^JaJCJ^J0J5CJ\^J0J5CJ\CJ0J5CJ\aJ 0JCJaJ045{|fǝOP՞֞GHIZ[\vw &dP7$8$H$ !7$8$H$wDE7$8$H$ 1h/ =!"#$%`!VZO32˾JE)!X$x خ>lmFPH.PmyjkQ"QDͥL)*!J*ͣfPƄԹsu|z>k=z{:#>^Ӌ==NX{xOI?Y?ㇾg}s//'ܣO}c:yg=~;} ko Jr;3k/~>2wwzQ?~GWxij~?[?ybw??:Oo^y<􍏽7;_"X{G8=|'H>NG;юvhG;юvhG;юvhG;юvhG;юvhG;юv[?ç?N"?~~#?#h}ޣv=^ 6}| OӯU^^_+~_vz~}ǝ>3>{~9N}~>#>11?'v_?G;}W?O/b1Ov۵fx3 ͧOO<}w~so_hG{p--N>IOz__^έ ?'^5_~O)W|WhхO?3n"kӼO~zWySS3˽5Ǐq?//:O}?_<}'}sWG;Ldl48m7/g V'k`ݻ˻s__zw|w|`\;ўf=N/}ю`+' k^e_/WdWzW:˗z)ο3<<9g7u>>,?H~o87;̽_ ϟ_8w̱퉳~۷}G"~p ^5^]^__o槷}۷=1QQg>^`$4!~o#?3~ϸlz_Y?g_qsS tR doo=oO?*۫{v_+_G}\{3q1v#uW1T-~ҽ+ܟ{zyg8.FoO?ԟS.xwz뜿O?'??{=}|9Kܖ/1\|S?gW_yӿܜ/ſxwe]?bs{Y~ӟC=0ǐCg8~o:N__{s೪_Xuu]oqs[㛼ɛuZxxLl~v?ئ>Ͻm?3_[yo8юv;U$>?/N>Oɟ|QYuBz2qk?__pdd?`ؖoam7LȖ/pC|A{z7z縪~9юv;5OQluc pmoUr{+`+nwpq[b"opc$?`( /cy=y^u_ vov?g߃Jp FhGVl8| /S?S9ȧ_~:\pcgĴ{[ű^~\{9`7_bg?S.oZhG{p-/|֭)z  .?ϟw9ć_/Sb!> Wmly7vvw89&`B~~g{o0R.ۆU[!m}v .8z~6 ye_/_wqzO[2}k=}_]qSL8xױr?[ Wnmcn=M~4k;7cax3?Gύq(<0 [l~Vw#:k8Ew^۾L8IDQiK;*fk)񅦓>w~w>hzWcĨ7~3_c ׼O >zbȶbHX$f}Q:sD6f"jtloo9W>ڷn\㷒[V&VYa4?;1=?G~~O{{IieW&~s j]un|565m6sfk9`nWtwG;^>w#3ү5lȐp^9 9p->9e˄m?w-WLF799nzG/ɽ&ffcp 5}gmn얭ulٍOoQ?mѱnvG=k~kp~܃8p@xo#[!r>~/g.˚ΚA[u˘8bZ0ui,XxJky8lߝ}g^fhGo{vԊq&WӞq]v,zW%ߋAH\<~yCY=5+kny0nG--9ȳmpG;ԍE6)w—5+M6љ/+P{w|͸!|Xuok=CjA['r(l?c5m+W'.1?sH *_7>ܒ8xֺټ? bKʷ`q_0|l#|NniVNNkt+eL, j\?66Xq-ZSM_\䇸ShhnY/_K O,]ƵC1.Z,,>tf#Cƍ->T ;C^ƴ>s0z>L>+͎\0|&Ekc^ѭ4 Eԧ>3׉k$W+\sYS MN7cLr$j?^-: 򵘺gE69ۦwW#-CO%s9Ċt??Jlµی/Ҍ1̕!>y~_dP,\ G"/렇_y[[݉7ȚsO-F!eV7%9Jµ5=r1Mƅra!O5^[OҋM<:kpmfLkhtl-NVpij}c9<0M}#ԔAa{V;9n7Mtlw]ȘY|Vp558>hGćډugɺʯ;!$~+3v ǟΘ'E<:կ+ߎ3+2ȺEW8^-?(0{dƵ~cdL}-95c7z ĵQ~X9pn\m31>ra<5@ :-ro@a8`.¸7}7cM_a^`mZl0q嫄]r.i!d^6<5A-Zoĵpı7k<3V6um'Z~~f i۔E=u\M35Moy`ZZ=fo3x]ÁkӞxےZwNָ?hx= YanV)uYo@;1b xRyı|S΄Y|{x|JHsEѿ]Z9ugY[ij-6mj\w=Scŕc[܏]I=)v>قk&rX>jݰg?h8Cf+=?fm|>W|Wu|d\зE1>1,yu ?Q?4~W%vp "ׅ55=|O'Lk]}tlӿbk;86\7+f. Ƶ'+[m|PJv`Ák+ۖmI~Ga =ُNg|id/^2];5țKK=,8lur9|W5Fmi$0ߍS7Kj^%nHIQ<ϣ-60-xƷnm\>,[m.](Lmpu2w?