K SivasubramaniyanAssistant ProfessorMadras Institute of Development Studies79, Second Main Road, Gandhinagar, Adyar, Chennai 600 020

E-mail: siva@mids.ac.inWeb: http://www.mids.ac.in/siva.htm

PARTICIPATORY IRRIGATION MANAGEMENT UNDER TANKS

THE CASE OF IAMWARM PROJECT

FIVE CONSTITUENTS MANAGING THE GLOBE ARE LAWFA

1 LAND – Possibility of ownership 2 AIR - Unknown (invisible) strength3 WATER - Possibility of ownership 4 FIRE - No ownership 5 ATMOSPHERE - Possibility of ownershipAmong the 5 constituents, the quality of the first 3 only

determine the environmental sustainability. So, all of us should be careful against this LAW (= Land, Air & Water) and not to pollute them but protect these natural resources.

Special Features of WATER• Among the five constituents of NRs, the WATER has its special features. • ¾ of land area is made up of water, but only 2.4 % is possible for utilisation. • Without water, nothing will move on this earth.• This resource is available in three forms such as Seawater, freshwater and

groundwater. The source for the latter two forms, is only by rainfall.• In some coastal areas the source for groundwater is Seawater, but it is fully saline. • This resource has no Boarders to hold in the world. As a result, any wrong doing to

this resource (Seawater Pollution) will affect the entire globe. • A very important postulate is: For the basic source of water, the quantum of annual rainfall

occurred on the earth is equal almost in all the years, but its distribution varies considerably. • By having all these special features, WATER serves better to one and all for a

happy living. But, what are we doing in our life to help the WATER RESOURCE?

• The possible answer is CONSERVE WATER & PREVENT POLLUTION IN ANY FORM

Table 1 Trends in Net Area Irrigated by Sources from 1950-51 to 2010-11 (Area in lakh ha)Source 1950-51 to 1959-60 1960-61 to 1969-70 1970-71 to 1979-80 1980-81 to 1989-90 1990-91 to 1999-2000 2000-01 to 2010-11

  Area % to NIA Area % to NIA Area % to NIA Area % to NIA Area % to NIA Area % to NIAINDIACanals 91.9 41.2 111.9 41.9 137.7 40.1 163.1 38.3 173.4 32.7 154.6 26.7Tanks 41.5 18.6 44.5 16.6 38.1 11.1 29.9 7.0 31.1 5.9 19.7 3.4Wells+tubewells 66.3 29.8 87.1 32.6 144.1 41.9 207.8 48.7 292.5 55.2 353.9 61.0Other sources * 23.2 10.4 23.9 8.9 23.8 6.9 25.4 6.0 33.1 6.2 51.9 8.9Total NIA 222.9 100.0 267.3 100.0 343.6 100.0 426.3 100.0 530.1 100.0 580.1 100.0TANMIL NADUCanals 8.0 37.6 8.8 35.6 8.9 33.2 8.2 33.0 8.3 29.3 7.3 26.8  (8.7) (7.9) (6.5) (5.0) (4.8) (4.7)Tanks 7.8 36.8 9.1 36.8 8.5 31.5 6.2 24.7 6.3 22.4 5.1 18.6  (18.7) (20.5) (22.3) (20.6) (20.4) (25.6)Wells+tubewells 5.0 23.5 6.5 26.0 9.2 34.1 10.4 41.6 13.5 47.7 14.8 54.2  (7.5) (7.4) (6.4) (5.0) (4.6) (4.2)Other sources * 0.5 2.2 0.4 1.6 0.4 1.3 0.2 0.8 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.4  (2.0) (1.6) (1.5) (0.7) (0.5) (0.2)Total NIA 21.2 100.0 24.8 100.0 27.0 100.0 25.0 100.0 28.4 100.0 27.3 100.0  (9.5)   (9.3)   (7.8)   (5.9)   (5.4)   (4.7)  Note: Figures in brackets indicate sourcewise percentage compared to India.

* Indicates Anicutes, Bhandaras, Springs, Kuttai, Thangal, Small diversion networks and so on.

Source: Indian Agricultural Statistics, 1985-86--1989-90, Vol.I, Ministry of Agriculture, GOI. New Delhi.

CMIE, Agriculture, Various Issues. Indian Agriculture in Brief 27th Edn. January 2000.

GOTN, Tamil Nadu-An Economic Appraisal, Various Issues, Evaluation and Applied Research Department, Chennai.

