Agricultural Water Management-Brief

8/4/2019 Agricultural Water Management-Brief

1/58

1

WELCOME


2/58

2

Water Management in Agriculture Need of the hour


3/58

3

Contents

1. Global, Indian and State scenario of waterresources development and use some important facts

2. World water challenges for the 21st Century

3. Action plan4. Andhra Pradesh Water Management Project

5. Comparison of crop water requirement and actualquantities of water applied in some selected canalcommands of Krishna Western Delta

6. Conclusions


4/58

4

(40 %)

(41 %)

(9 %)

(10 %)


5/58

5

97% of the Worlds water resources are present in

oceans. The remaining 3% of the water resources

are present on land

Out of the 3 % of water available on land, 2% is onice caps which can not be utilized. The remaining

1 % is only the available utilizable water on land

97% of the available fresh water on earth is

groundwater

India has 16% of worlds population while having

only 2% of land and 4% of fresh water resources

Worlds Water resources

Some important facts


6/58

6

Compared to average annual rainfall of Saudi Arabia

of about 150 mm, our Rain fall (1194 mm) is muchhigher i.e. almost 1.2 m height of water above the

entire land

The percent rainfall received due to South-west and

North-east monsoons is 74 and 3 %, respectively. Theremaining is received in pre & post monsoon periods

and hence it needs storage

Present quantity of irrigation water utilized in India is

174 km3 (incl. surface and ground waters)

In Zambia/ Zimbabwe, one single dam stores around

180.6 km3

In Egypt, Aswan high dam stores about 162 km3


7/58

7

Alarming Facts:

Though irrigated land now expands at about 1%per year, the population also expands at 1.5%

Per capita irrigated area peaked in 1978 and has

been declining since then. Presently it is 0.4 acres

More over, irrigated land is loosing productivity

due to water logging and salinisation

Conversion of food producing lands to othercommercial crops


8/58

8

Agricultural Water Use

- Irrigation to 43% net sown area

- 23 to 50% overall efficiencies of irrigation

projects

- Inequity in availability of irrigation water

- Water logging problems in about 10% canal

irrigated area

- Low average crop yields due to improper use


9/58

9


10/58

10

Water Resources of Andhra Pradesh

Source Available,

BCM

Utilized,

BCM

River basin

Godavari* 41.90 20.39

Krishna* 22.96 22.96

Pennar 2.77 2.77

Others 10.12 3.51

Ground water 30.40 12.97

Total 108.15 62.59

Demands

BCM

Domestic

(by )

3.45

Irrigation 107.98

Industry 1.44

Power Generation -0.06

tal .9


11/58

11

IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT OF ANDHRAPRADESH

Total Geographical Area : 27.4 M ha

Cultivable Area : 16.7 M ha (60%)

Area Under Cultivation : 11.81 M ha

Ultimate Irrigation Potential of A.P. : 8.78 M ha ( 52% of the Cultivable Area)

Present Irrigation Potential Created : 5.01 M ha (57% of the total potential

out of which 1.3 M ha gap is present)

States Gross Cropped Area

Under Irrigation : 40%


12/58

12

The States share of Dependable Flow

from the Rivers System : 2746 TMC

Present Utilization :1828 TMC

Balance Water to be Utilized : 918 TMC

Out of which Godavari Riveralone can yield : 684 TMC ( This forms 75% of the

balance water un-utilized)

To utilise balance of918 TMC : 15 times of our State Irrigation budget

(Aproxly. Rs. 45,000 Crores) required

Amount spent on Irrigation : Rs. 6946 Crores sincethe formation of A.P.


13/58

13

Peoples ParticipationAgriculture

Panchayat Raj

Water Users Associations

Watershed Committees

Village level committees for

Rural Water Supply projects


14/58

14

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

H

ectare

S

EPES S

VEE

ES

P

Y

PHE

E

J

J

aterneeds of differentcrops (Source: alkenmark etal. 1990)