+\ V=<6ؔڟ3s9[]|Ƭyw k H`[lĆИ/&3/>stʱ_3!Yx۬uA|fn2-\-HqԕI݄gSsz؄Mnk4l=[CZcYk+[Ǝ[Gp ׶ƵƷ`[\t3vZ8wHoo|-ÍͧZxyN{Ék-D?} OrsE\Iȥ}ytnc9s;֬mbqOrZ}צ=w߱mw[hOJ/µ=9?;}2}ˤkk6:V?{d>(ֶ9z]k;oFotkwxD2dP _kutJ3o^{>F>k4Z8Wr(= G.:P]{>v5Xci4r#9YwGǚGDzzg9k$w fl/]n+Lk[mlqK͍Z7yֺ/zlOZlub^MWkZ5]Fk9ʁí`~;}r/kǯ}ZMoP._ȟ5~q|p6ʗN&Ysu<)gCx\Ml-woz]Xۊpo|y>[yVe|Osq囻˹·b[cږ aձS/ģkgp>~+|[ɦ?lP[6cȶldPL'[o=XK'l/H6y!`k[=&ökȡ~¶zы:_8np}^'|yc/Gڧ%·KjM_S~ּN隱[95+k~榵.~skӎR`B[Όs#>+A@o\jE5qluџlL$xFK1=|8qmU`+ǵضkͼ [W!/\U9N\k}yG|-epu[Ǭ0a۪trTgz9rMںq-iǧlF&,cq0+\kkDJ5eX^qOp 'p6utdpя>~#ltY~W:9>R3gڵ٢ˊ<:}>5=Lõp5>]0<(_Oh\\ %syjg̭w:_w[5e:w&|?<1׳ks6SOQ5v 1NYKf}8sio۽nwtl|C9/NYS37A50G&D>n]\m/wi|+=V^Yߦ.2tdG\[%1`U^` ʯ'ڪ uvEO77yHpy)񙈟3л5:k%{ȌdPܖ#c\5גo">k5n@cxw};1گ}z[\:NMrbHVU;N_1m\[|q<}\N\[5kV6c8W9o-a úSc f cOݝg=~ﵮep r MÏ`:kwk+_kpox gqx!Ii=tN| V]5r\o [ _pK_]^Uۥ]}|m9kl#mthw||<7Hl*VpK2xo3g[եkn8NE+{7gUU}ﭖ9fmS߼ڰVZ1]ycZڪĵC}ί5u|V}/|y9^) ;KF)$GG  E'`<0|9Zlr?C̍=\2>7l[BX^~b}yOZ7%'Qq:7 w!۳\O9f-%KO_U|r5Mض0k88MrjgZ[g]1sUSvъmȽ5qz6Hk:b_q|1i7 I}tiO0 UȞ+ހO<{kЉkVqkQPy]r9`>Ncޘ} dV&l5~Yh Gd7HL\} V>1f<*6ڬ!E=7/gmP W\+kklo=3*l#sŘNxKvS\kkNȡt=~b_H:BY_$cPq~G]d2{Js,en3uFWqQ)/ DnaGG3fCPW6V/nM:-ڜsNw+͵z˗|nX7Nx8smqp2YΗi/kp|e,-;0ZkaZכn-58ĨaȲx\%s:+T&'%5~ЕLynumS]Θ?{gםm_\\(jtkY!&56-tұ]ʑyZ_Vkq*s0moøh\oeg5z'1qrk°~*f ~}|G\;_5DG\N{gɖx9c\ 9Mw rotγ-;Ҵ+JǾuC9eko{Mjbqacָfܱ2[gJg뷲μ[uo z-_ m|m\cK~L{;0Z5 ѡ/,&hkU._WkK?(km WZSnM )o;#zf1ax(4ldkx u6:7};}ضjtpl׶pmc֭>?b,tĂ,5 ]~['wOֹWa~mU#}Ƙ-85ضڛdK/LF20Nbf,ĸKSq{9}|)^|cЧr+wlMIHdžvކkaV>1zY mo{mǻyڌm[~+Kq4{9O ye _f5,Ƶxw}KLS_oUp=׬ s5M4F_cK"z5op ˯Fb"ҫѹ!cg\ud؟^i315gW1m6?Ӥϰ5촪Ѹg;^7Zۗ0P%~\c6G[+[M\s|G4:|>i0!ͼ{|m/kF?[\kxĆj⡂k035["w_m&2u ^x ],sۼ&$ 3ɯ'{Ì{^ Y5Wʶ|榭tl98~l50v <=>t|!3"N\y烻tg+ޙ:Hc lxPppK>Xź8Aw-;*Nsm²Kԗڪ9Y##| _![:۫q\sp#k֪%gl3rO.56ƶIdC9l^NM"ȣ̵&~#9.