1. Irrigation Management in Command Areas COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING JNKVV Jabalpur

2. Irrigation Efficiency at Field level 61.512.349.2Total 16.53.313.2Field application losses 20.04.016.0Field and Water Courses 8.01.66.4Distributaries 17.03.413.6Main canal and Branches TotalEvaporationSeepageSources of losses

3. Factors affecting Water Use Efficiency Genetic factors –Water use efficiency of C4 plant species such as maize, sorghum, sugarcane, pearl millet, finger miller etc is higher (3.14 to 3.44 mg dry weight/g of water) when compared to C3 species (1.49 to 1.59 mg dry weight/g of water) such as pulses, oilseed crops, wheat, barley, oats etc. Climatic factors Crop management factors Challenges –projected demand of about 450 million tones food grains by 2050. Challenge is therefore to achieve higher food grain production with reduced availability of water.

4. How to Enhance Water Productivity in Irrigated Commands Improving control over water delivery and its potential impact Changes in input use and potential impacts on water productivity Potential impacts of improving quality of irrigation and water allocation Allocating water across regions and productivity gains at the basin level

5. Module 2 V for ADA/ADH and other officers 1.Surface irrigation methods 2.Drip irrigation method 3.Soil moisture measurement, scheduling of irrigation 4.Surface drainage 5.On farm reservoirs and water recycling 6.Participatory Irrigation Management 7.Watershed management 8.Canal distribution network Water Management

6. Extendable Technology Average yield of soybean is rising from 9.8 to 15.9 q/ha (67% increase) An average WUE change from 0.85 to 2.68 kg/cum. This is an increase of 110.7 to 743 %. It was possible by adapting Scientific package of practices Ridge-furrow system of sowing, and Short duration variety of soybean. Maximum rise has been observed with ridge-furrow method of cultivation. Yield (Q/ha)WUE(kg/m 3 ) CropBasinVarietyTechnolo gy Demonst rated Number FPIP% IncreaseFPIP% Increase SoybeanKenJS-97-52,SPP 1012.8018.6045.311.604.13158.33 SoybeanKenJS-97-52 R & F 1013.9021.1051.800.564.69743.33 SoybeanTonsJS-93-05SSP 37.00 12.5078.570.571.45153.32 SoybeanTonsJS-93-05R & F 27.50 14.0086.670.691.63134.42 SoybeanTonsJS-93-05SDV 28.00 13.0062.500.571.20110.65 SoybeanBetwaJS-93-05SPP, SDV 108.10 14.6080.250.622.43290.53 Max13.9021.1086.671.604.69743.33 Min7.0012.5045.310.561.20110.65 AVE9.7815.9367.140.852.68305.57 Soybean : Ridge & Furrow system of sowing, Short duration variety

7. Ridge & Furrow system of sowing in Soybean

8. SRI method in Rice cultivation and change in local variety resulted inSRI method in Rice cultivation and change in local variety resulted in 44 percent rise in average yields and44 percent rise in average yields and 139 percent in WUE.139 percent in WUE. Yield (Q/ha)WUE(kg/m 3 ) CropBasinVarietyTechnol ogy Demon strated Number FPIP % Increas eFPIP % Increase RiceKenMR-219SRI10.0025.0042.0068.000.709.47255.70 RiceTons Pusa basmati-1 SRI5.0017.2022.5030.811.191.9663.80 RiceTons Pusa basmati-1 RV4.0015.3020.5033.991.282.5296.84 Max25.0042.0068.001.289.47255.70 Min15.3020.5030.810.701.9663.80 AVE19.1728.3344.271.064.65138.78 Rice: SRI Method, improved variety

9. SRI Method in Rice Transplanting of 12 days nursery Crop at 35 days age Crop at maturity stage

10. Wheat shows a gain of 37 percent in yield and 69 percent in WUE. Yield (Q/ha)WUE(kg/m 3 ) CropBasinVarietyTechnology Demonstrated Number FPIP % IncreaseFPIP % Increase WheatTonsGW 273SPP,NV 5.0020.00 28.0040.000.811.82124.00 WheatTonsGW 273SPP 5.0022.00 30.0036.360.891.4764.92 WheatKenJW- 366IPT, IS 5.0027.20 37.6038.401.161.4020.63 WheatKenJW- 366SPP 5.0026.50 35.8035.090.911.4660.49 min20.0028.0035.090.811.4020.63 max27.2037.6040.001.161.82124.00 AVE23.8232.8337.490.961.5669.11 Wheat: Improved production technology with irrigation scheduling