ne hectare of sugarcanerequires 300 ha-cm of water. heareas of other

crops thatcan be irrigated by the sameamount of waterare shown below


15/58

15

WORLD WATER CHALLENGES FOR THE

TWENTY FIRST CENTURY

Out of all the problems, water problem is the

second most important problem in the world

faced by mankind after population problem -

United Nations University


16/58

16

1. Water Scarcity

Agriculture is the largest user of freshwater. At present, 70% of

the total fresh water in the world is used to provide food, natural

fibers and employment to billions of rural dwellers

Now, at the end of 20th century, an estimated 26 countries with a

population of more than 300 million people suffer from water

scarcity. Projections for the year 2050 show that 66 countries

with about two thirds of the world population will face moderate

to severe water scarcity

The finite supply of water can be augmented by reducing

consumption, and recycling and reusing waste water

The Challenges


17/58

17

2. Lack of accessibility

3. Water Quality Deterioration

Industrialization and urbanization have produced large

volumes of effluent waste water, discharged in many

cases into water ways which carry fresh water supplies

into communities.

The projected mega cities and rapid industrialization

world- wide have only accelerated problems such as

inadequate waste treatment.


18/58

18

4. World Peace and Security

Affluent countries enjoy an abundance of fresh water resources,

poor nations face the twin menaces of water scarcity and water

quality deterioration

All this directly effects the economic and social development of a

society, undermines political stability, and threatens global security

5. Awareness by Decision Makers and the Public

Water availability is taken for granted by the public

Similarly, political leaders are largely unaware of the present

dimensions of the impending water crises in many countries

Requires long term and lasting solutions beyond the short term

mandate of political leaders and decision- makers


19/58

19

6. Decline of Financial Resources Allocation

The world witnesses a rapid growth in financial allocations to water/

development in the 1960s and the 1970s which was spurred mainlyby investment in the irrigation and drinking water supply. However,

a steady decline in financial outlay occurred in the latter part of

1980s, and become more pronounced throughout the 1990s

Right now, funds for operation and maintenance are in limited

supply, with existing schemes in dire need of repair and

replacement

7. Fragmentation of Water Management

At national level, the water management is divided among

hundreds or thousands of jurisdictions, municipalities and theprivate sector; or worse, left unattended

This institutional chaos has led to competition among users,

conflicts, duplication of efforts and contradictory policies, plans

and actions .Consequently, this has perpetuated wastage of

resources, and usage deficiency


20/58


21/58

21

Action Plan

1. In view of the climate change, more floods and

droughts will occur

All the rivers should be under network

(Godavari lot of water is being wasted)

NWDA plan should be implemented

We can tackle environmental issues

2. Conjunctive utilisation should be practiced

Except in some parts of Punjab, there is no conjunctiveutilization of water resources

For example this year groundwater in command areas

could be utilized


22/58

22

3. Water use Efficiency

Standing water may not be required for rice? Even paddy could be irrigated under sprinkler irrigation ?

Future yard stick will be how many tons of grains are

produced / hectare /m3 of water

4. Land Irrigability is most important

We can not irrigate paddy on the top of the hill. Equity

should first be implemented in quality land. Land reforms

are to be strengthened to ameliorate the problems

Land leveling is important

Watershed issues


23/58

23

5. Drinking Water problems

Still, there is a 30% wastage in the drinking water suppliesparticularly at the user level

proper planning is needed to supply water from the pipe

all along the people staying around it

Proper payment of tariffs. It is said that in Hyderabad, just

less than 50% consumers are paying

Even in the case of irrigation also, same situation

6. Recycling is the accepted fact

River water is recycled water


24/58

24

7. Single window clearance for all water uses

with IT should be stressed.

River basin Authority

8. Hydrological data acquisition

Variability of rain fall Groundwater variability

Need for data acquisition

Human resource utilization.


25/58

25


26/58

26

Network Operational Pilot Project on

AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT

IN ANDHRA PRADESH(AP Water Management Project APWAM)


27/58

27

Main Co-ordinating Center at Bapatla, Guntur ist.Network centers at

Garikapadu, Krishna ist.

agtial, Kari nagar ist.

Undi-Bhimavaram, W st Godavari ist. Tirupati, Chittoor ist.


28/58

28

Project Objectives

The long term objective of the proposed project is

the improvement of the water use efficiency inagriculture and spreading of irrigation benefits to

tail end areas and preservation of the agricultural

production capacity of agricultural lands in

irrigated commands

To achieve this objective

water resources (rain, ground, canal and waste waters) will

be optimally utilized to uplift the socio-economic conditions

and improve the agricultural production in the tail-end areasof canal and tank commands,

farm land in danger of becoming unproductive as a result of

water logging and soil salinity will be preserved, and

land that has already become unproductive because of

these processes will be reclaimed.