`9by__/gS%F %o{_@^+ ӧn׎g/y?q\}GC}^$>cƙ./~80>^CuC6Oy9>qDxp ryX)ց5}}oKJ_\ll$n&:qM_(+#8#ibcc*_np fS65ce4Wz~o^pQ㈣m8^򁳏Z3Y/]?Mg2_`y ۹:3ѐoْCpU<k]`r`WvX26a|.ϜXXSzE6,sr9DON$vL9%Ʈ~ٝyWO13~_,qOy~r1I:J7.\{lNX'2*ݬR_պoj/|\Cw뜟ȳ#j|lxS7_Mk??-F0(%4xc]YQg/5}/2g Oнـ'{(ho\Mf^ӫymd;r[NM~{o6iz#gdc c7<1.˯C)q΅"pޘ$y'G g$8~vŏf~P|I ڊN̜Ʃ1-2/= q3ǡ௹f?ݷ&{/2as~~u?gc>wmy>_ó°igm[wzgOFfJɜݎշ~ k֜'w"\w/fnaػZVhd-k ww>w8yN֥5 YKpS^dJa~-tB2%2WŊ3|cU\Etc|Gppy5{|3֝]s=>Х6;6Lܪ36}'c3r]՘5ҷB?s_sؒwgn'1[kll1vȡ6 oY_W{@94r &Cљszb灍ɁggK}N8NGNa+Wxo\[3Mc5Efm3~T?qȱ2rm]i_o{r{}=P48J&3`S+-nyJWyqZkC2 / O<0~p 'uZo2Wj&;m` .- ~h~}!e{?s'7Y[r%ǎ\M[Wl;'6+8+Y9۷5Ӭ rxŲZb266s#x-Ƀk_[iW;%\Cݱʁ3h` =%'ӗ80}~dzE1;Wy yBNa߷aɚ1[)?$GQܲק_ٙ>3Òخᚵ%kާµ 'C%7j9=Hdھic租yV-_9}nzn6>f. Enj]Cg\>?k|qo#o?o^cNә[x>Y/4Ȧ[8syg]opmZ}ss5_׮m<ȑ㯙ց=\e͑MR[ekS3녴 :i܀?f=Uk'|-{;mџC|&gSmt6c'7u:0L7j1<{}H^ɕKAƘ g10Oq4f_|N@cX{9UA5=9[et9ҽ78/|d1.8IXJ0܈Ml֩k69۬<צ}܁iηʹ~m.s\~f|Vے/Odsl/"Ӿ}bmJ?p@2 }cg=ھ]_fM0'[ge[ܲCf}&6y| WA:H{[^kƗ)>o }~-xZoʗ_Czlsxu.no$fsu>sn>|3oLJ˰U!+l|'_W6j㯓=-Nѽ8:5:G`ķl{>lgi.´u?}0k@soz5}AnU;Һ0.?OasXz⿱u">{-^C+_-8ݜ}JM<WȞ/lֈ9;cɌg 0 ϊ]2`mXv ]& oS֫qtGdav \3㇮g/5s||Y?D7 ?.I -g BL$6w^˦.~9|pw]zdPZ7 3[Fp/仕fGhuXjLڡytǂxUq܇zL<=YI_ڿ]ijӎ豤sHy)ߥvhd|Qjɇ4ulph4ȼbl9<ٷɛƔ~>NVQ42ﲗfE5:{3}&Y'q'#\%ٱ_g{Pp-uEc{ʼnf?k8{3',}Z'ؾO;pN=lFNլ)y|=ʞ9CյҥM_3EJeNۧ#\×W9sO%q-},jkd]}}=2v桱.YpWξ{v^Z!nm٫1#۶c:sljv- \QX\ ?KUJKƎ48#´Gû:u}6<~<+esGdz~a&X :VU^4~o.z~νvߥZ9TlJPa2VrcͿnv3m惠k-\ꠇX0r76{5]8d"n;9pN~_I0<9ҵW|i3jOϹk\C[_kXL'v>yUϽ9]rZ0|c`cip+-|-nsm6q/^#O`bƇrtp>ŸZhĖXO#\ l/!ivwߛ>݊ kkō 񟉮^u}*:rkׇU(.jt't#+uɓ8o\eGu3?wZr=H*ĿkijO}pP{5Y}͗AuQ8i ׮U= \Au.!xK֦{O3]8~aR|<1-g%3{;/a9 !SÃ\fd+ uFeHn\2̛qnipm<&ȡSbgMƹnf^[?ʹG~sTN_9e{s27 j>D||٘+Ե9|֫}<8;9޼7ba1k(F45MC`}{adCxOf-î!'