PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF ON-FARM WATER …prr.hec.gov.pk/jspui/bitstream/123456789/940/1/1929S.pdf · 2018-07-17 · Chairman Civil Engineering Department is thankfully acknowledged

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF ON-FARM WATER MANAGEMENT INTERVENTIONS IN

PUNJAB

Year: 2013

ABID LATIF 2005-Ph.D-CIVIL-09

Supervisor

PROF. DR. ABDUL SATTAR SHAKIR

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

LAHORE, PAKISTAN

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF ON-FARM WATER MANAGEMENT INTERVENTIONS IN PUNJAB

Year: 2013

ABID LATIF 2005-Ph.D-CIVIL-09

INTERNAL EXAMINER EXTERNAL EXAMINER (Prof. Dr. Abdul Sattar Shakir) (Prof. Dr. Abdul Razzaq Ghumman) CHAIRMAN DEAN Civil Engineering Department Faculty of Civil Engineering

Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Civil Engineering

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

LAHORE, PAKISTAN

ii

This dissertation was evaluated by the following Examiners

External Examiners:

From Abroad: Prof. Dr. Sucharit Koontanakulvong

Head, Department of Water Resources Engineering,

Faculty of Engineering Chulalongkorn University, Bankok, Thailand.

E-mail: [email protected]

Prof. Dr. Sohail Ahmed Rai

Modelling Expert in Water Resources and Hydrology,

Murray - Darling Basin Authority, GPO Box-1801

Canberra ACT 2601, Australia.


From Pakistan: Prof. Dr. Abdul Razzaq Ghumman

Civil Engineering Department, UET; Taxila.


Internal Examiner:

Prof. Dr. Abdul Sattar Shakir

Civil Engineering Department, UET; Lahore.


iii

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

This humble effort is

DEDICATED TO

MY PARENTS, ESPECIALLY TO MY WIFE

(They always pray for my success)

and

TO ALL MY FAMILY MEMBERS

(Their “you can do it” like remarks always keep me going)

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

All the praises and thanks to the ALMIGHTY ALLAH, the most gracious and merciful,

without HIS blessings I might not be able to put forward this research and humblest and

deepest gratitude to the greatest educator of mankind, the Holy Prophet MUHAMMAD

(Peace be Upon Him).

I would like to express my profound and heartiest gratitude to Professor Dr. Abdul

Sattar Shakir (Dean, Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and

Technology, Lahore) who supervised this research. His knowledge and experience

in this research area made this research a success. The support and

encouragement, he provided, made the years of research with him enjoyable and

memorable.

I would also acknowledge the support provided by Prof. Dr. Muhammad Latif

(Ex-Director, Centre of Excellence in Water Resources Engineering, University of

Engineering and Technology, Lahore) for his resourceful, scholastic and landmark

comments, encouraging attitude and devoted guidance during my doctoral

program.

Encouragement and cooperation provided by Prof. Dr. Muhammad Ilyas

Chairman Civil Engineering Department is thankfully acknowledged. The

technical advice provided by the Programme committee of Hydraulic and

Irrigation Engineering Division particularly of Prof. Dr. Habib-ur-Rehman, Prof.

Dr. Zulfiqar Ali and Prof. Dr. Noor Muhammad Khan.

Special thanks are due to the staff of Directorate General Agriculture, On-Farm

Water Management (OFWM), Punjab and particularly Mr. Mushtaq Ahmad Gill,

Ex-Director General Agriculture for his assistance and support provided in this

study

I am deeply indebted to my colleague Mr. Usman Rashid (Senior Engineer,

National Engineering Services Pakistan, Lahore) who always ensured his

availability for discussion and guidance whenever I needed.

v

I would like to express my deepest thanks to district officers (OFWM) of the

selected districts in rice-wheat cropping zone, Punjab who helped me during

actual hydraulic data measurement and economic data collection of On-Farm

Water Management Interventions.

I am really thankful to Engr. Rana Farooq Shabbir (Head of Department, Civil

Engineering Department, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan) for the

completion of this research which could not have been possible without the

untiring support.

I acknowledge my sincere and whole-hearted gratitude to my beloved parents,

especially to my mother who pray all times for my success, mother in-law (Late),

father in-law, my candor wife, brothers, sisters, Nabeel Javed and kids (M. Anas

Abid, M. Abdullah Abid, M. Taha Abid and Manahil Fatima).

Finally, I would like to appreciate my employer institution, i.e. Bahauddin

Zakariya University Multan, for providing me opportunity, encouragement and

facilitate the accomplishment of Ph.D. I also thank Engr. Tahir Sultan, Engr.

Abdul Bari, Engr. Mudassir Munir, Engr. Tanveer Ahmad, Engr. Mehboob Elahi,

Engr. Safdar Raza, Engr. Azhar Khatab and all other colleagues at BZU, their

constant encouragement made my task easier.

Abid Latif (2013)

vi

ABSTRACT

Water availability and its application affect most crop production activities and hence

become important for sustained crop production in agri-based economy of Pakistan. The

realization among farming community is increasing that On-Farm Water Management

(OFWM) is of prime importance for satisfying the needs of irrigated agriculture and other

related activities. They tend to endeavour to optimize the water supply to their crops

within the limits of their knowledge and the farming practices. The Govt. of the Punjab

initiated the On-Farm Water Management interventions in an organized manner in late

seventies and invested billions of Rupees on various interventions (i.e. lining of

watercourses, laser land levelling, zero tillage and bed-furrow, etc. out of which the major

share was devoted towards lining of watercourses). This study was designed to evaluate

the performance of on-farm water management interventions like watercourse lining,

laser land levelling, zero tillage and bed-furrow. The study area was selected in the rice-

wheat cropping zone of Punjab, Pakistan. Eleven districts were selected from the study

area for the performance evaluation of watercourse lining and Resource conservation

interventions. Sixteen sampled partially lined watercourses were randomly selected in

four districts in Punjab province. The flow rate of each selected watercourse was

measured at three sites along the length of the watercourse, i.e. at the head of lined

section close to the outlet (mogha), at the end of the lined section, and in the unlined

section at a distance equal to length of the lined section.

The average value of conveyance losses in lined and unlined sections of sixteen sampled

watercourses was 0.9 and 1.32 l/sec per 100 m length, respectively. The lowest losses

were found in lined watercourses of Sahiwal district while the highest losses were

observed in case of lined sections of Pakpattan district. The lined watercourses of Sahiwal

district reduced the conveyance losses by 38% whereas the lowest reduction of 27% was

found in the lined watercourses of Pakpattan district. Average reduction of 32% in

conveyance losses was found by partially lining of selected watercourses in the study

area.

vii

The reported number of watercourses in Punjab is 58,770 whereas 43467 have been lined

upto 2010-11. From the results of present study, it is concluded that the partially lining by

30% length has improved the watercourse conveyance efficiency by 10% and average

annual water saving by partial lining (30% length) watercourses in Punjab was estimated

as 4.6 BCM per year.

Apart from augmenting the conveyance efficiency and reducing seepage losses, the lining

of watercourses has significantly augmented the crop yield and farm income of the

farmers. The average crop yield of the fields served by the partially lined watercourses

has been augmented by 11, 12 and 9% for wheat, rice and sugarcane crops, respectively.

Similarly, gross farm income from these crops were higher by 17, 36 and 25%,

respectively

For feasible and sustainable agriculture production, the cost of crop inputs should be

decreased and at the same time the efficiency of resources must be increased. Resource

conservation interventions (RCIs) such as zero tillage (ZT), laser land levelling (LLL),

and bed-furrow (BF) play a key role to achieve these goals. A survey was conducted in

year 2011-12 in ten districts of Punjab for data collection about the agriculture inputs and

outputs of RCIs and conventional irrigation system. The analysis of data revealed that

these interventions have saved significant irrigation water, augmented the crop yield and

enhanced the farm income of the farmers. Irrigation water saved by zero tillage, bed-

furrow and laser land levelling was 49 and 40, 31% per hectare respectively in the

selected irrigated areas. Water productivity was higher for zero tillage (2.02 kg/m3)

followed by bed-furrow (1.59 kg/m3) and laser land levelling (1.58 kg/m3) interventions

as compared to the conventional technique (0.89 kg/m3). Fertilizer use efficiency by laser

land levelling, bed-furrow and zero tillage was 18.19, 17.7 and 19.1% per hectare

respectively as compared to conventional technique (13.98%). Hence, the OFWM

interventions have provided excellent tool for making development towards improving

and sustaining agriculture production, poverty empowerment and ensure food security in

Pakistan and elsewhere under similar socio-environmental conditions.

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Description Page No. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................... V

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................ VII

TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................................IX

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................... XII

LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................... XIV

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................. XVII

1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY ...................................................................................................... 1

1.1.1 Irrigation Water Uses and Water Losses ......................................................................................... 2

1.1.2 On-Farm Water Management Interventions .................................................................................. 4

1.1.3 Tertiary Irrigation System ................................................................................................................ 4

1.1.4 Resource Conservation Interventions (RCIs) ................................................................................... 9

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT .............................................................................................................. 12

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................ 13

1.4 THE STUDY AREA ....................................................................................................................... 14

1.5 NEED FOR THE STUDY ................................................................................................................ 16

1.6 OVERVIEW OF DISSERTATION .................................................................................................... 19

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 21

2.1 IRRIGATION SYSTEM OF PAKISTAN ............................................................................................ 22

2.2 WATER LOSSES IN WATERCOURSES ........................................................................................... 23

2.2.1 Water Losses in Unlined Watercourses ......................................................................................... 23

2.2.2 Water losses in Lined Watercourses ............................................................................................. 36

2.3 LATEST TOOLS FOR ASSESSMENT OF ON-FARM WATER MANAGEMENT INTERVENTIONS ........... 43

2.4 ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF WATERCOURSE LINING ........................................................................ 46

2.5 RESOURCE CONSERVATION INTERVENTIONS ............................................................................. 49

2.5.1 Zero Tillage Intervention ............................................................................................................... 53

2.5.2 Laser Land Leveling Intervention ................................................................................................... 58

2.5.3 Bed-Furrow Intervention ............................................................................................................... 61

2.6 SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................... 64

3. METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION ................................................................. 66

3.1 SITE SELECTION FOR HYDRAULIC DATA ...................................................................................... 67

ix

3.1.1 Site Selection Criteria .................................................................................................................... 67

3.1.2 Distribution of Selected Watercourses ......................................................................................... 68

3.1.3 Site Feasibility Survey .................................................................................................................... 68

3.2 HYDRAULIC DATA COLLECTION .................................................................................................. 70

3.2.1 Flow Measurement ....................................................................................................................... 70

3.2.2 Method of Flow Measurement ..................................................................................................... 71

3.2.3 Flow Measurement in the research Area ...................................................................................... 72

3.2.4 Seepage Loss Measurement .......................................................................................................... 77

3.3. ECONOMIC SURVEY OF WATERCOURSES ................................................................................... 80

3.4. ECONOMIC SURVEY OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION INTERVENTIONS ......................................... 83

3.4.1 Sampling Procedure and Data Collection ...................................................................................... 84

3.4.2 The study area ............................................................................................................................... 85

3.4.3 Economic Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 85

3.4.4 Limitations of Research Method ................................................................................................... 86

3.4.5 Sources of Uncertainty .................................................................................................................. 87

4. HYDRAULIC IMPACTS OF WATERCOURSE LINING ................................................. 88

4.1. CONVEYANCE LOSSES IN WATERCOURSES ................................................................................. 88

4.1.1. Reduction in Conveyance Losses in Khanewal District .................................................................. 88

4.1.2 Reduction in Conveyance Losses in Sahiwal District ..................................................................... 91

4.1.3 Reduction in Conveyance Losses in Okara District ........................................................................ 93

4.1.4 Reduction in Conveyance Losses in Pakpattan District ................................................................. 95

4.2 SEEPAGE LOSSES IN WATERCOURSES ......................................................................................... 98

4.2.1 Seepage Losses in Khanewal District ............................................................................................. 98

4.2.2 Seepage Losses in Sahiwal District ................................................................................................ 99

4.2.3 Seepage Losses in Okara District ................................................................................................. 100

4.2.4 Seepage Losses in Pakpattan District .......................................................................................... 101

4.3 WATER SAVING BY LINING OF WATERCOURSES ........................................................................ 102

4.4 PROPORTIONATE DISTRIBUTION OF WATER CONVEYANCE LOSSES IN LINED SECTIONS ............. 104

4.5 CONVEYANCE EFFICIENCY ......................................................................................................... 107

4.6 OVERALL HYDRAULIC PERFORMANCE ....................................................................................... 109

4.6.1 Separation of Conveyance Losses Components .......................................................................... 109

4.6.2 Average Conveyance Losses ........................................................................................................ 111

4.6.3 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Watercourse Lining ............................................................ 112

4.6.4 Average Irrigation Water Saving by Watercourse Lining ............................................................. 113

4.6.5 Average Conveyance Efficiency of Lined and Unlined Sections .................................................. 114

4.6.6 Irrigation Water Saving in Punjab ................................................................................................ 115

x

5. ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF WATERCOURSE LINING ................................................. 117

5.1 ECONOMICS IMPACTS IN KHANEWAL DISTRICT......................................................................... 117

5.2 ECONOMIC IMPACTS IN SAHIWAL DISTRICT .............................................................................. 123

5.3 ECONOMIC IMPACTS IN OKARA DISTRICT ................................................................................. 127

5.4 ECONOMIC IMPACTS IN PAKPATTAN DISTRICT ......................................................................... 132

5.5 OVERALL ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF WATERCOURSE LINING ........................................................ 137

5.5.1 Impacts of Watercourse Lining on Irrigated Area ....................................................................... 137

5.5.2 Impacts of Watercourse Lining on Cropping Intensity ................................................................ 138

5.5.3 Crop Yield .................................................................................................................................... 139

5.5.4 Gross Crop Value and Gross Crop Income ................................................................................... 141

5.6 COMPARISON OF THE RESULTS WITH OTHER STUDIES .............................................................. 145

6. ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION INTERVENTIONS ...... 147

6.1 TILLAGE COST ........................................................................................................................... 147

6.2 SEED RATE ................................................................................................................................ 148

6.3 IRRIGATION WATER .................................................................................................................. 149

6.4 FERTILIZER ................................................................................................................................ 150

6.5 WEED ERADICATION ................................................................................................................. 151

6.6 IMPACT OF INTERVENTIONS ON INPUTS ................................................................................... 151

6.7 CROP YIELD .............................................................................................................................. 152

6.8 CROPPING INTENSITY ............................................................................................................... 153

6.9 WATER PRODUCTIVITY (WP) ..................................................................................................... 153

6.10 FERTILIZER USE EFFICIENCY (FUE) .............................................................................................. 154

6.11 GROSS AND NET BENEFITS ........................................................................................................ 154

6.12 COMPARISON OF THE RESULTS WITH OTHER STUDIES .............................................................. 156

7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................... 157

7.1 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................................... 157

7.2 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................... 158

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 160

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................ 171

xi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ADB Asian Development Bank

AJK Azad Jamu Kashmir

AOSM Adjustable Orifice and Semi Module

BCM Billion Cubic Meter

CCA Cultivable Command Area

CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research

CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization

CSU Colorado State University

CSUF Colorado State University Faculty

CT Conventional Tillage

FANA Federally Administered Northern Areas

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

FATA Federally Administered Tribal Area

FUE Fertilizer Use Efficiency

FWMC Federal Water Management Cell

FYM Farm Yard manure

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GOP Government of Pakistan

hrs/ha Hours Per Hectare

IBIS Indus Basin Irrigation System

ICT Islamabad Capital Territory

IDB Islamic Development Bank

IFDA International Fund for Agricultural Development

IGP Indo-Gangetic Plains

IWASRI International Water Logging and Salinity Research Institute

IWMI International Water Management Institute

l/sec Litre Per Second

LLL Laser Land Leveling

xii

MAF Million Acre Feet

Mhm Million hectare-meters

MINFAL Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock

MREP Mona Reclamation Experimental Project

NPIW National Program on Improvement of Watercourses

O&M Operation and Maintenance

OECF Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund

OFWM On-Farm Water Management

OSL Operational Supply Level

PAD Provincial Agriculture Department

Pak Pakistan

PARC Pakistan Agricultural Research Council

PERI Punjab Economic Research Institute

PID Provincial Irrigation Department

Rs Rupees

RCIs Resource Conservation Interventions

RWC Rice-Wheat Consortium

RWS Rice-Wheat Cropping System

USAID United States Agency for International Development

USBR United States Bureau of Reclamation

USDA United States Department of Agriculture

WAPDA Water and Power Development Authority

WB World Bank

WM & ED Watercourse Monitoring and Evaluation Directorate

WP Water Productivity

WUE Water Use Efficiency

X-Section Cross Section

ZT Zero-Tillage

FUE Fertilizer Use Efficiency

xiii

LIST OF TABLES

Table No Description Page No. Table 1.1 Worldwide Freshwater Resources and Withdrawals, 2000 (km3/year). .................................... 3

Table 1.2 Water Balance of the Indus Basin irrigation system of Pakistan ................................................ 4

Table 1.3 Target and Achievement of watercourse lining under NPIW Project by the Year 2010 .......... 9

Table 1.4 Definition, advantages and disadvantages of resources conservation interventions. .............. 10

Table 1.5 Comparison of Resource conservation interventions ................................................................. 10

Table 2.1 Steady-state water losses in watercourses ................................................................................... 24

Table 2.2 Different types of losses in ‘sarkari khal’ and farmer’s watercourse ....................................... 25

Table 2.3 Reach-wise (pre-renovation) conveyance efficiency (percent) in OFWM-I and II .................. 26

Table 2.4 Reach-wise conveyance efficiency (pre-renovation) of main watercourses, Rabi 1992-93 (Percent) ......................................................................................................................................... 26

Table 2.5 Reach-wise overall conveyance efficiency (pre-renovation) of main watercourses, Rabi 1992-93. (Percent) ......................................................................................................................... 27

Table 2.6 Impact of watercourse cleaning on conveyance losses (litres/sec/100 m) ................................. 30

Table 2.7 Water Loss Data Summary by Ashraf et al. (1977) .................................................................... 32

Table 2.8 Watercourse average loss rates .................................................................................................... 33

Table 2.9 Unlined watercourse conveyance losses under Canal/ Tubewell water supply ........................ 35

Table 2.10 Seepage Loss Rates from Rectangular Watercourses Built with Soil-Cement Blocks ............ 38

Table 2.11 Performance Evaluation of Lined Test Sections* ...................................................................... 38

Table 2.12 Comparison of Conveyance Efficiency between Pre and Post Lining for OFWM-I Project (Percent) ........................................................................................................................... 40

Table 2.13 Comparison of Conveyance Efficiency between Pre and Post Lining for OFWM-II Project (Percent) ........................................................................................................................... 40

Table 2.14 Pre and Post-Lining Performance of watercourses under IFAD and USAID Projects .......... 41

Table 2.15 Reduction in Water Losses by Lining under USAID and IFAD Projects ................................ 41

Table 2.16 Conveyance losses at pucca improved watercourse ................................................................... 42

Table 2.17 Conveyance losses at earthen improved watercourse ................................................................ 42

Table 3.1 Distribution of the selected watercourses in each district .......................................................... 69

Table. 3.2 Computation of flow rate from lined watercourse ..................................................................... 76

Table 3.3 Description and basic data of the ponded reach ......................................................................... 80

Table 3.4 Calculation of seepage losses from lined and unlined sections of a watercourse ..................... 80

Table 3.5 Detail of the Farmers who were interviewed during survey in different districts for RCIs ... 85

Table 3.6 Distribution of farms area by different RCIs in Punjab ............................................................ 86

Table 4.1 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Khanewal District. ............... 88

Table 4.2 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Sahiwal District. ................... 91

Table 4.3 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of Watercourses in Okara District. .................... 93

Table 4.4 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Pakpattan District. ............... 95

xiv

Table 4.5 Seepage losses from lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Khanewal District. ......... 98

Table 4.6 Seepage losses from lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Sahiwal District. ............. 99

Table 4.7 Seepage losses from lined and unlined Sections of channels in Okara District. ..................... 101

Table 4.8 Seepage losses from lined and unlined Sections of channels in Pakpattan District. .............. 102

Table 4.9 Average water saving by partial lining of the watercourses. ................................................... 115

Table 5.1 Average Irrigated Areas of the Watercourses and Water Allowance in Khanewal District .......................................................................................................................................... 118

Table 5.2 Average Yield of Wheat, Rice and Sugarcane of the fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in Khanewal District ........................................................................................... 120

Table 5.3 Average Gross Value of the Selected Crops of the fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses in Khanewal District ........................................................................................... 121

Table 5.4 Average Cost of Tubewell Water used on fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses for a Crop Season in Khanewal District ........................................................... 121

Table 5.5 Average Gross Income of the Three Crops of fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses in Khanewal district ........................................................................................... 122

Table 5.6 Average Irrigated Areas of the Watercourses and Water Allowance in Sahiwal District ... 123

Table 5.7 Average Yield of Wheat, Rice and Sugarcane of the fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in Sahiwal district ............................................................................................... 125

Table 5.8 Average Gross Value of the Selected Crops of the fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in Sahiwal District .............................................................................................. 125

Table 5.9 Average Cost of Tube well Water used on fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses for a Crop Season in Sahiwal District ............................................................... 126

Table 5.10 Average Gross Income of the Three Selected Crops on the fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses in Sahiwal District ................................................................................. 126

Table 5.11 Average Irrigated Areas of the Watercourses and Water Allowance in Okara District ...... 127

Table 5.12 Average Yield of Wheat, Rice and Sugarcane of the fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in Okara District ................................................................................................. 129

Table 5.13 Average Gross Value of Selected Crops of the Lands Served by lined and unlined Watercourses in Okara District: ................................................................................................ 130

Table 5.14 Average Cost of Tubewell Water used on the fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses for a Crop Season in Okara District ................................................................. 131

Table 5.15 Average Gross Income of Three Selected Crops on fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses in Okara District ................................................................................................. 131

Table 5.16 Average Irrigated Areas of the Watercourses and Water Allowance in Pakpattan District .......................................................................................................................................... 133

Table 5.17 Average Yield of Wheat, Rice and Sugarcane Crop of the fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in Pakpattan District ............................................................................ 134

Table 5.18 Average Gross Value of the selected three Crops under Lined and Unlined Watercourses in Pakpattan District .......................................................................................... 135

Table 5.19 Average Cost of Tubewell Water used on the fields under Command of lined and unlined Watercourses for a Crop Season in Pakpattan District ............................................. 135

Table 5.20 Average Gross Income of the Three Selected Crops Grown on fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses in Pakpattan District............................................................................. 136

xv

Table 5.21 Average Irrigated Areas of the channels in different districts ‘With’ and ‘Without’ Lining of the Watercourses ........................................................................................................ 138

Table 5.22 Average Crop Yield on fields Served by Lined and Unlined watercourses in the study area ............................................................................................................................................... 140

Table 5.23 Average Gross Value of Selected Crops from fields Served by lined and unlined watercourses in the study area during the Year 2011 .............................................................. 141

Table 5.24 Average Cost of Tubewell Irrigation per Crop Season on fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in the study area (Punjab) during the Year 2011 .............................. 143

Table 5.25 Aggregate Gross income of Wheat, Rice and Sugarcane Crops is grown on fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in the study area during the Year 2011 ....................... 144

Table 5.26 Comparison of results with other studies .................................................................................. 145

Table 6.1 Number of Ploughing and Planking for wheat Fields .............................................................. 147

Table 6.2 Soil preparation and sowing costs (Rs. per ha) ......................................................................... 148

Table 6.3 Sowing dates and average seed rate (kg per ha) for wheat crop ............................................. 149

Table 6.4 Total Depth of Irrigation and water saved for wheat crop (2011-12) ..................................... 150

Table 6.5 Average fertilizer use for wheat crop (2011-12) under different interventions (kg per ha) .. 150

Table 6.6 Weed eradication and use of herbicide for wheat crop ............................................................ 151

Table 6.7 Impact of different Interventions on Inputs (Rs. per ha). ........................................................ 152

Table 6.8 Yield of wheat crop (2011-12) on the sample farms ................................................................. 152

Table 6.9 Water productivity of wheat crop on sample farms (2011-12) ................................................ 154

Table 6.10 Fertilizer use efficiency of wheat crop on sample farms (2011-12). ........................................ 154

Table 6.11 Total Cost of production, Gross Benefits and Net Benefit for wheat by various interventions (Rs per ha) ............................................................................................................ 155

Table 6.12 Comparison of results with other studies .................................................................................. 156

xvi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No Description Page No. Figure 1.1 A Typical Layout of Watercourse Command Area ..................................................................... 6

Figure 1.2 Indus River System of Pakistan ................................................................................................... 15

Figure 1.3 Study Area in Punjab Province, Pakistan ................................................................................... 17

Figure 3.1 Comparison of Flow Measurement by Current Meter and V-Notch ....................................... 72

Figure 3.2 Current Meter with Graduated Staff Rod, Digital Display and Turbo- Flow Sensor ............ 74

Figure 3.3 Velocity measured along the watercourse by digital flow current meter ................................. 75

Figure 3.4 Mean-Section Method in Lined Watercourses ........................................................................... 75

Figure 4.1 Conveyance Losses in lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Khanewal District. ..... 89

Figure 4.2 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Khanewal District ................ 89

Figure 4.3 Conveyance Losses in lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Sahiwal District .......... 91

Figure 4.4 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Sahiwal District .................... 92

Figure 4.5 Conveyance Losses in lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Okara District. ........... 94

Figure 4.6 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Okara District ...................... 95

Figure 4.7 Conveyance Losses in lined and Unlined Sections of watercourses in Pakpattan District. .... 97

Figure 4.8 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Pakpattan District ............... 97

Figure 4.9 Seepage Losses in lined and unlined watercourses in Khanewal District ................................ 98

Figure 4.10 Seepage Losses in lined and unlined channels in Sahiwal District. ......................................... 100

Figure 4.11 Seepage Losses in lined and unlined watercourses in Okara District. ................................... 101

Figure 4.12 Seepage Losses in lined and unlined watercourses in Pakpattan District. ............................. 102

Figure 4.13 Proportionate Distribution of Water Conveyance Losses in lined watercourses, Khanewal District ....................................................................................................................... 104

Figure 4.14 Proportionate Distribution of Water Conveyance Losses in lined watercourses, Sahiwal District .......................................................................................................................................... 104

Figure 4.15 Proportionate Distribution of Water Conveyance Losses in lined channels, Okara District .......................................................................................................................................... 105

Figure 4.16 Proportionate Distribution of Water Conveyance Losses in lined watercourses, Pakpattan District ....................................................................................................................... 105

Figure 4.17 Conveyance Efficiency of lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Khanewal District .......................................................................................................................................... 107

Figure 4.18 Conveyance Efficiency of lined and unlined Sections of channels, Sahiwal District ............. 108

Fig. 4.19 Conveyance Efficiency of lined and unlined Sections of channels, Okara District ............... 108

Figure 4.20 Conveyance Efficiency of lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Pakpattan District .......................................................................................................................................... 109

Figure 4.21 Average Proportion of water losses in lined and unlined watercourses in the study area .... 110

Figure 4.22 Average conveyance losses in lined and unlined sections of channels in the study area ....... 111

Figure 4.23 Average percent reduction in conveyance losses by partial lining of watercourses in the study area ..................................................................................................................................... 112

xvii

Figure 4.24 Average percent irrigation water saving by partial lining (30%) of watercourses in the study area ..................................................................................................................................... 113

Figure 4.25 Average conveyance efficiency of lined and unlined sections of watercourses in the study area. .............................................................................................................................................. 114

Figure 5.1 Average Cropping Intensity of the fields ‘With’ and ‘Without’ Lining of their Watercourses in Khanewal District ........................................................................................... 119

Figure 5.2 Average Difference in Crop Income from fields Served by Lined Watercourses compared to the Unlined Watercourse in Khanewal district .................................................. 122

Figure 5.3 Average Cropping Intensity of fields ‘With’ and ‘Without’ Lining of their Watercourses in Sahiwal District ....................................................................................................................... 124

Figure 5.4 Average Difference in Crop Income fields served by Lined Watercourses Compared to the Unlined Watercourse in Sahiwal district ............................................................................ 127

Figure 5.5 Average Cropping Intensity of fields ‘With’ and ‘Without’ Lining of their Watercourses in Okara District ......................................................................................................................... 129

Figure 5.6 Average Difference in Crop Income fields served by Lined Watercourses Compared to the Unlined Watercourse in Okara District .............................................................................. 132

Figure 5.7 Average Cropping Intensity of fields ‘With’ and ‘Without’ Lining of their Watercourses in Pakpattan District ................................................................................................................... 134

Figure 5.8 Average Difference in Crop Income from fields Served by Lined Watercourses compared to an Unlined Watercourse in Pakpattan District .................................................. 137

Figure 5.9 Average Increase in Cropping Intensity by Lining 30 percent Length of watercourses in the study area. ............................................................................................................................. 139

Figure 5.10 Average Proportion of canal and Tubewell Irrigations for Wheat, Rice, and Sugarcane Crops on fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in the study area .................... 142

Figure 6.1 Cropping Intensity (%) of Rabi season (2011-12) .................................................................... 153

xviii

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Pakistan lies between 24º to 37º north latitude and 61º to 75º east longitude in southern

Asia. Total area of the country is 796100 km2 and it extends approximately 1400 km in

length and 500 km in width. Pakistan is situated in the semitropical zone and its climate is

mostly semi-arid. Average annual rainfall is 495 mm, most of which falls in monsoon

season. The total population of the country is 173.2 million and approximately 64% of the

population lives in rural areas and their occupation continue to be around agriculture and

related activities (FAO, 2010). The total cultivated area of the country is about 22 million

hectares and 87% of the area (approximately 19 million hectares) is irrigated by surface

and groundwater resources. In Punjab, total land area is approximately 20.6 million

hectares, out of which 11 million hectares (53%) is cultivated (Agri. Statistics, 2008).