GOTN, Season and Crop Reports, Various Issues. Chennai.

www.IndiaAgristat.com

Sl no Sectors 1960-1 1970-1 1980-1 1990-1 1999-0 2010-11 Primary 43.5 34.8 25.9 23.4 17.3 8.82 Secondary 20.3 26.9 33.5 33.1 29.6 30.63 Tertiary 36.2 38.3 40.6 43.5 53.1 60.6

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 1 Structural Changes in the Economy of Tamil Nadu (Contribution by Percentage)

1. P Sector’s income contribution declined from 44 % to 9 %.

2. S Sector’s contribution increased from 20 % to 31 %.

3. T Sector’s growth is appreciable which contributes more than 3/5th of total.

The point is, still we have not self-sustained in all types of food grains requirements and still we are in the process of importing agl commodities.

In the US economy, agl sec’s contribution is only < 2% of GDP.

WATER (80+%) IS THE BASIC INPUT FOR PROSPEROUS AGRICULTURE

1. P Sector’s income contribution declined from 44 % to 9 %.

2. S Sector’s contribution increased from 20 % to 31 %.

3. T Sector’s growth is appreciable which contributes more than 3/5th of total.

The point is, still we have not self-sustained in all types of food grains requirements and still we are in the process of importing agl commodities.

In the US economy, agl sec’s contribution is only < 2% of GDP.

WATER (80+%) IS THE BASIC INPUT FOR PROSPEROUS AGRICULTURE

Basin wise Surface Water Potential, Capacity of Reservoirs and Tanks in Tamil Nadu Reservoirs Tanks

Capacity Capacity Total Capacity Sl.

no. Basin

Surface Water Potential (MCM)

No. MCM TMCft

% to Total No.

MCM TMCft

% to Total

MCM TMCft

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 Chennai 1124 1 91.2 3.2 1.5 2562 362.2 12.8 7.1 453.4 16.0 2 Palar 1758 4 18.5 0.7 0.3 4224 1074.1 37.9 21.2 1092.6 38.6 3 Varahanadhi 412 1 17.1 0.6 0.3 422 16.1 0.6 0.3 33.2 1.2 4 Pennaiyar 1310 7 333.4 11.8 5.4 4772 631.4 22.3 12.5 964.9 34.1 5 Paravanar 144 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 149 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 6 Vellar 963 5 109.3 3.9 1.8 1176 212.5 7.5 4.2 321.8 11.4 7 Agniyar 1084 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3081 230.3 8.1 4.5 230.3 8.1

8 Pambar & Kottakaraiyar 653 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2812 550.7 19.5 10.9 550.7 19.5

9 Vaigai 1579 6 521.6 18.4 8.5 2934 235.0 8.3 4.6 756.6 26.7 10 Gundar 568 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3337 549.6 19.4 10.8 549.6 19.4 11 Vaippar 611 7 49.9 1.8 0.8 1317 235.4 8.3 4.6 285.2 10.1 12 Kallar 125 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 192 28.4 1.0 0.6 28.4 1.0 13 Tambraparani 1375 7 193.7 6.8 3.2 1355 300.3 10.6 5.9 494.0 17.5 14 Nambiyar 204 2 5.8 0.2 0.1 425 52.5 1.9 1.0 58.3 2.1 15 Kodayar 925 5 239.9 8.5 3.9 1957 47.2 1.7 0.9 287.1 10.1

16 Parambikulam & Aliyar 864 8 707.7 25.0 11.5 11 0.1 0.0 0.0 707.8 25.0

17 Cauvery 10460 23 3839.7 135.6 62.7 8476 540.1 19.1 10.7 4379.8 154.7

Total 24159 76 6127.8 216.4 100.0 39202 5066.6 178.9 100.0 11194.4 395.3

Percentage to Total 25.4 54.7 21.0 45.3 46.3 100.0 Note: 1 MCM = 0.035314 TMCft or 35.314 MCft. All percentages and TMCft calculations are done by us. Chennai basin potential includes 340 MCM as per Krishna water agreement. Cauvery basin potential includes Cauvery in Tamil Nadu (4655MCM) and from Karnataka as per interim Tribunal order (5805 MCM). All basins surface water potential @ 75 % dependability is 24,159 MCM (Hence the Capacity is 25%). Source: XI FYP 2007-2012 SPC, Chennai, December 2007. Pp. 216 - 217.