11. Due to change in local variety by improved variety the mean yields of vegetables Yield increases by 55 percent WUE increases by 191 percent. Yield (Q/ha)WUE(kg/m 3 ) CropBasinVarietyNumber FPIP%FPIP% TomatoKenNirmal- 960 (Hybrid )STK 10.00137.80 194.7041.293.7418.72399.96 OkraKenNirmal -15(Hybrid )IY 3.00125.00 175.0040.004.875.7217.35 OkraTons F-1Hybrid (Varsa) SPP 8.0065.00 98.0050.772.324.90111.20 TomatoTons F-1Hybrid (Nunhems- 5005) SPP, HV 9.00168.00 290.0072.622.559.67279.76 BrinjalTonsNishi-52SPP, HV 8.00170.00 220.0029.414.2511.00158.82 ChillyTonsVNR-22 (Hybrid)SPP, HV 9.0060.00 95.0058.331.254.75280.00 OkraBetwaSungro S-51SPP, RDF 10.0023.00 40.0073.911.282.2273.91 OkraTons F-1Hybrid (Varsa) SPP, HYV 13.00105.00 160.0052.383.418.66153.97 OnionKenNasik RedIPT 4.0090.00 134.0048.890.611.31114.21 min90.00134.0048.890.611.31114.21 max170.00290.0073.914.8718.72399.96 AVE109.44166.4353.672.717.91191.21 Vegetables: Improved variety

12. Particulars BIJOREE WUA GOVINDGARH WUA BAUCHHAR WUA LocationJabalpurRewaNarsinghpur No. of Minors986 GCA, ha208218401531 CCA, ha10331482200 Comparative Performance of Water User Association Three WUAs Bijori, Bauchar and Govindgarh of Jabalpur, Narsinghpur and Rewa district The aim was to find out the factors responsible for the functioning of Water User Association and its performance To find out the factors responsible for project performance

13. Variation of wheat yields with reach wise water utilization

14. Water productivity at head reach in different WUA's WUA Name Farmer Category Water Productivity (kg/m 3 ) WheatGramPea Bijori WUAMarginal0.31-- Small0.380.97- Medium0.591.88- Large0.521.830.36 Govindgarh WUAMarginal 0.55 -- Small 0.99 1.11- Medium 1.14 1.39- Large 0.81 1.37- Bauchhar WUAMarginal0.31-- Small0.570.64- Medium0.560.70- Large0.510.740.12

15. Water productivity at middle reach in different WUA's WUA NameFarmer Category Water Productivity (kg/m 3 ) WheatGramPea Bijori WUAMarginal0.45-- Small0.50-- Medium0.641.220.14 Large0.442.230.29 Govindgarh WUA Marginal 0.83 -- Small 1.41 1.16- Medium 1.04 0.83- Large 1.30 1.31- Bauchhar WUAMarginal0.49-- Small0.98-- Medium1.200.98- Large1.0610.11

16. Water productivity at tail reach in different WUA's WUA NameFarmer CategoryWater Productivity (kg/m 3 ) WheatGramPea Bijori WUAMarginal0.46-- Small0.580.62- Medium0.521.620.54 Large0.394.180.49 Govindgarh WUAMarginal 0.63 -- Small 1.07 1.86- Medium 1.93 2.11- Large 1.79 2.22- Bauchhar WUAMarginal1-- Small0.830.59- Medium1.32-0.11 Large1.351.200.13

17. Causes of Variation in Water Productivity Evaluation of Project Performance through indicators on  Delivery  Maintenance  Financial  Sustainability Evaluation of WUA Functions Level of participation Operation and management Water management Financial management Organizational

18. Significant findings Water productivity is highest 1.37 kg/m 3 in WUA3 at Govindgarh. due to participation of water users in management The tail-end supply ratio ( 0.67) is also highest Medium farmers normally have GW source and hence apply water at appropriate time thus depicts higher WP WP is lowest in head reach due to over irrigation.

19. Water Productivity of Wheat Under Drip Irrigation Water productivity of drip irrigated wheat was 44.52% more than the flood irrigation Water productivity was found maximum with one lateral in three rows with dripper placed at 30 cm.

20. Thanking You for the cause of water