Pakistan has two main cropping seasons, i.e. summer season (Kharif) begins in April and

ends in October and winter season (Rabi) begins in October and ends in April. Wheat,

gram and barley are the main Rabi crops, whereas rice, sugarcane, cotton and maize are

Kharif crops.

The Indus River and its tributaries are the vital source of surface water in the Indus Basin

irrigation system (IBIS) of Pakistan. Its average annual flow is approximately 175 BCM

(142 MAF) of surface water annually in which about 128 BCM (104 MAF) is diverted to

the canal for irrigation. Approximately 43 BCM (35 MAF) flows to the sea, 44 BCM (36

MAF) is lost as conveyance losses which include seepage, evaporation, leakage and spills

during floods and 3.7 BCM (3 MAF) is wasted by the transmission losses in rivers

(WAPDA, 2002). The flows of the Indus and its tributaries vary widely within the year

and from year to year.

The Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS) includes barrages, main canals, branch canals,

distributary canals, minor canals and watercourses. It is a perennial irrigation system with

minimum human interactions. The water flows continuously in the irrigation canals when

appropriate flow is available in the river and there is requirement for the water. The water

1

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

is diverted for on-farm irrigation from the distributary or minor canals to the watercourses

through outlets locally called ‘moghas’. The outlet may be simply a non-modular

submerged pipe or an adjustable orifice semi-module (A.O.S.M.). The discharge rate of

the outlet is designed according to the command (irrigated) area served by the channel.

The watercourse is a main channel locally called ‘sarkari khal’, which is operated and

maintained by the water users and the ‘sarkari khal’ conveys water to a further

distribution system of field channels and ditches which are constructed and managed by

the farmers to irrigate their fields. The water is supplied to the farmers on rotation of

seven days (called ‘warabandi’). Each farmer acquires water assigned to his land for a

specific time period proportionate to the size of his land holding. The operation and

maintenance (O&M) of main canals and distributaries are responsibility of the Provincial

Irrigation Departments (PIDs) whereas O&M of watercourse is the responsibility of the

water users. The canal system of the IBIS consists of 12,676 km of main and branch

canals (primary irrigation system), 38,884 km of distributary and minor canals (secondary

irrigation system) and 122,268 numbers of watercourses in which 58770 numbers of

watercourses lie in Punjab Province (Bhutta and Ahmad, 2006). The length of the

watercourses varies according to size of the command area and it may vary from one to

three km in length. The primary and secondary canals are mostly unlined. Approximately

72% of the watercourses in the IBIS had some lining involving approximately 15 and

30% of their lengths in fresh and saline groundwater regions, respectively (FWMC,

2010).

1.1.1 Irrigation Water Uses and Water Losses

Worldwide, 7,130 cubic kilometre of water is used in agriculture; 20% is available from

blue water (water from rivers, lakes, reservoirs and aquifers) whereas 80% is directly

from green water (rainwater). Worldwide freshwater withdrawals are assessed as 3,830

cubic kilometres, of which approximately 2,664 cubic kilometres (70%) is used in

farming as given in Table 1.1. The net evapotranspiration supplied to crops is about 1,570

cubic kilometres, whilst the remainder of the 7,130 cubic kilometres is attained directly

from rain (IWMI, 2007). Approximately 1,000 cubic kilometres (25 to 30%) of the 3,830

cubic kilometres of freshwater are drawn from groundwater which is used both for

irrigation and drinking. The water demand in municipal and industrial sectors including

2


energy generation is growing faster than the demand for farming. The augmented demand

of water from these sectors may reduce the farm share of freshwater resources in coming

years. About 70% irrigated land of the world lies in Asia, where it accounts for

approximately 35% of cultivated land. More than fifty percent of the Asian irrigated area

falls under India and China which have great population densities and depend on irrigated

farming to augment agricultural production to confirm their food security.

Table 1.1 Worldwide Freshwater Resources and Withdrawals, 2000 (km3/year).

Zone

Total

freshwater

withdrawal

Freshwater Withdrawals Withdrawal

as share of

Renewable

resources

Renewable

freshwater

resources

Agriculture Municipalities Industry

Amount Share

(%) Amount

Share

(%) Amount

Share

(%)

Africa 217 186 86 22 10 9 4 5.5 3936

Latin

America 252 178 71 47 19 26 10 1.9 13477

Asia 2378 1936 81 172 7 270 11 20.5 11594

Caribbean 13 9 68 3 23 1 9 14.4 93

Oceania 26 19 72 5 18 3 10 1.5 1703

North

America 525 203 39 70 13 252 48 8.4 6253

Europe 418 132 32 63 15 223 53 6.3 6603

World 3830 2664 70 381 10 785 20 8.8 43659

Source: IWMI. (2007)

Pakistan with its limited water resources irrigates approximately 6.6% of the world

irrigated area (Bhatti, 2009) by using surface and groundwater resources. During the

current century, The Indus Basin irrigation System comprised of three major dams

(Tarbela, Mangla and Chashma), which accommodate 10% of the flow of Indus River.

The other irrigation infrastructure comprises 17 barrages, 12 inter-river link canals, 45

main canal systems with the aggregate length of main canals is 56,059 km, 122,268

watercourses and more than 600,000 tubewells (Asrar et.al, 2008). The large contiguous

irrigation system of the Indus Basin loses about 60 and 32.6% of the surface and

groundwater resources within the system respectively as the water flows from its source

to the irrigated field and 28% application losses in the field (FWMC, 2010). The water

3


balance of the Indus Basin irrigation system of Pakistan is given in Table 1.2. The water

losses are computed as percent of the volume at the head of each irrigation unit.

Table 1.2 Water Balance of the Indus Basin irrigation system of Pakistan

Location At Head (BCM) Water losses

Percent (BCM) (i) Canal Diversions Canals 129.6 15.0 19.4 Distributaries 109.8 8.0 8.8 Watercourses (Sarkari) 101.0 17.3 17.5 Watercourses (Farmers) 83.5 12.0 10.0 Fields 73.5 30.0 22.0 Crop Use 51.5 (ii) Tubewells Watercourses (Farmers) 61.5 10.0 6.2 Fields 55.4 25.0 13.8 Crop Use 41.6

Total 97.7 Source: Bhutta and Ahmad 2006.

1.1.2 On-Farm Water Management Interventions

Water management is an art to manage the available water resources in the best possible

manner and on-farm water management is the manipulation of water within the borders of

an individual farm. The major interventions made in the last four decades for on- farm

water management in Punjab are:

Watercourses lining

Zero tillage

Laser land levelling

Bed-furrow

1.1.3 Tertiary Irrigation System

The conveyance channel which carries water from an outlet on a minor or distributary

canal to the agricultural fields of farmers is called watercourse. It is locally termed as

‘sarkari khal’, in the canal irrigation system of Punjab, Pakistan. It is commonly a

partially lined (15-30%) channel that runs within the borders of the command area

marked by the Provincial Irrigation Department (PID). Its construction, operation and

4


maintenance are the responsibility of the farmers of the designated command area who

have the right to use its water. The PID decides width and alignment of the right of way

of the watercourse. As it is a community operated channel used by the beneficiaries, thus,

it is a property of all the stakeholders (farmers), yet belongs to no one. However, within

the specified command area, each farmer has a legal access to the water and which cannot

be denied any other farmer or official. The discharge and size of the watercourse is

directly proportional to the size of the command area to be irrigated. A watercourse, in

Pakistan, commonly commands an area from 80 to 320 ha, regardless of the number of

beneficiaries or farmers. Mostly, the number of water users in a watercourse command

area varies from one to more than 150. The water flows continuously in the watercourse

throughout the year except during the canal closure period. Within the command area of

tertiary irrigation system, water is generally distributed to the farmers on a weekly

rotation. The water passes through the outlet to the ‘sarkari khal’ which conveys the

water to a system of field channels and field ditches which are constructed and

maintained by the farmers to irrigate their individual fields. A typical layout of

watercourse network is shown in Fig. 1.1.

(a) Canal outlet

An outlet is a brickwork structure through which water is conveyed from the

distributary/minor canal to the ‘sarkari khal’ or watercourse. It is a hydraulic structure

which is designed and constructed by the PID according to the water requirement of the

command area. It also acts as flow measuring device and has a great importance in water

allocation and equity along the minor /distributary canal. The outlet is designed so that it

draws its sanctioned share of water continuously without intervention of other farmers or

any government officials and also it cannot be easily tampered. There are three types of

outlets (moghas) which are used for water distribution in watercourse system namely:

(i) Non-modular outlet.

(ii) Flexible modules or Semi modules.

(ii) Rigid modules.

5


Figure 1.1 A Typical Layout of Watercourse Command Area

(b) Water losses in watercourses

The performance of tertiary irrigation system plays a key role in economy of Pakistan.

Approximately, 26% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and 80% of the foreign exchange

of the country depends on the agriculture sector. The irrigated agriculture in the country

comprises approximately 87% of the cultivated area by using various sources of water.

The water conveyance system, arranged and developed by the farmers within the tertiary

irrigation network, is used to carry the irrigation water (surface/ groundwater) to the point

of application (farm-gate). It is assessed that more than 1.6 million kilometre of

watercourse and field channels are in use in the tertiary irrigation system of Pakistan

(WAPDA, 2002). Approximately 72% of the watercourses are partially lined to the extent

of 30 and 15% of their length in saline and fresh groundwater regions, respectively. The

6


field ditches are completely unlined which are constructed and maintained by the farmers

in their farms for the purpose of conveying irrigation water to their cultivated fields.

A major part of irrigation water is lost in the unlined conveyance system of the main

tertiary unit. Many studies have concluded that water loss generally varies from 25 to

65% of the available discharge at the outlet (FWMC, 2004). The common types of water

losses observed in the unlined watercourses in Pakistan include: absorption losses,

seepage losses, leakage losses, spillage losses, channel breaches and dead storage (Trout

and Bowers, 1981).

The unlined watercourses are usually poorly maintained due to poor association and weak

linkages between the irrigators. Cleaning and maintenance of the watercourses is

conducted as and when required. The main reason of the water losses in Pakistan’s

tertiary unit is the poor maintenance of the watercourses which includes:

More silt deposition resulting from delayed cleaning.

More weeds growth in the watercourses causing hindrance in water flow and

overtopping of (watercourse) the banks.

Variable cross section of the channels due to poor workmanship during cleaning

process.

Narrow fragile watercourse banks due to cutting by adjacent farmers who are

violating on the channel right of way.

Damages by animals and unplugged rodent holes.

The history of water losses in the tertiary unit of IBIS is as ancient as the beginning of

gravity flow (canal irrigation) in the subcontinent. Water losses in the watercourses of the

Punjab, were first indicated in 1881 by Kennedy (Government of Punjab, 1987).

However, the significance and magnitude of water loss in the tertiary irrigation system

was introduced in the early seventies when the Colorado State University Faculty (CSUF)

was hired through the USAID (United States Agency for International Development) to

support Pakistani Agencies in the improvement of water management. The CSUF started

research on the subject in 1972 in collaboration with Mona Reclamation Experimental

Project (MREP), a research unit of WAPDA (Water and Power Development Authority)

Pakistan. A sample of 40 unlined watercourses was selected for water loss study at head,

7


middle and tail reaches. The research team found that the conveyance losses in the sample

‘sarkari khals’ (watercourses) were in the range of 33 – 65% with an average value of

approximately 47% (Skogerboe, 1996).

The joint research team had analysed the data at the end of 1975 and indicated the major

prospects for improving irrigation water management within the watercourse command

areas. The team proposed the following activities for the improvement of the irrigation

performance at tertiary level (Early et al., 1976):

(i) Watercourse lining and earthen Improvement i.e. Rehabilitation.

(ii) Installation of shallow tube wells.

(iii) Precision land levelling.

(iv) Effective Water and Agriculture Management technical support.

(v) Establishment of local institutions (Water Users Associations) to support and

initiate the improvement program.

(c) Lining of watercourses in Pakistan

The Government of Pakistan, in 1976-77, launched the On-Farm Water Management

(OFWM) Pilot Project, in all the four provinces, to carry out the recommendations of the

CSUF & MREP study investigation teams on water losses in watercourses. The USAID

financed the pilot project which initiated in July 1976 and continued to June 1981.

Approximately 1500 watercourses were reconstructed under this project. The

rehabilitation comprised earthen improvements of the ‘sarkari khals’ under the

supervision and guidance of the project technical staff and lined approximately 10% of

the length of the improved watercourses at their head sections. After successful

accomplishment of the pilot project, the World Bank gave loan for the OFWM-I in July

1981. Subsequently, a series of watercourse rehabilitation programs were initiated in

Pakistan with the aid of: Asian Development Bank (ADB), World Bank (WB), Islamic

Development Bank (IDB) and Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund (OECF) Japan.

Under these rehabilitation programs approximately 28% of the watercourses in the

country were improved. Fifteen percent of watercourse lengths were lined in regions

where groundwater was fresh, while 30% of watercourse lengths were lined in saline

groundwater regions. Recently, in year 2004, the government of Pakistan launched a

watercourse rehabilitation program under the name of “National Program for

8


Improvement of Watercourses in Pakistan (NPIW)” which is in progress. The NPIW

Project objective was to rehabilitate all (86,000) of the unimproved watercourses by the

end of June 2008, but it is still in progress. The country level implementation and

progress of all the OFWM Projects was compiled and monitored at the Federal Water

Management Cell (FWMC) Islamabad, established under the Ministry of Food,

Agriculture and Livestock (MINFAL). The region-wise target achievement (FWMC,

2010) of the watercourse rehabilitation work under NPIW project is summarized in Table

1.3.

Table 1.3 Target and Achievement of watercourse lining under NPIW Project by the Year 2010

Regions Target (Numbers) Achievements (Numbers)

Achievements (percent)

Punjab 30000 19276 64 Khyber Pakhtun Khwa 10000 11559 115 Sindh 29000 18566 64 Balochistan 13466 13132 98 FATA 1600 645 40 AJK 1000 340 34 FANA 600 416 69 ICT 337 175 52 Total 86003 64109 74.5

1.1.4 Resource Conservation Interventions (RCIs)

In the post green revolution period, decreasing productivity, reduction of natural resource

base and high cost of inputs for crop production in the irrigated agriculture systems of the

country are the key issues of concern. Use of resource conservation interventions (RCIs)

for enhanced crop yield and resource use efficiency has great potential in the intensively

irrigated farming areas of the country. RCIs have been shown to improve water

management, crop growth and productivity. With RCIs, substantial savings in irrigation

water, enhance in cultivated area, improved efficiency of inputs, higher crop yields,

decreased cost of weeding and better operational efficiency can be achieved. Acceleration

of RCIs and evaluating its impact require immediate attention.

Resource conservation interventions definition, advantages and disadvantages are

summarized in Table 1.4, whereas, the comparison of three RCIs under different

circumstances is given in Table 1.5.

9


Table 1.4 Definition, advantages and disadvantages of resources conservation interventions.

Interventions Definition Advantages Disadvantages Zero tillage (ZT)

The cultivation intervention in which soil is disturbed only in the hole or slit where seed is to be planted.

• Conserve moisture. • Earlier sowing of crop possible. • Decrease erosion. • Use less labour. • Consume less fuel. • Augment soil organic matter.

• Require a zero tillage planter.

• Rely on herbicides for weed control.

• May cause soil compaction in upper soil zone.

Laser land levelling (LLL)

Laser levelling is a process of smoothing the land surface (± 2 cm) from its average elevation using laser-equipment.

• A leveled surface leads to uniform soil moisture distribution, resulting in good germination, increased input use efficiency and improved crop yield.

• Laser leveling allows for control of water distribution with negligible water losses.

• Laser leveling improves irrigation efficiency and reduces the potential for nutrient loss through better irrigation distribution efficiency and less runoff, if any.

• Land leveling reduces weed, pest, and disease problems.

• Leads to reduced consumption of seeds, fertilizers, chemicals and fuel.

• High cost of the laser instrument.

• Need for skilled operator to adjust laser settings and operate the tractor.

• Less efficient in irregular and small sized fields.

Bed - furrow (BF)

It is a process in which the field is divided into narrow strips of raised beds / ridges separated by furrows. The crops are planted on the bed surface and irrigation water is applied through the furrows.

• Saving of approximately 30% irrigation water.

• Less reduced chances of plant submergence due to excessive rain or over-irrigation.

• Lesser crusting of soil around plants and therefore, more suitable for saline and sodic soils.

• Adaptable for various crops without changing basic design / layout of farm.

• Increased fertilizer use efficiency due to local application.

• It needs land grading so as water can travel the entire length of furrow without ponding.

• It needs continual slope by removing low and high spots.

• It is not suitable to all crops.

Table 1.5 Comparison of Resource conservation interventions

Circumstances Interventions

Zero tillage Laser land levelling Bed- furrow

Topography

Plane regions - Best because economical w. r. t. levelling

-

Low-lying regions - -

more preferable for Low- lying regions with weak drainage system

Soil type Silt clay loam Best because well drained and no - -

10


salinity

sandy soil Best due to soil is already loose - -

saline and sodic soil - -

Best because negative effects of salinity can be avoided

Dominant irrigation method

Surface/flood irrigation method

- Best because water is uniformly distributed -

Furrow irrigation method

- - Best because 45% water saving

Crop type

Sugarcane - Best due to equal distribution of fertilizer and water

-

wheat

Best due to less sowing time, decreasing weed infestation

- -

cotton - - best furrow crops

Economy

Best due to the reduced number of tillage operations prior to seeding and reduced number of irrigations.

- -

Water logged region - - Best because furrows performs as drainage channels

Fertilizer use efficiency (FUE) - - Best due to light irrigation and top dressing on bed.

Crop yield - Best because maximum land use intensity than others

-

Water use efficiency (WUE) - -

Best because water is applied in furrow only and not to the entire field

weed control

Best because less soil disturbance which could not help to germinate the weed seed.

-

Timely/Early sowing Saving in water

Best due to sowing is completed within 2 weeks.

-

Saving in water - Best because 45% water saving

Moisture conservation

Best because of better infiltration of surface water and reduction of surface evaporation

- -

11


1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Irrigated Agriculture is the mainstay of Pakistan’s economy as it is the single major sector

that contributes more than twenty percent of the GDP. Profitable farming and

sustainability of agriculture sector is highly dependent on irrigation water. The efficiency

of the resources must be increased and at the same time the cost of production (inputs)

needs to be lessened. For this, On-farm water management interventions like watercourse

lining, zero tillage, laser land levelling and bed-furrow play a vital role to attain these

objectives. Irrigation water is the basic input for the agricultural growth; therefore, it

should be available to the farmers in time with sufficient quantity and good quality.

Unfortunately, due to water scarcity and water losses, surface water resources only meet

30-40% of the crop water requirement. A huge amount of surface water is lost in the

conveyance system of primary and secondary canals (22% of canal withdrawals) and

another 40% (FWMC, 2004) of the available water below outlet is lost in the

watercourses. The seepage losses from main canals could be decreased by hard lining of

the canals but now it is unviable due to large capital investment and unmanageable of

massive diversion canal for water distribution during construction period. Therefore, the

water resources planners and government agencies have focused on lining of the

watercourses to control the stated conveyance loses of the tertiary irrigation system. The

lining of watercourses was started with the following main objectives:

To decrease the water conveyance losses.

To acquire additional area under irrigated farming by using the additional water

saved by lining.

To make Water Users Associations (WUAs) at tertiary level for better

management of the tertiary irrigation system.

To enhance the crop production by augmented water availability at farm gate.

The lining of watercourses has been implemented during the last four decades and since

then approximately 85% of the country’s watercourses, inside and outside of the Indus

Basin irrigation system, have 15 and 30% of their length lined in fresh and saline

groundwater regions, respectively (FWMC, 2010).

Over the past two decades, researchers in coalition with farmers have been trying to

control the problems of decreasing water resources, declining input use efficiency,

12


deteriorating soil fertility by developing, refining and evaluating conservation and

precision agriculture-based resource-conserving interventions for the crop system. The

escalating prices of the inputs like irrigation water, seeds, herbicides and fertilizers have

worsened the situation. Therefore, interventions must be adopted to reduce the cost of

production, improve the soil fertility, less use of chemicals and augment in the efficiency

of fertilizers and irrigation water for the development of environmentally enhanced and

economically feasible crop production system. Hence, resource conservation

interventions like zero tillage, laser land levelling and bed-furrow irrigation have been

implemented to achieve these goals.

Literature lacks the integrated impacts of on- farm water management interventions with

respect to reduction in water conveyance loss, water saving, conveyance efficiency,

economic condition and farm income. Hence, this study was undertaken to investigate the

performance of the partially lined watercourses, zero tillage, laser land levelling and bed-

furrow irrigation interventions. In order to evaluate the actual performance of OFWM

interventions, the hydraulic and economic data were collected from different

watercourses and farmers, respectively.

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

Many studies have concluded that 30% of water delivered at the outlet, is lost in the

tertiary conveyance system of the unlined main watercourse and another 10% of the same

water is lost in the field channels and farm ditches. Also, 28 % of the same water,

available at the farm gate, is lost at the farm level during application to crops (FWMC,

2004). It has been estimated that the partial lining of watercourses in Pakistan (15% of

their length in fresh water regions and 30% in saline regions) would save approximately

11 BCM (9 MAF) annually. Also, it is visualised that the partial lining would augment

the irrigation water at farm by 20%, decrease water logging and salinity in the study area

by 10%, enhance the crop yield and cropping intensity by 10 – 15% and 5 – 20 % in the

study command area, respectively. It was conceived that the RCIs would reduce the

losses and save approximately 35% (12 BCM) of applied water. Appropriate economic

evaluation of the OFWM interventions needs information on accomplishments. In order

to show the sustainability of the expected benefits of on-farm water management

13


interventions, the present study was designed to evaluate the performance of on-farm

water management interventions like watercourse lining, laser land levelling, zero tillage

and bed-furrow.

Therefore, the study was initiated with the following objectives:

To evaluate and analyze performance of On-Farm Water Management

interventions in Punjab.

To formulate/recommend strategies for better management of available water on

farm-gate.

1.4 THE STUDY AREA

In Punjab, Pakistan, the total area is 206, 300 km2, which comprises approximately 26%

Pakistan’s geographical area. The province is densely populated and about 60% of the

country’s population lives in Punjab, whereas, the mean population density is 398/km2.

The climate is semi- arid and the average minimum and maximum monthly temperature

are 3.2 & 45.7 0C during the month of January and June, respectively. The average annual

rainfall in the Punjab province varies between 172 mm in the south to 1100 mm in the

north. The name Punjab is derived by two Persian words, i.e. ‘Punj’, which means ‘five’,

and ‘Aab’, which means ‘water’, therefore, the entire word means ‘five water’ confessing

the five rivers flowing through the province. The five rivers comprise; Beas, Sutlej, Ravi,

Chenab and Jhelum. All these streams originate from India and enter the Punjab province

from the north-east border of Pakistan. Beside these five rivers, the main river which

delivers approximately 65% of the surface flow in the Indus Basin is the Indus River

which initiates in south-western Tibet and enters Pakistan in northern zones from the

Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir. After Indus Water Treaty between India and

Pakistan in 1960, the three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) were allocated to

Pakistan, whereas, the three eastern rivers (Ravi, Sutlej, Beas) were assigned to India. The

Indus River and its tributaries are shown in Fig. 1.2.

14


Figu

re 1

.2

Indu

s Riv

er S

yste

m o

f Pak

ista

n

Punjab is the breadbasket of Pakistan and it contributes approximately 68% to annual

food production in the country. The irrigation System of Punjab province consists of

approximately 37,100 km of canals, which irrigate about 8.5 million hectares in the

province (PID, 2010). The twenty four canal systems, which have a total carrying

capacity of 3116.5 cumecs, offtake their shares through 14 barrages on the rivers in

Punjab region. The barrages also regulate diversion of supplies to the inter-river link

15


canals which convey the water of the western rivers to the eastern rivers to replace their

headwaters which were assigned to India in the Indus Water Treaty and deliver supply for

irrigation canal systems off-taking from these rivers. The water is distributed to the

farmer’s fields through 58,770 watercourses which comprise approximately 48% of the

total watercourses in the IBIS.

The current research area falls in rice-wheat cropping zone of Punjab province and it is

situated between 3100ʹ – 32020ʹ N latitude and 73045ʹ – 74030ʹ E longitudes covering a

land area approximately 15,000 km2. The study area is covered by eleven administrative

districts named; Sahiwal, Khanewal, Pakpattan, Okara, Kasur, Lahore, Sheikhupura,

Gujranwala, Hafizabad, Sialkot, Nankana (Fig. 1.3). Weather of study area is

characterised as semi-arid with great seasonal variations in rainfall and temperature.

Winters are short and cold, starting from November to end of February, maximum

daytime temperature varying between 5 –220C, Whereas Summers are hot and long,

lasting from April to September, it varies between 24 –45 0C. The average annual rainfall

is approximately 600 mm. The rainy season is the months of June to August and accounts

for approximately 60% of the total annual rainfall. The soils are mostly sandy-loam to

silt-loam caused by more conductive aquifer of loamy sand to sandy loam. The average

farm size in the research area is approximately 3.20 hectares. Approximately 36% of the

farms are tenant operated whereas about 64% are owner operated. The crops grown in

the area are; sugarcane, wheat, rice, fodder and vegetables during Rabi and Kharif

seasons.

1.5 NEED FOR THE STUDY

Irrigated agriculture is the backbone of Pakistan’s economy, which contributes about 26%

of the gross domestic product (GDP), also provides 80% of total national exports and

16


Figure 1.3 Study Area in Punjab Province, Pakistan

Study Area

17


employs 54% of the labour force (Chaudhary et al; 2002). The rice-wheat cropping zone

has served as a key source for Pakistan’s ever growing food demand over the last 50

years. However, the ability to further intensify production is severely constrained by

available water supplies. Water is a curtailing resource; it should be well managed and

carefully applied. Appropriate water management needs to comprise control of

operational and application losses at the farm level. But, unfortunately, due to lack of

resource constraints and information, farmers lose a large amount of their water before

and after reaching fields. The present study was designed to carry out evaluation of On-

farm Water Management Interventions in Punjab which mainly comprise watercourse

lining and RCIs.