Figure 2 Trends in NIA by Sources in Tamil Nadu - 1905-2006

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

19

05

-06

19

09

-10

19

13

-14

19

17

-18

19

21

-22

19

25

-26

19

29

-30

19

33

-34

19

37

-38

19

41

-42

19

45

-46

19

49

-50

19

53

-54

19

57

-58

19

61

-62

19

65

-66

19

69

-70

19

73

-74

19

77

-78

19

81

-82

19

85

-86

19

89

-90

19

93

-94

19

97

-98

20

01

-02

20

05

-06

Year

Are

a in

'00

0 h

a

Canal Tank Well Other Sources

Trends in Sources of Irrigation in Tamil Nadu 1950s to 2000s

1. In TN, canal irrigation declined from 8.0 lakh hec to 7.3 L Hec.

2. Tank irrigation also declined from 7.8 lakh hec to 5.1 L Hec.

3. Well irrigation increased from 5.0 lakh hec to 14.8 L Hec.

4. Overall net irrigated area increased from 21 lakh hec to 27 L Hec. However, NSA increased marginally from 57 to 58 lakh hec.

A TRICKY QUESTION IS: HOW, WELL IRRIGATION HAS BEEN INCREASING?

1. Area under both Canals & Tanks have been declining. These are the main sources for recharging groundwater source.

2. The interesting point is: whether canals / tanks are irrigating or not, it is only secondary, but the primary concern is that once these two surface sources get water supply – either through rains or through dams – the next second onwards continuously these sources seeps, percolates water into the soil to penetrate it into the sub-surface strata to store it as groundwater source.

3. Hence, the groundwater is in one way, the other form of surface source and its judicial use is considered important.

Trends in Sources of Irrigation in Tamil Nadu 1950s to 2000s

1. In TN, canal irrigation declined from 8.0 lakh hec to 7.3 L Hec.

2. Tank irrigation also declined from 7.8 lakh hec to 5.1 L Hec.

3. Well irrigation increased from 5.0 lakh hec to 14.8 L Hec.

4. Overall net irrigated area increased from 21 lakh hec to 27 L Hec. However, NSA increased marginally from 57 to 58 lakh hec.

A TRICKY QUESTION IS: HOW, WELL IRRIGATION HAS BEEN INCREASING?

1. Area under both Canals & Tanks have been declining. These are the main sources for recharging groundwater source.

2. The interesting point is: whether canals / tanks are irrigating or not, it is only secondary, but the primary concern is that once these two surface sources get water supply – either through rains or through dams – the next second onwards continuously these sources seeps, percolates water into the soil to penetrate it into the sub-surface strata to store it as groundwater source.

3. Hence, the groundwater is in one way, the other form of surface source and its judicial use is considered important.

Characteristics of Kaveripakkam, Dusi-Mamandur and Chembarambakkam Tanks --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Technical Details KPT DMT CPT ___________________________________________________________________________________ Number of villages served 14 18 38 Number of sluices 10 4 8 Number of fillings 1 1 1 Number of supply sources 1 3 3 Number of surplus weirs 3 2 2 Depth of tank at FRL (feet) 31 30 24 Original / Present storage capacity at FTL (mcft) 1474 (1100) 1799 3130 (3645) Registered ayacut (acres) 1983 (UDR) 5853 4139 13572 Water Spread area (m.sq.feet) 173 151 275 Free catchment area (sq.miles) 12 12 30 Combined catchment area (sq.miles) 49 116 138 Length of bund (miles) 5 2 6 Length of main channels under all sluices (Kms) 23 36 NA Length of Branch channels under all sluices (Kms) 67 23 NA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: Updated Settlement Registers. FTL = Full Tank Level. Source: PWD Memoirs – KPT, DMT and CPT.

Table 4 District wise net sown, net irrigated and tank irrigated area in Tamil Nadu 2005-06 to 2010-11 (area in hectares)

Sl.No. Districts --> 2005-06 to 2010-11 <-- Col.5/

Col.4*100

Col.5/ Col.3*1

00

No.of Tanks Total Avg.NIA/

tank

Name of river basin

NSA NIA by during 2010-11All Sources Tanks > 40 ha < 40 ha

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1 Sivagangai 114414 83320 68362 82.0 59.7 678 4288 4966 13.8 Manimuthar + PV

