Water Irrigation Systems In India Environmental Sciences Essay

Water is the most distributed substance on our planet. It is available in different amounts everywhere and plays an important role in the surrounding environment and human life. By recent estimates the earth’s hydrosphere contains a huge amount of water of about 1,386 million cubic kilometers. However, 97.5 per cent of this amount is saline water and only 2.5 per cent is fresh water. The greater portion of the fresh water (68.70%) is in the shape of ice and permanent snow cover in the Antarctic, the Artic, and Mountains regions. Only 0.26 per cent of the total amount of fresh water on the earth is concentrated in lakes, reservoirs, and river systems. They are most accessible for economic needs and very important for water ecosystems. Agriculture sector requires more irrigation water compared to industry and domestic sectors. Especially in developing countries the consumption of irrigation water was more than 90 per cent.

Irrigation in India

India’s irrigation development in this century and particularly after independence has seen number of large storage based system all by the government effort and money. However, in pre-British period in India, there were practically no large reservoir projects. Even in British period, a few storage structures were built only in the beginning of this century. Post independent India however has seen more than 60 per cent of irrigation budgets going for major and minor projects. Indian states have taken over total responsibility of planning, decision making, finance, construction, operation and maintenance of existing and future irrigation projects of all sizes.

India’s irrigated agriculture has been fundamental to its economic development and poverty alleviation. About 18.00 per cent of India’s gross domestic product and 67.00 per cent of employment is based on agriculture. Agriculture is the primary source of livelihood in rural area, which accounts for 75.00 per cent of India’s population and 80.00 per cent of its poor. And, in turn, irrigation is the base for about 56.00 per cent. Considering these aspects of agriculture, Government of India has undertaken construction of major and minor irrigation projects in India. But, these projects have failed in equitable distribution of water resources throughout the country.

Irrigation in Karnataka

The Karnataka state is the eighth largest state in the country and it is located in the Deccan plateau. The geographical area of state is 1,90,498 sq km accounting for 5.8 per cent of the total area of the country. The climate of state varies from very humid rainy monsoonal climate in the west coast, the ghats and malnad areas to semi-arid warm dry climate on the east. There is a large variation in the rainfall with higher amounts in the Western Ghats and reducing towards the eastern plains. Along the coastal Dakshina Kannada district, the normal rainfall is about 4000 mm while in the drought prone districts of Bijapur, Raichur, Bellary etc., the rainfall is of the order of 500 mm to 600 mm. The average annual yield of the rivers of the Karnataka has been roughly estimated as 98,406 M.CUM (3,475 TMC).

Agriculture being the main occupation of the state, irrigation plays utmost significant role in obtaining increased yields from the land. The development of irrigation in the state was slow and unsystematic during the pre-independence era. However, there was some notable irrigation works undertaken and completed during the pre-independence, such as Krishna Raja Sagar, Vijayanagar canals, Cauvery anicut channels, Gokak canal, Vanivilas Sagar, Markonahalli and Anjanapur. Though major projects like Tungabhadra, Bhadra, and Ghataprabha stage-I were commenced prior to the plan period, their progress was low and got impetus only after their inclusion in the first five year plan.

River systems of Karnataka and water resources

Karnataka has seven river systems, namely Krishna, Cauvery, Godavary, West flowing rivers, North Pennar, South Pennar, and Palar. It is estimated that the economically utilized water for irrigation is about 1695 TMC, excluding ground water.

The total net sown area in the state is 107 lakh ha including rainfed irrigated area of 46 lakh ha. It is reported that the balance irrigation potential from all sources excluding rainfed irrigation has been estimated as about 61 lakh ha comprising 35 lakh ha under major and medium irrigations, 10 lakh ha from minor irrigation using surface water and 16 lakh ha from ground water.

The Tungabhadhra Project

The Tungabhadhra Dam is built across Tungabhadra river near Mallapura village about 5 kms from Hospet town. The name Tungabhadra is derived from twin rivers Tunga and Bhadra, which originate in Varaha Parvata in Western Ghats and join at Kudali village in Shimoga district. The Tungabhadra Project was started during the year 1945 as a joint venture by the Governments of Madras and Hyderabad. At the time of States reorganization, the project came over to Karnataka state.

In Karnataka, it is intended to irrigate an area of 3.63 lakh hectares in Bellary, Raichur and Koppal districts under this project. The ultimate irrigation potential of Tungabhadra project is 3.63 lakh hectares. About 3.52 lakh hectares have been developed up to end of March 2006.

Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM)

PIM is not a new concept in India and locally managed irrigation systems are centuries old. They existed long before but they have been forgotten as the years rolled by and with the advent of the British regime and contraction of major irrigation projects. In ancient and medieval India, small irrigation schemes were entirely managed by farmers. As early as third century B.C. the Kautilya Arthashastrta enunciated the principles of participatory irrigation management. In second century A.D. in Tamilnadu, the Chola king built the Grand Anicut across the Cauvery river in the delta area and it was locally managed system till it was taken over by the British in 1799. Similarly, the Vijayanagar canals built by the Vijayanagar empire (13th to 16th century) as river diversion across the Tungabhadra river were entirely and ideally farmer managed.

During the British period, many canal irrigation systems were built to ward off the havocs and distresses of famines in India. All these irrigation systems were entirely Government managed through the State Irrigation Department from top to bottom. Thus, the irrigation management became the exclusive responsibility of the State Irrigation Department.

The concept of irrigation management is as much an organizational and social responsibility of the irrigators has been ignored with the need to increase agriculture productivity. Governments (Centre and State) embarked upon ambitious and major irrigation projects and they are all Governments managed. In this process, the past success of farmers in managing their own irrigation system was forgotten.

The administration of such projects has not been able to enforce water control efficiently. Even if they are enforced, the legal mechanisms against the violators are also very weak. The failure of large scale irrigation projects has led to increased support for systems which could be run and maintained by the users themselves. In view of this, participatory irrigation management took birth.

Realizing the great role of irrigation in economic progress, many countries in the world invested huge amounts of money for development of irrigation. Most of these state owned projects suffered from certain lacunae. These irrigation systems are not self sustaining because, the water charges have been kept low and also have not been collected efficiently over the years. The allocation of funds for the Operation and Maintenance (O and M) have created problem of unreliability of distribution of water.

It has been recognized widely that unless the farmers are involved in an orgainized way in the operation, management and maintencance, the objectives of the irriagation projects cannot be realized to a full extent. Therefore, there is a trend all over the world to switch over to management of irrigation by farmers and thereby improve the efficiency. In the United States of America, the efforts began as early as in 1939 in this direction and completed thirty years later in 1969. France and Taiwan implemented the process in 1960’s and 1970’s. Since 1980’s there have been experiments of this kind in Asia, Latin America, Africa, Arabia and Europe. Similarly Colombia, Chile, Peru, Mexico, Brazil, Philippines and other countries. This program is called by different names in different countries. It is called as “Turn over” in Indonesia and Philippines. “Management transfer” in Mexico and Turkey, “take over” in Colombia, “Post-responsibility system” or “Responsibility contracting system” in China and “Participatory Management” in Sri Lanka. The process of change is also described differently as Farmers Organization and Turn over (FOT), Transfer and Self-Management (TESM), Irrigation Management Transfer (IMT), Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM), etc.

Participation is a process in which people express themselves, share, contribute and act with mutual responsibility to promote a common goals. Participation is crucial for agriculture and rural development and is one of the critical components for success of natural resource management. Farmer’s participation in decision making is more likely to lead to a sustainable increase in food production as well as in eco-preservation, restoration and development.

“Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM) refers to the involvement such as planning, designing, construction and supervision, policy and decision making, operation and maintenance (O and M) and evaluation of irrigation system”.

The program is implemented in India with the label of Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM). The objectives vary from place to place within the country, but generally directed at improving the operation and maintenance of the irrigation system, increasing efficiency in the use of water, reducing the Government expenditure on irrigation, increase the collection of revenue.

The man behind the present day Participatory Irrigation Management and irrigation co-operation is Sir. M. Vishveshvaraya, who as early as 1902-03 had advocated for establishment of such co-operation in respect of Khadakwasla canals while he was working as an Assistant Engineer in the Bombay state. Two water user’s co-operative societies were established namely Saswad Mali Society (1932) in Pune district and Samvastra Vibhag Water Supply Co-Operative Society (1936) in Ahamadnagar district.

PIM in Karnataka

The associations were named as “Water User’s Co-operative Societies” (WUCSs) and the task of organizing them was entrusted to the Command Area Development Authority (CADA). The jurisdictional area of society was indicated in the range of 300 to 500 ha depending upon the position of the command area, hydrologic base and consideration of socio-economic aspects. The first society was registered in May 1990 at Shettikera in Shahapur taluka of Upper Krishna Project comprising an area of 328 ha in Shahapur Branch Canal.

Since 2000, the Government of Karnataka has initiated a number of fresh measures for the implementation of the Participatory Irrigation Management. It had promulgated amendments to the Karnataka Irrigation Act 1965 and Irrigation (Levy of Betterment Contribution and Water Rate) Act 1957, to provide the legal frame work for formation of the societies and their duties and responsibilities have been framed.

Water users associations at different level: It was proposed to organize the Water Users Associations (WUAs) at four levels as follows,

Lateral level – Water Users Co-operative Societies

Distributory level – Water Users Distibutory Level Federation

Project level – Water Users Project Level Federation

State level – Water Users Apex Level Federation

Objectives of PIM model in Karnataka

To initiate participation of the farmers in water management, irrigation scheduling, distribution and maintenance of system at micro level.

