Participatory Irrigation Management in Andhra Pradesh E V Murray Faculty Member CAB, Pune

Irrigation Projects Maximum investment has gone into major irrigation projects Basically two types Storage Diversion Dependable flows are calculated Based on this, the command area of the project is decided

Issues in Irrigation Projects There is a very long gestation period in irrigation projects Contract system with packages and slices Depend on budgetary allocations Forest clearance Land acquisition problems Rehabilitation and resettlement issues Focus on head works

Issues in Irrigation Projects Command area development is a very low priority Water budget is drawn on ID crops basis Hierarchy in canals Main canal Distributaries Minors Field channels

Issues in Irrigation Projects Irrigation facility is created over a period of time In early years, the initial reaches get abundant water supply Therefore, farmers in the head reaches start cultivating heavy duty crops Tail reaches and tail ends often just receive a trickle

Problems in Irrigation Management Inadequate water availability at the lowest outlets Poor condition/maintenance of the system Lack of measuring devices and control structures Inadequate allocation for O&M

Problems in Irrigation Management Inequitable distribution of water Lack of incentives for saving water Poor drainage

Problems in Irrigation Management (Issues identified by participants at a national seminar on PIM) The cost of maintaining a departmental structure is huge Majority of the allocation goes to meet salary and establishment costs Patronage and nepotism widely prevalent in the system

Life of Irrigation Projects Projects have a designed life period Therefore, over time they start losing ayacut There is need for continuous maintenance of the system to perform efficiently Cropping patterns and water requirements change over time

AP Model of Participatory Irrigation Management Also called the “big bang” approach as it was conceived and prepared by the bureaucracy or top-down. The AP experience shows that this is a fairly good method of quick implementation through statutory provisions.

The AP Farmers Management and Irrigation Systems Act, 1997 Main objectives To ensure equitable and reliable water supplies To bridge the gap between irrigation potential created and utilized To bring about social audit and water audit in irrigation To enable the department to withdraw from M&O and concentrate on reservoir management and development of new systems

Water Users Associations Elections were held in 17th June 1997, for over 10,000 WUAs Subsequent to the elections, extensive training was provided to government officers and WUA presidents Creation of these institutions has succeeded in providing a forum for expression of the collective demands problems and concerns and as a channel of communication with the government in a systematic manner

Works Taken up by the WUAs Silt clearance of channels Strengthening of embankments Repairs to pipe outlets and drop structures Plugging of breaches Fixing of shutters

Claims of the Government of Impact of PIM 5.12 lakh acres of ayacut has been additionally brought under irrigation SRSP : from 115,000 to 336,000 acres Nizamsagar: from 114,000 acres to 185,000 acres NSP 60,000 acres Increase in yields of crops by 10 to 15 %

Impact of PIM Maintenance of irrigation system after PIM Percentage Same 15 Worse - Distinct Improvement 85

Impact of PIM Change in irrigated area after PIM Percentage Yes 27 No 73

Impact of PIM Change in crop yield after PIM Percentage Yes 11 No 89

Response to PIM from Farmers Prefer dealing with Percentage Department Personnel 28 WUA 60 Indifferent 12

Total Irrigated Area as Reported under Wazirabagh Distributary (SRSP) (in hectares) Year Kharif Rabi Revenue Department Irrigation Department 1998 7467 9352 369 2290 1999 7737 10723 4666 11000

Issues to be addressed Equitable distribution of water ? Charging for water by usage ( volumetric) Payment of water cess Long term sustainability

Have you been paying water dues as per revised rates Response of farmers Percentage Revised rates 15 Old rates 40 Not paying 45