29/58

29

The short term objectives are:

Organization and empowering the farmers for management

and equitable distribution of local water resources and

maintenance and operation of irrigation and drainagesystems

Introduction and evaluation of equitable distribution

practices like Turn system and Rotational (Warabandi)

system

The transfer of technology (equipment, knowledge andskills) relating to the reclamation of waterlogged saline lands

and cropping system based water management practices

The construction of on-farm rainwater harvesting ponds,

wells and improvement of irrigation canals to provide water

resources to tail end area of about 100 ha under selected

WUAs The construction of subsurface drainage to reclaim

waterlogged saline lands


30/58

30

Short term objectives contd

Continuation of monitoring of Konanki and Uppugunduru

subsurface drainage experimental areas for long term

impacts

Conductance of research on water requirements and

irrigation schedules of various crops and techniques for

less water use especially for rice crop

Introduction and evaluation of sprinkler and drip irrigation

systems for field crops. Development of agronomic and cultural practices for multi-

cropping in rice based cropping system

Conductance of operational research on water

management and subsurface drainage in waterlogged

saline lands of other canal commands.


31/58

31

Activities of

Main and Network Centers


32/58

32

Bapatla Main Center

Drainage for control of salinity and water loggingi) Selection of pilot area

ii) Pre-drainage investigations including bench marksurvey of cropping pattern, socio-economic & gender issues

iii) Design of appropriate drainage systemiv) Installation of drainage system

v) Monitoring and Evaluation of drainage systemincluding Socio-economic and gender issues

vi) Integration of Drainage with water resourcesmanagement (recycling of drain water)

Water less rice production systemi) Aerobic Rice

ii) System of Rice Intensification (SRI)

Project Command: Krishna Delta


33/58

33

Garikapadu Network Center

Water regulation at distributory level

i) Selection of 3 pilot areas one each at head, middle and

tail reaches of the canal

ii) Conjunctive use of rain water, surface water and sub-surface (ground) water

iii) Package of practices on water management

iv) Micro-irrigation experiments at the research station

Project Command: NSP Left canal command


34/58

34

Undi (Bhimavaram) Network Center

Drainage for control of water logging and salinity

in black cotton soils

i) Selection of pilot area

ii) Pre-drainage investigations including bench mark

survey of cropping pattern, socio-economic & gender issues

iii) Design and execution of appropriate drainage systems

iv) Monitoring and Evaluation of drainage system

including Socio-economic and gender issues

v) Experiments on envelope materials for clay soils

Water less rice production system

i) System of Rice Intensification (SRI)

Project Command: Godavari Western Delta


35/58

35

Jagtial Network Center

Water regulation at distributory leveli) Selection of 3 pilot areas one each at head, middle and tail

reaches of the canal

ii) Conjunctive use of rain water, surface water and sub-surface

(ground) water

iii) Package of practices on water management

Water less rice production systemat Research station and farm level

i) Rice under drip irrigation

ii) Methods of sowing (direct, wet and aerobic)

iii) Methods of irrigation (alternate wetting & drying and irrigation

at 50 % moisture depletion)

iv) System of Rice Intensification (SRI)

Project Command: Sriramsagar project


36/58

36

Tirupati Network Center

Water management under tanks and wells

i) Selection of tanks

ii) Water budget for the tanks

iii) Data on water resources

iv) conjunctive use of rain, tank and ground waters

v) Package of practices

Project Command: Tanks and Wells


37/58

37

Comparison ofCrop Water Requirements and

Actual Water Applied in Krishna

Western Delta in Andhra Pradesh


38/58

38

Estimation of

crop water requirements for

Ponnur region in Krishna Western Deltausing CRIWAR model


39/58

39

Sl.

No.