To improve irrigation as well as water use efficiency or optimal production per unit volume of water.

To make best use of natural precipitation and ground water in conjunctive with the canal water.

To develop a sense of economy in water use amongst the users.

To facilitate the users to have a choice in selecting crops, cropping sequence, timing of water supply depending upon the soil and availability of water, climate and other infrastructure facilities available in the command such as road, markets, cold storage etc., so as to maximize the income and profit.

To delineate responsibilities of water distribution and maintenance of system between the users both relating to allocation and actual supply of water.

To facilitate resolution of conflicts among farmers.

To entrust collective and community responsibilities on the farmers to collect water charges and payments to government.

To improve and sophisticate deliveries precisely as per crop need by the department at the supply point of the minors and thus reduce operation losses.

To create healthy atmosphere between the managers and users in the entire operation.

Enough research has been conducted to develop appropriate technology for irrigation commands, but it has not been adopted properly due to various reasons. In this context, Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM) is conceived as panacea for the ills of irrigated farming. It is expected to solve the problems such as poor drainage, poor crop productivity, environmental degradation etc. PIM also deals with the maintenance of the irrigation system, equitable distribution of water, scientific crop management, planning and designing, construction and supervision, policy and decision making, operation and maintenance and evaluation of irrigation system etc. The logic is that water users have higher stake and they have total control over management of the irrigation system.

PIM in Tungabhadra Project area

Tungabhadra project (TBP) is one of the oldest projects to help the drought hit districts of North Karnataka. It serves three districts namely, Koppal, Raichur and Bellary. The ultimate irrigation potential of Tungabhadra project is 3.63 lakh hectares. An area of 3.52 lakhs hectares has been developed up to the end of March 2006. Sufficient time has elapsed without adequate returns in terms of agriculture output, income or revenue from the investment. To overcome these hurdles, the state adopted Participatory Irrigation Management and formation of Water User’s Co-operative Societies (WUCSs) in early 1990’s.

As per the directions of the Government of India, the farmers are required to adopt micro level systems of water management. In this respect, from the year 1990 to 1999, sixteen water users co-operative societies were organized under CADA of which 13 societies were assisted with an amount of Rs.12.97 lakhs for first three years to meet the expenses of establishment charges like office rent, furniture and maintenance charge etc. But these societies have become defunct due to stoppage of financial assistance from the Government. Action is being taken to revitalize these societies and to adopt the new bye-laws and start functioning as per the amendment brought to irrigation act which was enforced from 2000 and onwards.

In Tungabhadra project command area, 432 water users co-operative societies (out of 835 societies covering 3.63 lakh hectares) were registered up to end of November 2007 at Bellary, Koppal and Raichur districts. These water users’ co-operative societies covered an area of 1.77 lakh hectares of land. Among 432 water user’s co-operative societies, 168 water users’ co-operative societies have executed MOU and also two distributory level federations are registered one at RBLLC Bhagewady distributory and the other at RBHLC D.P.13 distributary. The formation of three more distributory federations are under progress. The registration of WUCSs in large number was mainly due to the pressure and target fixed by the government to the CADA officials. However, the progress of entering into memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Water Resources Department (WRD), actual hand over to farmers, etc was practically very slow. The expectations of organization of WUCSs were not achieved. There are many hurdles in the implementation of PIM at the grass root level.

Therefore, in the study an attempt is made to understand the nature and progress of PIM and to identify the various factors / constraints limiting the successful implementation. This would throw light on ways and means for operatationalization of existing WUCSs in TBP area.

Specific Objectives

To analyze the growth in participatory irrigation management (PIM) in Tungabhadra project area.

To asses the physical and financial progress of participatory irrigation management in the command area.

To assess the impact of participatory irrigation management on farm economy.

To identity the constraints in the operationalisation of participatory irrigation management (PIM).

Hypotheses

Growth of participatory irrigation management is increasing over the years.

The physical and financial progress of the water users association is not satisfactory.

The impact of functional water user’s co-operative societies on farm economy is not satisfactory over existing co-operative societies.

Working of water user’s co-operative societies is beset with constraints.

Presentation of the study

The study has been presented in seven chapters. In chapter I, the nature and importance of the research problem, specific objectives of the study have been depicted. Chapter II deals with the review of the relevant past studies related to the study.

Chapter III gives an over view of the study area, the nature and sources of data, the analytical tools employed for evaluating the objectives and interpreting the results and various concepts used in the study. The results of the study have been presented through a variety of tables in the chapter IV. A critical discussion of the results obtained has been presented / depicted in the chapter-V.

A brief summary of the overall results and the main findings of the study have been presented in the chapter-VI along with the policy implications that emerged from the findings of the study.

Chapter -VII includes the list of the refered books and journals in the study.