{|m^iK<\_.1zӷz1Gx7df2G>7taWxW^-C}c^fj'?L:|=q(fg7V!5׋n 1k׏uұxd쉸9G%tbfΒN]mdǔAͽ5SK ~KzwfrrYp#pѯgزi+XWֈ9@fe0MK vf-)MW~ b"lM{hk-uXkjk|/[5VnmΧijߘ5=ok\w|:m2y {e=(cb[|{CVd~ٽ pDX\+]377(sv7{ut {!̇4sё#c'{Xr=?_p^zK:XgNNZդ]lV9'W:ƷVr_lp;9,z3JϳV$l]  }6FGq2yyZs|9Qͷ|UV54{<>25Va\sM]{YW:#xoYx5}#f[wX\^Ӽ (f>_{4kO}à Vc2ok29'cUf+`>gΎ=>v>,9/>Db'9.\5ȰJ.p]]6ynDW l-U_0ѹRhj:nܩ};vs>}GP\Xv?{ ${gs2|o7pFL,Yjs-7{}|gctDϠϥ9^L*cNլ[uvU nD[Z(gst}@µ9NA>}g9֙y-Nj_{ťH$ܢQ8Ij%87 scm ?LbLs1ooҡÉ>al8X.3ܒL'G>2.cO#9Č6f{[|5Fiнd%ug.<)3^2q3QU[ZN vĶŇo"cF0י~3 צm xQSIlZtɟo=vݕ^|ʢ_p0O%Ef%lM/fo}_ʽy9VGWuV':nsnq"y9ώ|^?rhrvk r(Lkf[0tG0e]C~]B# FFnQQ/KzAq12hgfxK JW|Wlg)Z0MZju$neٵtC±kj߮껦ϻ.AǏOYTMƵgk7cfN)#X'&f5vt"5V>]tQ.T \Dc#/4QMw֯xy җ-I[!] ;,Ioq1v{ZY>s[@k+q)ϓ aop 9W:o ϶8٪ƪjcLorѯ37:+۱|zM3pֺ5o\%9G{Aˠ+\ڬ[6q뗭S\s={hpRw#3]k+!fs׬-t%=90/ KhkDƿ\|`Ytbsu `74y|֯E:_nwԃ>N@gǟ$u;^abZ=C%Dž% }W:ԧb;N~-tcj_:d~C~/W:_[vJ6koצ׸GOUW'2#mPo|l0z#/Jsxe$l^W~':@ãR"Xp-ZvپYW|{oŮCp&|Ǿ'~Ne4{%[oj»>sWK_} ;~Їkɗ3׶jo%%FcZ1.aHU;"o7:]\#jMm-8mƅK&~GgFpOJ}S:| Vi_w$|!M'%ztN禳ǙnoȖ-79%v>0XOoINmcҩ%w`lgx-7N 76x{![MYt|srn~lӇmU 1qJSt8*s2ƵCWk{[kO\>7k>]㳎Y㍻Œǃ[ [zR~j^O&>~nGP Β/H/ܳ`ș0ᅟу"e ZjmS̷gI s.&[5\> zc5gkl#-rnZ3`7ήtk5{=J_6S~\N~{9pاֱqqu2$ˢOޭI/Yrs[0+? Ϛ:'霮g2GKM |s]Zt|@MOˊq`\cæӃԏ_:dxCt[x7Lj'=ً%7t8=|&sX<1ٶriO{ ?Ӹq^&VAZt];pcÛڽ~, 񝲮+%X4u#Doxl^ Ğhsd޺j[\k].Cf {{ĀifU|DږR޹_X:]w 8^g÷f/:'#ܫ{>qt3̯ޱ3G˳wRICjZytн]ӧу;>uzg<L K5 $pe R!u^D/^kKz椽9S u8—6WԵ}=宯 L.!ǒcEG߼&/>IlhkR' 7p"~oߝ:$>t+|! cd$4Ls_NU 4Xhr/VxsFXMz}8痹gnkj kq=>g`V$yI3gkC5a|;0Y~[C_'d+/V| 5}/" 7u^ڳoYGo5O GN]ڴF6'xnkߜ##Bc?'ï=SAۏـ0<+\dA4dN8p kkj|`Ɯ~ĚM=ȶA\盓HP笎\wt0&13f>v?~mW9Nq>9Wn 'nrnVVگ"~ѭg noڞwv{/ 2_|R<"[[&fU=, &m0W|Orϥk}qsyfCb%kbKgrGGcÿK5{+lYwC=߾,=*cjLy?rrr^[ _3NRy9:s 'x&1I>PςޚʺJmUm6;7w Knd}`_.~}6fyX@ }b`#7'pbluv۲7d-'+J5WS?ڊ6ڲs-kS HcgI|5h0a+ "K)k Is'kq8Ȗ;:ǡ.uJ}|ʧ})'!pYY d o*m+>5#/>>;IOϭ܍>X {~`\y6yvкU_/ٻڞڵq>/+Ams!iw/*'׃-4?