The conveyance losses in the watercourses (‘sarkari khal’) and farmer ditches of IBIS are

30 BCM (25 MAF) and 12 BCM (10 MAF) respectively as reported by the FWMC

(2004). Reduction of conveyance losses in the watercourses was endeavoured by

constructing brick lining at the head of watercourses (30% of the total length). It was

perceived that the lining would decrease the losses and save approximately 10 BCM (8

MAF) of water which is nearly equal in capacity to the storage of Tarbela Dam (the

storage capacity estimated in 2004). Therefore, the present study was designed to obtain

an estimate of the projected benefits of watercourse lining. The results of the study will

quantify the water losses in unlined watercourses and water saving by lining. The study is

designed to conclude whether benefits of watercourses lining exceed their cost, or

whether the benefits are matter of employment in the rural areas and economic activity.

The beneficiary’s response and perceptions regarding lining of the watercourses and their

actual benefits will help the future water conservation projects to optimize their economic

benefits.

During application of water in the fields, approximately 34 BCM (28 MAF) is lost during

field application as reported by the FWMC (2004). Reduction of water application losses

in the fields was attempted by adoption of Resource Conservation Interventions (RCIs).

The RCIs include zero tillage, bed-furrow and laser land levelling. It was conceived that

the RCIs would reduce the losses and save approximately 35% (12 BCM) of applied

water. Therefore it was essential that the impact of these RCIs be evaluated. So, the

18


present study was also designed to obtain an evaluation of the projected benefit of RCIs.

The results of the study will quantify the water losses in conventional technique and water

saving by RCIs. The study is also designed to conclude whether benefits of RCIs exceed

their cost, or whether the benefits are matter of economic activity. The beneficiary’s

views regarding RCIs and their actual benefits will help the future water conservation

projects to optimize their economic benefits.

1.6 OVERVIEW OF DISSERTATION

The 1st chapter consists of background of the study, irrigation water uses and water losses,

on-farm water management interventions, tertiary irrigation system, water losses in

watercourses, lining of watercourses and resource conservation interventions. The

problem statement, study area and objectives of the study are also included in this

chapter.

The 2nd chapter, Literature Review, comprises thorough review of more than 100 journal

papers, conference papers, reports and books on the subject matter relative to this research.

The literature cited mainly includes the topics of water losses in unlined and lined

watercourses, economic impact of watercourse lining and resource conservation interventions

i.e. zero tillage, laser land levelling and bed furrow.

The 3rd chapter ‘Methodology’ contains step by step procedure for conducting the study. It

mainly includes collection of the hydraulic data of watercourse lining, economic data of

watercourse lining, and resource conservation interventions.

The 4th chapter describes the analysis and results of conveyance losses, seepage losses in lined

and unlined sections of the watercourses. The overall results about conveyance losses, seepage

losses, reduction in conveyance losses, water saving and conveyance efficiency by

watercourse lining are also included in this chapter.

Analysis and results of economic impacts of watercourse lining are discussed in chapter 5

consisting of irrigated area, cropping intensity, crop yield and gross farm income in the study

area.

19


The 6th chapter discussed the analysis and results of economic impacts of resource

conservation interventions (RCIs) mainly including water saving, crop yield, fertilizer use

efficiency, water productivity, gross farm income and net farm income of RCIs.

The 7th chapter states the conclusions and recommendations of the research work.

The complete list of references have been also provided at the end of the dissertation. The

dissertation is also supported by the appendices of concerned hydraulic data and designed

questionnaire proformas for the collection of economic data for watercourse lining and

resource conservation interventions.

20

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter summarizes and discusses past research to develop the starting point for the

present study. The literature cited includes the topic of water losses in lined and unlined

watercourses, economic impact of watercourse lining and resource conservation interventions

i.e. zero tillage, laser land levelling and bed furrow.

The amount of water existing on earth is estimated as 1.41 billion cubic kilometre, of

which just 2.5% is fresh water. Approximately 87% of the fresh water is contained in

atmosphere, deep inside the earth or in the ground and in ice glaciers (IWMI, 2007).

Demand for water has been augmenting gradually over the years from several sectors.

World-wide water use has increased more than tenfold since the turn of last century

(FAO, 2010). The demand for water is expected to enhance further, especially in

developing countries like Pakistan because of the population augment. Thus it is an

immense challenge to use available water efficiently to meet the future requirements of

human life and agriculture.

With about 70% of the available fresh water exploited, agriculture is currently the largest

world-wide water using sector. Water is a significant input in irrigated agriculture. Timely

and adequate supply of water is necessary for efficient crop yield along with other inputs

such as seeds, fertilizers, herbicides, manpower, pesticides, finance and marketing.

However, unfortunately, canal irrigation systems in developing countries like Pakistan

have been performing far below their potentials (i.e. overall delivery system efficiency is

estimated at 35-40%). The main reasons include; high rate of seepage from watercourses

and irrigation canals, deteriorated canal structures, uncontrolled outlets, augmenting

operation and maintenance costs, and lack of a policy for conjunctive use of water.

The present study was designed to address the problem of water losses in the tertiary

irrigation system which are a main reason for the low delivery system efficiencies and

also, water application losses within the fields due to ancient water application technique.

Therefore, previous studies of irrigation conveyance losses and water application losses

within the fields and their reduction are reviewed and are presented along with the

21

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

economic impacts of the mitigatory on-farm water management interventions like

watercourse lining, zero tillage, laser land levelling and bed-furrow.

2.1 IRRIGATION SYSTEM OF PAKISTAN

The water of Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS) is diverted through barrages/reservoirs

into the main irrigation Canals which distribute the irrigation water to the command areas

through the canals system. There are two major storage reservoirs on the Indus River

System, the Mangla Dam on the Jhelum River and Tarbela Dam on the main branch of

the Indus River, having a combined storage capacity equivalent to about 10% of the

average annual river flow in the surface flow system. The current live storage capacities

of the Mangla and Tarbela dams are 8.14 BCM (6.6 MAF) and 8.02 BCM (6.5 MAF),

respectively. A third reservoir, Chashma, with a live storage capacity of about 0.60 BCM,

provides only water regulation (WAPDA, 2002). There are long-term strategies to

construct additional storage reservoirs on the Indus River to manage more water for flood

control and irrigation, and to enhance the water regulation for power generation. The

irrigation system of Pakistan is the largest integrated gravity flow irrigation network in

the world, which serving 18.2 million hectares of adjacent agriculture land. There are 17

barrages in the Indus Basin and 45 main canals with discharge capacities varied from 15

to 42.5 cumecs. In addition, there are 12 inter-river link canals with discharge capacities

varied from 142 to 624 cumecs (Asrar et.al, 2008).

The irrigation canal system of IBIS is designed for continuous operation nearby full

capacity and can be regulated within very limited parameters. The continuous flow

operation is disturbed only during canal repair or floods. The watercourses receive their

share through outlets (moghas). The outlet is designed to supply a fixed flow rate of

water, based on watercourse command area, when the irrigation canal is flowing at full

capacity. The Provincial Irrigation Department (PID) of Punjab is responsible for the

maintenance and operation of the irrigation system from the barrages to the outlet. Whilst,

below the outlet, the farmers of the channel command area are responsible for the

operation and maintenance of the watercourse system. Each farmer has right to a quantity

of water proportional to the size of his land holding. Commonly, each farmer is assigned

a period of time on weekly basis to take his share of irrigation water. Farmers receive

22


water for a fixed period every week irrespective of crop water requirements. While water

trading is illegal under formal rotations, yet, it is common. The irrigation system was

designed by the British to command the maximum area possible with a minimum of

management required up to the outlet (Merrey, 1986). Despite, major reconstructing at

the large level, canals are still operated according to principles established by the British.

2.2 WATER LOSSES IN WATERCOURSES

Watercourses are the last link to the fields in the Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS).

There are approximately 122,268 watercourses in the country including 58770

watercourses of Punjab province (FWMC, 2004). These watercourses form arteries for

the agriculture in the country; however, they are not maintained properly. The

watercourses are out of the jurisdiction of PID of Punjab and the farmers of relevant

command areas are responsible for the cleaning and maintenance of these community

operated channels. Due to mismanagement and ignorance, majority of the watercourses

are physically weak and hydraulically inefficient, therefore, a huge amount of scarcely

irrigation water is lost from this tertiary portion of the distribution system. Due to poor

maintenance and inadequate cross sections of watercourses, the water is being lost in the

tertiary system since long time.

The literature shows that the loss of water in tertiary irrigation system of the sub-

continent was first observed by Kennedy in 1895. However, the intensity of water losses

in tertiary irrigation system was recognised by Clyma et al. (1975). It was concluded that

more than half of the water (about 60%) that left the outlets was not reaching to the

cropped fields. Since then intensive investigations have been conducted in the country to

measure the water conveyance losses of the tertiary irrigation system by using various

methods and to reduce the losses by taking effective measures. The available literature

relating to the subject is reviewed and summarized in the following sections.

2.2.1 Water Losses in Unlined Watercourses

Arshad et al. (2009) evaluated the watercourse losses in Rechna Doab region of Punjab,

Pakistan. The flow measurements were conduct by the inflow-outflow method with

23


cutthroat flumes. The study results revealed an average water loss of 64% which is

summarized in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1 Steady-state water losses in watercourses

Watercourse Replication Inflow Rate Loss/100 m Total Loss (litre/sec) (litre/sec) (%) (litre/sec) (%)

1 1 28.34 1.39 4.91 19.27 67.9 2 34.01 1.39 4.1 23.13 68 3 34.01 1.39 4.1 23.13 68

Average: 32.02 1.39 4.37 21.77 67.9

2 1 17 0.93 5.47 10.88 64 2 19.84 0.93 4.69 12.7 64 3 19.84 0.93 4.69 12.7 64

Average: 18.99 0.93 4.94 12.15 64

Sarki et al. (2008) studied the conveyance losses and conveyance efficiency of a

watercourse in Sindh, Pakistan. The study was conducted on an unlined watercourse 1R

Qaiser Minor near Tandojam. For the purpose, a straight section 600 m length was

selected which was divided into five sections of 120 m each. Water Losses were

measured in each section both by using inflow-outflow and ponding method. Cutthroat

flume was used for discharge measurement in 120 m long sections whilst for ponding test

30 m length was separated from each section. The results revealed that average

conveyance losses and seepage losses were 1.6 litre/sec/100m and 1.23 litre/sec/100 m

with inflow-outflow and ponding methods, respectively. Ponding tests measured seepage

losses 23% less than inflow-outflow test. The conveyance efficiency of the watercourse

was concluded to be 69%.

Australian National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage (ANCID, 2006) studied that

the main mechanism for the conveyance of water to farms is through unlined

watercourses. Latest studies have showed that a significant amount of water (10 to 30%)

is lost in conveyance to farm.

Bhutta and Ahmad (2006) studied seepage losses in watercourses of Pakistan. It was

concluded that average seepage losses in unlined sections of ‘sarkari khal’ were 18% of

the inflow at the head, whereas the average seepage losses were 12% in farmers’

watercourses (branches). The study also revealed that seepage losses in ‘sarkari khals’

24


and farmers’ field channels were 57 and 43% respectively, of the total water losses

observing in tertiary irrigation systems. The study findings of different types of losses are


Table 2.2 Different types of losses in ‘sarkari khal’ and farmer’s watercourse

Different types of Losses Losses (%) of Inflow

Total 'Sarkari khal' Farmer's Watercourse

Surface Evaporation 0.21 0.09 0.3

Steady State Seepage 20.2 15.8 36

Visible Leakage 0.63 0.57 1.2

Dead Storage 2.2 1.5 3.7

Transient Seepage 1.4 0.9 2.3 Breaches 0.4 0.3 0.7

Total 25 19 44

Arshad (2004) evaluated the conveyance losses from watercourses and their impact to

groundwater recharge in Rechna Doab, Punjab. He concluded that the water losses were

in the range from 64 to 68% with an average value of 66%. The conveyance losses were

evaluated as 859 mm/day while 0.227 mm/day was the contribution to groundwater

recharge. It was found that watercourses added 9.94% to the groundwater recharge of the

Rechna Doab region which was 2.98% of the inflow at the head.

Drost et al. (1997) stated that in systems where seepage from unlined watercourses is 60

times greater than seepage from lined watercourses, seepage from unlined watercourses

dramatically increased groundwater flows and caused elevated water tables.

Van der Lely (1995) found that losses from on-farm channel systems to the ground water

system have been variously estimated to contribute about 15-25 % of total ground water

accessions.

WAPDA (1994) evaluated that the performance of On-Farm Water Management Project-I

& II. For evaluation, eight watercourses were selected such that four channels were

falling in each of the two projects. One watercourse from Khyber Pakhtun Khwa and Sind

provinces and two channels were selected from Punjab for each of the two projects. The

conveyance losses were measured by inflow-outflow method, using cutthroat flume. The

25


averaged conveyance losses (pre-renovation) of watercourses for OFWM-I & II were 62

and 73% respectively. The results are summarized in Table 2.3.

Table 2.3 Reach-wise (pre-renovation) conveyance efficiency (percent) in OFWM-I and II

Channels Reach OFWM-I OFWM-II

Head 85 84

Middle 66 71

Tail 46 65

Average 62 73

Gill (1994) concluded that about 50% of the total available irrigation water is lost during

conveyance in the village level irrigation system and at the farm level during application

to crops. A significant quantity of irrigation water is lost due to unlined channels and

uneven fields.

WAPDA (1993) reported the Monitoring and Evaluation of On-Farm Water Management

Project-III. The pre-renovation data of sixteen watercourses were collected during

November 1992 to April 1993 from four provinces of Pakistan. Twelve watercourses

were equally distributed between Sind and Punjab with equal representation of saline and

fresh groundwater regions. Four main channels were from outside the canal irrigated area

and were equally distributed between Baluchistan and Khyber PakhtunKhwa provinces.

The conveyance efficiency of main watercourses was measured through inflow-outflow

method, using cutthroat flumes. Similarly, overall conveyance efficiency was computed

by measuring the channel conveyance losses upto the field turnouts (nakkas). The study

findings are summarized in Tables 2.4 and 2.5.

Table 2.4 Reach-wise conveyance efficiency (pre-renovation) of main watercourses, Rabi 1992-93 (Percent)

Watercourse Reach

Irrigated* Barani**

Saline Fresh Baluchistan KPK

Tubewell Weir Control Tubewell

Head 79 85 85 80 83

Middle 72 74 71 73 53

Tail 56 60 68 58 41

Average 70 74 76 70 58

26


Table 2.5 Reach-wise overall conveyance efficiency (pre-renovation) of main watercourses, Rabi 1992-93. (Percent)

Watercourse Reach

Irrigated* Barani**

Saline Fresh Baluchistan KPK

Tubewell Weir Control Tubewell

Head 73 77 85 78 83

Middle 65 68 71 68 53

Tail 49 54 68 55 41

Average 63 67 76 67 58 * Canal Watercourses underlain by saline and fresh groundwater. **Irrigation source other than canal water.

Lawler (1990) studied the seepage losses from on-farm channels in the Campaspe Region

of Northern Victoria and found that large volumes of water were being lost to the water

table up to 400 mm/day when the channel was being filled. The lowest value recorded

was 50 mm/day at the end of the irrigation period.

PERI (1987) evaluated the performance of Command Water Management Project,

Punjab, Pakistan through base line survey. The study was conducted in the commands of

27 unlined watercourses located in sub-project regions; Shahkot, Niaz Beg, Vehari and

Haroonabad. The conveyance losses of selected channels were measured by the inflow-

outflow method using cutthroat flume. The water conveyance losses were estimated in the

range of 47–50% of the inflow.

WAPDA (1984) studied on pre-improvement appraisal of On-Farm Water Management

Program. A sample of 45 watercourses was selected from different sites in Punjab, Sindh

and Khyber PakhtunKhwa Provinces of Pakistan. The delivery efficiency of selected

watercourses was found at head, middle and tail reaches by the inflow-outflow method,

using cutthroat flumes. The average conveyance losses were determined to be 45% of the

inflow at the outlet head.

Trout and Bower (1981) studied the water conveyance losses in watercourses of Pakistan

and measured the operational conveyance losses including transient losses of five

watercourses by using inflow-outflow method. Transient losses which are generally not

measured by the conventional conveyance loss methods were described as:

Water leakage and seepage during the time when water is being conveyed from

one field to another.

27


Rapidly infiltrated water which wets up dry watercourse banks.

Water losses causing from turnout breaks and short-term watercourse breaches.

Dead storage water, left lying in the bottoms of watercourses after drainage of

channel storage into the fields is complete.

During the water conveyance loss measurements, flow rates were observed continuously

at the selected points and the discharge data accumulated on the hydrographs. Operational

conveyance losses were computed as the difference between the volume of water entering

at the head of the watercourse and the volume of water entering the irrigated fields,

during a complete rotation. Whilst, transient loss was computed as the difference between

the total operational loss, computed volumetrically, and the steady-state loss concluded in

the traditional method from flow rate differences. The study results were summarized as

follows:

The transient losses on the five watercourse systems were 12 – 23% of the

conveyance losses or ranged from 5.7 – 8.4% and averaged value 7% of the

inflow.

Total operational conveyance losses on the five watercourses varied from 37–56%

and averaged value 45% of the inflow.

Water surface evaporation contributed less than one percent of the losses on the

five channels.

Dead storage comes to approximately 3.7% of the inflow or half of the transient

losses.

Trout et al. (1981) evaluated seepage loss measurement in 122 channel sections of 18

selected watercourses in Punjab, Pakistan, by using ponding method. The lengths of

channel sections 20–40 m were selected for ponding test to keep the difference in ponded

water depth at each end of the selected section within 1cm. The water recession along

with the water top surface width were recorded which was noted with respect to the

elapsed time. The water loss rate was computed by applying the following relationship;

(𝑄𝐿)𝑑𝑖 =(𝑑𝑑)

(𝑑𝑡)𝑑𝑖× (𝑇𝑊𝐴)𝑑𝑖 × 𝐶

Where:

(𝑄𝐿)𝑑𝑖 = loss rate at flow depth di (l/sec/100m)

28


(𝑑𝑑)(𝑑𝑡)𝑑𝑖

= water surface recession rate at flow depth di (cm/hr)

(TWA) di = average water surface top width at flow depth di (cm)

C = conversion factor

They concluded that the seepage loss rate consistently varied with the depth of flow,

therefore, an exponential relationship developed between the flow depth and the seepage

loss rate such that the loss rate doubled with each 5 cm increase in flow depth and tripled

with an 8 cm augment.

The study result was concluded as under:

Ponding measurements water loss rates were slightly lesser than the inflow-

outflow measurements and steady-state loss were usually between those values.

Average conveyance loss in the watercourses was forty percent.

Seepage loss rates into watercourse banks were several time higher than

infiltration rates and often as much as hundred times greater than seepage into bed

in the surrounding fields.

Ashraf and Munir (1981) discussed watercourse conveyance losses measured in Pakistan

during 1973-74. They utilized inflow-outflow method for measurement of conveyance

losses and concluded that approximately 45% of water delivered at the head was lost

during conveyance to the field.

Akram et al. (1981) evaluated the impact of watercourse cleaning on conveyance losses at

Mona Reclamation Experimental Project, Punjab, Pakistan. They selected two

watercourses for evaluation with unimproved and improved selections. The unimproved

channel was a normal private channel, while, the improved channel was earthen improved

by eliminating the old holes from banks. The water loss was measured before and after

cleaning on both channels by using ponding method. It was evaluated during field study

that the full supply operating level in the watercourses was decreased by 7 or 8 cm after

cleaning which resulted in reduced water losses as shown in Table 2.6.

Kemper et al. (1980) evaluated water losses more than forty percent at watercourses in

the command of public tubewells MN-51, 56, 57 and 78 at the Mona Project. They also

concluded that after improvement, the area for irrigation under high delta crops on these

channels augmented significantly.

29


Table 2.6 Impact of watercourse cleaning on conveyance losses (litres/sec/100 m)

Section No. Unimproved Watercourse Improved Watercourse

Before cleaning After cleaning Before cleaning After cleaning

1 3.6 1.1 3.4 0.65

2 3.5 1.55 2.7 0.5

3 5.7 0.5 1.2 0.37

Average 4.3 1.05 2.4 0.51

Trout and Bower (1980) reported the performance of 5 watercourses in the Indus Basin

irrigation system of Pakistan. They stated that the total water losses varied from 30 to

50% of inflow at outlet head. They concluded that conveyance losses included transient

losses such as turnout leakage, dead storage, high initial seepage into dry watercourse

banks and bank washouts.

Reuss et al. (1979) reported that water loss from Pakistan’s more than 90,000

watercourses has become a major problem over the previous few years. Assuming 56%

delivery efficiency, they appraised that five million hectare-meters (Mhm) water is lost

before reaches the field. They suggested the strategies to reduce the conveyance losses

included heavy cleaning and maintenance, construction of lined watercourses and earthen

improvement with pucca control structures. They recommended that these strategies

could be implemented in individually or combination. Nevertheless, the best arrangement

for implementing improved on- farm water management interventions in Pakistan would

be to apply the combination of the three basic strategies, earthen improvement with pucca

control structures, heavy cleaning and maintenance and lining of major portions of

channels. They suggested that all three strategies should be implemented with the help of

Water User Associations (WUAs).

Whiting and Javed (1979) evaluated the conveyance losses from farm turnout (nakkas) in

Peshawar, Pakistan. They concluded that by managing the leakage from nakkas, after

sealing the nakkas with mud, the water losses in the watercourse decreased from 36 to

22%.

Lowdermilk (1978) evaluated water conveyance losses in watercourses of Pakistan by

applying inflow-outflow method. Cutthroat flumes were used for discharge measurement

at the head of outlet and field turnouts. The measured water losses varied from 33 – 65%

30


with an average value of 47%. The study concluded that most of the water losses were

due to poor cleaning and maintenance of the watercourse.

Hussain et al (1977) reported that misuse and mismanagement of water are the root-

causes of waterlogging and salinity in most of the canal irrigated regions in the country.

Consequently, the affected soils had lost productivity, which personated far reaching

economic impacts on the national economy. They concluded that the life of pucca and

katcha watercourse improvement was 25 and 7 years respectively. With improvement,

conveyance loss in a pucca watercourse was reduced by 85% and in a katcha channel by

37.5%. In the pucca watercourse, area irrigated per turn was increased by 45% whilst

cropping intensity augmented by 37.23%. Gross benefits increased by 85%. The

remodelling cost of pucca channel improvement was Rs. 119.29/m.

Ashraf et al. (1977) studied the water conveyance losses from watercourses in Pakistan.

The reviewed literature concerned to the study work conducted by different companies

and Colorado State University (CSU) Staff during the period of 1965 – 1977. The

Hunting Technical Services measured watercourse losses on 11 sites in Punjab and Sindh,

Pakistan in Lower Indus Project (1965). The conveyance losses measurements were

conducted by selecting straight sections of comparatively new channels approximately

150 m long and the seepage loss was measured applying the ponding method. The

seepage losses averaged 1.8 percent loss per 300 m or 0.7 litre/sec/300 m channel length.

The average length of watercourses was 1.5 km, hence, total water losses in a watercourse

was approximately 10% of the water delivered at the head. This lower percent of seepage

loss resulted due to the researchers assumed the supply rate of the watercourses and made

their measurements on relatively new watercourses. Same results were stated by the

Punjab Irrigation Research Institute, Pakistan in 1972, when seepage loss rate was

measured on 12 watercourses in Punjab by using ponding method. The average loss rate

was 1.5 percent per 300 m in channel length. These study results developed the “fact” in

the minds of many Water Planners and Managers in Pakistan that the water loss from

watercourses was not greater than 10%. However, after the CSU staff and their

cooperators conducted extensive flume measurements in Pakistan, their study results

changed the mindset of all planners and researchers. Early et al. (1977) studied

watercourses in Punjab and Sindh, Pakistan, including those channels which were studied

31


in the mid 1960’s by Hunting Technical services and Sir Alexander Gibb in the Upper

Indus Basin and Hunting and Sir Murdock MacDonald in the Lower Indus Basin. The

study results were completely different from the previous results and the average water

losses in Lower and Upper Indus Basin channels were 38 and 17 percent per 300 m

watercourse length. Early et al., implemented inflow-outflow method while the previous

researchers implemented ponding method in which they had selected the watercourse

sections of their choice by sealing or eliminating the turnouts and hence concluded lower

seepage losses, whereas the CSU staff measured the operational conveyance losses

without sealing the turnouts and considered the total length of channel. The research

results reviewed by Ashraf et al. (1977) are summarized in Table 2.7.

Table 2.7 Water Loss Data Summary by Ashraf et al. (1977)

Organization/ Researcher Site Year Method

Used Loss Rate/300m Total

Loss (%) (l/sec) (%)

Kennedy Punjab 1881 - - - 28

Benton Punjab 1881 - - - 28

Blench Punjab 1881 - - - 29

Hunting Tech. Services Lower Indus 1965 Ponding 0.7 1.8 -

Punjab Irrigation Research Institute

Punjab 1972 Ponding 1.1 1.5 15

Boom and Gerhards Mian Channu 1975 Inflow-

Outflow 2 4.1 22

Clyma et al.

Multan

1975 Inflow-Outflow

2.2 6.2 22 Shadab 4.1 21.4 43

Faisalabad 3.9 9 25 Mona 8.1 11 32

Sargodha 12.1 40 40

Early et al.

Upper Indus Basin

Faisalabad

1976-77 Inflow-Outflow

- 12.2 32 Multan - 17.7 42 Lahore - 30.9 38

Sargodha - 13 47 Gujranwala - 11.1 42

Lower Indus Basin

Muzaffargarh - 27 47 Bahawalpur - 45 66

Sukkur - 72 67 Dadu - 14 60

Tharparker - 20 54 Thatta - 48 30

32


Table 2.7 Continued…

WAPDA/CSU MREP (Mona) Punjab

1976-77 Inflow-Outflow

10.4 8.5 44*

MREP (Mona) Punjab 6.2 4.4 25**

Trout et al. MREP (Mona) Punjab 1977 Inflow-Outflow 7.4 13 56

Average 5.3 19.6 39 * Before earthen improvement, **After earthen improvement

Trout et al. (1977) studied the total water losses from a watercourse in Pakistan. The

study was conducted to determine the total water losses including the operational losses

from a watercourse over a period of one week, i.e. warabandi (one complete rotation of

irrigation turn within the command area). The study was carried out on a watercourse of

Fatehpur Distributary canal in the MREP area, Bhalwal, Pakistan. Cut-throat flumes were

used to measure flow rates. Water conveyance losses along the tertiary conveyance

system were determined by using the inflow-outflow method. They showed that 60% of

the total water losses occurred in the public sector watercourse (‘Sarkari khal’) sections.

Conveyance efficiency varied with distance from outlet, the average conveyance

efficiency of the ‘Sarkari khal’ (public sector watercourse) section was 68% while in the

farmer’s field channel it varied from 33 to 52%. The average loss rate of the watercourse

is given in Table 2.8.

Table 2.8 Watercourse average loss rates

Description 'sarkari khal' Farmers Branches Total system

Length Utilized (m) 3,353 7,927 11,280

Total Usage (103 m-hrs)* 220.2 55.5 275.7

Loss (103 m3) 15.7 8 23.7

Average Loss Rate (litres/sec/330 m) 5.9 12.2 7.4

Average Flow Rate (litres/sec) 59.5 41 56.6

Average Loss Rate (%age/330 m) 10 30 13 *Number of hours water flows in a watercourse length

The conclusions were:

The conveyance efficiency of village level channel system was evaluated to be

44%.

66 % of the water losses occurred in the public sector watercourse (‘sarkari khal’).

33


At night, water conveyance Loss was higher by 5%.

13% of the water losses were due to operational conditions.

Dead storage accumulated for 5% to the total water losses.

In the ‘sarkari khal’, visible leakage was approximately 8% of the total water

losses.

The economic survey indicated that farmers’ yields from the head to the tail end

of the tertiary conveyance system did not vary as much as expected considering

the higher conveyance efficiencies at the head. The matter required further study

to determine how the tail end farmers obtained crop yields equal to those of the

farmers at the head who were getting 30 to 50% extra water.

