Dr. V. Geethalakshmi Professor

1. Application of Extended Range Forecast for Climate Risk Management on crops in Coastal and Western Agro-ecosystems of Tamil Nadu Dr. V. Geethalakshmi Professor Agro Climate Research CentreTamil Nadu Agricultural University Coimbatore

2. Objectives • To assess past climate anomalies, pattern and their impacts on agriculture with reference to extreme weather events. • To establish a system to provide climate information on time to selected locations for climate risk management in agriculture. • To train the target groups on the application of extended range weather forecast on farm decision making to reduce the climatic risks • Feed back analysis for refinement and improvement of the forecast and application of forecast information on decision making • Development of decision support system

3. Location Map of Study area

4. Normal Rainfall & Temperature of Study region

5. NEZ NWZ WZ CDZ HZ SZ HRZ Excess rainfall October 07 : 178 % of LPA (358 mm against 200 mm) December 07 : 231 % LPA (371 mm against 160 mm) March 08, : 220 % of LPA (160 mm against 50 mm) Drought April 08: - 83% of LPA (8.4 mm against 50 mm) July 08: - 96 % of LPA (4.4 against 109 mm) Extreme weather events – 2007 & 2008 Rf : Oct 23rd, 2007: 107.5 mm Drought : SWM, 2008: -32 % of LPA

6. Choice of Crops Rainfed maize - Coimbatore Upland Irrigated cotton - Coimbatore Irrigated Groundnut – Nagapattinam Lowland Rice - Nagapattinam

7. Cropping calendar

8. Progress made so far • Village Selected: • Cotton : Avinashi, Coimbatore • Maize : Pollachi, Coimbatore • Rice : P.R.Puram, Nagapattinam • Groundnut : Vettaikaran iruppu, Nagapattinam • Farmers selection : in progress. • Collection of weather data & Crop Yield data (1970 – 2000) • Assessing the past climate anomalies, pattern and their impacts on agriculture : In Progress

9. Past Experience • ENSO based SCF and Farm Decision making • Economic Impact Analysis Project • Experimental Agromet Advisory Services • Weather based forewarning of Downy Mildew – ICAR funded project

13. Weather Summary (Observed and Predicted)– Banana (2005)

14. Weather Summary (Observed and Predicted)– Tomato 2005

15. Economic Impact of AAS on manures and fertilizers No difference in FYM usage AAS- used more fertilizer 2004 – 26.5 % - Rs. 1673 2005 – 29.1 % - Rs. 2106 2006 – 15.2 % - Rs. 1210 AAS farmers used lesser FYM (7.5 %) AAS- used less fertilizer 2004 – 11.7 % - Rs. 256 2005 – 14 % - Rs. 72 AAS- used more fertilizer 2006 – 4.3 % - Rs. 68 AAS farmers used lesser FYM in 2004 and 2005 (4.5 %)But more in 2006 (10 %) AAS- used less fertilizer 2004 – 13.6 % - Rs. 466 2005 – 15 % - Rs. 77 AAS- used more fertilizer 2006 – 9 % - Rs. 247 Tomato & Cotton - Well Distributed rainfall during flowering and fruiting in 2006

16. Economic Impact of AAS on Pesticide usage AAS- spent more on plant protection chemicals 2004 – Rs. 44 2006 – Rs. 145 AAS farmers used lesser plant protection chemicals Saving 2004 – Rs. 94 2005 – Rs. 168 2006 – Rs. 297 Furadon sucker treatment Weather based pest and disease management AAS farmers used lesser plant protection chemical Saving 2004 – Rs. 76 2005 – Rs. 92 2006 – Rs. 71

17. Economic Impact of AAS on Labour usage Saving of 1- 2 men labours on irrigation Saving of 1 men labour on fertilizer application Saving of 2 men & 2 women labours on pesticide application More labour for harvest Saving of 2 Men labour on irrigation One labour more for fertilizer application Four labour more for intercultural operation Saving of 2 men labours on irrigation Saving of 1 labour on fertilizer application Saving of 5 – 8 labours on intercultural operations More labour for harvest Weather based operations and labour management

18. Irrigation water saving - 2004

19. Input Usage by farmers- Banana • Marginal saving on seed material • No difference in FYM usage • AAS farmers used more fertilizers (15.2 % to 29.7%) • AAS farmers spent more on plant protection chemicals • Saving of 2 Men labour on irrigation • One labour more for fertilizer application • Four labour more for intercultural operation

20. Input Usage by farmers- Tomato • AAS farmers used more seed materials • AAS farmers used lesser FYM (7.5 %) • AAS- used less fertilizer : 2004 – 11.7 % - Rs. 256 • 2005 – 14 % - Rs. 72 • AAS- used more fertilizer : 2006 – 4.3 % - Rs. 68 • 4. AAS farmers used lesser plant protection chemical • Saving of 2 men labours on irrigation • Saving of 1 labour on fertilizer application • Saving of 5 – 8 labours on intercultural operations • More labour for harvest

21. Input Usage by farmers- Cotton • Marginal saving on seed material • AAS farmers used lesser FYM (7.5 %) • AAS- used less fertilizer : 2004 – 11.7 % - Rs. 256 • 2005 – 14 % - Rs. 72 • AAS- used more fertilizer : 2006 – 4.3 % - Rs. 68 • 3. AAS farmers used lesser plant protection chemicals • 4. Saving of 1- 2 men labours on irrigation • Saving of 1 men labour on fertilizer application • Saving of 2 men & 2 women labours on pesticide application. • More labour for harvest

22. Use of AAS bulletin on increase in yield (Qts/ac) - Banana

23. Use of AAS bulletin on increase in yield (Qts/ac) - Tomato

24. Use of AAS bulletin on increase in yield (Qts/ac) - Cotton

25. Gross Return - Banana

26. Gross Return - Tomato

27. Gross Return - Cotton

28. Cost of Cultivation - Banana

29. Cost of Cultivation - Tomato

30. Cost of Cultivation - Cotton

31. Net Return - Banana

32. Net Return - Tomato

33. Net Return - Cotton

34. Banana (More investment – More return) Cotton (More investment – More return)

35. Cotton -Medium farmers (Less investment – More return) Tomato (Less investment – More return)

36. Tomato -large farmers (More investment – Less return) Conclusion Tomato – More sensitive to weather Weather forecast helped in monitory gain up to Rs. 15000 /ac

37. Thank you