>MM{K0}{g&k0Lm%r.:k➍7a%7DWbQtݩi{/oV ySٯ;F%ò)O箭\K\=y#aW>`x&2/l=#Lh3w8:gн֤;'}cۇjwuΡɉuk[qg$S|q3:\s]|vtW Bkxպ&5cI.Rk7ѮSֵ۞q[sIc6q޺&Kekg3W|ɱ/KOZPJ.&n6Qb66=&>3Gq %tǫ\MFWq01/xTӯ)|-<"\3{&eNfO~p p yْ1یA7x.oD\gZ?8\ݺ6oJ|"/|icݬ]$5{ăt.㎇>N_p_Ɍ ;ny&Iexرk^Sʇõٹ_XuMLhE?%ZOq-_ůa9.I -ѧw{lw޳_ ٣%7Y[֥q߀4ebۜGm~d=}i^ӓ)aSQ ܼ7f~֣LNxv}}609ɑl!|Xn{};dm&Okm9,zu8} Vuŧ_5_aF&?>Tsmi77U 9Ôl#~ޑCm3GǫOLz>#uጾSsϱ5 'lއ<܍8})ܓ8m46/tZb$':Ӽ2-"]՘n?hO)Grk)"[ִiC043B 0}+jlkGc=`X( v8B4'dffmKlCO,kO)y9:+Gz;W }O;~2R:ƶuug%} ys)Í#{氹_Ƞ8*=N3ft o8'yөmtMB\?0M,mIWeXdEgl5Y>105ϛCL=eKm׷7}9~!g(:qɗX# idbn.z%k.)(K-,SSG%dShך]lK{ɇl7GѧX$oW3r&Ξ}q [yV*q1_n-mkYn7ԇ)ɭ2֖}֏:l;I^f3:m~~w\7F["ܧ[󠶣f蒟WsA?qӭcK'&l9(Z/Cӧ2h5{u`=$fv`0W1j~:3YK8$/(~I_ņq;$F#l挜qd~ `}%޸7kѯ_׬Z?i!ۄi@whpNۘ&Zo؏\CG͜bb z11dر+|4yVW_gO_Fal?nFcKX]V5VN#w}(eeɟAEe~Xp횼=[wWͼ7? ƟK ͭ9t>~g٪r#-ڛjFVI)|_эk&φklpoضɴ|s<{Ȼl00=l_KAo?ĵKy 1sK_pɿݯp_|LܖmV*['vԳңOGIg7Ng{eN R|WvSbZ'z 8 \ _׭c]ߨu6έd-f%>' 7ɳ)cۺ-9}@f OidQɗ񗱯gm"<]d|-q0qFe{Lqw}`Rs=>-w]F>㗳ϟ4~3wֶչV>eIcP c\&&\[=ML[w_̏ͷױ3=9|!>#Ttt!vzrAU~+<xt=ϛo- woq]S16ևOuaķi]?e^-\#)}3~p]2z Ӈ#M, .%9'pv7HnFglp=^+NLRZ=`ܵYsj{tw\!ҸܢJb>)wHt ^c1rE sWBk_9ύ`3MfdJ~q:k^jԶ {]¸-;yxjvg'ne@da{ ArL/;:k :kt9 aAqdPv|w=s_Xqkj=ZYva ڇW9< п%Vybbcb§\wFFjlm13z c-LIw+}ږrlõƵ9[6s7gk=;Ub w ?6;Nkőx5>b'۞=e}|+mZ7m8c19a[q(Ӧzm\/Z[9=ōϜFp-<)Y+^MЭb4^;"^'Mm7d ײr.m+t צn+2`̊ ‚ WR+}\pZڼkwzpE'FƇ:l[s ׶|γ'ǮjwΎsت[HWks5560~揙_s&npc ߚmuzmk͘Y'cp'<9Ç/-Yl7!7uEݼɎml۫g9kҷ>l~ϯiӧc%ֶpu[56pU!5[S5 \gnkԧ5?AM Ο\ɽ} _c[!w·K)OYtߝ5KVq)_䉬̈́ޘq3_RCއc:4bd#l9|`9[mn=Ʋ]a ׮ج k31WjEu>:{%'3ŵGp͹GlW6%4)vpڼ-[g[5k~m&ŒCq$oď79Iód#%'9ZC;g.9}MXlSc8]V:Y?+.r-kYW->ȋɱr c ל/6ĨZ'W6+揳[v V6U\w2}fU' 1=Y։97nou>c 8Ղ_戹*?*x[b $qO1U;j\i{2Ζ: g1+}*'V͡ѹ)%يo\µ5EIο"plxUr9L9ߌd#DZCÇ7-ߚ-y;jج{vewOckS |GW|Kə=lu=:`ܴNF>%[y5rB|j'p=qͽ+_K?vXMMb k;^^AXpiC,)\ss3cݵ.>??=(19yeҭForC99^[k?