2 Ramanathapuram 188216 69657 54897 78.8 29.2 477 1217 1694 32.4 PV + Gundar

3 Pudukkottai 153768 109447 72028 65.8 46.8 660 4791 5451 13.2 Vellar + Cauvery

4 Kancheepuram 130506 116818 65702 56.2 50.3 709 1233 1942 33.8 Palar

5 Kanniyakumari 80791 27677 14350 51.8 17.8 41 2582 2623 5.5 Kodayar

6 Virudhunagar 131454 56746 25608 45.1 19.5 290 707 997 25.7 Vaippar + Gundar

7 Tirunelveli 165992 115841 48717 42.1 29.3 373 1782 2155 22.6 Tambraparani + Chittar

8 Madurai 140217 85523 23022 26.9 16.4 294 1995 2289 10.1 Periyar-Vaigai (PV)

9 Villupuram 337400 234287 55922 23.9 16.6 988 1097 2085 26.8 Ponnaiyar +Gadilam

10 Thiruvannamalai 227378 150643 33214 22.0 14.6 604 1361 1965 16.9 Cheyyar

11 Thoothukudi 177061 40981 8320 20.3 4.7 107 544 651 12.8 Vaippar + Chittar

12 Thiruvallur 115486 90434 14674 16.2 12.7 573 1322 1895 7.7 Ponnai + Cooum

13 Krishnagiri 179956 48502 7686 15.8 4.3 139 1188 1327 5.8 Ponnaiyar

14 Perambalur 154315 47254 5105 10.8 3.3 84 732 816 6.3 Cauvery

Total 2296953 1277131 497606 39.0 21.7 6017 24839 30856 16.1  

% to State Total     94     75 75 75    

15 Dharmapuri 162324 65606 4264 6.5 2.6 89 926 1015 4.2 Ponnaiyar + Chinnar

16 Vellore 193922 96967 5540 5.7 2.9 420 935 1355 4.1 Palar

17 Theni 114858 60033 1423 2.4 1.2 20 130 150 9.5 Suruli + PV

18 Dindigul 235858 105945 6153 5.8 2.6 766 2338 3104 2.0 Kodavanar+Shanmukha

19 Tiruchirappalli 233511 120603 7400 6.1 3.2 115 1652 1767 4.2 Cauvery

20 Thanjavur 206869 168850 321 0.2 0.2 130 298 428 0.7 Cauvery

21 Cuddalore 229157 147988 6179 4.2 2.7 188 404 592 10.4 Cauvery + Vellar

22 Namakkal 170012 70545 318 0.5 0.2 67 192 259 1.2 Vellar

23 Salem 225057 102556 998 1.0 0.4 89 457 546 1.8 Vellar

24 Karur 97602 53035 130 0.2 0.1 18 248 266 0.5 Kodavanar+Shanmukha

25 Coimbatore 344044 202581 1130 0.6 0.3 49 42 91 12.4 Aliyar+Bhavani+Noyyal

26 Erode 252246 150019 167 0.1 0.1 17 681 698 0.2 Bhavani+Noyyal

27 Thiruvarur 172551 148158 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0  

28 Nagapattinam 173545 125992 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0  

29 The Nilgiris 78080 550 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0  

Total 5186589 2896559 531627 18.4 10.3 7985 33142 41127 12.9  

Source: GOTN. Season and Crop Reports of Tamil Nadu, Various Issues. Dept. of Economics & Statistics. Chennai - 6.

Table 5 Size Class and NIA by Tanks and Rainfall in Tamil Nadu:1950-51 to 2010-11Sl No Period Number of Tanks NIA by

Tanks Lakh ha <---- Rainfall in MM --->

>40ha <40ha Total June to Sept

Oct. to Dec.

Jan. to May

June to May

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Normal Rainfall -> As per 2010-11 SCR --> 319 430 159 908

Normal Rainfall -> 61 Years data ------------>     319 457 156 933

1 1950-1 to 1959-60 7008 19125 26132 7.66 329 409 194 932

2 1960-1 to 1969-70 7922 27377 35299 9.12 323 466 151 940

3 1970-1 to 1979-80 8079 29724 37803 8.49 329 475 128 932

4 1980-1 to 1989-90 7251 30804 38054 6.16 320 372 165 856

5 1990-1 to 1999-00 7606 31570 39176 6.21 304 520 118 942

6 2000-1 to 2009-10 7791 32523 40315 5.06 301 487 183 971

Source: GOTN, Season and Crop Reports, Various Issues, Dept. of Economics and Statistics.

Names of Small Water Bodies in the Villages Served by Kaveripakkam Tank, 1913. Sl.no. Name of Village Name of Water Bodies No. of SWBs

