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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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.

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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 %

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

16. Impact of PIM Change in irrigated area after PIM Percentage Yes 27 No73

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

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

19. 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

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

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