Kemper et al. (1976) found that water losses were much high near or at watercourse

junctions due to borrowing of soil to construct earthen nakka across the watercourses and

consequently narrowing of the channel banks and widening of the channel.

Approximately fifty percent of the water was lost near or at those junctions of the

watercourse. Improvement of these sections by taking soil from near fields and

reconstructing the banks to suitable cross-section can save up to fifty percent of the water

loss. They also found that low conveyance efficiencies were usually due to deposition of

vegetation and silt in the watercourses. Data showed that raising of the water level by 5

cm increased conveyance losses by a factor two or three. Enhance in conveyance loss was

due to holes in the upper banks due to rodent activities and water overtopping. Making of

new watercourses or compacting and renovation of channel banks can reduce water

conveyance losses to a great extent. Water losses can be reduced from 0.09 to 1.39 l/sec

per 100 m depending on the degree of compaction and texture of the soil. Comparing

costs of increased water supply at the farmers field due to watercourse improvement with

the cost of pumped water (Rs 325 to 3250 per ha.m) or the cost of water from new

reservoirs (Rs 1945 to 4865 per ha.m) showed that channel improvement and

maintenance in Pakistan is the minimum expensive source of additional water for the

farmer. Such improvement and maintenance will also be effective in reducing

waterlogging and salinity problems.

Clyma et al. (1975) studied water losses from unlined watercourses in Pakistan. The

reasons identified in contributing conveyance losses were; seepage, improper cross

section, improper alignment, insufficient channel capacity, clogging of the watercourse

34


with; grass, trees, sediment and weeds, channel dead storage and leaky nakkas. They

reported that the water loss was a function of; watercourse length, flow rate, frequency of

maintenance and soil type. They measured water conveyance losses by using inflow-

outflow method and the average loss rate as a function of watercourse discharge are


Table 2.9 Unlined watercourse conveyance losses under Canal/ Tubewell water supply

Discharge (litres/sec) Conveyance Losses (litres/sec/m)

Canal water only

28 0.007

56 0.012

84 0.019

Canal + Tublewell water

28 0.015

56 0.023

84 0.03

112 0.037

140 0.048

Tublewell and/or Canal (Well Maintained)

28 0.0019

56 0.0033

84 0.0042

Kemper et al. (1975) evaluated that all the water which entering and flowing out of

watercourse into the fields during the complete irrigation turn and concluded that only

43% of water entering this watercourse reached the field. The comparison of this loss

with steady state measurements conducted at different sites shown an average of 60%

loss.

Clyma and Corey (1974) studied watercourse conveyance efficiencies in Mona

Reclamation Experimental Project (MREP) area in Pakistan. They found that the

efficiencies varied from 50 – 80% with an average value of approximately 65%. They

reported that the conveyance losses in watercourses of Pakistan to be in the range of 20 –

50% of inflow at the head of the watercourse.

35


Corey et al. (1973) reported that about 10 million hectare-meters (Mhm) water is diverted

annually through canal irrigation system for about 10 Mha. They appraised that only 6.4

Mhm water was reaching to fields due to conveyance losses in which 1.6 Mhm water was

also reduced by losses within the field because of ancient water application techniques.

National Irrigation Commission, (1972) reported that the commonly accepted figures for

conveyance losses in alluvial plains of north India (Ganga basin) are 17% for main and

branch canals, 8% for distributaries and 20% for watercourses. Commission also reported

that, 45% of water is lost as seepage before it reaches the field.

2.2.2 Water losses in Lined Watercourses

Irrigation watercourses have been extensively lined internationally to achieve the

following specific objectives:

Improve hydraulic efficiency of watercourses

Reduce seepage losses and enhance water saving

Improve equity of water distribution

Improve construction, operation and maintenance

Reduce drainage requirement

Lining does not entirely eradicate water losses. It comprises a layer with less permeability

to water, laid over the earthen channel section to achieve the above goals. However, due

to certain limitations of the workmanship and lining material, it often has a limited

service life.

Wachyan and Rushton (1987) reported that perforating a lining to extent of one percent of

its area was sufficient to allow leakage flow to reach 70% of the value attained in unlined

circumstances. Hence, a proper design, selection of appropriate lining material and

careful construction, operation and maintenance are all essential to reduce water losses.

Similarly, Goldsmith and Makin (1989) evaluated water losses from lined watercourses

and compared the results with that of the unlined watercourses. They concluded that the

poorest lined watercourses had higher water loss rates than the unlined.

The literature reviewed about water losses from lined watercourses is discussed as

follows:

36


Arshad and Ahmad (2011) stated that lining has increased 25% conveyance efficiency

and if we lined all other watercourses not only conveyance efficiency will be improved

but will also help in equal water distribution among farmers and will increase the

command area of that watercourse.

Arshad et al. (2009) compared the water conveyance losses between lined and unlined

watercourses in Indus Basin of Pakistan. Four watercourses were selected for the study

with two unlined and two lined. The channels were located on the same distributary. The

lining age of the selected watercourses was ten and twenty five years. Water conveyance

losses were measured by inflow-outflow method using cutthroat flumes. The study was

concluded with a water conveyance loss of 64 – 68% and 35 – 52% in unlined and lined

watercourses, respectively. It was found that lining decreased water conveyance losses by

22.5%.

Kahlown and Kemper (2005) evaluated the performance of sediment-cement and soil-

cement lining in reducing the seepage losses from watercourses in Pakistan. Soil-Cement

blocks, 30.5 cm x 15.3 cm x 10.2 cm in size were prepared by using the soil from

adjacent field and mixing with cement making a ratios of 1:8 or 1:6. Blocks were used in

lining watercourses test sections and were plastered; further mixing sodium silicate in the

mortar and plaster to reduce permeability of the lining blocks. The performance of blocks

lining in reducing the seepage was tested by using the ponding method. The results are

given in Table 2.10, which show that the plastered sections lost an average of just 0.03

litres/sec/100 m, whereas unplastered sections lost an average of 0.63 litres/sec/100 m. It

was appraised that the soil-cement block could reduce the costs by 30 – 40% compared to

fired bricks lining.

IWASRI (2004) reported the evaluation carried out by Watercourse Monitoring and

Evaluation Directorate (WM & ED) of WAPDA, Lahore, Pakistan. Water conveyance

losses were measured on 26 watercourses of which sixteen were unlined and ten were

lined. It was concluded that lining of watercourses increased the conveyance efficiency in

the range of 12 – 14% from head to tail end of the watercourses.

37


Table 2.10 Seepage Loss Rates from Rectangular Watercourses Built with Soil-Cement Blocks

Section Number

Blocks (cement-soil)

Plaster (cement-sand 1:3)

Water Surface Recession Rate

(cm/hr)

Seepage Loss Rate (litre/sec/100 m)

1 1:6 None 5.37 0.76

2 1:8 1 cm thick plaster 0.27 0.04

3 1:8 None 5.37 0.81

4 1:8 1 cm thick plaster 0.14 0.02

5 1:8 None 2.33 0.33

Kahlown and Masood (2000) appraised the performance of traditional and linings in

watercourses of Pakistan. Low-cost linings and Conventional test sections were

constructed in Mona Reclamation Experimental Project (MREP) region, Bhalwal. They

appraised the efficiency of different lining types by comparing the performance of

watercourses before and after lining. Likewise, the useful life of lining was also evaluated

by comparing the data collected immediately after and 24 years after lining of the same

test sections. The test sections included six types of brick masonry lining, 12 types of

low-cost traditional lining and 4 types of PCC lining. The traditional low-cost test

sections were constructed in different shapes using various amounts of construction

materials. Seepage loss in the test sections was measured using the ponding method

where about 30 m long representative watercourse sections were separated for

measurement. The Results of the study are given in Table 2.11.

Table 2.11 Performance Evaluation of Lined Test Sections*

Description of Section Average Seepage Losses (litre/sec/100 m)

Before Lining After Lining (1974-75) (1997-98)

Conventional Brick Masonry, Rectangular Section with varied wall & bed thickness 4.6 0.2 0.9

Conventional Cement Concrete, Trapezoidal Section with varied P.C.C. Proportions 4.5 0.2 2.1

Low-Cost Brick Masonry, Rectangular Section with varied wall & bed material 5.1 0.4 1.1

Low-Cost Brick Masonry, Trapezoidal Section with varied wall thickness and plaster 5.1 0.3 0.7

Low-Cost Cement Concrete, Trapezoidal Section with varied P.C.C. proportions and bed material 5.1 0.3 0.7

*Average values are given in the Table.

38


Recommendations of the research are given below:

A section with 23 cm thick brick masonry walls with 8 cm (1:3:6) concrete in bed

is recommended for watercourses constructed in fill. Whereas, a low cost section

with 11 cm thick masonry walls with no lining in the bed was recommended for

watercourses constructed in cut.

All variants of lining should be provided with well trowelled plastering on the

inside of the channel walls. Suitable design and careful mixing of the cement and

sand in the mortar provide linings which produce low losses.

4 cm thick tile wall lining with 4 cm thick tile bed and plastered on inner side was

cost effective.

Singh and Khan, (1999) stated that in the absence of proper lining, about 10–35% of

water is lost during conveyance from the source to the field due to seepage and

evaporation losses.

Ambast et al., (1990) reported that at watercourse level, seepage losses are estimated 20–

25% and 11% in the unlined and lined watercourse, respectively.

WAPDA (1994) appraised the performance of watercourses lined under OFWM-I & II

projects in Pakistan. They selected eight lined watercourses. The sample channels

represented the watercourses from all four provinces of Pakistan. The main parameters

for evaluation include; conveyance efficiency, cropping pattern, crops yield, cropping

intensity and gross farm income. The performance evaluation was based on the actual

data collected during the year 1992-93 (Kharif 1992 and Rabi 1992-93). The water

conveyance losses were measured by inflow-outflow method using cutthroat flumes. The

findings of water losses and conveyance efficiencies under selected watercourses of

OFWM-I & II programs are given in Tables 2.12 and 2.13 respectively. The results of

Table 2.13 shows a net augment in conveyance efficiency by 15 – 16% during first two

post-lining periods which was reduced to 13% during Rabi 1992-93. The conveyance

efficiency was maintained at 80 – 81% during Kharif 1989 to Rabi 1990-91 but reduced

to 78% during Rabi 1992-93, i.e. 5 years after lining.

WAPDA (1993a) studies two projects of watercourse improvement program, one funded

by IFAD and other by USAID in Pakistan (Bhutta and Ahmad 2006). Measurements were

taken at the head of the main watercourse, at the farm turnout and where water enters the

39


field. For USAID project, it was found that the conveyance efficiency augmented from 70

to 80% in case of main watercourse or ‘sarkari khal’ and from 61 to 72% for overall. For

IFAD program the conveyance efficiency augmented from 73 to 80% for main

watercourse and 64 to 74% for overall IFAD project. The results are given in Table 2.14.

The researchers reported that WAPDA in 1993 also computed reduction in losses and

water saving due to channel lining. The results revealed a reduction in watercourse

conveyance losses in the range of 12 to 26% due to lining as given in Table 2.15.

Table 2.12 Comparison of Conveyance Efficiency between Pre and Post Lining for OFWM-I Project (Percent)

Canal Reach Pre-Lining Post-Lining

Rabi (1982-83) Kharif (1984) Rabi

(1984-85) Rabi

(1992-93) Head 85 90 89 92

Middle 66 74 78 76

Tail 46 69 62 64

Average: 62 77 78 75

Water Loss Rate (litres/sec/300 m) 5.3 4.6 4 3.5

Table 2.13 Comparison of Conveyance Efficiency between Pre and Post Lining for OFWM-II Project (Percent)

Canal Reach Pre-Lining Post-Lining

Rabi (1987-88)

Kharif (1989)

Rabi (1989-90)

Rabi (1990-91)

Rabi (1992-93)

Head 84 87 89 91 92

Middle 71 76 81 81 74

Tail 65 73 72 71 68

Average 73 80 81 81 78 Water Loss Rate (litres/sec/300 m) - 2.8 2.4 2.3 2.5

National Seminar (1983) stated that watercourse lining was identified as an effective

intervention strategy to reduce seepage since major water losses occur at this level of the

conveyance system.

40


Table 2.14 Pre and Post-Lining Performance of watercourses under IFAD and USAID Projects

Serial No. Item

IFAD Project USAID Project Regular

Program Accelerated

Program

1 Average outlet Discharge (litres/sec) 48.7 46.72 75.88

2 Pre-Lining Efficiency (%)

Main Watercourse ('sarkari khal') 73 74 70

Overall 64 67 61

Average Available Supply (litres/sec)

Farm Turnout 36 35 53

Field Turnout 31 31 46

3 Post -Lining Efficiency (%)

Main Watercourse ('sarkari khal') 80 77 80

Overall 74 72 72

Average Available Supply (litres/sec)



4 Enhance in Water Supply (%)



Table 2.15 Reduction in Water Losses by Lining under USAID and IFAD Projects

Serial No. Item

Delivery efficiency

Water Losses

Reduction in losses

Water Losses

Water saving

(%) (%) (%) (ha-m) (ha-m)

1 Regular Program

Pre-Lining 73 27 - 39 -

Post-Lining 80 20 26 29 10

2 Accelerated Program

Pre-Lining 74 26 - 36 -

Post-Lining 77 23 12 32 4

41


Hussain et al. (1977) studied the impact of watercourse improvement on field economy at

MREP area in Bhalwal, Pakistan. They selected two watercourses for measurement of

water losses; one was pucca improved whereas the second was earthen improved. Data

was collected ‘with’ and ‘without’ improvement for both the cases. The pucca channel

was constructed during 1973-74 and the earthen improvement was carried out during

1975-76, but the data was collected during the year 1976-77. Pucca channel improvement

reduced average conveyance losses from approximately 11 litre/s to less than one

litre/s/300 m of channel length whereas earthen channel improvement reduced average

water losses from about 10 litre/s to 6 litre/s/300 m. The results are given in Tables 2.16

and 2.17.

Table 2.16 Conveyance losses at pucca improved watercourse

Watercourse Average Losses (litre/sec/300 m)

Before Improvement After Improvement

Main 14.15 0.25

Branch-1 9.91 0.33

Branch-2 11.32 1.07

Branch-3 14.15 1.35

Branch-4 11.32 1.13

Branch-5 8.49 0.39

Branch-6 9.91 0.62

Average: 11.32 0.73

Table 2.17 Conveyance losses at earthen improved watercourse

Watercourse Average Losses (litre/sec/300 m)

Before Improvement After Improvement

Main-1 7.64 5.66

Main-2 8.21 4.24

Main-3 19.25 7.07

Main-4 4.53 3.11

Branch 11.6 9.91

Average: 10.25 6.00

42


Johnson et al. (1978) reported that brick lining of watercourse has been concluded to

reduce the water conveyance losses by 88 to 95%.

2.3 LATEST TOOLS FOR ASSESSMENT OF ON-FARM WATER

MANAGEMENT INTERVENTIONS

The tools commonly used for water measurement in irrigation channels are; weirs, flumes

and current meters. It is wise to briefly review the description of these measuring devices

before using them to understand the inaccuracies inherent in the devices during field

application. The types of weirs, flumes and current meters used in irrigation channels are

as under:

1. WEIRS

• Sharp-crested (triangular, rectangular and trapezoidal)

• Broad-crested (rectangular, trapezoidal and circular)

2. FLUMES

• Long-throated (modified broad-crested weir)

• Short-throated (Parshall flume)

• Throatless (cutthroat)

3. CURRENT METERS

• Anemometer and propeller current meter

• Electromagnetic velocity meter

• Doppler velocity meter

• Optical strobe velocity meter

Sharp-crested weirs: Sharp-crested weirs are one of the oldest open channel flow

measuring device. The difference in water surface elevation between upstream and

downstream (head loss) must be large enough to allow complete free overfall. The usual

recommendation is that the downstream water surface should be at least 5 cm below the

crest opening. A weir discharge measurement consists of measuring depth or head

relative to the crest at the proper upstream location in the weir pool, and then using a table

43


or equation for the specific kind and size of weir to determine discharge. Accurate

measurements of submerged sharp-crested weir discharges cannot be made because of the

spread of measured data when determining correction factors for drowned or submerged

weirs. Skogerboe et al. (1967) showed plots of correction factor curves for several weirs

with actual data points plotted around them. The range of data spread of submergence

corrected discharge was ±15 percent.

Broad-crested weir: Broad-crested weir has a raised overflow crest, commonly a flat

horizontal block. Broad-crested weirs often have special approach transitions ahead of

and up to the crest surface, such as nose treatments like ramps and rounded corners. Crest

length in the direction of flow is generally long enough, relative to the measuring head, to

make the effect of flow curvature insignificant and short enough to prevent friction from

controlling depths. These weirs can be computer calibrated when flow curvature is

insignificant. Submergence does not affect broad-crested weirs up to about 80% with a

vertical downstream drop and up to about 90% with sloped downstream transitions

(USBR, 2001).

Long-throated flume: Long-throated flumes are also called modified broad-crested weir

because the control section is formed both by raising the channel bottom and narrowing

the width. These flumes can be constructed on site or used as a portable device for

measurement in lined and unlined irrigation channels. Long-throated flumes can be

computer calibrated to within ±2% and can be designed to have submergence limit

(modular limit) ranging from 65 – 95% depending on discharge rate, shape and exit

channel energy conditions.

Short-throated flume: Short-throated flumes control flow in a region that produces

curvilinear flow. Although they may be termed short throated but the overall specified

length of the finished structure, including transitions, may be relatively long. The Parshall

flume is the most common example of this type of flume. A detailed and accurate

knowledge of the individual streamline curvatures are required for calculating the flume

ratings. The calibrations for short-throated flumes are determined empirically by

comparison with other more precise and accurate water measuring devices. Designing and

setting Parshall flumes for submerged flow measurement is not usually recommended

because less expensive, long-throated flumes can be designed that approach or exceed

90% submergence limits with a single upstream head measurement (USBR, 2001).

44


Cutthroat flume: Cutthroat flumes belong to the class of throatless flumes which are

formed by directly connecting a 6:1 converging section to a similar diverging section and

provided with a flat bottom. The level flume floor permits placing the device directly on

an existing channel bed without further excavation. The cutthroat flume was developed

for use in flat gradient channels under both free and submerged flow conditions. The

transition from critical (free) to subcritical (submerged) flow occurs for submergence

ratios of 79 to 88%, depending upon size of the flume.

The several reviews reveal that the weirs and flumes raise water surfaces in the upstream

channel which cause losses beyond those which normally occur. Hence, greater

inaccuracies are caused by the perturbation of the flow than the random and systematic

errors during measurement.

Current Meters: The velocity of flow in a channel or pipe may be measured directly

with a current meter where the discharge is estimated by multiplying the mean velocity of

flow by channel cross-section. The channel at the measuring section should be straight

with a fairly regular cross-section. The cross-section of flow is divided into a number of

sub-areas or verticals and mean velocity of flow is measured for each of the sub-area. The

recommended method for establishing the mean velocity in a vertical is the two point

method (USGS, 1980; USBR, 2001) where, at first the velocity is measured at 0.2 and

then at 0.8 of the depth from water surface. The average of the two measurements will be

used as mean velocity of the vertical. The two point method should not be used where the

depth of flow is less than 60 cm. For shallow depths less than 60 cm, the six-tenths depth

method should be used by measuring the velocity at 0.6 of the depth from water surface.

Beside these most commonly used methods, a Three-Points method is also used when the

velocities in the vertical appear to be abnormally distributed (Khan et al., 1997). The

current meter measurements are taken at 0.2, 0.6 and 0.8 of the flow depths. The mean

velocity in the vertical is obtained by first averaging the velocities measured at 0.2 and

0.8 of the flow depth, then averaging the results with the velocity measured at 0.6 of the

flow depth. The method may be used where the flow depths are more than 75 cm (USGS,

1980).

Among the described types the propeller current meter and the electromagnetic velocity

meters are most commonly used for irrigation water measurement. The propeller current

meters uses cup wheels or propellers to sense velocity. They are calibrated in a towing

45


tank and the obtained data will be used to develop a regression equation and a rating table

for the current meter. The propeller current meters are classified according to their use in

large and small canals. The Price current meter is usually used to measure velocity of

flow in large canals and streams, whereas the Pygmy current meter which is smaller in

size is used in small channels or shallow waters and may also be used for measuring

velocities closer to flow boundaries in large canals. The use of Pygmy meters is limited to

velocities upto 1.2 m/sec. The accuracy of propeller type current meters is normally rated

as ±5%. In contrast to the propeller meters, the electromagnetic velocity meters have no

moving parts and it works on the principle of Faraday’s law of electromagnetic induction.

The device consists of a sensor that is to be immersed in flowing water and is connected

to the display unit through a cable. The sensor is mounted on a standard wading rod

similar to that used with the current meters. When the sensor is placed in flowing water,

its magnetic field creates a voltage. This voltage is sensed by electrodes embedded in the

sensor and is transmitted through the cable to the display meter. The voltage amplitude,

representing the rate of water flowing around the sensor, is electronically processed and

displayed on the meter. Head loss through the meter is negligible and accuracy is rated as

±1.0% (USDA, 1997; USBR, 2001).

2.4 ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF WATERCOURSE LINING

The objective of watercourse lining is to reduce the conveyance and seepage losses in

watercourse irrigation system and get additional area under irrigated agriculture through

the use of water saved by lining and to increase the farming production. The main

objective is to improve the economic status of the farmers of respective command areas

by increasing their income through increased crop yield. Various studies have been

conducted to determine the economic impact of lining which are summarized as follows:

Mohammad karimi. (2013) concluded that under the watercourse of Zavin village, it is

observed after the watercourse lining cultivated area of wheat and Barley has increased as

25%. The average yield of wheat and barley has increased 300 and 500 Kg per hectare,

respectively. After the watercourse lining in Gonabad village, cultivated area and yield of

wheat 14.29% and 20%, barley 20% and 40%, Onion 33.33% and 40%, tomato 33.33%

and 33.33% has increased. After the channel lining in Sultanabad village cultivated area

46


and yield of wheat 40% and 40% barley 50% and 33.33%, Apple 42.85% and 33.33%,

pears 50% and 36.36% . By comparing the annual uniform cost of watercourses lining

with increasing annual income of farmer the result was that channels lining makes

economy prosperity. The annual income of farmers in Abgarrm, Zavin, Sultanabad and

Gonabad villages increased 84, 13, 83, and 63%, respectively.

Chaudhary et al. (2004) evaluated the impact of watercourse lining on cropping intensity,

crop yield and gross farm income. The study was conducted in four districts of Punjab,

Pakistan. They interviewed about 140 farmers from different sites in the study area. The

study results showed that the cropping intensity and gross farm income was higher by 14

and 30%, respectively. Similarly, the crops yield of sugarcane, wheat, rice fodder and

citrus grown on land served by lined watercourses was higher by 9, 15, 14, 8 and 16%

respectively. They concluded that before lining, 90% of the farmers were unaware of the

economic benefit of watercourses lining.

IWASRI (2004) discussed the studies carried out by Watercourse Monitoring and

Evaluation Directorate (WM & ED) of WAPDA, Lahore, Pakistan. The analysis of

agronomical data revealed enhanced of 3.1% of cropping intensity in the lined

watercourses areas as compared to the unlined.

WAPDA (1994) conducted economic impact evaluation of OFWM-I & II. Four partially

lined watercourses were selected from each of the two projects, hence a total of eight

watercourses were tested for economic evaluation. The main indicators identified for the

evaluation include; conveyance efficiency, irrigated area, cropping intensity, crop yields

and gross farm income.

The economic evaluation results are summarized as under:

The area cropped in the cultivable command area (CCA) of the watercourses

augmented in three out of four cases for each OFWM project, whereas, it was not

sure that the enhanced cropping in the CCA was caused by the lining, it observed

to be related indirectly to the improved water supply.

Overall area of crops grown in the command areas of the OFWM-I lined

watercourses enhanced by over 12%, while for OFWM-II the augment was 10%.

The cropping intensity for OFWM-I augmented from 151 to 157% and from 151

to 175% for OFWM-II project.

47


The gross farm income of the crops produced in CCAs was increased by 17 and

30% for OFWM-I & II, respectively.

PERI (1993) reported that lining of watercourses has increased the cropping intensity

from 151 to 175% in a study area of Punjab. The yield of wheat, rice, sugarcane, cotton

and maize on areas served by lined watercourses was higher by 11, 17, 15, 7 and 23%,

respectively. The gross farm income per acre on areas served by lined watercourses was

23% higher than on areas served by unlined watercourses.

PERI (1987) conducted an evaluation survey for comparison the performance of lined and

unlined watercourses in Punjab, Pakistan. They selected 16 lined and 16 unlined

watercourses where 143 farmers were interviewed from each type. They concluded that

the cropping intensity on lined channels was increased by nine percent and the yield of

sugarcane, rice and wheat was augmented by 9, 16 and 8%, respectively.

WAPDA (1984a) conducted a study for economic impact evaluation of 36 improved

watercourses randomly selected in Pakistan. The cropping intensity on the improved

watercourses was augmented by 16%, whereas average crop yield was increased by 34%.

Renfro (1983) studied the economic impact of ten unlined and ten lined watercourses near

Faisalabad Pakistan. The researcher interviewed 129 farmers on different sites of the

selected watercourses and data was collected about area irrigated, crop yield, cropping

intensity and gross farm income under unlined and lined circumstances. He found that the

farmers on lined watercourses obtained 18% more water supply per acre as compared to

the unlined. The average gross farm income per acre was evaluated to be twelve percent

higher on lined watercourses.

OFWM (1982) evaluated the performance of eleven lined watercourses in Punjab,

Pakistan and concluded that the cropping intensity in the respective command areas was

augmented by twenty percent. Area of major crops was also increased. Due to reduction

in water losses, the yield of major crops, wheat, cotton, maize and sugarcane were

increased by 18, 21, 16 and 11%, respectively.

WAPDA (1982) conducted an evaluation survey of 45 lined watercourses, which were

selected randomly throughout the country. The results showed that average delivery

48


efficiency of these watercourses augmented from 56 to 68%. The yield per acre was

increased an average of 36% for wheat, rice, cotton and sugarcane.

Hussain et al. (1977) studied the economic impact of watercourse improvement on farm

economy at MREP, Bhalwal, Pakistan. They selected two sampled watercourses, one was

brick mortar lined and second was earthen improved. The data was collected through

interviewing the farmers. The study results revealed that the cropping intensity at the

command area of lined watercourse augmented by 37%. The yield of rice, wheat and

sugarcane was enhanced by 31, 47 and 42% after lining of the channel. The farmers’

gross income was reported to be increased by 26%.

2.5 RESOURCE CONSERVATION INTERVENTIONS

The resource conservation interventions (RCIs) are Zero tillage, laser land levelling and

Bed-furrow interventions. The increasing prices of the inputs like tillage, seeds, irrigation

water, fertilizers and herbicide demand their judicious use. Therefore, resource

conservation interventions must be implemented to reduce the production cost, augment

the soil fertility, enhance in the efficiency of irrigation water and fertilizers and less use of

chemicals for the improvement of environmentally safe and economically feasible wheat

production in the country. Hence, resource conservation interventions would help to

achieve these objectives. The numerous studies carried out the economic impact of RCIs

for wheat are briefly reviewed below.

China is the main wheat crop producer and consumer country in the world and wheat

status as the third important crop in China after rice. The wheat production, average yield

and the wheat cropped area were 105 million tonnes (mt), 4487 kg/ha and 23.4 million

hectare, respectively in 2007 (Li, 2008).

Erenstein et al, (2008) stated that the early impacts of these RCIs using early adoption

data have been standard. The results revealed that there is significant saving in the cost of

production of wheat.

Gupta and Seth (2007) reported that a well deal of research endeavours has been done by

the national R&D system to improve and distribute resource-conservation interventions

(RCIs) for Rice-Wheat Cropping System RWS in the Indo-Gangetic Plains (IGP). Rice-

49


Wheat Consortium (RWC) has further stabilized these efforts by promoting research

organizations and establishing additional resources. As a result, zero-tillage wheat and

other resource conservation interventions like raised bed planting and laser land levelling

(LLL) were improved through on-farm study.