1 Kaveripakkam 1. Tamara Kuttai. 1 2 Kondapuram 1. Kandappar Kulam. 2. Nallathanni Kulam. 2 3 Sirukarumbur 1. Krisnan Kasam. 2. Amarapuram Kasam. 3. Ayapadi Kasam. 4. Ocheri Kasam. 4 4 Athipattu 1. Sirukarumbur Kasa Kalvay. 2. Meclean Kalvay. 3. Mamandur Kasam. 4. Vilagam Kasa Kalvay. 4 5 Eralacheri 1. Sitheri Tangal. 2. Isvaran Kulam. 3. Setti Kulam. 4. Nalla Thanni Kulam. 5. Pillaiyar Kuttai. 6. Nanthi- Setti Kuttai. 7. Paracheri Kuttai. 8. Thandu Kuttai. 9. Peria Devi Kuttai. 10. Karai Kuttai. 11. Sundu Kuttai. 11 6 Cheri 1. Nallathanni Kulam. 2. Alli Kulam. 3. Isvarankoil Kulam. 4. Pillaipettai Kuttai. 5. Anniyamman Kuttai. 5 7 Kattalai Wholly a wetland village located adjacent to the foot of KPT. 0 8 Thuraiperumpakkam 1. Pakkiri Kuttai. 2. Vannan Kuttai. 3. Para Vannan Kuttai. 4. Amman Kuttai. 5. Talattiyan Kuttai. 6. Pattan Kuttai. 7. Ayanan Kuttai. 7 9 Maganipattu 1. Divittiyan kulam. 2. Toppu Kuttai. 3. Mangkuttai. 4. Thenginaru Kuttai. 5. Jambu Kuttai. 6. Sangara Kuttai. 7. Elaval Kuttai. 7 10 Alapakkam 1. Pudu Tangal. 2. Isvaran Kulam. 3. Govindan Kulam. 4. Nalla Thanni Kulam. 5.Tamarai Kulam. 6. Paracheri Kuttai. 7. Nirali Kuttai. 8. Vella Kuttai. 9.Pidari Kuttai. 10.Thulukkan Kuttai. 11. Kosavan Kuttai. 12. Mel Kuttai. 13. Munuperumal Kuttai. 14. Andar Kuttai. 15. Ellaitarisu Kuttai. 16. Parayan Kuttai. 17. Ramadas Kuttai. 18. Sudukattu Kuttai. 19. Petta Kuttai. 20. Lingam Kuttai. 21. Muttivettan Kuttai. 21 11 Pudupattu 1. Sitteri Tangal. 2. Kurutu Anichan Tangal. 3. Pudupattu Tangal. 4. Vellalan Kulam. 5. Pillaiyar Kulam. 6. Govindan Kulam. 7. Kosavan Kuttai. 8. Enavayan Kuttai. 9. Mungil Kuttai. 10. Pandaram Kuttai. 10 12 Panniyur 1. Nallathanni Kulam. 2 Palani Mudali Kuttai. 3. Ayakaran Kuttai. 3 Total 75

Source: Descriptive Memoirs of Villages Served by Kaveripakkam Tank, 1913.

<---------- Demographic Pressure ---------->Big Land Lords From To

Multiplicity of tenants (Agre for Survival) Upper LowerTenants became owners

Land to the tiller (Govt's Policy)Devpt of Wells Leads to

Weakening of OrganisationLess cooperation with the Orgn led to

Most non-well farmers got affectedPoor utilisation of available water

Less (yield) Productivity

However, the beneficiaries involvement is totally lacking in the TN-IAMWARM Project now it is nearing completion

Hence a strong organisational set-up is necessary to effectively run the irrigation system

Finally, while attempting on tank modernisation / rehabilitation and any other improvements the Govt / NGO should take into account the socio-economic, demographic and technological transformation that have occurred in the village economies over time. Most importantly the users / beneficiaries should be involved in the Development Process.

CHANGES IN IRRIGATION INSTITUTIONSIncrease in Pop; Land SD; Pattadars

LAND CONTROL CASTE

Landed Community: BR; MR; NR; SC

Difficult to avoid drought; reduce scarcity in surface supply; quality of irrigation

(Assured, adequate & timely supply)

Farmers without depending on tanks are not interested to cooperate

THE IAMWARM PROJECTIrrigated Agriculture Modernisation and Water Bodies Restoration and Management

Objective : More Yield per Drop of Water

Budget & Years: 2200 Crore & 7 Years (2007-2013)

Depts. Involved: 1 Agri. 2 Agl Engg. 3 Agl Marketing. 4 Animal Husbandry. 5 Fisheries. 6 Horti. 7 TNAU & 8 WRD.No. of Tanks to be Rehabilitated : About 5000 in 63 SBs.C-A: Irri. System Modernisation @ SB Framework – 55 % Budget

C-B: Agl. Intensification & Diversification - 32 %

C-C: Institutional Modernization for Irri. Agre - 10 %

C-D: Water Resources Mgt. - 1 %

C-E: Project Management Support - 2 %.

Period: Start – April 1, 2007 and Closing – March 31, 2013.