Name of the

canal

Length of

the canal

(km)

Command

area

(ha)

Rated

discharge

(cumec)

1 Srirangapuramchannel

22.73 3,322 3.43

2 Mutluru channel 6.00 848 0.85

3 Ponnur channel 13.2 2326 2.41

Table 1. Particulars of selected commands in

Krishna Western Delta


40/58

40

General features of CRIWAR model

CRIWAR is a simulation model on crop irrigation water

requirements and it calculates the irrigation water

requirements (either per month or per 10 day period) of a

cropping pattern in an irrigated area, for various stages of

crop development through out the growing season

Crop irrigation water requirement = ETp - Pewhere ETp = Potential evapotranspiration,

Pe = Effective precipitation

CRIWAR model calculates the ETp on the basis of two

alternative methods of computing the reference

evapotranspiration, the FAO modified Penman Method,ETg, and the Penman Monteith Method, ETh

ETp.fao = kc ETgETp.pm = kc. ETh

where kc = crop coefficient


41/58

41

Model Inputs

General data file of the irrigated area Meteo data file

Cropping pattern file

Model Output

Reference evaportanspiration

Crop irrigation water requirements per 10 day

period or month Cropping pattern


42/58

42

General data needed for the model

Latitude

Altitude

Size of irrigable area

Calculation period (month/ 10 days)

Mean depth of water application (mm)

Interval between applications (days)


43/58

43

Meteorological data needed for the model

Monthly average values of

Temperature - Tmin and Tmax

Precipitation (mm)

Sunshine hours (h)

Humidity (%) - RHmin and Rhmax

Wind speed - mean (m/s) and ratio

Average ind speedduringday

Wind speed ratio = ------------------------------------------

Average ind speedduringnight


44/58

44

Crop data needed for the model

Crops grown in the area

Seasons followed

Cropped area (ha)

Growing period (days)

Planting month

Variety of crops

Crop coefficients (kc) for different stages of

crop growth


45/58

45

Sl.

No.

Season and

Year

Crop water requirements

Net water

require-

ment

Effective

precipit-

ation

Netirrigation

require-

ment

Gross

irrigation

requirement

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)=(3)-(4) (6)=(4)/0.6*

FAO Modified Penman method

1 kharif 2000 77.2 42.3 34.9 58.2

2 kharif2001 78.5 49.9 28.6 47.5

3 kharif2002 79.9 29.3 50.6 84.3

Penman Monteith method4 kharif 2000 61.2 38.0 31.2 52.0

5 kharif2001 68.9 46.8 22.2 37.0

6 kharif2002 69.9 27.6 42.3 70.5

Table 2. Water requirement of paddy crop as estimated by

CRIWAR model


46/58

46

Estimation of

actual quantities of water applied

in selected canal commands ofKrishna Western Delta


47/58

47

Estimation procedure

1. Discharge (cumecs) = Discharge (cusecs) / 35.36

2. Volume of water applied on each day (m3/day) =

Discharge (cumecs) x 60 x 60 x 24

3. Total volume of water applied during the season (m3) =

Sum of volumes of water applied on

each day of the season (m3)

4. Gross depth of irrigation water applied (m) =

Total volume of water applied (m3

)/Area of the command (m2)

5. Net depth of irrigation = Gross depth of irrigation x

Application efficiency


48/58

48

Sl.No.

Season andyear

No. of days

canal waterreleased

(days)

Volume of

canal waterapplied

(million cu.m.)

Gross depth

of irrigationwater applied

(cm)

Srirangapuram channel command

1 Kharif2000 136 27.69 83.4

2 Kharif2001 95 20.06 60.4

3 Kharif2002 130 25.11 75.6

Mutluru channel command

4 Kharif2000 138 7.69 90.7

5 Kharif2001 117 6.34 74.8

6 Kharif2002 98 5.24 61.9

Ponnur channel command

7 Kharif2000 110 21.14 91.3

8 Kharif2001 110 16.21 69.8

9 Kharif2002 102 16.63 71.6

Table 3. Actual quantities of irrigation water applied in

the selected commands


49/58

49

Comparison of

crop water requirement and

actual quantities of water applied


50/58

50

Sl.No.

Season andYear

Irrigation

waterrequirement

(cm)

Irrigation

waterapplied

(cm)

Difference

Quantity

(cm)Percentage

Srirangapuram channel command

1 kharif 2000 58.2 83.4 25.2 43.3

2 kharif2001 47.5 60.4 12.9 27.2

3 kharif2002 84.3 75.6 - 8.7 - 10.3

Mutluru channel command

4 kharif 2000 58.2 90.7 32.5 55.8

5 kharif2001 47.5 74.8 27.3 57.5

6 kharif2002 84.3 61.9 - 22.4 - 26.6

Ponnur channel command

7 kharif 2000 58.2 91.3 33.1 56.9

8 kharif2001 47.5 69.8 22.3 46.9

9 kharif2002 84.3 71.4 - 12.9 - 15.3

Table 4. Comparison of requirement and application of

irrigation (canal) water


51/58

51

Sl.