Rajaram et al. (2007) reported that wheat is the most commonly grown and consumed

food crop and is the main food for 35% of the world population. The irrigated wheat crop

contributes above 40% of wheat production in the developing countries. To meet the

growing wheat demand, the worldwide production require 1.6 to 2.6% annual growth

rate, which can be mainly attained through improvement in input use efficiency.

Yi et al. (2007) stated that timely sowing of wheat is necessary, since wheat yield can be

significantly reduced with delays of 7–14 days after the optimum time. Augmented

seeding rates and improved applications of irrigation water and fertilizers are mandatory

to achieve high yields following late planting of wheat seed.

GOP (2006) stated that wheat is the main essential food crop of the people of Pakistan

however; its average yield is far less in Pakistan than the other wheat growing countries,

like Mexico, Egypt, U.S.A, etc. Wheat occupies a significant position in forming

agricultural rules. It contributes 3.0% to the value added to GDP and 13.7% in

agriculture.

Humphreys et al. (2005) reported that in terms of water use, latest performance evaluation

researches have recorded that these Resource Conservation interventions can be

successful in improving field level irrigation efficiency, consequently in savings in water

application.

RWC (2004) reported that the international and national research organizations and

donors have made concentrated efforts to improve environmental sustainability and

productivity of RWS. Combination of research efforts of the national agricultural research

systems and the CGIAR (Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research)

Centres in the area and mobilization of additional resources from international donors

have been attempted through several research groups and programs. In terms of research

effort, major thrusts zones followed were improvement of tillage and crop residue

management and high yielding of rice and wheat, nutrient management and reclamation

of salt-affected lands and water. Analysis of economic issues, on-farm demonstrations

50


and experimentations, Small-scale mechanization and system diversification also received

huge attention. These programmes led to numerous significant outcomes. In particularly,

the resource conservation interventions like zero tillage, raised bed planting and laser land

levelling made substantial impacts.

Chand and Pal, (2003) stated that rice-wheat cropping system (RWS) in India is mostly

practiced in the states of Uttar Pradesh (UP), Haryana, Punjab, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh

(MP) and West Bengal. However, abundant of the RWS zone is concerted in the states of

Punjab, Haryana, UP, and Bihar. Stability of the region under RWS or even development

wherever suitable reveals that rice and wheat crops still enjoy superiority over other

crops, both in terms of economic returns and their stability. Price policy, market and

Infrastructure also favour rice and wheat crops, resulting government market operations

and widespread farming of the system.

Sidhu (2003) reported that from the mid-1980s, researchers, extension specialists,

farmers, local machinery manufacturers and machinery importers have been practicing to

adapt RCIs in South Asia’s rice-wheat cropping zones. Recommendation has revealed in

recent years to propose that these efforts are commencing to bear fruit. Data collected

from selected fields being observed on a long-term basis indicate that RCIs provide a

wide array of benefits, including lower production costs, improved water and fertilizer

use efficiency, higher yields, better control of diseases and pests and decreased

greenhouse gas emissions.

Gupta et al. (2002) reported that the rice-wheat cropping system of the Indo-Gangetic

Plains (IGP) is essential for food security, livelihoods and employment for millions of

urban and rural poor in the region. Recently, evidences recommend that sustainability of

RW cropping system is at menace as the productivity of the system is static for previous

several years and total factor productivity is falling because due to weakened natural

resource base, increasing water shortage, changing climate, rising fuel prices, labour

deficiency and negative effects of puddling on soil health. Therefore, the system needs

infusion of new interventions to enhance productivity, sustainability and income. In

recent years, the main stress in RW cropping system has been on implementing Resource

conservation interventions to curtail the production costs and enhance the profit margin of

the farmers.

51


Feder et al. (2001) reported that for majority of the rural poverty in developing countries;

improving each day value of life needs developments in agricultural productivity. With

the slow decline of government support for public agricultural study, extension, and

marketing in many of these sceneries, the distribution of new agricultural interventions

and methods is progressively formed by the private sector.

Gill (2001) reported that about 80% wheat crop area in Pakistan is irrigated by wide canal

irrigation system, improved with tubewells water. Due to continuous dry spell over the

previous various years, both surface and groundwater sources are declining.

Chaudhary et al. (1999) reported that in Punjab, 34% area is devoted for wheat of the total

cultivable area. The districts of Sheikhupura, Lahore, Narowal, Gujranwala, Hafizabad,

Kasur, Sialkot and Gujrat cover an area of 1.1 million ha for rice-wheat zone in Punjab.

In these regions, 72% of wheat is grown in rotation with rice. But, its yield is low as

compared to other cropping zones in Pakistan.

MINFA (1998) reported that wheat is the essential basic food of the people of Pakistan

but, its production is below than demand in the country. Wheat is frequently imported to

provide the needs of the population. Hence, in 1998, 4.11 million ton wheat was imported

in the country. In the next ten years, the demand of wheat will be 25 to 30 million ton.

Such a huge demand could only be met by vertically augmenting the yield.

Woodhead et al., (1994) reported that the improvement of the rice-wheat cropping system

(RWS) in the Indo-Gangetic Plains in a way represents the track of agricultural

development in South Asia. While this system has been implemented since the 16th

century, it distribute extensively with the development of canal and tubewell irrigation

during the 1960s and 1970s. Accessibility of high-yielding varieties of rice and wheat has

further increased the area under RWS; introduce the Green Revolution in the region.

Eventually, this system revealed as one of the most wide spread, extremely important and

intensively cultivated for the agricultural prosperity and food security. It is assessed that

RWS is followed on more than 14 million hectares of agricultural lands and

approximately two-thirds of the existing cereal supplies comes from this system in the

South Asia.

Byerlee and Moya (1993) reported that there are significant differences between

developing and developed countries regarding who grows the wheat crops and how wheat

52


is grown. Less than 5% of the total wheat produced in developed countries (and also in

Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay) comes from irrigated areas, whereas large-scale farmers

are by far the most important wheat producers. In contrast, well over 50% of wheat

production in developing counties (especially for large producing countries in China and

south Asia) comes from irrigated areas, and the huge majority of these farmers are very

small-scale.

Huang (1992) concluded that in high yielding regions of Henan and Shandong provinces,

China, the average wheat yield obtained 4.5 t/ha due to the more frequent irrigations,

augmented seeding rates, improved soil fertility and enhanced input of fertilizers, in the

1970s.

Mann, (1988) concluded that with the same area of wheat i.e., 8.45 million hectare (Mha),

at least double wheat yield (42 m.t.) can be achieved if better water management, seed,

nutrient and tillage practices are used in Punjab, Pakistan.

2.5.1 Zero Tillage Intervention

Cai et al. (2008) reported that the retaining of crop residues on the soil surface usually

related with conservation agriculture-based zero tillage system has a significant impact on

soil water storage.

Gupta and Seth (2007) reported that wheat can be shown on residual moisture after

paddy, thus pre-sowing irrigation can be avoided. Furthermore, water requirement for

wheat during first irrigation is much less under ZT wheat as compared to CT. Thus, there

is significant reduction in water requirement. Research data have sown that average water

saving in wheat under ZT could be 36%. Water use reduction with ZT in first irrigation is

30-50% and 15-20% in subsequent irrigation. Water use could be further reduced if ZT is

used in combination with other interventions like laser land levelling. They also found

that experimentation is initiated to additional improve incorporation of paddy residue

through use of developed ZT drill with disk furrow opener. In this technique, entire paddy

straw can be left on land surface and wheat can be sown under ZT. This has various

further merits. First, there is coverage of land surface which curtails evapotranspiration

losses and therefore maintains temperature and soil moisture, which are favourable for

plant growth. Secondly, mulching effect destroys weed (about 40% less weed infestation)

53


and enhances plant population. Also there is reduction of weedicide, resulting into

additional environmental and economic benefits. Finally, farmers may not burn paddy

straw for sowing of wheat, as done under Conventional technique and therefore

generating significant environmental advantages.

Singh et al. (2007) concluded that farmers had positive attitude towards zero tillage

intervention, but non adopters need to be encouraged to implement zero tillage

intervention. Zero tillage intervention has been quickly accepted by farmers due to its

impact in reducing cost of production, improving crop yields and conservation of

resources.

Laxmi et al. (2007) reported that in these days, the resource-conserving intervention that

has been more successful in the IGP is zero tillage planting of wheat after rice especially

by using a tractor drawn ZT seed drill.

Malik et al. (2005) found that a profit-driven benefit of zero tillage intervention has

endorsed for small and medium farmers to increase reliance in this intervention.

Significant endeavours were made to encourage the farmers to implement zero tillage

intervention.

Malik et al. (2005a) concluded that on-farm and on-station experiments with ZT wheat in

the rice–wheat cropping zones of the IGP have revealed mostly positive impacts on wheat

crop management, particularly through curtailed input requirements combined with

potential yield augments. The practice of ZT substantially decreases energy costs, mainly

by reducing tractor costs related with traditional techniques.

Hobbs and Gupta, (2003) reported Laser land levelling and Zero tillage interventions are

to date the most commonly implemented in Pakistan, with use centred on the Punjab and

other rice-wheat cropping zones While two primary impacts from these interventions are

expected to be water savings and augmented crop yield.

Hobbs & Gupta (2002) concluded that extensive implementation of zero-tillage

intervention could have significant benefits for South Asia in particularly and for the

world in general. Surface and ground water quality problems are often related with

pollution creating from urban areas and point sources. An augmenting use of cultivation,

pesticides and chemical fertilizers has a measurable and significant effect on freshwaters

54


and the eutrophication of lakes, rivers and enclosed water bodies is a serious concern.

Implementation of conservation tillage interventions can significantly reduce soil erosion

and related Non-Point Sources (NPS) pollution.

Limon-Ortega et al. (2002) discussed that Crop residues accumulating on the land surface

form a cover to reduce soil temperature and water loss by evaporation. More stable land

aggregate structure is present under ZT as compared to CT.

Khan et al. (2002) compared zero tillage sown wheat with waddwattar and rauni

technique of wheat sowing. Economic analysis revealed that zero tillage intervention was

more beneficial as compared to the rauni and waddwattar method. They also reported that

the fields which are cultivated by zero tillage intervention; there were less than 60%

weeds intrusion as compared to traditional methods.

Hobbs (2001) reported that as an alternate to the traditional tillage, zero tillage

intervention practices direct seeding of wheat crop just after harvest of rice with the help

of zero-till seed drill without preliminary ploughing. Hence, zero-tillage ensures early

sowing of wheat, reduces cost of cultivation and saves irrigation water. In case of zero-

tillage, some of the farmers used harvester for the removal of paddy straw and incurred

further cost of Rs. 150/acre. Some farmers also burnt the paddy straw in the field and

even some farmers directly used strip tillage drill in the standing stubbles of rice. This

intervention holds pledge of managing rice residues more efficiently than any other

currently available opportunities.

Similarly, one author also stated that there is sufficient residue soil moisture after

harvesting of rice crop. If the soil is ploughed by conventional technique, it will not only

dissipate the moisture reserved in the soil but also causes further physical and financial

issues for the farmers in term of ploughing, planking and irrigation before sowing (rauni).

Moreover, it often delays seeding for the wheat crop which may decrease the crop yield.

According to some researchers, in Pakistan, sowing after mid of November may decrease

wheat yield at the rate of one percent per day (Aslam et al. 1999).

Saturnino and Landers (2001) reported that significant wheat yield augment and income

stability for the farmer lead to a widely implementation of the ZT intervention in Brazil.

55


Du et al.(2000) concluded that four-year average net economic incomes for wheat crop

grown in the zero tillage cropping system augmented by approximately 30%, compared

with the conventional tillage system, as a result of both lower production costs and higher

wheat yields.

Tuong (1999) concluded after several Studies that evaporation losses could be diminished

by saving in duration of land preparation and zero tillage intervention essentially meet

this objective.

Bell (1997) discussed that the Zero-tillage intervention is a different tillage system which

causes several physical variations in the soil. The scope and type of changes depend upon

soil type, farming and climate history. Farmers who adopt zero-tillage intervention from

few years commonly observed more organic matter and soil moisture retention, better

seedbed cultivation and more earthworms. These improvements are due to variations in

soil physical, biological and chemical conditions, which occur with consecutive years of

low disturbance seeding into standing crop residues.

Hobbs et al. (1997) concluded that the higher yield in zero-tillage intervention was

attributed to well-timed sowing of wheat crop, improved germination and crop stand,

improved fertilizer use efficiency and light interception. Also, zero-tillage and bed-furrow

interventions wheat sowing produced relatively higher yield than the traditional wheat

sowing technique. Bed-furrow planting either with two rows or three rows of crop plays a

significant role in water saving and the technique is quite suitable for low-lying regions

and quality seed production.

Fujisaka et al. (1994 reported that reduction in cost of production is highly important in

the context of creating the farm products more competitive in the international market.

Implementation of zero tillage intervention is one such step in this direction. Planting of

wheat after rice in the Indo-Gangetic plains under traditional tillage comprises pre-sowing

irrigation, intensive land preparation and finally sowing on fine plough land. These

processes consume labour, time, energy and irrigation water, which delay seeding of

wheat and result in poor plant growth and crop yield.

Lawrence et al. (1994) reported that in Australia, consistent merits in wheat yield for ZT

intervention as compared to CT technique in four years experiments.

56


Brandt (1992) reported that the wheat yield can be improved with ZT intervention which

providing an adequate plant stands and weed control in west-central Saskatchewan,

Canada.

Dickey et al. (1992) discussed that in zero-tillage intervention, soil is left undisturbed

from the harvest of one crop to the sowing of the coming crop, with only slight land

disturbance associated with forming a narrow furrow for placement of seeds.

Additionally, the dangers of environmental and ecological problems like water logging

and secondary salinization, air pollution due to burning of crop residues, decrease of

organic matter, soil degradation, nutrient imbalances and injudicious application of

pesticides and fertilizers are curtailed in the conservation tillage intervention.

Aslam et al. (1991) stated that a simple drill has been manufactured locally. Therefore,

zero-tillage wheat production pilot project in the Punjab rice-wheat cropping zone was

launched. In this project, locally manufactured drills and inputs were provided to farmers

free of cost. As a part of the research, a survey was also conducted with the goal to

evaluate the farmer’s point of view about the adoption of zero tillage intervention (ZTI).

In Zero tillage intervention, the average yield of wheat crop was 28 maunds/acre, whilst,

in traditional technique, the average yield of 23.7 maunds/acre was evaluated.

Aslam et al. (1989) concluded that during Study work on zero tillage intervention

revealed favourable findings. Direct seeding of wheat in rice stubbles through zero tillage

technique was compared with traditional technique from 1984 to 1988 over 34 sites.

Overall zero tillage intervention gave 10% more grain yield compared to current farmer’s

practices. Where seeding dates between treatments different, the average yield of zero

tillage intervention was 41% greater than farmer’s practices. High yield with zero tillage

technique was, therefore, mainly due to timely sowing. Others reasons associated with

higher yields in zero tillage technique were lesser weeds and better seedling establishment

than the traditional technique. They also reported that in the preceding on-farm tests in

Pakistan revealed that ZT wheat enhanced the crop standard and yielded 10–40% higher

as compared to traditional under different wheat sowing regimes and soil types.

Sorrenson and Montoya, (1989) have reported potential advantages to implementation of

Zero Tillage intervention as.

57


Cost of erosion: Considering losses of soil of 10 t/ha/year on the 6 million ha and the

value of the macronutrients.

Reduction in fertilizers cost: The savings by spreading small phosphorus in zero tillage

systems.

Eradication in costs of replanting: Reducing costs of replanting after erosion.

Reductions in herbicides: The potential reducing by planting black oats followed by

soybean for weed destruction could be greater than US$5.7 million.

Reduction in fuel: The expected saving in costs of fuel needed for soil preparation was

greater than US$1.9 million in 1984.

Costs of physical management works: The reductions on maintaining and constructing

terraces could reach US$1.2 million. The value of the further production resulting from

additional land being available because of the decrease in the number of terraces required

is assessed at about US$3.2 million.

Augment in production: The cost of additional production was appraised at a minimum

of US$5.7 million in 1984 on the basis of the differences in crops' yield between

traditional and direct drilling cultivation study in the experiments.

Externalities: Eroded soil approaching from cropped regions tends to Sediment Rivers,

roads, etc. and enhances pollution in the water.

Analysis of cost-benefit ratio of soil management: Savings of US$19 million/year

would provide a profit of twenty percent per year with the widespread implementation of

suitable practices (particularly crop rotations and zero tillage) over a time period of 20

years.

2.5.2 Laser Land Leveling Intervention

Jat et al. (2009) reported that as Laser land levelling (LLL) was first introduced in 2001 in

western Uttar Pradesh in India, the number of laser land levellers design to 925 and the

fields under LLL cultivated to 200,000 hectares in 2008. A series of researches on LLL in

rice-wheat cropping zones of the IGP have concluded 10-30% irrigation savings, 3-6%

effective enhances in agricultural area, 6-7% augment in nitrogen use efficiency, and 3-

19% yield enhance.

58


Jat et al. (2006) reported that Laser land levelling is a new resource conserving

intervention in East Uttar Pradesh (EUP), but existing in other regions of the Indo-

Gangetic Plains (IGP). In the IGP, in surface irrigated rice-wheat cropping system, 10-

25% of irrigation water is lost due to uneven fields and poor management. Uneven fields

also lead to inefficient use of chemicals and fertilizers, lower yields, enhanced biotic and

abiotic stress. They also concluded that wide practice of LLL to 2 million hectares of rice-

wheat land in the IGP could save 200 million liters of diesel and 1.5 million hectare-

meters of irrigation water, decrease greenhouse gas emissions by 0.5 million metric tons

and increase crop yields by $500 million in three years.

Jat and Chandana (2004) reported an addition of 3-5% average area under farming due to

precision land levelling intervention.

Pal et al. (2004) reported that a substantial enhance in the agronomy and application

efficiency as well as apparent recovery fraction of the used nitrogen, phosphate and

potash in wheat due to precision land levelling compared to conventional levelling.

Jat et al (2004) analysis the economics of laser levelling intervention in wheat for two

consecutive years and concluded that in the first year of wheat cropping although the

incomes were slightly less compared to conventional levelling but in the succeeding year

there was significant enhance in the financial advantage compared to conventional

levelling practice.

Ren et al. (2003) concluded that the study of existing literature on land levelling revealed

positive impact on farm productivity, water saving and crop yield.

Rajput and Patel (2003) reported that in on-farm researches the plot size of wheat was

augmented from 50 x 12 m without levelling to 50 x 20 m with precision land levelling

intervention. Also, stated that contrary to that on practice hiring basis laser levelling for

wheat production was determined beneficial even in the first year.

Sattar et al. (2003) reported that the significant improvement in water application and

distribution efficiency with precision land levelling compared to conventional levelling.

Chaudhary et al. (2002) showed the impact of laser land levelling on the yield of wheat

sown on several dates. In general, as the time of sowing is delayed, the yield reduced.

However, the marginal curtail in the yield because of delayed sowing (from 1st to 2nd

59


and 2nd to 3rd date of sowing) was much higher in conventionally sown wheat (774.5 and

1425.5 kg/ha) compared to sowing under laser land levelling (346 and 581 kg/ha). Also,

concluded that higher water use efficiency (1.67%) with laser levelling compared to

conventional levelling (1.10%) during on-farm investigations. They observed higher

fertilizer use efficiency (26.91%) by laser levelling compared to conventional levelling

(21.67%) in wheat crop. They also reported enhance in net income of Rs. 5125/ha from

wheat grown with laser levelled field compared to traditional levelling.

Rickman (2002) concluded that improves crop establishment and enhancing field size

from 0.1 hectare to 0.5 hectare which increases the farming area from 5 to 7% due to

precision land levelling intervention. This augment in farming area gives the option to the

farmer to redesign the farming area that can decrease operating time by 10 to 15%. Also,

reported that significant reduction of 75% in labour requirement for weeding was

observed due to precision levelling. There is a strong relationship between the land

levelling and crop yield and significant augment in yield of crops is possible due to

precision levelling.

El-Raie et al. (2004) concluded that the laser land levelling saves farm inputs like water

and fertilizers, encourages even germination and improves crop yield.

Gill (1998) concluded that uneven fields and poor farm design are responsible for thirty

percent water application losses. Approximately, eighteen million-acre feet (MAF) of

water are lost to irrigate uneven fields in Pakistan.

Anonymous (1997) stated that land levelling of farmer’s field is an essential process in

the preparation of land. It permits efficient utilization of limited water resources through

elimination of unnecessary elevated and depressions contours.

Landon (1995) reported that salinity spots in the leaching down and elevated parts of soil

nutrients from the root zone in lower patches of uneven fields can impute towards low

crop production. Also, concluded that laser levelling intervention can ensure precision

and very accurate land levelling to the limit of ±2 cm. Approximately 700,000 acres have

been levelled in Punjab out of which 50,000 have been levelled with the help of laser

intervention and its benefits have been extensively accepted by the farmers.

60


Nazir (1994) reported that precision land levelling assisted application efficiency through

uniform distribution of water and augmented water-use efficiency that resulted in better

crop growth, uniform seed germination and higher crop yield.

Burton (1994) reported that augment in wheat grain yield in laser land levelling was

highly substantial over conventionally levelled fields.

Cheema and zulfiqar (1989) reported that attributed more production in precision land

levelling to more constant ‘Wattar’ conditions that assisted timely preparation of soil and

timely seeding of crop as compared to uneven fields. The reason for low yield in

unlevelled field might be uneven distribution of water over the field which severely

reduced the yield in elevated and lower spots.

Ahmedjanov et al. (1988) concluded that in 1980s, levelling of surface of the irrigated

blocks became main use in Soviet Central Asian countries. The land levelling was used as

water saving technique and has revealed favourable results. Water use have been reduced

by 1,500 m3 per ha in levelled fields.

Khan (1986) reported that in Sind and Punjab province of Pakistan, due to precision land

levelling 2 to 3% increase in cultivable area and also concluded that precision land

levelling intervention helps uniform distribution of soluble salts in salt affected regions.

Tyagi (1984) informed that the yields were higher by 50% in precision levelled plots

compared to conventional levelled plots.

Khepar (1982) monitored a decrease of 270 kg/ ha for each unit enhance in topographic

index from 0.5 to 2.82 cm. It can therefore, be determined that precision land levelling is

the most effective intervention to improve yield of the crops irrigated by surface methods.

Eckert et al. (1975) reported that the precision land levelling improve uniform soil

moisture for germination, irrigation application efficiency, improve fertilization

efficiency, reduction in salt accumulation, augment cultivable land and yields and

decrease delivery losses.

2.5.3 Bed-Furrow Intervention

Jat et al. (2009) reported that in the latest years, sowing of wheat on raised bed

intervention is being promoted in South Asia for improving resource use efficiencies,

61


especially water use efficiency (WUE). However, significant augment in water use

efficiency on laser levelling fields intervention has been concluded by various researchers

under several climatic and soil conditions.

Sayre, (2004) discussed that raised bed planting intervention application has

conventionally been associated with water management problems, to irrigate crops in

semi-arid and arid zones where water productivity is comparatively low or to reduce the

contrary impact of excess water on crop yield. He also reported that a more widely used

application of raised beds in many arid and semi-arid regions is seeding crops on the

ridges or edges of beds that are formed between furrows used to supply irrigation water.

This system has been implemented in dry areas of China, Zimbabwe and Central Asia

where irrigation systems were established and also in the arid regions, western United

States.

Sayre & Hobbs (2004) concluded that wheat has superficial/shallow root system. The soft

soils of fresh beds not only support in the growth of seed but also help the development of

roots and consequently improve the vegetative growth of the crop.

Wang et al. (2004) reported that a bed-furrow planting intervention for wheat cropping

system was established in Mexico by which a definite number of rows of wheat are

planted on the tops of ridges with furrow irrigation between the beds. This manipulates

some of the demerits of flood irrigation such as inefficient use of nitrogen, low potential

irrigation water use efficiency, degradation of some soil properties, higher levels of crop

lodging and crusting of the soil surface.

Mann and Meisner (2003) and RWC (2002) reported that crops are grown on the raised

beds and irrigated by furrows in raised bed planting intervention. Dimensions of raised

beds and furrows are best dictated by the tractor type size and width. It is best to practice

narrow tyres for crop sowing in raised bed system to avoid compaction of raised beds by

wide tyres. This system can also be applied to plant intercrops in several patterns. Raised

bed planting intervention promotes crop diversification and intensification besides saving

irrigation water. In raised bed intervention, 30-40% water saves as compared to

conventional irrigation practice.

Kahlown et al. (2002) stated that the On-Farm Water Management (OFWM), which has

been working for the last two decades, has presented efficient irrigation interventions

62


through better conveyance systems, well water application and watercourse improvement.

The bed-furrow sowing intervention is a significant improvement in the application

efficiencies of using irrigation water. It has been also reported that significant amounts

(10-25%) of irrigation water is lost during application at the field level due to uneven

fields and poor management.

Mann et al. (2002) reported that in Pakistan, Bed-furrow intervention for wheat has

special function. In the low-lying regions with weak drainage system, the bed-furrow

planting technique is more suitable than traditional intervention. Therefore, conservation

tillage intervention is the precise solution to all the problems risking to eco-friendly and

sustainable wheat production system in the country.

Sayre (2000) reported that the wheat planting on raised beds with two or three sowing

rows is practiced on the entire region of north-western in Mexico.

Vaidyanathan, A. (1999) found that the established features of surface irrigation

concentrating on maintenance of channel system and cost recovery should be accorded

due significance. Furthermore technological advancements like water-reduction

interventions for efficient use of irrigation water deserve high priority. Some efforts have

been made in this direction and the success is limited to raised bed planting and zero-

tillage in wheat.

Aquino (1998) concluded that the Bed-furrow intervention implemented in the irrigated

areas of northwest, Mexico, the farmers that grow wheat using the sowing system on beds

obtain 8% high yield, use about 25% less irrigation water and encounter at least 25% less

operational costs compared to those still sowing conventional tilled wheat on the flat

using flood irrigation. The latest economic field survey has revealed that the average bed-

furrow planted wheat yield is approximately 10% higher than for flood irrigation.

Kahlown et al. (1998) reported that the establishment of suitable crop specific layouts can

improve the application efficiency of available irrigation water resources. Different

interventions have been developed for efficient application of irrigation water and for

reducing water loss in the field. The bed-furrow irrigation intervention is one of the most

efficient surface water application techniques.

63


2.6 SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW

The review of losses from unlined watercourses is studied. The reviewed losses are

varying in magnitude from 11 – 70% of the inflow whereas the average loss is found to

be 43.4%. The variation in loss results may be attributed to the methods of loss

measurement, length of channel wetted perimeter, number of turnouts along the channel

length, channel bed material. The results of losses in ponding tests are lower than that of

the inflow-outflow method which was mainly due to the selection of straight channel

sections without turnouts (or sealing the turnouts) and controlled spillage. Inflow-outflow

technique was used in about 70% of the cited literature, where cutthroat flumes were used

(which were introduced by CSU staff who trained Pakistani manufacturers to make these

flumes to needed precise dimensions). In case of inflow-outflow technique, the majority

of these studies did not account for seepage which may have been induced due to raised

water level upstream of the flume.

The losses, observed by different organizations and researchers in lined tertiary canals

were reviewed and summarized. The reviewed literature revealed that reduction in losses

by lining of the watercourses varied from 14 – 91%. The large difference in the reported

loss was mainly due to method of loss measurement and material used for lining. The

higher loss reductions were estimated by those researchers who collected the required

data through social contact and interview of the farmers without any physical loss

measurement at the respective sites. Similarly, higher loss reductions were reported where

test sections of lining were evaluated which had been installed under close supervision.