DEPARTMENT WISE INTERVENTIONS

1 Water resources department (WRD)1 Supply Channel Desiltation 2 Sluices & Surplus Weirs Repair / Reconstruction 3 Strengthening of Tank Bund4 Lining of Field Channels 5 Laying of Boundary Stones 6 All Other Works (model section, steps, measuring

devise, weir shutter and protection wall…)

2 Department of Agriculture (Agri)

1. Introducing modern techniques – SRI, Pulses mission, popularizing oilseeds and so on.

2. Increasing CI, Crop diversification and Productivity.

3. Identification of commodity groups.

4. Capacity building activities.

3 Agricultural Engineering Department (AED)

1. Improving conveyance efficiency of water.

2. Improving Application Efficiency by drip / sprinkler.

3. Improving groundwater recharge through developing farm-ponds.

4. Popularizing agl. Machineries to improve productivity of crops

4 Agricultural Marketing Department (AMD)

1. Ensure market driven profitable crops.

2. Facilitate value addition crops.

3. Improve transport arrangement for marketing of products.

4. Provide cold storage/godowns & ABCs.

5. Identifying & forming commodity groups.

6. Improve market awareness using latest techniques.

5 Animal Husbandry Department (AHD)

1. Upgrading local cattle population.

2. Improving health care of livestock.

3. Nutrient management of animals.

4. Developing entrepreneurship in livestock through training unemployed veterinary graduates.

6 Fisheries Department (DoF)

1. Promoting Pisciculture / Quality fish seed production in Farm Ponds.

2. Promoting sustainable Aquaculture in Irrigation Tanks.

3. Promoting small Ornamental Fish Culture units to increase income.

7 Department of Horticulture (DoH)

1. Crop diversification to HYV & Water Efficient Crops / Techniques.

2. Introducing Hybrid Varieties in Vegetables / Fruits / Spices to increase income

3. Promotion of INM / IPM for sustaining soil health.

4. Promoting Organic Farming

8 Tamil Nadu Agl University (TNAU)1. Promoting large scale adoption of modern / scientific

technologies – SRI, Oilseeds, Pulses to increase PDY.

2. Spreading of Precision Farming / sprinkler / Drip technology to increase yield & save water.

[Tomato in 1 ha yield is 30,000 kg – Normal cultivation.

In Precision farming this yield is 1.5 lakh kg.

In Israel the same is 5 lakh kg. The plant is 16’ high and the crop period is 8-9 months].

3. Popularizing Crop Diversification / Labour saving implements.

4. Promotion of Seed Village Concept (SVC) to produce quality seeds.

Component Wise IAMWARM Project Cost and Expenditure (Figures in Rs. Crores)

Sl. No. Component / DepartmentsProject Cost in Rupees

Expenditure Details

Total Expenditure for the Year 2012-13

(till Dec. 2012)

Cumulative Total for the Project

 Component A – Irrigation Systems Modernization

1 Water Resources Department 1,272 255 1,071Component B – Agl Intensification & Diversification

2 Agriculture Department 98 0.74 573 Agriculture Engineering Dept. 339 4.82 75

4 Agri-business & Agri. Marketing Dept. 93 0.14 28

5 Tamil Nadu Agriculture University 89 6.20 57

6 Horticulture Department 73 0.90 547 Animal Husbandry Department 39 2.03 288 Fisheries Department 17 0.03 9

 Total (Component B) 748 14.87 308Component C (WRD – Institutional Modernization) 237 1.64 38Component D (WRD) – Water Res. Mgt . (SWaRMA) 23 0.68 0.95Component E (MDPU) – Project Mgt. Support 37 3.26 24.39

Total 2,317 311 1,452

Problems and Issues Identified among the WUAs and Depiction made by them During the Training

Name of the WUAs Problems and Issues Identified

1. Koivaneri anicut

WUA

t ha;f ;f hy ; rhp nra;a Nt z ;Lk;. ki l i a J }h;t hw Nt z ;Lk; ki l i a , bj ;J fl ;l Nt z ;Lk; f z ;kha; kz ; t pt rhaj ;J f ;F gad ;gLj ;j Nt z ;Lk;. t uj ;J f ;f hy ;t ha; mi l j ;J K l ;f s ; t s h;e;J s ;s J t uj ;J f ; f hy ;t ha; mf yg;gLj ;j Nt z ;Lk; fi uapy ; kz ;mhpg;G c s ;s J . kPd ;p Vy j ;j hy ; j z ;z Ph; j pwe;J t pLt j py ; rpf ;f y ;.

2. Thailakulam tank

WUA

f z ;kha;f ;F s ; t pt rhak; nra;f pwhh;f s ;. f z ;kha;

j z ;z Pi u gpLq;f p t pLf pwhh;f s ;.