ɓI8`CJAݠq̢41vPQėxkpO~{yVo3ro׳µYSkkh]k[\m'%Nlv_{:-?W\[Unl'a -Cnh+}cC\&XQ6\K8|\GmM-ɱy͉kיsi]sQ? q_Vxo˳2s\+q>ڟۇyu Ｎ j*t?KWEt6{F ѥX~\A73nȡ`ibMk+\kد;A?MSq9>kXEv}vk|ǁoMߏim5\sogk;K^q-=:_p-2!?;%6sO]3tڬ8V~l><*3'[ߙ'78!vʎ0uBS/o|o mZ0EMTB|o[!WσkĄ=\5鐇׳x~p_gd?9qmOpVKrLeݵ`.?{5;ہiG{"x[ǟ6o-]vM-ĵS:[Z]lɿڡ\;XҘ0c/;Y 9]3\o<^pM>`mjL\[Ƽ֧uî㲪=ߛ7G[):ph7odYǯs7d:k9̿\/!WQl`x}*>JQpM@YC`C^߅=& zg5x-M~[w/5u%fmU]<0h u jh:]'k*qk3kh튭Ӣ'&ޜ+'n7pbSK)`?u͛Je^勜Y,6Yj*_z= qYsoo%;pkܹWvExY|OěVƻۻ[-\k\>P|Mul|Sn>}5u ̿-v ?jҭ?aG}G!gG6ϙ-CM7 F(}ۖZ_>"['M{k=>|ˎvvV(55Ľ'?||w4>>V>:䊤Ksޖ&?!ָv9t[Y+|[Y9}|KBZs ^31kbi|;IYKg?M"޲x)IPL;^x&+\ky͜yɇ**8{DԊ:n-up% z@N"}l ,3qZhߴh7Cllr夅jr$Q]{+ *-#k5x| V;`%;vNU ceюvw[uV9)g^.G?<Đ~ʧ|هmlpmKc'3syX'[Xlw=z7}=ܴ~Fcym.F~o-DzA7u1_Zڇ{LfYz_罪~ |;ƋwsVTC]Zk4ޑp y-|^Y e( {ENnkck_wuW~.iNl;F^k@#l㵇~xuW^9]"mmh?>:p-h= ~^c}1ׇX鑊>P{̾'g;i4V?|ݻZ꟦iv -a#kGk8^/2HXL=5wx7{20i4VfniNJ>ߋqzXEN{s ǧ;j'3Eӏuxh4*̴Eb%]E|è3KUv=5}5W=ξ}֍zv8SO ?Ѭ3?כ kcZ={cC C~uHgq *ŃCDa~S}K-K4GN:#?_$T_} )nkF/rl4<m/30 G^_W_ԃe؛`vV-=T<|S|(?97oPČ|Ź;p^ e(^Q{+IsΑmqܢ:K:\ϙ3K&=cF].]J-mFȘ~x}u9ŧ~:e~'ǵxnq#˞Mw'*5O˧-Zb=pZs}FcsfL&en\ 7LE]4p|,eOJC~GK/x,|w70n*)U ]՘ح}1NݱR8Ǟ:~;W\qƆ[h7HJǫpI|i q<4FqfpxG U]ɜtgK K9ըo8w|=[RWM/Jj}MP.gRz8ٲeukFCo  =yי{=`ꯙz[<>x~>5wLk# 4[⫛#:MYg5dx͵؉%^{'G^{W5u^Z[yXN3ǹ{/kbxm۶mTjsq ^\!^8kM]xqps{7xN652Pxb>k8A>k@i6.G>x'+Z<*dv+,^íTwU?V;cvN+41>o\&ӹ3I|#+AM?'&>و3îVYV O\_v2;ru.hlDJepQIw#nGCmn}]^+ۇ}9Hixʷ&áx5iޜ;F4ݡײ}tf&~Ӯ.c|GR qU%z:_qUW 6ynrzxhryfj Ѫ43ѻ kkr{^[SF8[nԺ:FCz/;؏`ρ?#_}CF''OrRWgjnAB2C}Uh/sZy4ks~k<cюe?Zc3; >Aq)]Z<>1/]eǔOrz<.ns,Iݕ`wq>38|衇G4fm{eѩ.k6Zo}٘Vo )1C/)D?|qv[$V .??s >Cxǜ/v3'Vk_Fc5f`b}Y̭5w~gn3ӈ9v33%,} nÕƗ_-h2Wdv2WE{LՉM +S[3?`&6|.{-st_~mz fSN GX?6jBk 9 /pXE(jNk4V8 ?ˇ;}U{ZY[g}vE+-GmKcRu6yI'4>>.5>jvP5W_R]K]U.+Nn.iiM1p[f:ScMAΪF<Ttԟ~i8J>bB56;4nLWCO?}~[lU]q]bA{zhciZb/<4rb38,^QF'̿65ߚ62{Ծ7+o#UkzS^aCu4;Ծ3j^.v׮][nV!iX_.d5Us><#| oûor~][M$qStb51 .˽,]hݪxv.