No.

Name of the

command

2002 2001 2000

Yield

(t/ha)

Yield

(t/ha)

Percent

decrease

over year

2002

Yield

(t/ha)

Percent

decrease

over year

2002

1Srirangapuram

channel6.13 5.34 12.9 5.48 10.6

2Mutluru

channel5.87 5.19 11.6 5.28 10.1

3Ponnur

channel6.05 5.25 13.2 5.35 11.6

Table 5. Average paddy yield in the selected channel commands


52/58

52

Fig. 1 Comparis on of irrigation water requirement, actual amount of irrigation

water applied and paddy yields in Srirangapuram channel command

58.2

47.5

84.383.4

60.4

75.6

0

20

40

60

80

100

2000 2001 2002

Year

Depthof

irrigation,cm

4.8

5.2

5.6

6.0

6.4

Paddy

yield,

tons/ha

Irrigation water required Irrigation water applied Paddy yield


53/58

53

Fig. 2 Comparis on of irrigation water requirement, actual amount of irrigation

water applied and paddy yields in Mutluru channel command

58.2

47.5

84.390.7

74.8

61.9

0

20

40

60

80

100

2000 2001 2002

Year

Depthof

irrigation,cm

4.4

4.8

5.2

5.6

6.0

Paddy

yield,

tons/ha

Irrigation water required Irrigat ion water applied Paddy yield


54/58

54

Fig. 3 Comparison of irrigation water requirement, actual amount of irrigation

water applied and paddy yields in Ponnur channel command

0

20

40

60

80

100

2000 2001 2002

Year

Depthof

irrigation,cm

4.4

4.8

5.2

5.6

6.0

6.4

Paddy

yield,

tons/ha

Irrigat ion wat er requirement Irrigat ion wat er applied Paddy yield


55/58

55

Prediction of

crop water requirement using

CRIWAR model by consideringpast ten year average weather data

T bl 6 W t i t f dd b d


56/58

56

Sl.

No.

Period Crop water

requirement

(cm)

Effective

precipitation

(cm)

Irrigation water required (cm)

Net irrigation

requirement

Gross irrigation

requirement

1 11-20 July 7.2 2.8 4.4 7.3

2 21-31 July 7.8 2.8 5.0 8.3

3 1-10 Aug 6.0 4.1 1.9 3.2

4 11-20 Aug 6.0 4.1 1.9 3.2

5 21-31 Aug 6.5 4.2 2.4 4.0

6 1-10 Sept 5.3 2.7 2.6 4.3

7 11-20 Sept 4.8 2.7 2.1 3.5

8 21-30 Sept 4.7 2.7 2.0 3.3

9 1-10 Oct 2.6 2.6 0.0 0.0

10 11-20 Oct 3.5 3.5 0.0 0.0

11 21-31 Oct 3.7 3.7 0.0 0.0

12 1-10 Nov 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.3

13 11-20 Nov 2.6 0.9 1.7 2.8

14 21-30 Nov 2.5 0.9 1.6 2.7

15 1-10 Dec 1.8 0.3 1.5 2.5

Table 6. Water requirement for paddy crop based on

ten year(1993-2002) average weather data


57/58

57

Conclusions of the study

The farmers have applied 27.2 to 57.5 % excess

irrigation water than required in the years 2000and 2001 while in the year 2002, they haveapplied 10.3 to 26.5 % less water than therequired quantity of water in the selectedcommands

In spite of applying more quantities of irrigationwater in the years 2000 and 2001, the averageyield of paddy crop in those years was less by10.1 to 13.2 % when compared to the year 2002indicating that applying excess water is not at all

advantageous and instead it is the wastage ofvaluable water resource.

Using the CRIWAR model, an efficient irrigationwater management plan can be worked out andadopted


58/58

58

Thank You

Agricultural Water Management-Brief

Documents

Transcript of Agricultural Water Management-Brief