3. Malli Periyakulam Anaithalaiaru & Peyanaru WUA

t uj ;J f ;f hy ;t ha; ePh; t ut py ;i y . gps hl ;

Mf ;f pukpg;i g mf w;wp rhp nra;a Nt z ;Lk;.;

4. Pottakualam anicut & Vasudevanallur tank WUA

F s j ;j py ; c s ;s nrbfi s mf w;Wj y ; 1. ePh;t uj ;J Mw;i w rh;Nt nra;J Mf ;f pukpg;Gfi s

mf w;w Nt z ;Lk; 2. Mw;WePi u Nkhl ;l huhy ; C WQ;Rj y ;.

Name of the WUAs

Problems and Issues Identified

1. Pudukulam

tank WUA

direct

kPd ; F j ;j i fi a ePhpi d gad ;gLj ;J Nt hh; rq;f j ;J f ;Nf muR K O c hpi k t oq;f Nt z ;Lj y ;.

nghJ f ;Fwpg;G Nkw;F nj hl h;;r ;rp ki yg;gF j papy ; c s ;s

%d ;W F s q;f s pd ; c ghp ePh; C hpd ; eLg;gF j papy ; nry ;Y k; f ypq;f yhuhy j w;NghJ rhf ;fi l MW Mf khwp c s ;s J ; mi j Rj ;j k; nra;J me;j ePH; c ghp ePUl d ; f y f ;f hky ; nra;j y ;.

2. Ariyur

Periyakulam

WUA

ehd ;F I e;J Mz ;l hf ki o , y ;yhj f huz j ;j hy ; F s j ;j pd ; c s ;Ns , uz ;L rK j ha f pz W Nj hz ;b gk;G nr l ;L mi kj ;J %d ;W ki l f ;F k; F oha; gj pj ;J f ; nf hLj ;j y ;.

3. Athikulam Senkulam tank Anaithalaiaru and Peyanaru WUA

f hy ;t ha; rPh;j pUj ;j g;gl Nt z ;Lk;. j pUt py ;ypGj ;J }h; ef uhl ;rp f opg;gpl f opTfi s , rhag;gl ;l i w f opTePh;f s t uj ;J f ; f hy ;t hapy ; Nghl ;L %Lf pd ;wd h;.

nrq;F s k; f z ;khapd ; Nkw;F gF j papy ; t PLf s ; fl ;b , l k; Mf ;f pukpg;G nra;f pd ;wd h;.

Name of the WUAs Problems and Issues Identified

1. Indhiraperikulam & Peikulam WUA

f z ;khapy ; mj pf Moj ;j py ; kz ; ms ;s g;-gLf pwJ . ki l f ;F j z ;z Ph; Neuhf t uhi k.

2. Ilanthaikulam Sirukulam WUA

f z ;khapy ; nrq;f y ; R+i s f ;F mD kj p t oq;F j y ;

3. Thirthakkal anicut WUA

f z ;khapy ; c s ;s t pt rha epyq;fi s Mf ;f pukpg;G mf w;Wj y ; mj pf khf c s ;s J .

4. T. Manakaseri tank Anaithalaiaru and Peyanaru WUA

f z ;khapy ; kz ; ms ;S t j w;F mD kj p

murhq;f k; nf hLf ;f t py ;i y

5. Pudukottai tank and Thathaperumalkulam tank WUA

mof hGhp gf ;f K s ;s VIP rpl ;b; c s ;s f z ;kha;f ;F ghj ;j pag;gl ;l f hy ;t hi a Mf ;f pukpg;i g c s ;s J .

f z ;khapy ; j z ;z Phpy ;yh Neuj ;j py ; t pt rhaj ;j pw;F rK j ha f pdW mi kf ;f Nt z ;Lk;

6. Sankanaperi Anicut Direct Ayacut WUA &

Vw;f d Nt 8000 A+dpl ; kz y ; Mw;wpy ; vLj ;j j hy ; epy j ;j b ePh; F i we;J t pt rhak; ghj pf ;f g;gl ;L c s ;s J .

7. Sengulam anicut WUA

ePh;gpbg;G gF j pf s py ; C uhl ;rp F g;i gf i s nj hl ;b t Uf pwhh;f s ;. , j dhy ; ePh;gpbg;G F i we;J t Uf pwJ

Name of the WUAs Problems and Issues Identified 1. Padharankulam &

Chittaru WUA nrq;f y ; R+i s f s ; c gNahf j ;j pw;F kz ;

vLf ;f mD kj p ms pf ;ff ; $ l hJ . 2. Keelachinthamani

Tank WUA rpWki l gOJ nra;J 6 khj k; $ l

Mf t py ;i y . mJ K Oi kAk; rhpe;J t pOe;J t pl ;l J . j z ;z PNu t ut py ;i y .

