31
Table 4.1 Size of Each Sub-Watershed, Erosion, and Erosion
Repair Results, CP Value at Ayung Watershed
N o
Name of Sub-Watershed location-Village
Size of Sub-Watershed Erosion
t ha
-1
th
- 1
Erosion of Revision
Result CP Ha
t ha
-1
th
-1
Upstream
1 Sub- Watershed of Sidan river Belok
611,53 2,23
1,61 0,89
2 Sub- Watershed of Bangkung river Tambakan
1812,96 6,61
459,72 19,70
3 Sub- Watershed of Ayung river Ulian
1739,07 6,34
335,13 14,36
4 Sub- Watershed of Ayung river Blanga
635,4 2,32
252,58 10,13
5 Sub- Watershed of Ayung river Catur
1583,33 5,77
182,97 7,84
6 Sub- Watershed of Bunutin river Bunutin
200,36 0,73
665,73 0,63
7 Sub- Watershed of Mengani river Mengani
24,68 0,09
331,70 14,22
8 Sub- Watershed of Mengani river Manikliyu
2216,75 8,08
294,72 12,63
9 Sub- Watershed of Ayung river Bayung Cerik
1016,57 3,70
7,58 0,42
10 Sub- Watershed of. Kilap river Blanga
1102,86 4,02
236,35 10,13
11 Sub- Watershed of Kilap river Antapan
1115,19 4,06
129,35 1,39
12 Sub- Watershed of Sidan river Plaga
1703,97 6,21
163,46 1,75
13 Sub- Watershed of Ayung river Langgahan
697,39 2,54
411,96 17,66
14 Sub- Watershed of Ayung river Kerta
2003,42 7,30
459,73 19,70
15 Sub- Watershed of Carangsari river Sulangai
114,89 0,42
0,62 0,62
16 Sub- Watershed of Sidan river Belok
1525,32 5,56
49,99 21,42
17 Sub- Watershed of Bangkung river Petang
50,92 0,19
221,97 1,52
18 Sub- Watershed of Anak Ayung river Buahan
1237,75 4,51
1,52 0,57
19 Sub- Watershed of Carangsari river Pangsan
585,23 2,13
0,57 0,57
20 Sub- Watershed of Anak Ayung river Puhu
1255,37 4,57
1,23 0,53
Center
21 Sub- Watershed of Carangsari river Carangsari
723,92 2,64
0,53 0,53
22 Sub- Watershed of Medid river Taman
748,24 2,73
0,74 0,74
23 Sub- Watershed of Ayung river Bongkase
650,48 2,37
0,67 0,67
24 Sub- Watershed of Anak Ayung river M Kelod
1440,95 5,25
0,62 0,62
25 Sub- Watershed of Buangga river Mambal
433,91 1,58
0,50 0,50
26 Sub- Watershed of Ayung river Abiansemal
866,03 3,16
0,52 0,52
27 Sub- Watershed of Bangkung river S. Kaja
37,85 0,14
32,29 0,46
28 Sub- Watershed of Bangkung river S. Gede
577,94 2,11
0,62 0,62
Downstreamr
29 Sub-Watershed of Ayung Downstream P.
galak 734,4
2,68 45,73
9,61
Total 27.446,68
100,00
4.3 Analysis of Farmer Income
Farming conditions are represented by the average income of farmers sampled in each part of the
watershed upstream, midstream, downstream, when linked with the level of erosion in the watershed of each
section, it turns out the highest income of farmers in the Ayung watershed upstream section followed by erosion
rate from mild to very severe 1.04 to 724.86 t ha-1 yr- 1. The middle and downstream watershed erosion
32
Ayung very mild to very severe, the center of the erosion 0.50 to 221.97 t ha-1 yr-1 and the downstream
erosion from 0.22 to 31.80 t ha-1 yr-1. Table 4.2
Table 4.2 Comparison of Farmers Income and Rate Erosi in Section
Upstream, Center, Downstream of Ayung Watershed RupiahFarmerYear
No. Description
Ayung Watershed Upstream
Section Center Section
Downstream Section
1. Gross
Income π Rphayear
165.987.641 50.184.416
41.361.561 2.
3. Rate of
Erosion Size ha
Very mild to very severe:
1,04-724,86 t ha
-1
th
-1
. 0,61
Very mild- moderate and
severe 0,50- 32,29
dan 221,97 t ha
-1
th
-1
0,30 Very light
0,22-12,74 t ha
-1
th
-1
, dan sedang 31,80 t
ha
-1
th
-1
, 0,36
Source : Result of analysis
Hypothesis : H : there is no real correlation between the level of farmers
income and the rate of erosion H
1:
there is a real correlation between the level of farmers income and the rate of erosion.
H
0 =
be accepted Rs =coefisien correlasi of Rank Spearman = 0,25 R-table 5, n=3 =1,00
Differences in income in the upstream, midstream and downstream are caused by differences in the type of
farming, the dominant upstream while the orange groves in the middle and lower reaches of the Ayung watershed
is in the form of paddy rice farm. Revenues in the upstream economically beneficial but environmentally
vulnerable to erosion, due to citrus crops in the planting of traditional terrace monokoultur without amplifier
patio plants.
33
The income of farmers in the middle and lower reaches of the watershed is lower, due to the people in
the middle and downstream land managed acreage has more narrow around 30-36 acres. Farmers can not
change the land use to land uses for citrus crops, because it is a wetland or rice field, with a Subak system
where the member of Subak obey to rule awig-awig in the Subak.
The relationship of the farmers income and erosion rates were then analyzed using Spearman Rank.
The analysis showed that high income is not always followed by a high erosion or otherwise. This is caused
by high revenues for major crops are citrus crop whose price is determined by the market.
4.4 Planning of the Land Use in Ayung Watershed