Thus, their results are not representative of channel lining constructed for farmers by

project contractors under ordinary supervision of Government agencies. Hence, water loss

reductions by brick lined channels are the true representative of lined channels in Punjab,

Pakistan, only when losses were physically measured under field conditions. Therefore,

by considering the representative reviews, the reduction in losses by lining of the

watercourses in Pakistan are about 24% of the unlined losses which indicates that about

76% of the water losses are still taking place in the tertiary conveyance system of

Pakistan.

The literature of Resource conservation interventions evaluation includes zero tillage,

laser land levelling and bed-furrow reviewed. Economic analysis data showed that zero

64


tillage intervention for wheat cultivation is the most economical and attractive option for

farming community followed by laser land levelling and bed-furrow. Wheat sowing by

conventional methods proved to be economically less favourable.

65

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION

In this study, performance analysis of On-Farm Water Management interventions like

watercourse lining, zero tillage, laser land levelling and bed-furrow irrigation was

undertaken in Punjab. The watercourses which were partially lined to reduce the

conveyance losses and to increase the irrigation water supply in the tertiary conveyance

system by the Government under different projects were inspected. The programs to line

watercourses have been launched in Pakistan since the initiation of On-Farm Water

Management (OFWM) Pilot Project during 1976-1981 which was financed by United

States Agency for International Development (USAID). After successful implementation

of this Pilot Project, World Bank extended loan for funding OFWM-I project in 1981.

This was followed by a series of OFWM projects in Pakistan and the most latest in this

series is ‘National Program for Improvement of Watercourses in Pakistan (NPIW)’. The

number of watercourses or channels lined under these projects in Indus Basin Irrigation

System (IBIS) and now totals 88,495 (FWMC, 2010) watercourses which have been

lined. Approximately 49% of the lined watercourses are located in Punjab province.

Laser land levelling intervention was first initiated on demonstration trail in 1985 in

Punjab with the import of a laser unit from the USA. Now, Pakistan has a full capacity to

develop complete laser land levelling units locally to meet growing demands by farming

community. The Government of Punjab has launched a scheme in July 2005 for the

provision of 2500 units for the farmers at union council level in all districts of Punjab and

completed the scheme in 2008 (Gill, et al. 2006). Zero tillage intervention was first

introduced in the year 1996-97 for sowing of wheat under rice-wheat cropping zone and

now total 6000 units have been distributed upto 2003-04 in Punjab (Noorjamal, et al.

2006). Bed-furrow or Raised bed intervention was first launched in 2005. The

Government of Punjab initiated a project in 2006-07 to 2010-11 for the provision of 400

units in Punjab out of which100 units have been distributed in rice-wheat zone

(Directorate General Agriculture, On-Farm Water Management, Punjab. 2005).

The present study was conducted in the rice-wheat zone of Punjab province and includes:

physical measurement of conveyance and seepage losses in lined and unlined sections of

66

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION

the partially lined watercourses, interviews of the beneficiaries of the lined watercourses

regarding water supply, cropping intensity, crop yield and farm income and also

interviews of the farmers of resource conservation interventions like Zero tillage, Laser

lane levelling and Bed-Furrow and conventional irrigation system regarding agriculture

inputs and outputs i.e., tillage, seed rate, irrigation water supply, weed eradication,

fertilizer use, cropping intensity, crop yield and farm income.

3.1 SITE SELECTION FOR HYDRAULIC DATA

The tertiary irrigation conveyance network in Pakistan usually called watercourses or

‘sarkari khals’ are community operated watercourses which offtake from a minor or

distributary canal and convey water to the tail of the watercourse whereas the command

area of the watercourses on weekly rotation system commonly called ‘warabandi’. The

discharge and length of the watercourse depends upon size of the command area. The

watercourses which have higher discharge are longer and serve larger command areas.

The operation and maintenance of these watercourses are the responsibility of the farmers

whereas the officials of Provincial Irrigation Department (PID) are responsible for

suitable functioning of the distributary/minor outlets provided at the head of the

watercourses. The alignment and lining of watercourses is executed by the On-Farm

Water Management Wing of the Provincial Agriculture Departments (PADs) after

receiving an application from the water users of the command area of a watercourse.

According to the OFWM project guidelines, the watercourses are lined at the head section

by 15 or 30% of their total lengths depending on whether they are in fresh or saline

groundwater zones, respectively. Whereas selecting the watercourses for this study, it was

observed that the rule of 15 and 30% was not followed and in majority cases the lining

was done from 20 to 40% of their total lengths, regardless of groundwater quality. Thus,

in this study the lined sections of watercourses were supposed to be thirty percent

(average) of the total lengths of the watercourses.

3.1.1 Site Selection Criteria

The sites for the present study were randomly selected without first considering lining or

physical condition of the watercourse but satisfying the following criteria:

67


The selected watercourses were used for conveyance of canal water or canal and

tubewell water. The watercourses used only for conveyance of tubewell water

were not chosen as the tubewell water is silt free and therefore, the seepage from

such channels will be significantly different from that of canal water supplied

channels.

The selected watercourses should be brick lined, plastered inside and should be

rectangular in cross-section which is the most common lining section used in

Punjab.

The selected watercourses did not belong to an experimental station or

government farm because those channels receive more care during construction

and maintenance for demonstration and experimental purposes.

The selected watercourses had discharges within the extent of 30 – 70 l/sec, as the

data obtained from On-Farm Water Management Wing of the Provincial

Agriculture Department (PAD) revealed that majority of the watercourses had

discharge within the said range.

The watercourses which were only operated by a land lord were not selected for

this study because these channels were especially constructed and maintained

under complete supervision.

3.1.2 Distribution of Selected Watercourses

The study was aimed to evaluate the performance of watercourses with respect to the

lining and it was conducted during the year 2011. The study area was covered by four

representative districts (Khanewal, Sahiwal, Okara, and Pakpattan) in the rice-wheat zone

of Punjab province. Four sampled watercourses were selected from each district such that,

a total of 16 watercourses was selected for the study. The numbers of the selected

watercourses in each district are given in Table 3.1.

3.1.3 Site Feasibility Survey

A comprehensive record of watercourses of the study area along with the relevant maps

of the irrigation system was obtained from the PID. The data regarding lining of the

watercourses under different projects was obtained from the Directorate General

68


Agriculture, OFWM, Punjab. The data comprised complete information of the lined

watercourses including location, outlet discharge, total length of the watercourses, lined

length, number of shareholders, date of completion and cost incurred on linings. The

above data were obtained from the government offices after making great efforts since the

time of officer in these offices is tightly committed to assignments other than sharing the

official records and documents. The available data of the watercourses were screened

according to the designed selection criteria and study requirement. The watercourses with

a discharge range of 30 – 70 l/sec were first sorted out from the study area and then the

sorted lined watercourses were equally distributed in four representative districts

according to the criteria. Finally, the data were shortlisted according to the preferably and

accessibility included those being fed by several minors and distributary canals. Earlier to

data collection, the shortlisted watercourse sites were visited to verify the information or

site features obtained from the official record. At each selected site, the basic information

related to irrigation water supply and command area were obtained from the farmers who

were informed about the scheduled visits and study requirements. The proforma designed

for the feasibility survey of the site is given in Appendix-A. During the field survey, the

physical status of the lined section was recorded in another proforma given in Appendix-

B.

Table 3.1 Distribution of the selected watercourses in each district

Selected districts Number of Selected Watercourses Total

Khanewal 39886-L 98188-R 9057-TR 35991-L 4

Sahiwal 80755-R 8795-R 85258-R 13000-R 4

Okara 12330-L 53010-L 12336-L 23800-R 4

Pakpattan 131880-L 1320-R 28400-R 14587-TR 4

Total 16

69


3.2 HYDRAULIC DATA COLLECTION

In past, the lined watercourses were studied by considering the impact of lining in

reducing water conveyance losses by comparing the pre and post-lining scenarios, but, the

present study is unique in a way that the research was conducted simultaneously on both

the lined and unlined sections of the same watercourse. As stated previously the

watercourses are partially lined at their head sections to the range of 20 – 40% of the total

length whereas the remaining 80 – 60% length in the downstream were earthen improved

by the farming community prior to lining. As per condition of the OFWM projects, the

earthen improvement of downstream channel is mandatory for lining of the head section.

The performance of lined watercourses was evaluated by comparing the conveyance and

seepage losses of lined sections with that of the unlined sections of the same watercourse.

The length of unlined section used for conveyance losses measurement was selected equal

to that of the length of lined section of the same watercourse, falling immediately below

the lined section. For the evaluation of hydraulic performance of the lined channels,

sixteen sampled channels, equally distributed in four representative districts (Khanewal,

Sahiwal, Okara and Pakpattan) were selected in the rice-wheat zone of Punjab province.

The conveyance and seepage losses of the sampled watercourses were measured by the

author during 2011. The conveyance and seepage losses were measured by the inflow-

outflow and ponding methods respectively in both the lined and unlined sections of the

selected watercourses. During the seepage measurements, the climate data at the

respective site was also recorded which included humidity, evaporation, minimum and

maximum temperatures. At each site, the economic data were also collected by arranging

interviews and meetings with the farmers of the command area. Additionally economic

data of resource conservation interventions like zero tillage, laser land levelling, bed-

furrow and conventional irrigation systems were also collected during the field visits in

year 2011-12 (Rabi season) in ten districts (Gujranwala, Hafizabad, Sheikhupura, Sialkot,

Nankana, Kasur, Lahore, Khanewal, Okara, Sahiwal) of Punjab.

3.2.1 Flow Measurement

It was planned that the flow rates would be measured using a digital current meter

velocity measuring device was used having capacity for measuring the flow velocity

within the range of 0.1 to 8 m/sec (0.3 to 25 ft/sec) with accuracy of ±2 percent. The

70


device was tested by measuring flow (using velocity area method) in brick lined

rectangular channel as well as in unlined trapezoidal watercourse in the Laboratory. A

standard 900 v-notch weir was used for validation of the measurement of flow current

meter which was placed at the head of the watercourse. The unlined channel was

concealed with plastic sheet to hinder the seepage from the channel so that the exact

amount of flow measured by the v-notch at upstream should pass through the velocity

measuring station. The purpose of construction of unlined trapezoidal channel was to

check the performance of the flow meter at different depths across the watercourse width

of measuring stations at constant flow rate. Because in rectangular watercourses, the flow

depth at a given rate is almost uniform across the channel width but in trapezoidal

channels, the flow depth is minimum at the banks and maximum at the centre, therefore,

the velocity profiles varied in these cross sections.

The current meter was tested at five discharges i.e., 30, 40, 50, 60 and 70 l/sec, which

were common flow rates in watercourses of the study area. Three repetitions of each test

were conducted in the lined and unlined channels. The flow velocity was measured in

each sector across the watercourse width at 0.6 of the flow depth from free surface which

is the recommended one point depth by several scholars/researchers for velocity

measurement in shallow channels, which is usually taken as less than 60 cm (Khan et al.,

1997; Kraatz, 1977; USDA, 1997; Bukhari et al., 2001; USBR, 2001). The average of the

observed flow velocity in each case was used to compute the flow rate by velocity area

method. The same was compared with the discharges measured by the v-notch weir at the

head of the channel and the results are plotted in Fig. 3.1.

The difference (%) or deviation of flow rate measured by flow current meter and v-notch

weir was in the range of -1.8 to +1.67 and -1.02 to 1.98 for lined and unlined

watercourses, respectively.

3.2.2 Method of Flow Measurement

The flow rate in watercourses is usually measured by using weirs, flumes and velocity

meters. In case of velocity meters, a standard current meter technique is commonly used

as direct method of measuring discharge. This method is also known as area velocity

method or free flow method. In this method, whole cross section of the channel is divided

into sub sections. The velocity of flow in the subsections of the watercourse cross section

71


is measured and the flow rate is computed as summation of the products of the subsection

areas and their respective average velocities as given in the following equations:

q = a × v (3.1) Q = ∑ (𝑎 𝑥 𝑣)𝑛

𝑖 = ∑ (a𝑖 × v𝑖)𝑛𝑖 (3.2)

Where q = flow rate from an individual sub-section a = area of the sub-section v = mean velocity of flow in the sub-section Q = Total flow rate in the cross section of the watercourse The common approaches of calculating the flow rate by using velocity meters are; Mid-

section method and Mean-section method. Detail of these methods is given in Appendix-

E.

Figure 3.1 Comparison of Flow Measurement by Current Meter and V-Notch

3.2.3 Flow Measurement in the research Area

The flow of watercourses was computed by applying velocity area method. The velocity

of flow was measured at three stations along the channel which are described as under:

i) At head of the lined section near the outlet where flow should be non-turbulent

and uniform. Usually, the flow is super critical near the mogha due to steep slope

0

20

40

60

80

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Disc

harg

e by

Cur

rent

Met

er (l

/s)

Discharge by V-notch(l/sec)

V-notch

Lined

Unlined

72


in the watercourse and is commonly turbulent flow upto some distance in the

direction of flow. Therefore, the first measuring station was carefully selected at

the head of lined section, mostly at a distance of 10 to 20 m from the outlet.

ii) The second station was located at the lower end of the lined section avenues.

iii) The third station was selected in the unlined section of the same watercourse at a

distance equal to length of the lined section measured from the second station.

The water supply in the distributaries/minors for irrigation is not constant, thus, before

taking the discharge measurements, the water level in the watercourse was marked at each

of the selected stations by fixing a meter rod in the channel and the level was recorded as

the standard operational supply level (OSL) mark for the measurement. In case of

decrease or increase in the water level, the measurements were stopped and started again

when the water level had become steady at the prior position or in some cases water level

had achieved a new steady position. The velocity of flow was measured by using the

same digital flow current meter at each selected station starting from the head of lined

section and ending in the unlined section. The same instrument was purposefully used to

reduce the systematic errors induced by the measuring device. It is suggested that same

device should be used for inflow-outflow method of discharge measurement if possible,

so that instrument error, if any may be cancelled out (CSIRO, 2008; Sarki et al., 2008).

The watercourse wetted perimeter was measured at three points along each selected

section prior to velocity measurement and the average of these three values was used for

calculating the average cross sectional area of the channel. The channel flow depth and

wetted perimeter was measured with more care because in velocity area method the main

errors are caused by inaccuracies in cross-section area determination rather than velocity

finding (USDA, 1997). The velocity measurement was generally started by installing a

graduated staff rod across the channel over the banks and the watercourse was practically

divided along its cross section or width into a number of verticals or sectors 10 cm apart.

The depth of flow at each vertical was measured and the sensor of the metering device

was fixed on the bottom of graduated staff rod at 0.6 of the depth from water surface. In

case of constant flow depth across the lined section (Rectangular X-Section) the position

of sensor remained unchanged for velocity measurement in each sector, but, in case of

varied flow depth across the unlined section (Trapezoidal X-Section) the sensor was

73


repositioned at 0.6y from water surface according to the varied flow depth. The flow

velocity in the verticals was measured with three repetitions by using mean-section

method and as explained prior it is the method best suitable for velocity determination in

watercourse cross sections with irregular perimeters like those in the unlined sections.

The sensor, graduated staff rod and digital readout display is shown in Figure 3.2.

Figure 3.2 Current Meter with Graduated Staff Rod, Digital Display and Turbo- Flow Sensor

The top width (T) of the trapezoidal unlined and rectangular brick lined sections of the

watercourses was in the range of 50 – 140 cm and 46 – 60 cm, respectively. Therefore,

the unlined channels cross sections were divided into 5 to 14 sub-sections and for lined it

was 5 to 6 sub-sections with 10 cm sub-sectional width. The flow velocity measurement

in the unlined channels has been explained in detail in the previous sections. In lined

watercourses the flow velocity was measured in each vertical between the walls. In two

end sections, the velocity was measured as close to the walls as possible and then the

mean velocity at vertical wall was estimated.

The velocity measured at various stations by the author along the selected watercourses is

shown in Fig.3.3 and was recorded on a designed proforma given in Appendix-C. The

rectangular x-section of lined watercourse (mean section method) is presented in Fig. 3.4

and the computation of flow rate from a lined watercourse is given in Table 3.2.

Turbo –Prop Sensor

Digital Readout Display

Current meter with Graduated Staff Rod

74


Figure 3.3 Velocity measured along the watercourse by digital flow current meter

Figure 3.4 Mean-Section Method in Lined Watercourses

75


Table. 3.2 Computation of flow rate from lined watercourse

Distance from left bank ‘x’

(m)

Flow Depth

‘y’

(m)

Velocity at 0.6y (m/s)

Average point

Velocity at 0.6y (m/s)

Vertical Section Mean Flow Depth

(m)

Width (m)

Area (m2)

Mean Velocity

(m/s)

Discharge (L/s)

I II III 0 0.25 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.25 0.05 0.013 0.25 3.15

0.05 0.25 0.29 0.3 0.29 0.29 0.25 0.05 0.012 0.31 3.80

0.1 0.24 0.32 0.34 0.32 0.33 0.25 0.1 0.025 0.33 8.17

0.2 0.25 0.33 0.35 0.34 0.34 0.25 0.1 0.025 0.35 8.71

0.3 0.25 0.35 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.26 0.1 0.026 0.35 8.93

0.4 0.26 0.35 0.35 0.33 0.34 0.26 0.05 0.013 0.31 4.00

0.45 0.25 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.25 0.05 0.013 0.24 3.02

0.5 0.25 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.20

Discharge in Channel Section: 39.8

The velocity near vertical wall was computed as follows:

V�𝑤 = 0.65V�𝑥V�𝑥

V�𝑦𝑤�

In the above case, x=0.05m

y𝑤 = 0.25m x

y𝑤=

0.050.25

= 0.20 V�𝑥V�𝑦𝑤

= 0.885 (from graph appendix-F)

V�𝑥 = .29m/s Therefore, the velocity near vertical wall is V�𝑤 = 0.65 x0 .29

0.885= 0.21m/s

The flow rates at head and tail of the selected section of watercourse was computed

according to the described procedure, given in Appendix- G. The conveyance losses from

the selected length of channel section were computed by taking difference of the two flow

rates and presented as percent of the flow rate at the head.

76


𝐿𝑐 = 𝑄ℎ−𝑄𝑡𝑄ℎ

× 100 (3.3)

Where

Lc = Conveyance Loss (%)

Qh = flow rate at head of the selected section (l/sec)

Qt = flow rate at tail of the selected section (l/sec)

Also

𝑅 = (𝐿𝑜𝑠𝑠)𝑈−(𝐿𝑜𝑠𝑠)𝐿𝐿𝑜𝑠𝑠𝑈

× 100 (3.4)

Where

R = Reduction in conveyance losses (%)

3.2.4 Seepage Loss Measurement

The difference between conveyance and seepage loss from an irrigation conveyance

network is that the seepage loss is commonly concerning to infiltration of water into the

soil through the watercourse wetted perimeter which percolates through partially or fully

saturated soil in response to the force of gravity. Whereas, conveyance loss is the water

lost in seepage, spillage, leakage and water surface evaporation during conveyance of

irrigation water from watercourse inlet to any selected reach. In the present study, the

seepage from lined and unlined sections of watercourses was measured in order to

appraisal the involvement of steady state seepage losses in conveyance losses of the

channels. The seepage losses in unlined and lined sections were measured by selecting a

straight reach of the watercourse free from turnouts and obvious leaks so that the

measured seepage loss accurately represented the effectiveness of lining in reducing the

seepage rate when compared with that of the unlined section.

In watercourses of Punjab, the distance between consecutive turnouts are usually 60 m,

and as it was planned that the channel length selected for seepage loss measurement

should be free from turnouts, therefore, a watercourse section 50 – 55 m in length was

generally selected for the measurement of seepage loss. Prior to the seepage

measurements, the tests and its requirements were discussed with the farmers, whose

cooperation was essential to obtain the required water and fit the measurement into the

end of their irrigation turn. They actually lost some of their canal water due to the

77


prolonged seepage loss, but were usually willing to cooperate when they understood the

purpose of the measurement.

The seepage losses were measured in unlined and lined section of the watercourses on the

same day by two observers. It was confirmed that the unlined test section should not be

fully dry and should have been used a day before the test, because in dry channels the

initial seepage rate is very high as compared to the seepage rate during normal channel

operation. The selected test sections were diked at both ends by soil sediment mixture

obtained from the adjacent field and inside the watercourse (from outside the test section).

Another dike at both ends was also catered at a distance of one meter from the inner

(first) dike to observe any leakage from the inner dikes. As the unlined test section was

constantly sited at downstream side, hence, the lower end was first diked and when the

section was filled above the operational supply level (OSL) then the upper end was diked.

Same procedure was adopted to fill the lined test section. A meter scale fixed to a base

plate was located inside the pool and a provisionally water level was noted before the

start of the test and allowed some time for the water waves to come on steady position.

The initial water surface width and wetted perimeter were measured, before beginning the

test, at three points along the test section with a measuring tape. During the test period, to

measure the evaporation rate from the water surface, a container was filled with water and

put near the ponded section and the water level inside the container was measured by

using a point gauge. The maximum and minimum temperatures during the test along with

the humidity were also observed at each site. The seepage measurements were recorded

on a designed proforma given in Appendix-D.

After starting the experiment, the water recession level was recorded in both test sections

using an interval of 30 minutes for at least six hours. At the end of the test, the final water

surface width and wetted perimeter was recorded. The seepage rate was computed by

using the following equation (Bodla et al., 1998; Shahid et al., 1996, Kraatz, 1977):

S = W(y1−y2) × L ×24PL∆t

(3.5)

Where

S = average seepage in m3/m2/24 hour over distance L.

W = average width of water surface of the ponded reach.

y1 = depth of water at starting of measurement.

78


y2 = depth of water after an elapsed time Δt (hours).

P = average wetted perimeter.

L = length of the watercourse reach.

Δt = elapsed time (hours) between observations ‘y1’ and’ y2’.

The seepage rate may also be computed in minor units for the watercourses as m3/m2/24

hr, or may be described in terms of flow rate per unit length of the channel as l/sec/100m

length (Kahlown and Kemper, 2005; Trout et al., 1981;). The basic required data of the

ponded reach of one watercourse is given in Table 3.3; while the calculation of seepage

losses from lined and unlined sections of the watercourse is presented in Table 3.4 to

describe the procedure. The detailed seepage rate computed data of all the selected

watercourses is attached as Appendix-H.

Water recession rate in lined test section (Table 3.4) = 6.4360 x 60 = 1.067 cm/hr

= 25.6 cm/day

Water recession rate in unlined test section = 8.68360

x 60 = 1.45 cm/hr

= 34.72 cm/day

Seepage rate from lined test section: S= 59(33.56−27.16)𝑋 5200

100 𝑋 5200 𝑋 6 = 0.63 cm3/cm2/hr

= 15.12 cm/day

= 0.091 litre/sec

Seepage rate from unlined test section: S= 110(22.48−13.8)X 5200115 X 5200 X 6

= 1.38 cm3/cm2/hr

= 33.21 cm/day

= 0.229 litre/sec

Evaporation from water surface during test period = 1.3 mm

Humidity = 22%

During test period, maximum temperature = 27.6 0C

During test period, minimum temperature = 21.9 0C

The precise seepage rate was calculated by subtracting the surface evaporation from ‘y1’

and then solved the equation (3.5) for accurate seepage rate. In present case, the corrected

seepage rate for lined and unlined section will be 0.62 and 1.36 cm3/cm2/hr, respectively.

79


Table 3.3 Description and basic data of the ponded reach

Serial number Description Measurements

Lined Section Unlined Section 1 Length of ponded test reach in meters (L) 52 52 2 Average water surface width in cm (W) 59 110 3 Average wetted perimeter in cm (P) 100 115

4 Depth of water at beginning in cm (y1) 33.56 22.48

5 Depth of water after six hours in cm (y2) 27.16 13.8

6 Average wetted area of pond in m2 (A) 52 59.8

Table 3.4 Calculation of seepage losses from lined and unlined sections of a watercourse

Serial

number

Time Water Level in Ponded

Reach Water Level Recession

Clock Elapsed Lined Section Unlined

Section

Lined

Section

Unlined

Section

(hrs) (min) (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm)

1 10:30 0 33.56 22.48 0 0

2 11:00 30 33 21.73 0.56 0.75

3 11:30 60 32.51 21.02 1.05 1.46

4 12:00 90 32.02 20.32 1.54 2.16

5 12:30 120 31.53 19.67 2.03 2.81

6 13:00 150 31.04 18.82 2.52 3.66

7 13:30 180 30.55 18.13 3.01 4.35

8 14:00 210 29.98 17.45 3.58 5.03

9 14:30 240 29.41 16.78 4.15 5.7

10 15:00 270 28.84 16.01 4.72 6.47

11 15:30 300 28.27 15.32 5.29 7.16

12 16:00 330 27.7 14.61 5.86 7.87

13 16:30 360 27.16 13.8 6.4 8.68

3.3. ECONOMIC SURVEY OF WATERCOURSES

The performance of the watercourse lining was carried out to reduce the conveyance

losses and to enhance the irrigation water supply in the tertiary irrigation system. Due to

lining of the watercourses, it is conceived that the augment in irrigation water supply will

80


enable farmers to bring more area under irrigated farming and will enhance the crop yield

by use of additional water for irrigation. In addition, lining of watercourses would help in

decreasing the cost of supplemented irrigation water by reducing the use of tubewell

irrigation. Therefore, it was revealed that the enhancement in irrigation water supply and

reduction in cost of tubewell water will improve the economic status of the farming

community by augmenting the farmers’ income.

An economic survey was conducted in year 2011 to evaluate the extent to which the

expected benefits of watercourse lining, as described above were achieved. The

mandatory information was collected directly from the beneficiaries of the lined

watercourses at the selected sites and their experiences and views were recorded.

Comprehensive interviews and conversation programs were scheduled with the farmers to

collect the mandatory information. For this purpose, two separate questionnaires were

designed for the lined and unlined watercourses which were tested in the field prior to the

scheduled interviews and the essential modifications were incorporated accordingly. The

designed questionnaires are given in Appendix-I and F-J for economic data collection

from the lined and unlined watercourses, respectively.

The views and experiences of the farmers with 30% partially lining of the watercourses

were collected through the first questionnaire (Economic Data of Lined Watercourses)

which include, area irrigated before and after lining the watercourses, percent area

irrigated before and after lining by tublewell water, cost of tublewell water per unit area,

cropping intensity, crop yield before and after lining, hydraulic performance of lining,

and finally the enhance in income after lining. The second questionnaire (Economic Data

of Unlined Watercourses) was designed to collect the information from the beneficiaries

about the crop yield and percent use of irrigation water (watercourse and tubewell) per

unit crop area of unlined watercourses in the areas neighbouring the selected study sites.

Data representative of the study area were collected from the head, middle and tail

reaches of the selected watercourses. Two farmers were interviewed with field in each

selected reach length (head, middle, tail) and hence a total of six farmers were

interviewed from each selected watercourse. Since the selected watercourses were sixteen

in number, almost ninety six farmers from lined watercourses were interviewed to record

their views and experiences regarding watercourse lining. The average age of the farmers

81


were 46.2 years with an average experience of twenty years in irrigated agriculture.

Approximately 70% of the farmers were illiterate while 25% were below matric and only

5% had matriculated from school. The first questionnaire (Appendix F-I) was filled by

recording the experiences and views of the farmers of lined watercourses, whereas, the

second questionnaire (Appendix F-J) was filled to record the crop yield and farm income

of the unlined watercourses in the neighbouring command areas. The landholdings of the

farmers interviewed in the study areas were in the range of 6.5 to 12.5 acres.

In Punjab, a majority of those farmers who personally manage their own farms do not

maintain records of their farm expenses and income. Maintained farm records are

available only in big farms that are being operated by farm managers employed for the

purpose of supervising the farming activities. In this study such big farms were not

included during the field survey. Due to the absence of proper farm records of the

farmers, there was no another solution except to depend on the memory of the farmers

especially when the farm activities had implemented over the previous number of years.

However, for accurate evaluation it was essential to limit the comparison indicators that

were recalled without any doubt through all the farmers of the lined and unlined

watercourses. Thus, the economic indicators used for this study include irrigated area,

cropping intensity, crop yield and gross crop income at the sites of the selected

watercourses. All these indicators before lining were compared with the same

watercourse after lining or all these indicators of field served by the selected partially

lined watercourses were compared with those served by the unlined watercourses in

adjacent command areas.