}CLjU8կ1~>zgz 27oyx,FD˛b0Kõuз 3hlxZM\AMKn3|sx#Id3(gF3^ W.ON;]c74f2)Hy' "#Z@z1񠍎LJ=JwmԺ#ިSAA|;i}kOȾ qk9J9jx-xnyi~=~Յx5=C x \qe-[x-hYג{t:uS#K@(F; d嶺N^Gҭ86Dl\Rv;Ѻۮ_FnR B0+F5oWxo3q+Mn5J{O=mx m5+a]΍Ƒ gh=@3GW[isfɡkoꁪ}C\/sTޯU81X&qtTzVx}Pg֭C]Mƫ/}G53z$ׯQ8\\P1:|mxi~LCCGAcRJ̷/ݶmz4ks_mF>>7_opo$F<:ٱ|]w;Fq8-twgf;!T8N /J;Y\/!o9◫֯E8ܼ9:قYCS+6{y@ٳOtu=Z4ħ鼧$=ff /~-m|%κ3sپ\33}^  ~o<`ayz{01=> ! c d m n   #56OBC45 ##%%''p)q)r)))1,2,--//22H5J5K5g556v66 777 9 9;; > >>(>=>>>L>T>Y>Z>q>>>>>>>>>>??%?3?I?J?[?j????????????@ @D@\C]CCEEEGGHHHJJJLLZN[NhNOOOwQxQ1S2STSUS\S]SvShUiUAWBWfXgXRZSZ[[[ ^ ^___cceeqgrghhhiikkmmmmmmn!n(n)n5n;n>n?nHnKnQnRncnhnjnkn|n~nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnppqqqqrrssttttvvvTxUxzz||-.HI./OP,-IJmn&'9:34 45{|fǙOP՚֚GHIZ[\vwDE00000000 00 00 00 000 00 000 000 00 000000000000000000000000000000 000 000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000 000 00000 000 00000 000 0000000 00 0US0000000000 0US0000 0US00000000 0 0h00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0t00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000@0@0@0 00000000000-hRV\cr>d'v:=BYBBCDDUWl(r)rQrRrrrrrrtIwWYZ[]^_`abdefghijklmnopqstX~!  /X2$ /Yճdv=8rHU2$ZO32˾J^"U@ J(  B    B     ~   C NA6@SS`TS`TB S  ?H5_e I  Z$B Th%T1?GHIKROVinovW ^ p } P ^ b i ?Mci~FTZ_"&'&".1../11f7n79$9):-:.:8:,<4<>>GALAAAE#E$E*EHHHHHHIIJJOJVJjJpJLL!Q*Q~SS TTTT5U=UtUyUUU\ \C\G\^^LaMaSaffiiljtjyjjkknnbphpppOqTq`qeqsqxq@sEsyy}&}Y]$%)clnwx؎ÐА(1đϑޑ '0#*v}˔Ҕ5>|>H"#),6.>HNPT>HLPQX[\ wJR!"#@ABHi'0= p ~ Fv{r)))p<<<'=`_adagae`fafff)ghhhhvvvwy^zizkz̎ ';< I bOlmƚǚ֚AHLN >H[\|3333333333333333333333333333333333  !"st&'=H`aH,->HY\vwǠΠԠ7YYӡ Ravishanker`C:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\Word\AutoRecovery save of Final Copy of MotaKakadiamba.asd RavishankerAD:\documents\dsc\dsc2004-rsch.wa\Final