3. Valaikulam tank, Peyanaru WUA

f ypq;f ypy ; fl e;j IAMWARM Nt i y f s py ; Gj pa , Uk;G mi l g;ghd nra;j hh;f s ;. mJ K w;wpY k; Nr j ki l e;J gi oa kur l ;l h;fi s khl ;b c gNahf pj ;J t Uf pNwhk;. mj py ; epi wa ePh; nt s pNaWf pwJ . kz y ;t hhpapY k; ePh; nt s pNaWf pwJ .

4. Vagaikulam WUA t hi ff ;F s k; f z ;khapy ; c s ;s ePh;gpbg;G gF j papy ; c s ;s j d pahh; Mf ;f pukpg;G kw;Wk; murhq;ff ; fl ;bl k; (mq;f d ;t hb i kak;) mf w;wg;gl Nt z ;Lk;.

1984Mk; t Ul k; UDRapy ; rh;Nt nra;ag;gl ;l j py ; gy ;Nt W F s Wgbf s ; c s ;s J . mi j kWgbAk; hPrh;Nt nra;J c z ;i kahd gl ;l hj huh;f S f ;F ngah; khw;wk; nra;J nf hLf ;f Nt z ;Lf pNwhk;.

5. Manalur Periyakulam and Perunkottur WUA

ePH; gha;r ;Rt j w;F Ms ; Nj i t . ePh;gpbg;G gF j papy ; Mf ;f pukpg;G rq;f j ;j pw;F rpwpa mY t y f k; Nj i t .

Major Problems in Tank Irrigation Reporting Data 1. Most of the available official statistics of tanks are inadequate, inconsistent and incomplete. 2. No clear data on no. of tanks & the area irrigated by them. 3. Regional studies indicate that not much reduction in the ayacut area under tanks; but at macro level – state / national – it is difficult to see the full extent of area irrigated under tanks even in good rainfall years. 4. This raises doubts about the data recording system. 5. No data are available for the quantum of supply available to each tank and the quantum of water utilised from each tank. All available data are merely approximations. 6. Development of well irrigation affects the growth, mainly due to poor functioning of IIs / stability of tank irrigation. So, regulation required. 7. But the tricky point is: all the wells get their supply either from rainfall or from surface water sources, if so, why farmers do not realise this fact and act upon cooperatively to maintain the tanks?

Critical Factors Affecting Tank Irrigation

1. Three important sets of factors: a) PHYSICAL – Location, sources of supply, siltation and weeds in the tank & supply

channels, encroachments in supply channels, foreshore area, tank beds and the catchment area.

b) INSTITUTIONAL – This problem is more severe in recent decades: Social (caste

and class structure); economic (land holding pattern), demographic (population pressure on land); and Political (poor attention, no policy change, lethargic attitude of politicians in many tank related aspects).

c) TECHNICAL – Conditions of water supply; drainage conditions; soil quality, the

spread of well irrigation and so on. 2. Most importantly all these factors do not act in isolation and there is strong inter-connection among them, which complicate the smooth functioning of institutions.

Suggestions for Improvement and Restoration

1. Converting local ponds into full-fledged tanks and non-system tanks into system tanks. 2. A thorough survey of existence of tanks and their present position in the state.

3. Studying the effectiveness of tanks in terms of groundwater banking. That is, the quantum withdrawal

and quantum recharged in each year.

4. To restore the original storage capacity of tanks in the 14 ITI districts, for which suitable no. of bulldozers to be provided by the government to maintain the tanks fully.

5. The GIS to be utilised for tank improvement purpose.

6. The LAWS should be tightened to evict encroachers from all water bodies instantly.

7. To educate the farmers on the importance of tank maintenance, the govt. agencies such as PWD,

Revenue, Forestry, Mining as well as the NGOs should be involved. At present these departments itself are not properly functioning for tank improvement purposes.

8. The government’s effort should be to link the southern peninsular rivers first and then these should be

interconnected to bigger tanks, which must be given priority in the planning process.

Conclusion: The tank improvement programmes undertaken in recent decades have been inadequate in scale, misconceived in design, poor in implementation and dubious in their impact - A. Vaidyanathan – Former Central PC Member. The apt eg for this point still is the currently moving IAMWARM Project in TN. Hence, due importance should be given in the Plan investments for betterment of tank irrigation.

THANK YOUTHANK YOU