The crop yield varied along the watercourses and it was observed that the crop yield

under both the lined and unlined watercourses was higher in head reaches of the

watercourses due to better water availability and it reduced towards downstream ends of

all the channels. Therefore, the crop yields were averaged along the selected watercourses

and those average values were used for the comparisons of lined and unlined

watercourses. During the present study, scarcity of watercourse irrigation water was

observed at each site and approximately at all the sites the farmers were enhancing the

canal water with the tubewell water for irrigation. As the main objective of this survey

was to evaluate the economic benefit of watercourse lining at tertiary level, therefore,

82


information was required on the amount spent on irrigation for both the lined and unlined

watercourses.

In Punjab, the canal water rates (abiana) are nominal and at the time of data collection it

was Rs. 120.0 and 80.0 for Kharif and Rabi crops per acre of the irrigated area,

respectively. The purchase price of tubewell water for irrigation was 15 and 22 times

more expensive than the canal water to irrigate one acre during Kharif and Rabi,

respectively. Hence, the expenditure amount on crop irrigation by using tubewell water

played a vital role on irrigation cost and net crop incomes. Therefore, the probed and

detail discussion with the farmers of the selected sites regarding percentage of canal and

tubewell water being used in maturing the crop for both the lined and unlined

watercourses. It was observed during the field visits that the percent use of tubewell water

for irrigation also varied along the watercourse with minimum to maximum usage from

head to tail of the watercourses, respectively. Average values about use of tubewell water

for irrigation along the watercourse were used for comparisons between the watercourses.

Due to adjacent and nearby districts of Punjab, the costs of land preparation, fertilizers,

seed rate and labour per unit cultivated area were almost the same throughout the study

area. For any specific crop, therefore, it was assumed that the farmers of the lined and

unlined watercourses had spent the same amounts per unit crop area on these inputs.

On about, all the selected farms the farmers cultivated wheat, rice, sugarcane, fodder and

vegetables during Kharif and Rabi seasons. The majority of the farmers failed to verify

the vegetable and fodder yields as they were growing those crops for their domestic use

and farm animals and usually kept no records. Therefore, the data of three major crops

(wheat, rice, and sugarcane) were used to evaluate the gross farm incomes.

3.4. ECONOMIC SURVEY OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION

INTERVENTIONS

Economic impact of Resource Conservation Interventions (RCIs) was investigated in ten

districts of Punjab, where RCIs have been implemented. A questionnaire was developed

to collect data from the farmers of the selected areas. Fifty nine farmers, who have

implemented RCIs for sowing of wheat, were purposively selected for data collection.

The questionnaires were filled by interviewing the farmers of the selected areas. The

83


survey was conducted in year 2011-12 for collection of data from the farmers through

questionnaire (Appendix-K) to appraise the economic impact of RCIs. The questionnaire

developed for data collection for the study was redesigned and modified through

discussion with the local supervisor and some relevant personnel of On Farm Water

Management. Before the actual interview, questions were translated into local language.

The irrigated area selected for evaluation of RCIs includes rice-wheat cropping zone. The

data collected through questionnaire included the agriculture inputs and outputs of the

RCIs and traditional irrigation system i.e. tillage, seed rate, irrigation water, weed

eradication, fertilizer use, FYM, herbicide, cropping intensity, crop yield, total cost of

cultivation, gross farm return and net farm return.

The economic analysis was carried out on the basis of agriculture inputs and outputs. The

results of economic analysis of RCIs were compared with traditional irrigation system to

appraise the impact of enhancing the crop yield and reducing the agriculture inputs. In

addition to economic analysis the water productivity (WP) and fertilizer use efficiency

(FUE) was also computed for RCIs and traditional irrigation system.

3.4.1 Sampling Procedure and Data Collection

The RCIs were used in ten districts of Punjab. During the survey, total 59 farmers were

interviewed in ten districts of Punjab. The detail of the farmers interviewed during the

survey is given in Table 3.5.

In overall, 74 wheat farms were surveyed belonging to 59 farmers. At 11 farms wheat

was sown on bed-furrows, 19 farms used laser land levelling before sowing of wheat crop

and at 19 farms wheat was sown with zero tillage intervention. However, there were 25

wheat farms where wheat was sown by traditional method. Twenty three farmers

implemented all three interventions on different fields i.e. bed-furrow planting, laser land

levelling and zero tillage in three districts (Okara, Gujranwala, Sheikhupura). 18 farmers

practiced the two interventions of Laser land levelling and zero tillage in three districts

(Lahore, Kasur, Hafizabad). 12 farmers implemented the intervention of bed-furrows

planting and laser land levelling in three districts (Sialkot, Nankana, Khanewal) and 6

farmers implemented the two interventions of bed -Furrow planting and zero tillage in

84


Sahiwal district. Impact appraisal of the Resource Conservation Interventions was done

using ‘with’ and ‘without’ intervention approach.

Table 3.5 Detail of the Farmers who were interviewed during survey in different districts for RCIs

Sr. No Name of District Number of Farmers interviewed

Percent of total sampled farmers

1 Gujranwala 9 15

2 Hafizabad 5 8

3 Kasur 8 14

4 Khanewal 4 7

5 Lahore 5 8

6 Nankana 4 7

7 Okara 6 10 8 Sahiwal 6 10

9 Sheikhupura 8 14

10 Sialkot 4 7

3.4.2 The study area

The study area lies in central Punjab. Distribution of farm area covered by ‘with’ and

‘without’ interventions, which was surveyed, is given in Table 3.6. In the present study,

an effort was made during the field survey that only those fields were selected where

single RCI was implemented. Hence those fields were selected for the study where the

improvement in benefits was only due to single RCI as shown in Table 3.6

3.4.3 Economic Analysis

The impact assessment by economic analysis was carried out in the present study for the

rice-wheat cropping zone. The economic impact indicators were assessed for RCIs and

traditional irrigation system. During economic analysis, all the indicators were converted

to equivalent monetary units i.e. in rupees per unit area for the purpose of comparison of

the results. In addition to economic analysis of the Water Productivity (WP) and Fertilizer

Use Efficiency (FUE) were also calculated.

85


Table 3.6 Distribution of farms area by different RCIs in Punjab

Location Village Total area (ha)

Distribution of farms area by different interventions (hectares)

Bed-furrow Laser land leveling Zero tillage Traditional

(ha) % (ha) % (ha) % (ha) % Distt.Lahore - 20 - - 8 40 4 20 8 40 (i)Lahore cantt Hair 20 - - 8 40 4 20 8 40 Distt. Sahiwal - 24 4 16.67 - - 10 41.67 10 41.67 (i)Sahiwal 113/9L 24 4 16.67 - - 10 41.67 10 41.67 Distt.Okara - 32 8 25 8 25 8 25 8 25 (i)Depalpur Pipli mehtab

ray 32 8 25 8 25 8 25 8 25

Distt. Kasur - 68 - - 24 35.29 20 29.41 24 35.29 (i)Kasur Weerum

Hittar 36 - - 12 33.33 12 33.33 12 33.33

(ii)Pattoki Narohi thatta 32 - - 12 37.5 8 25 12 33.33 Distt.Hafizabad - 24 - - 8 33.33 8 33.33 8 33.33 (i)Pindi Bhattia Bhopa

Lodhika 24 - - 8 33.33 8 33.33 8 33.33

Distt.Gujranwala

- 70 7 22.67 22 32 28 - 13

(i)Kamokee Kallu kalan 40 4 10 12 30 16 40 8 20 (ii) Gujranwala Hambokey 30 3 9.33 10 34.67 12 40 5 16 Distt.sheikhupura

- 60 8 - 16 - 16 - 20

(i) sheikhupura Manawala 40 6 - 10 - 10 - 14 (ii) Ferozwala Kotpindi Das 20 2 - 6 - 6 - 6 Distt. Sialkot - 20 4 20 8 40 - - 8 40 (i)Daska Dholanwali 20 4 20 8 40 - - 8 40 Distt. Nankana - 24 4 16.67 10 41.67 - - 10 41.67 (i)Nankana Bunga 24 4 16.67 10 41.67 - - 10 41.67 Distt. Khanewal

- 20 6 30 8 40 - - 6 40

(i)Kabeerwala Kohiwala 20 6 30 8 40 - - 6 40 Total 362 41 11.32 112 30.94 94 25.97 115 31.77

3.4.4 Limitations of Research Method

The limitations of research method are as

i) Results are based on data collected through survey of ten districts in Punjab.

86


ii) Only farmers were interviewed in each district through questionnaire.

iii) Only those areas were included in the study which was subject to single RCI for

improvement in benefits.

iv) RCIs were evaluated for only rice-wheat cropping zone.

v) Research work is only carried out for economic evaluation and no socio

parameters have been included.

3.4.5 Sources of Uncertainty

In the absence of proper farm records, there was no alternative except to rely on the

memory of the farmers. Therefore, the uncertainty may be in crop yield, number of

irrigations, fertilizer and seed rate used.

87

CHAPTER 4

HYDRAULIC IMPACTS OF WATERCOURSE LINING

4.1. CONVEYANCE LOSSES IN WATERCOURSES

For the evaluation of hydraulic performance of the lined channels, sixteen sampled

watercourses, equally distributed in four representative districts (Khanewal, Sahiwal,

Okara and Pakpattan) were selected in the rice-wheat zone of Punjab province. The

conveyance losses of the sampled watercourses were measured by the author during

2011. The losses were measured for both lined and unlined sections of the selected

watercourses by inflow-outflow method. The conveyance losses were computed in both

lined and unlined sections for the same length equal to 100 m length of the channels. The

data collected from each of the four districts is first discussed separately and later the data

is combined to evaluate the performance of lining in reducing the conveyance losses.

4.1.1. Reduction in Conveyance Losses in Khanewal District

The data relating to conveyance losses in lined and unlined sections of selected channels

and reduction in losses due to lining is given in Table 4.1 and also plotted in Figs 4.1 and

4.2 for more elaboration.

Table 4.1 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Khanewal District.

Watercourse number

Flow rate Conveyance losses per 100 m length Reduction in

conveyance losses Lined section Unlined section

(l/sec) (l/sec) (%) (l/sec) (%) (%)

39886-L 27.2 0.38 1.41 1.69 6.46 77

98188-R 33.1 1.43 4.32 1.23 4.08 -16*

9057-TR 34 1.16 3.42 0.98 3.40 -19*

35991-L 65.6 0.46 0.70 1.01 1.68 55

*Due to poor construction & maintenance, inappropriate bed slope, inadequate

maintenance and non- existence of WUAs in lined sections.

88

CHAPTER 4 HYDRAULIC IMPACTS OF WATERCOURSE LINING

The conveyance losses in lined sections of two watercourses were lower than the unlined

sections of the same watercourses but in other two channels (98188-R and 9057-TR), the

losses in the lined sections were more than their respective unlined sections. The unlined

sections of these two watercourses had been well maintained than the other two channels

(39886-L and 35991-L).

Figure 4.1 Conveyance Losses in lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Khanewal District.

Figure 4.2 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Khanewal District

0.38

1.43

1.16

0.46

1.69

1.23

0.98 1.01

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

39886-L 98188-R 9057-TR 35991-L

Lined Unlined

Watercourse number

Conv

eyan

ce lo

ss p

er 1

00 m

leng

th (l

/sec

)

77

-16 -19

55

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

39886-L 98188-R 9057-TR 35991-L

Reduction in Conveyance loss (%age)

Redu

ctio

n in

Con

veya

nce

loss

(%

age)

Watercourse number

89


The minimum and maximum conveyance losses in lined sections were observed in

channels No. 39886-L and 98188-R respectively (Fig 4.1). From these results, it is

evident that lining has variable impact on the conveyance losses in this district. The

minimum reduction in conveyance losses was observed in case of lined section of channel

No. 9057-TR which was computed as -19 percent, whereas maximum reduction was

observed in lined section of watercourse No. 39886-L which was 77% (Fig 4.2). It is

obvious from these data that the conveyance losses in the lined section of channels No.

98188-R and 9057-TR are higher than the unlined sections of the same channel. This

finding is contrary to the general concept that the lined channels should have less loss.

Similar findings contrary have been also reported by Goldsmith and Makin (1989) where

the poorly lined watercourses had higher loss rates than the unlined ones. The high

conveyance losses in lined channels may be attributed to poor construction, operation,

inappropriate bed slope and inadequate maintenance. All these factors caused to damage

the lined sections which resulted in excessive leakage and spillage.

Due to poor construction of lined sections of the channels No. 98188-R and 9057-TR,

water was leaking at many points from the side walls. The side walls of the channels were

damaged a year after its construction which was rehabilitated by the farmers at their own

expenditures. The leaking points augmented the conveyance loss from the lined sections

in channel No. 98188-R and 9057-TR resulting in higher losses (1.43 and 1.16 l/sec per

100 m Table 4.1) than the lined sections of the other two channels.

The lined section of channel No. 39886-L had minimum losses among the others.

However, the unlined section of the same channel had maximum losses and it was mainly

due to its not fully compacted side walls with low height and there was more spillage

along the channel length. In spite of this, the lined section has maximum reduction (77%

Fig. 4.2). It indicates that lined section was a good example of quality construction and

management.

The watercourse No. 35991-L has the longest lined length which was extended over 1205

m with a 30 number of turnouts (nakkas) for water distribution. As the length of lining

was lengthy with greater number of water distribution structures (turnouts), hence, the

leakage from turnout structures had made main contribution in the conveyance losses.

90


However, its performance was still satisfactory and it was reducing conveyance losses up

to 55% (Fig. 4.2).

4.1.2 Reduction in Conveyance Losses in Sahiwal District

The data analysis of lined watercourses in Sahiwal District revealed different

performance as given in Table 4.2 and also plotted in Figs 4.3 and 4.4.

Table 4.2 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Sahiwal District.

Watercourse number

Flow rate

Conveyance losses per 100 m length Reduction in conveyance

losses Lined section unlined section

(l/sec) (l/sec) (%) (l/sec) (%) (%)

80755-R 32.3 0.79 2.45 1.12 3.94 30

8795-R 63 0.77 1.23 1.75 2.86 56

85258-R 24 1.08 4.51 1.30 6.66 17

13000-R 30.9 0.69 2.24 1.20 4.99 42

Figure 4.3 Conveyance Losses in lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Sahiwal District

The performance of conveyance losses in lined sections was different than the unlined

sections of each selected watercourse. While, there was nothing special with these

channels compared with the others except the channels of 8795-R, where the total

0.79 0.77

1.08

0.69

1.12

1.75

1.30 1.20

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

2.00

80755-R 8795-R 85258-R 13000-R

Lined Unlined

Watercourse number

Conv

eyan

ce lo

ss p

er 1

00 m

leng

th (l

/sec

)

91


command area belonged to the tenant farmers who get 50% share of the final produce.

The main reason of the high conveyance losses in the unlined section of this channel is

that the farmers did not own the land and they were only getting their share on the crop

profit (Fig 4.3).

The lined section of 80755-R channel was in a good physical condition where no cracks

or damages were found along the entire length of the lined section. Lining length of the

lined section was 520 m of this channel and there were five water distribution structures

(nakkas) with fourteen turnouts on both sides of the watercourse. Reduction in

conveyance losses indicated that the lined section of watercourse was free from silt and it

was well maintained (Fig 4.4).

Figure 4.4 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Sahiwal District

The conveyance losses in the lined section of 85258-R channel was lower than that of the

unlined section, but the percent losses in this lined section was highest (4.51% per 100 m

length) compared to the other lined sections (Table 4.2). The reason was poor hydraulic

performance of the watercourse which caused the water level to rise to near the top of free

board and spill out at many points along the channel. The channel was badly managed

and was silted up to a depth of 20 cm. The nakka turnouts were broken and leaky.

Leakages were clearly visible from the cracks along the lined section. Despite all these

problems, it was delivering better than the unlined section owing to irregular cross-

section, poor maintenance and more seepage in the unlined section.

30

56

17

42

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

80755-R 8795-R 85258-R 13000-R


R

educ

tion

in C

onve

yanc

e lo

ss

(%ag

e)

Watercourse number

92


The physical condition of lined section of watercourse (13000-R) was much poor. The

situation of lining was probed in detail and after conversation with the farmers, it was

concluded that the disintegration occurred due to poor quality of construction; however

the deterioration continued as the water users did not make any effort to replace or repair

the broken panels. The lack of awareness and concern of the farmers were also evident in

the maintenance and operation of the unlined section of this channel. Despite low

conveyance loss in the lined section, the poor condition of the unlined section of this

channel led to waste still almost twice as much as the lined section.

4.1.3 Reduction in Conveyance Losses in Okara District

The computed conveyance losses in the lined and unlined sections of selected

watercourses and reduction in conveyance losses due to lining are given in Table 4.3 and

also plotted in Figs 4.5 and 4.6.

Table 4.3 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of Watercourses in Okara District.

Watercourse number

Flow rate

Conveyance losses per 100 m length Reduction in conveyance

losses lined section Unlined section

(l/sec) (l/sec) (%) (l/sec) (%) (%)

12330-L 33.7 0.55 1.63 1.33 4.60 59

53010-L 27.5 0.39 1.41 0.56 2.34 30

12336-L 46.6 2.25 4.82 1.68 4.19 -33

23800-R 41.2 0.60 1.46 2.02 5.18 70

It is obvious from these data analysis that the conveyance losses in the lined sections of

selected watercourses in Okara district were lower than the unlined sections of the same

channels except channel No.12336-L (Table 4.3).

The lined sections of watercourses 12330-L and 23800-R were in a good physical

condition and no cracks or leakage was developed along both the lined sections. Hence,

the hydraulic performance was also satisfactory. But, the unlined sections of the same

channels were in poor condition due to lack of awareness and concern of the farmers was

also evident in the maintenance and operation of the unlined sections. Consequently, the

93


weak situation of the unlined sections caused to lose almost three times more irrigation

water than the lined sections of the same channels (Fig 4.5).

The lined section of channel 53010-L was in a good physical condition where no cracks

or leakage was observed along the entire length of the lined section. The data revealed

that the lining length of lined section 53010-L was 975 m and there were sixteen water

distribution structures (nakka) with twenty four turnouts on both sides of the watercourse.

Reduction in conveyance losses indicated that the lined section of this channel was well

maintained and free from silt. However, the more number of nakka turnouts played a

main role in enhancing the losses in the lined section (Fig 4.6).

Figure 4.5 Conveyance Losses in lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Okara District.

It is also apparent from the data computation that the conveyance losses in the lined

section of channel No. 12336-L are higher than the unlined sections of the same

watercourse (Fig 4.5). This finding revealed that the lined sections were physically in

poor condition with a number of vertical and longitudinal cracks developed along the

lined length and also due to ignorance and mismanagement of the water users. The main

reason of high conveyance losses were low quality material used for construction which

resulted plaster on both inner sides of the channel to be washed away and cracks in the

masonry led to more water leakage to the adjacent fields. Eventually, these leakage and

seepage water through the cracks with consequent increase in the losses. The much high

loss rate from lining cracks was also reported by Wachyan and Rushton (1987). They

0.55 0.39

2.25

0.60

1.33

0.56

1.68

2.02

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

12330-L 53010-L 12336-L 23800-R

Lined Unlined

Conv

eyan

ce lo

ss p

er 1

00 m

(l/

sec)

Watercourse number

94


concluded that perforating a lining to extent of 1% of its area was sufficient to allow

leakage flow to reach 70% of the value attained in unlined conditions.

Figure 4.6 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Okara District

4.1.4 Reduction in Conveyance Losses in Pakpattan District

The computed conveyance losses in lined and unlined sections of selected watercourses

and reduction in conveyance losses due to lining are given in Table 4.4 and also plotted in

Figs 4.7 and 4.8 for more elaboration.

Table 4.4 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Pakpattan District.

Watercourse number

Flow rate Conveyance losses per 100 m length Reduction in

conveyance losses lined section Unlined section

(l/sec) (l/sec) (%) (l/sec) (%) (%)

131880-L 25.3 0.97 3.83 2.12 9.14 54

1320-R 37.2 1.71 4.60 0.94 3.50 -82

28400-R 36.3 0.31 0.84 0.75 2.37 59

14587-TR 47.5 0.84 1.77 1.50 3.67 44

59

30

-33

70

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

12330-L 53010-L 12336-L 23800-R

Conveyance loss per 100 m (%age)

Watercourse number

Red

uctio

n in

Con

veya

nce

loss

(%

age)

95


The conveyance losses in the lined sections were lower than that of the unlined sections

in all the selected channel in Pakpattan district except the channel 1320-R. Surprisingly,

the conveyance losses in the lined section was approximately two times higher than the

unlined section of the same channel 1320-R (Table 4.4).

In case of channel 131880-L, the lined section was a straight channel, 240 m long with

satisfactory physical condition and minor cracks or leakage were developed along the

lined length. The lined section was a good example of management and quality because

conveyance loss of lined section is lower than the unlined section of the same

watercourse. Hence the hydraulic performance was satisfactory.

The conveyance losses (3.83%) in the lined section may be attributed due to the minor

leaky nakkas in the lined section. The conveyance losses were reduced in the lined

section than the unlined section by 54% (Fig 4.8). The reason of enhanced conveyance

losses of lined section of watercourse 1320-R was poor physical situation of lining due to

ignorance and mismanagement of the water users. Most of the nakka turnouts were leaky

and broken which appeared unnoticed by the irrigators. They did not effort to repair the

lining cracks or to replace the broken nakka lids but they were complaining of thefts of

nakka lids (Fig 4.7).

In case of watercourse 28400-R the conveyance loss in the unlined section was higher

than that of the lined section (Fig 4.7). The reason was near the channel junctions, the

channel banks were narrowed due to borrowing of soil to construct the earthen nakka

across the channel and high leakage from these thin side walls of the unlined section to

the adjacent fields. Kemper et al. (1976) found that the conveyance losses were often high

at or near junctions and about 50% water was lost at or near the junctions of the unlined

watercourses. The data also revealed that the lined section was 1600 m long and was

provided with only six nakka turnouts which were firm & free from leakage. Due to this

reason, the reduction in conveyance losses was highest with 59% as compared to the

others.

The conveyance losses in the lined section of channel 14587-TR were almost highest

(0.84 l/sec) in all the selected channels in Pakpattan district except 1320-R due to leaky

nakka turnouts. The nakka turnouts were provided with lids and were properly closed but

even then a gap was often left in-between the nakka and the lid seats that allowed

96


leakage. However, the conveyance losses of the lined section were lower than the unlined

section as the unlined section was very porous and water continuously leaking from both

side walls to the adjacent fields (Fig 4.7).

Figure 4.7 Conveyance Losses in lined and Unlined Sections of watercourses in Pakpattan District.

Figure 4.8 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Lining of watercourses in Pakpattan District

0.97

1.71

0.31

0.84

2.12

0.94 0.75

1.50

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

131880-L 1320-R 28400-R 14587-TR

Lined Unlined

Conv

eyan

ce lo

ss p

er 1

00 m

leng

th (l

/sec

)

Watercourse number

54

-82

59

44

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

131880-L 1320-R 28400-R 14587-TR


Watercourse number

Redu

ctio

n in

Con

veya

nce

loss

(%

age)

97


4.2 SEEPAGE LOSSES IN WATERCOURSES

The seepage losses were also measured in both the lined and unlined sections of the

selected watercourses by ponding method at sixteen sites. The seepage losses were

computed in both lined and unlined sections for the same length equal to 100 m length of

the watercourses. The results are presented and discussed in the following sections.

4.2.1 Seepage Losses in Khanewal District

The data of seepage losses in lined and unlined sections of selected watercourses in

Khanewal district as given in Table 4.5 and also plotted in Fig 4.9 for more elaboration.

Table 4.5 Seepage losses from lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Khanewal District.

Watercourse number

Seepage losses per 100 m length

Lined section Unlined section

(l/sec) (l/sec)

39886-L 0.07 0.21

98188-R 0.09 0.23

9057-TR 0.06 0.10

35991-L 0.18 0.26

Figure 4.9 Seepage Losses in lined and unlined watercourses in Khanewal District

0.07 0.09

0.06

0.18

0.21 0.23

0.10

0.26

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

39886-L 98188-R 9057-TR 35991-L

Lined Unlined

Seep

age

loss

per

100

m (l

/sec

)

Watercourse number

98


The seepage loss was symmetrical on both sides of watercourse 9057-TR where

minimum seepage loss was observed and highest loss rates were observed in case of

watercourse No. 35991-L. The data revealed that the seepage losses of lined sections

were lower than that of the unlined sections in all of the sampled watercourses in

khanewal district. The seepage rate of lined section of channel No. 9057-TR was at

lowest with a value of 0.06 l/sec due to silt deposited on the channel bed. The same factor

also played a role in decreasing seepage of the unlined section (Fig 4.9).

4.2.2 Seepage Losses in Sahiwal District

The data of seepage losses in lined and unlined sections of selected watercourses in

Sahiwal district as given in Table 4.6 and also plotted in Fig 4.10.

Table 4.6 Seepage losses from lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Sahiwal District.

Watercourse number


Lined section unlined section

(l/sec) (l/sec)

80755-R 0.08 0.35

8795-R 0.21 0.58

85258-R 0.06 0.09

13000-R 0.18 0.60

The trend of seepage losses of selected irrigation watercourses of Sahiwal was very much

similar to that of Khanewal and also the same physical situation in the both districts. The

data revealed that the same value of seepage loss rate was observed under lined

watercourses 85258-R and 9057-TR in Sahiwal, Khanewal and the apparent reason for

such as the symmetrical performance was quality of construction which was very much

alike to each other. However, the same cannot be verified by the findings of irrigation

conveyance losses as those losses not only depend on the quality of construction but

channels leakages, spills and management losses also contribute to the conveyance losses.

The unlined section of watercourse 85258-R showed very low value of seepage loss rate

99


as compared to other unlined sections due to good management of the water users (Fig

4.10).

Figure 4.10 Seepage Losses in lined and unlined channels in Sahiwal District.

4.2.3 Seepage Losses in Okara District

The data of seepage loss of the watercourses in Okara is presented in Table 4.7 and the

same is plotted in Fig. 4.11 for comparison.

The seepage losses in the lined sections of selected watercourses were lower than that of

the unlined sections in all of the selected same watercourses in Okara district (Table 4.7).

The seepage loss in the lined section of channel 12330-L was same with that of the

channel 53010-L. These lined watercourses have developed different minor cracks along

the length that have caused the seepage rate. The watercourse 53010-L, both lined and

unlined section, resulted in highest seepage losses compared to the other watercourses of

Okara district and the main reason was poor construction quality of lining and bad

condition of unlined section. The seepage loss rate in channel 12336-L and 23800-R was

approximately same where the lining was not destroyed and the channel sections were

almost free from damages and cracks (Fig 4.11).

0.08

0.21

0.06

0.18

0.35

0.58

0.09

0.60

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

80755-R 8795-R 85258-R 13000-R

Lined Unlined

Watercourse number

Seep

age

loss

per

100

m le

ngth

(l/s

ec)

100


Table 4.7 Seepage losses from lined and unlined Sections of channels in Okara District.

Watercourse number



(l/sec) (l/sec)

12330-L 0.15 0.23

53010-L 0.15 0.46

12336-L 0.09 0.21

23800-R 0.08 0..19

Figure 4.11 Seepage Losses in lined and unlined watercourses in Okara District.

4.2.4 Seepage Losses in Pakpattan District

The data of seepage loss of the watercourses in Pakpattan is given in Table 4.8 and the

same is plotted in Fig. 4.8.

The seepage losses in lined sections of the selected watercourses of Pakpattan revealed

mixed behaviour except the channel No.14587-TR. The lined and unlined section of

watercourse 14587-TR showed equal value of seepage loss rate due to good management

of the water users in the unlined section. While, seepage rate of the lined sections of other

watercourses remained less than the unlined (Table 4.8).

0.15 0.15

0.09 0.08

0.23

0.46

0.21 0.19

0.000.050.100.150.200.250.300.350.400.450.50

12330-L 53010-L 12336-L 23800-R

Lined Unlined

Watercourse number

Seep

age

loss

per

100

m (l

/sec

)

101


Table 4.8 Seepage losses from lined and unlined Sections of channels in Pakpattan District.