Copy of MotaKakadiamba.doc RavishankerAD:\documents\dsc\dsc2004-rsch.wa\Final Copy of MotaKakadiamba.doc Ravishanker`C:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\Word\AutoRecovery save of Final Copy of MotaKakadiamba.asd RavishankerAD:\documents\dsc\dsc2004-rsch.wa\Final Copy of MotaKakadiamba.doc Ravishanker`C:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\Word\AutoRecovery save of Final Copy of MotaKakadiamba.asd Ravishanker`C:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\Word\AutoRecovery save of Final Copy of MotaKakadiamba.asdabc]C:\WINDOWS\Desktop\Joy\Best Practice\Integrated Approach\Final Copy of MotaKakadiamba (1).docabcdC:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\Word\AutoRecovery save of Final Copy of MotaKakadiamba (1).asd LibrarianfD:\My Documents\Web soft research\Research Studies-Final\Download\Final Copy of MotaKakadiamba (1).doc{G"s`*tt$,AV ,7 Q94 O:B1"jIhp>Im3MTLihzN:vIhzN4 O:m3MA;t ,7P9Lut${"jIQ9:v|Ix,MT갰h.Yһ                b        (0VyȰtm >j% :|         H5J5 77 >>(>=>>>L>T>Y>Z>q>>>>>>>>>>??%?3?I?J?[?j???????????mmmmmn!n(n)n5n;n>n?nHnKnQnRncnhnjnkn|n~nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn"@X`@UnknownG:Times New Roman5Symbol3& :Arial5& :TahomaA& Trebuchet MSC FuturaBT-Book;Wingdings?5 :Courier New"1hTTB!0v 2Q Integrated Watershed Development Ravishanker Librarian Oh+'0x  4 @ LX`hp!Integrated Watershed Developmentrosnte RavishankeraviNormaln Librarianr2brMicrosoft Word 9.0d@@(-.@(-. ՜.+,0 hp|  rB !Integrated Watershed Development Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~ Root Entry FT-.1TableRjWordDocumentSummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjjObjectPoolT-.T-.  FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q