Watercourse number



(l/sec) (l/sec)

131880-L 0.15 0.32

1320-R 0.07 0.46

28400-R 0.14 0.59

14587-TR 0.09 0.09

Figure 4.12 Seepage Losses in lined and unlined watercourses in Pakpattan District.

The seepage loss in the lined section of channel No.131880-L was approximately same

with that of the channel No.28400-R. The seepage loss rate of unlined section of channel

No. 14587-TR was lowest than the other unlined sections due to proper cleaning and

maintenance of the channel by the water users (Fig 4.12).

4.3 WATER SAVING BY LINING OF WATERCOURSES

The amount of water saved by lining of the watercourses was computed by taking the

difference of water losses in lined and unlined sections of the same watercourse. The

saving of water by lining is a comparative term and it depends upon water losses in

0.15

0.07

0.14 0.09

0.32

0.46

0.59

0.09

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

131880-L 1320-R 28400-R 14587-TR

Lined Unlined

Seep

age

loss

per

100

m (l

/sec

)

Watercourse number

102


unlined section to which it was compared. Figures 4.2, 4.4, 4.6, and 4.8 showed the

proportion of water saved by lining which was lost in the unlined sections. But, in few

cases, as shown in the above Figures, more water was lost due to lining a very amazing

observation. It was noted that four numbers of lined sections of the selected watercourses

(98188-R, 9057-TR, 12336-L and 1320-R) in respective three districts have conveyance

losses which were abnormally high and greater than the unlined sections of the same

watercourses. These abnormally high losses could be because of the following reasons

which have reduced the benefits of lining:

The lined sections of the watercourses could be subject to abnormal wear and tear,

rodent attack and trampling of banks by humans and animals.

The maintenance of these watercourses could be poor because of non- interest or

poor performance of the Water Users Associations.

Poor workmanship and low quality material of construction.

Ignorance of the water users towards operation and maintenance of the lined

channels.

Illegal diversion of water from the watercourse was going on.

Inefficient pre-cast nakka panels.

The lining and improvement workmanship could have been poor (poor sealing of

the joints and compaction, poor alignment, etc.).

Overflowing the banks of the watercourse due to siltation, etc.

Non-existence of Water Users Associations.

The quality of construction was not impressive because majority of these watercourses

have developed cracks in channel side walls and at many places along the channel length

the inside plaster was eroded away which have increased the leakage and seepage of

water to the adjacent field. In addition to the quality of construction, the most significant

cause of conveyance losses in lined sections was the use of inadequate and ineffective

pre-cast nakka panels. At most of the sites, the nakka turnout structures were not serving

the purpose and water was continuously leaking from these structures. In majority of the

cases either the lid seats have worn out or the nakka lid was broken from its edges and

were unable to completely stop water when closed.

103


4.4 PROPORTIONATE DISTRIBUTION OF WATER CONVEYANCE LOSSES

IN LINED SECTIONS

The proportionate contribution of management and seepage losses in the conveyance

losses system of selected lined watercourses in four representative districts of Punjab is

plotted in Figs. 4.13 to 4.16.

Figure 4.13 Proportionate Distribution of Water Conveyance Losses in lined watercourses,

Khanewal District


Sahiwal District

18 6 5

39

82 94 95

61

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

39886-L 98188-R 9057-TR 35991-L

Com

pone

nts o

f Con

veya

nce

Loss

es

(%ag

e)

Watercourse number

Management Losses Seepage Losses

10 27

6

26

90

73 94 74

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

80755-R 8795-R 85258-R 13000-R

Com

pone

nts o

f Con

veya

nce

Loss

es (%

age)

watercourse number


104


Figure 4.15 Proportionate Distribution of Water Conveyance Losses in lined channels, Okara

District


Pakpattan District

In this study the term ‘conveyance loss’ was used for the amount of water lost between

two points along the channel when water was flowing at operational supply level (OSL).

The conveyance losses may also be termed as steady state conveyance losses as the losses

without considering the transient losses. Transient losses are the losses which occurred

during filling and emptying of a channel.

27 39

4 13

73 61

96 87

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

12330-L 53010-L 12336-L 23800-R

Com

pone

nts o

f Con

veya

nce

Loss

es

(%ag

e)

Watercourse number


16 4

46

11

85 96

54

89

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

131880-L 1320-R 28400-R 14587-TR

Com

pone

nts o

f Con

veya

nce

Loss

es

(%ag

e)

Watercourse number


105


Thus, while considering the lined sections, the steady state conveyance losses include:

leakage from turnouts while they were closed, leakage through lining cracks, spillage of

water during channel operation and seepage through lining. The term ‘seepage loss’ was

used for the amount of water lost through the channel side walls and bed from a selected

section that was free from obvious major cracks, holes, leakage and damaged portions.

The conveyance losses can be classified as unmanageable (seepage losses) and

manageable losses. The seepage losses are unmanageable losses, therefore, the water lost

through the seepage can be separated from the conveyance losses. Impermeable lining

can be placed by using a specialized lining material but in brick lining of lined

watercourses, especially under field conditions, the seepage loss through the channel

wetted perimeter cannot be completely controlled as it is a function of construction

quality and lining material. However, in unlined watercourses, farmers usually clean the

‘sarkari khal’ twice in a year which decreases the seepage losses but they don’t attempt to

repair or re-plaster the lined section.

Hence, for the purpose of data analysis, the seepage losses are considered as

unmanageable operational losses in lined sections. While, the other operational losses,

described earlier which occur during conveyance of water through a certain section along

the channel are considered as manageable operational losses, because the leakage through

closed turnouts can be stopped, the channel holes can be plugged to prevent the outflow,

the lining cracks can be repaired to stop the leakage and the channel can be kept free from

silt deposition and vegetation by timely cleaning the channels. Thus, all these manageable

losses occur due to poor management and operation by the water users and in fact these

are ‘management losses’ which can be eliminated or minimized by combined efforts of

the water users.

The data of conveyance and seepage losses in lined sections of channels were plotted to

reveal the contribution of seepage and other manageable operational losses in the

conveyance losses of watercourse. The proportionate distribution of water conveyance

losses in the lined section of channels, shown in Figures 4.13, 4.14, 4.15 and 4.16,

revealed that the management losses or the manageable operational losses in all the above

cases ranged from 54 to 96% of the total conveyance losses while the seepage losses

varied from 4 to 46% of the water conveyance losses.

106


4.5 CONVEYANCE EFFICIENCY

The conveyance efficiencies per 600 meters average length of the lined and unlined

sections of selected watercourses in four representative districts of Punjab are plotted in

Figures 4.17 to 4.20.

Figure 4.17 Conveyance Efficiency of lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Khanewal

District

Conveyance efficiency is the evaluation of performance of a watercourse in conveying

water between specified points along its length. In the present study, the discharge of

channels was measured at the head and tail of the lined sections. The percent of the

discharge that reached the tail of the lined section is designated as conveyance efficiency

of the lined section. Similarly, the conveyance efficiency of the unlined section is the

percent of the flow (at the head of unlined section) that reached the tail of the unlined

section (the unlined section was taken equal in length to the lined section just below the

lined section). Conveyance efficiency varied along the distance from the head and it

decreases as watercourse length increases. The data revealed that the lined length was

different in the sampled watercourses; therefore, the data was analyzed on the basis of

600 m as the standard average length (approximately 30% of the total length) of the lined

section for the purpose of comparison among the lining of several selected watercourses.

92

74 79

96

61

76 80

90

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

39886-L 98188-R 9057-TR 35991-L

Lined Unlined

Watercouse number

Conv

eyan

ce E

ffic

ienc

y /6

00 m

(%ag

e).

107


Figure 4.18 Conveyance Efficiency of lined and unlined Sections of channels, Sahiwal District

-

Fig. 4.19 Conveyance Efficiency of lined and unlined Sections of channels, Okara District

The conveyance efficiency of lined sections per 600m length varied from 71 to 96% of

different selected channels in four representative districts of Punjab as shown in Figures

4.17 to 4.20. The inconsistency revealed that the water users involved in cleaning, repair

and maintenance of these watercourses varied in their carefulness or understanding of

how important their role is in the conveyance efficiency of their channels.

85 93

73

87 76

83

60 70

0102030405060708090

100

80755-R 8795-R 85258-R 13000-R

Lined UnlinedCo

nvey

ance

Eff

icie

ncy

/600

m

Watercourse number

90 92

71

91

72

86 75

69

0102030405060708090

100

12330-L 53010-L 12336-L 23800-R

Lined Unlined

Conv

eyan

ce E

ffic

ienc

y /6

00 m

Watercourse number

108


Figure 4.20 Conveyance Efficiency of lined and unlined Sections of watercourses in Pakpattan

District

4.6 OVERALL HYDRAULIC PERFORMANCE

The data have been discussed and analyzed on the basis of sampled watercourses in the

previous sections of this chapter. Now, in this section the analyzed data will be combined

regarding the impact of lining on saving of water, reduction in conveyance losses and

improvement in irrigation conveyance efficiency, if any.

4.6.1 Separation of Conveyance Losses Components

As discussed earlier, the conveyance losses are combination of seepage and management

operational losses and the proportion of these two components in each of the sample

watercourses were computed. Earlier to planning a cost effective water conservation

scheme, it is valuable to understand the proportion of the conveyance losses that are due

to seepage and other factors in the conveyance system so that the components responsible

for major losses should be controlled. The average percentage of management and

seepage losses of the lined sections in each district and average percentage of the unlined

sections are presented in Fig. 4.21

77 72

95 89

45

79 86

78

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

131880-L 1320-R 28400-R 14587-TR

Lined UnlinedCo

nvey

ance

Eff

icie

ncy

/600

m (%

age)

.

Watercourse number

109


Figure 4.21 Average Proportion of water losses in lined and unlined watercourses in the study area

The seepage operational losses from lined watercourses reveal the sustainability and

stability of lining. Also it is the evaluation of quality and permeability of the material

used for lining. Better the quality of construction the more sustainable will be the benefits

of lining and the more impermeable the material the less will be the seepage rate. Under

present study the data was collected from Punjab Province of Pakistan where almost 47%

of the watercourses of the Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS) operate while the rest are

located in other three provinces of Pakistan.

The average seepage loss rate of lined sections varied from 17 to 21% of the conveyance

losses with a mean value of 19% for the selected districts, while the mean seepage loss

rate for unlined channels was found 29% (Fig. 4.21). The results of lined sections reveal

that the seepage loss rate from a properly well-constructed brick lined watercourses under

field condition remains above 17% of the channel losses. The seepage loss rate may

become higher depending upon quality of construction and channel maintenance. Fig.

4.21 reveals that the management operational losses accounted upto 83% of the

conveyance losses which means that when the farmers accept and understand their

responsibility with respect to operation and maintenance of the lined watercourses, the

management losses may be reduced. Another important inference can be derived from the

17 17 21 19 19 29

83 83 79 81

81 71

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Khanewal Sahiwal Okara Pakpattan Mean Lined Mean Unlined

Aver

age

Wat

er L

osse

s (%

age)

Average Management Losses Average Seepage Losses

Selected Districts In Punjab

110


data presented in the above figure which is that lining will not reduce all the conveyance

losses. As demonstrated in the figure, lining has helped to reduce the seepage losses only

by 10% (29-19).

4.6.2 Average Conveyance Losses

The conveyance losses in lined and unlined sections of the selected watercourses were

discussed in the previous sections for the sampled channels. The conveyance losses in

lined and unlined sections of sampled channels of each selected district in Punjab were

averaged and are plotted in Fig. 4.22.

Figure 4.22 Average conveyance losses in lined and unlined sections of channels in the study area

The lowest conveyance loss was found in lined sections of Sahiwal district with almost

average loss of 0.83 l/sec/100 m length due to the conveyance losses in lined sections

were lower than that of the unlined sections in all the selected watercourses in Sahiwal

district, while the highest conveyance loss was found in lined sections of Pakpattan with

an average loss of 0.96 l/sec/100 m length due to the conveyance loss in lined section was

higher than that of the unlined section of one selected watercourse 1320-R (Table 4.4).

Kahlown and Masood (2000) evaluated the conveyance losses in traditional brick lined

watercourses and found average conveyance loss of approximately 0.89 l/sec/100m. The

average value of conveyance losses found in the present study was 0.90 and 1.32

0.86 0.83 0.95 0.96

1.23 1.34

1.40 1.32

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

Khanewal Sahiwal Okara Pakpattan

Lined Unlined


Conv

eyan

ce lo

ss /

100

m (l

/s).

111


l/sec/100m of the lined and unlined sections of the selected watercourses in Punjab,

respectively.

4.6.3 Reduction in Conveyance Losses by Watercourse Lining

The average percent reduction in conveyance losses by partial lining of the watercourses

are plotted in Fig. 4.23.

Figure 4.23 Average percent reduction in conveyance losses by partial lining of watercourses in

the study area

The average percent reduction in conveyance losses for each of the selected watercourses

in different districts of Punjab were computed by taking the difference of conveyance

losses between the lined and unlined sections which is presented as percent of the unlined

losses. The lined watercourses of Sahiwal district have decreased the conveyance losses

by 38% which was highest among the others whereas the lowest reduction of 27% was

found in the lined channels of Pakpattan. The data reveal that 68, 62, 73 and 70% of the

conveyance losses of unlined sections were being lost in lined sections of Okara, Sahiwal,

Pakpattan and Khanewal districts, respectively (Fig 4.23).

Average reduction of 32% was computed from reduction in conveyance losses by the

lined sections of selected districts in the study area. From these results, it is clear that

lining will only reduce the conveyance losses almost by one-third.

30

38

32

27

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40


Reduction in Conveyance losses


Aver

age

%ag

e Re

duct

ion

in

Conv

eyan

ce L

osse

s

112


4.6.4 Average Irrigation Water Saving by Watercourse Lining

The partial lining of watercourses in Punjab has saved a proportion of irrigation water that

was being lost in the unlined conveyance system before to its field application. The

aggregate mean percent of the length lined in the selected sixteen watercourses was 37%.

The length of lining varied in the sampled watercourses but for comparison and simplicity

among the lined watercourses, the data was analyzed assuming the length of partially

lining as 600 m which was about 30% of the average total length. The average percent of

irrigation water saved by the partial lining of watercourses in the study area is shown in

Fig. 4.24.

Figure 4.24 Average percent irrigation water saving by partial lining (30%) of watercourses in the

study area

The highest irrigation water was saved 12.25% per 600 m length of the lined sections of

watercourses in Sahiwal district. Irrigation water saving in lined sections of channels in

the Pakpattan district was higher (11.25%) than that of Okara and Khanewal districts

which may be attributed to poor condition of unlined sections due to ignorance and

mismanagement of water users in cleaning and maintenance of the watercourse.

The saving of irrigation water by lined sections of watercourses involves that the lining

has added an additional amount of irrigation water to the tertiary irrigation system of

Punjab. Hence, it can be concluded that 30% partially lining of watercourses, on average

8.5

12.25

10.5 11.25

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14


Average Water Saving


Aver

age

Irrig

atio

n w

ater

savi

ng (%

)

113


basis, has added approximately 10.6 percent additional water to the tertiary irrigation

system of Punjab.

4.6.5 Average Conveyance Efficiency of Lined and Unlined Sections

Conveyance efficiency varied along the distance from the head and it reduces with the

augment in channel length due to increased conveyance losses.

Conveyance efficiencies of the selected lined and unlined watercourses were compared

by using the standard length of 600 m as described prior. The average conveyance

efficiency of lined and unlined watercourses was above 80 percent per 600 m length of

selected sections in the selected districts of Punjab. The highest average conveyance

efficiency (86%) was found in lined channels of district Okara, whilst, the average lowest

conveyance efficiency (83%) in lined watercourses was found in Pakpattan is shown in

Fig. 4.25. The results are very close to the study conducted by WAPDA (1994) for

evaluation of OFWM-I & II Programs, where the irrigation conveyance efficiency of

unlined watercourse at the head was evaluated as 75% and the conveyance efficiency of

lined sections were found to be 85%.

Figure 4.25 Average conveyance efficiency of lined and unlined sections of watercourses in the

study area.

85 85 86

83

77

72

76

72

60

65

70

75

80

85

90


Lined Unlined


Aver

age

conv

eyan

ce

effic

ienc

y /

600

m (%

age)

114


In the present study, the average conveyance efficiency varied with the distance from the

head of the watercourses and gradually reduced with the augment in the channel length

which may be attributed to well condition of the lined section due to awareness of water

users in cleaning and maintenance of the channel. Mean of the conveyance efficiencies

per 600 m length of channels for lined and unlined sections were estimated 84 and 74%,

respectively. Hence, partially lining (30%) has improved the channel conveyance

efficiency by 10 percent (84 – 74%). IWASRI (2004) concluded that lining of

watercourses increased the average conveyance efficiency of 13% from head to tail end

of the watercourses.

4.6.6 Irrigation Water Saving in Punjab

The partial lining (30%) of watercourses in Punjab has saved a proportion of irrigation

water that was being lost in the unlined conveyance system prior to lining. The amount of

irrigation water saved by partial lining of the watercourses in the selected districts is

given in table 4.9. The table shows that the highest percent of irrigation water (12.25%)

was saved in the Sahiwal district, while the lowest percent of (8.5%) was saved in

Khanewal district. Similarly, the water saved in the Okara and Pakpattan districts was in

the order of 10.5 and 11.25%, respectively.

Table 4.9 Average water saving by partial lining of the watercourses.

Selected Districts in Punjab Average Water Saving/600m (percent)

Khanewal 8.5

Sahiwal 12.25

Okara 10.5

Pakpattan 11.25

Mean 10.6

The saving of irrigation water by the lined sections of the watercourses involves that the

lining has added an additional amount of irrigation water at the tertiary irrigation level.

Specifically, partial lining of the watercourses by 30% of the length has saved about

10.6% water in the tertiary irrigation system. As stated earlier the total number of

watercourses (‘Sarkari khal’) in Indus Basin of Punjab is 58770. Up to 2010-11, the total

number of partially lined watercourses in Punjab was 43467. The average annual water

115


saving in volume by partial lining (30% length) watercourses in Punjab province was

estimated as 4.6 BCM per year.

116

CHAPTER 5

ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF WATERCOURSE LINING

The main objective of this study was to examine the economic impacts of partially lined

watercourses which was constructed by brick lining. The study region was selected in the

rice-wheat zone of Punjab province. A comprehensive questionnaire was prepared for the

interview of the farmers to collect the required data. Results of the economic impacts are

discussed on the basis of sampled channels for each of the selected four districts

separately and later the data are combined to evaluate the economic impacts by

watercourse lining.

5.1 ECONOMICS IMPACTS IN KHANEWAL DISTRICT

(a) Irrigated area

Irrigated area of a watercourse is defined as the cropped area irrigated only by canal water

without using tubewell water. The selected sampled watercourses were divided into head,

middle and tail reaches and two farmers were interviewed from each assigned reach (i.e.

head, middle and tail). Hence, a total of six farmers were interviewed from the command

area of each watercourse. The data information about percent irrigated area was averaged

for farmers receiving water from selected channels. The research data was collected

during the year 2011 which is analysed by using ‘with’ and ‘without’ technique. The area

under watercourse irrigation, after lining augmented in all the selected lined channels

which is given in Table 5.1. The maximum enhancement (32.2%) occurred in the channel

irrigated area of 35991-L, while the lowest increase of 4.9% was observed in case of

39886-L. The main reason for higher increase (32.2%) in watercourse irrigated area in the

command of 35991-L was attributed due to better water supply (65.6 l/sec) during the last

few years, as reported by the farmers.

The significant difference in the irrigated area of different channels watercourses was

mainly a function of sanctioned flow rate of the watercourse, its command area, the

location of the watercourse along the distributary and water level in the distributary.

During survey, a high variation in water allowance of the selected channels was observed

117

CHAPTER 5 ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF WATERCOURSE LINING

such that the highest water allowance was found 0.62 l/sec/ha (9057-TR) and lowest was

0.24 l/sec/ha (98188-R) given in Table 5.1. The PID is assumed to supply the canal water

to the command areas with equal water allowance. But, practically it varied from

distributary to distributary and also within a distributary. The most common reasons are

mismanagements by PIDs field staff, un-cleaned and silted distributaries with poor

hydraulic performance and intervention by influential farmers in getting more water than

their due share.

Table 5.1 Average Irrigated Areas of the Watercourses and Water Allowance in Khanewal District

Watercourse Number

Irrigated area (%) Water Allowance

With Lining Without Lining Percent increase (l/sec/ha)

39886-L 60.1 57.3 4.9 0.33

98188-R 19.3 16.5 17.0 0.24

9057-TR 29.7 27.2 9.2 0.62

35991-L 24.2 18.3 32.2 0.43

(b) Cropping Intensity

Cropping intensity is defined as the ratio between total cropped area in a year (Kharif plus

Rabi) and actual net cultivated area expressed in percentage. There was only a little

increase in cropping intensity in the command areas of the selected lined watercourses as

shown in Fig. 5.1. The command area under watercourse 39886-L and 98188-R were not

getting water during Kharif (summer) season and they used only rainfall and tubewell

water to grow their Kharif crops which was the main reason for low cropping intensity

under these watercourses. The rest of the selected watercourses (9057-TR and 35991-L)

in the district were also short of canal irrigation water but they enhanced the cropping

intensity by the conjunctive use of canal and tubewell water along with rainfall to meet

the crop water requirements. During the field visits, it was observed that the farmers were

interested in cultivating the maximum area without considering the optimum water

availability and most of the farmers were of the opinion that ‘something is better than

nothing’, consequently they usually cultivate the maximum area regardless of the water

availability.

118


Figure 5.1 Average Cropping Intensity of the fields ‘With’ and ‘Without’ Lining of their

Watercourses in Khanewal District

(c) Crop yield and income

As reported earlier, the average yields of three major crops i.e. rice, wheat and sugarcane

were compared. The impact of partially lining watercourses on crop yield was evaluated

by comparing the results with the average yield of an unlined watercourse in the

neighbouring area. The average yields of wheat, rice and sugarcane are given in Table 5.2

which is based on the field data collected in year 2011.

The average wheat yield in the command area of lined watercourses in Khanewal varied

from 3.47 to 3.97 t/ha (37.6 to 42.9 maund/acre). The highest average wheat yield was

obtained under lined watercourse 9057-TR (Table 5.2) where the average yield was 3.97

t/ha, whereas, the lowest wheat yield of 3.47 t/ha was obtained under lined watercourse

98188-R as reported by the farmers. The average wheat yield of the fields served by the

unlined watercourse was 3.13 t/ha (33.9 maund/acre).

Similarly, the average rice yield varied from 3.50 to 3.88 t/ha (37.9 to 42 maund/acre).

The highest average rice yield was in the command area of the lined channel 39886-L,

whereas, the lowest average yield was obtained of the fields served by lined channel

98188-R. The average rice yield of the fields served by the unlined watercourse was 3.16

t/ha (34 maund/acre). The average sugarcane yield was close to each other in the lined

161.6 160.8

197.5 191.2

149.4 155.6

195.3 188.3

8.2 3.3 1.1 1.5 0

50

100

150

200

250

39886-L 98188-R 9057-TR 35991-L

With Lining Without Lining Percent Increase

Watercourse number

Crop

ping

Inte

nsity

(%)

119


watercourses except 9057-TR (Table 5.2) which produced a higher average yield than the

others, i.e. 58.29 t/ha (631 maund/acre). The lowest average yield of sugarcane crop was

obtained of the fields served by the lined watercourse 35991-L which was 53.57 t/ha (580

maund/acre), whereas the sugarcane average yield in unlined watercourse was obtained as

51.25 t/ha (554.7 maund/acre) as reported by the farmers.

Table 5.2 Average Yield of Wheat, Rice and Sugarcane of the fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in Khanewal District

Watercourse No.

Crop yield wheat (t/ha)

percent difference

Rice (t/ha)

percent difference

Sugarcane (t/ha)

percent difference

39886-L 3.69 18 3.88 23 54.9 7

98188-R 3.47 11 3.5 11 54.45 6

9057-TR 3.97 27 0 - 58.29 14

35991-L 3.68 18 3.79 20 53.57 5

Unlined 3.13 - 3.16 - 51.25 -

The crop yields of the field served by lined watercourses were generally higher than that

of the field served by the unlined watercourse. The reason of low yield in unlined

watercourse was the excessive losses mainly due to poor condition of the channel where

high spillage/ leakage was observed along the entire length of the watercourse which

absolutely resulted in low delivery efficiencies.

The average gross value of the three selected crops in lined and unlined watercourses

were computed according to the market rate in 2011 and the results are presented in Table

5.3.

The average crop water requirement per season for sugarcane, rice and wheat crop is

1700, 1400 and 380 mm respectively (FWMC, 1997). The average water requirement of

sugarcane and rice crop is 4.5 and 3.7 times higher than the wheat crop and the return per

unit area of these two crops are also higher than the wheat crop. In all of the above cases,

the canal irrigation water was supplemented by tubewell water. The proportion of canal

and tubewell water varied from site to site and the ratio of tubewell water per unit area

increased towards the tail end of the watercourses. The conveyance losses also enhanced

towards the tail ends which is why the tail end farmers always get less water than their

120


due share. Hence, the farmers at the tail end spend more for irrigating the crop (using

more tubewell water) as compared to the farmers at the head of the channel and therefore,

the net income per unit area at the tail end was lower.

Table 5.3 Average Gross Value of the Selected Crops of the fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses in Khanewal District

Crop Rate/40 kg (Rs)

Rate/kg (Rs)

Average Gross Value (Rs/ha)

39886-L 98188-R 9057-TR 35991-L Unlined

Wheat 950 23.75 87638 82436 94264 87376 74338

Rice 1300 32.50 126133 113913 0 123143 102700

Sugarcane 150 3.75 205894 204191 218588 200884 192184

As the crop yield and use of tubewell water varied along the channel, thus, the

comparison between the lined and unlined watercourses were made by taking the average

crop yield and cost of the tubewell water for the entire length of the watercourses. The

average cost of tubewell water for maturing the crops under consideration along the

selected watercourses of Khanewal was computed on the basis of field survey which is

given in Table 5.4.

Table 5.4 Average Cost of Tubewell Water used on fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses for a Crop Season in Khanewal District

Crop Average Cost of Tubewell Water Value (Rs/ha)

39886-L 98188-R 9057-TR 35991-L Unlined

Wheat 6252 6401 6392 6523 13619

Rice 39918 50220 0 15923 50846

Sugarcane 39983 54893 37352 52328 49569

The average cost of the tubewell water was subtracted from the value of the harvested

crop to obtain an average “Gross Income” per hectare for each crop and the average

“Gross Income” at each of these fields in the Khanewal area were computed and is given

in Table 5.5.

121


Table 5.5 Average Gross Income of the Three Crops of fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses in Khanewal district

Crop Average Gross income (Rs/ha)

39886-L 98188-R 9057-TR 35991-L Unlined

Wheat 81792 76451 88287 81277 61603

Rice 88810 66958 0 108255 55160

Sugarcane 168503 152858 183657 151948 145829

The average gross income of the three selected crops were higher on fields served by

lined watercourses than the unlined and the main reason was bad condition of the unlined

watercourse where excessive conveyance losses were observed along the entire length of

the unlined channel.

Figure 5.2 Average Difference in Crop Income from fields Served by Lined Watercourses

compared to the Unlined Watercourse in Khanewal district

Rice crop requires a huge amount of water, but canal irrigation water was scarce in

Khanewal areas and the enhanced use of tubewell water reduced the “gross income” of

the rice crop in both lined and unlined channels (Table 5.5). The sugarcane crop on fields

served by lined watercourses gave higher returned than the lands served by the unlined

channels.

32.77 24.10

43.32

31.94

61.00

21.39

0.00

96.25

15.55

4.82

25.94

4.20

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

39886-L 98188-R 9057-TR 35991-L

Wheat Rice Sugarcane

Watercourse number

Inco

me

varia

tion

of c

rop

(%)

122


Fig. 5.2 shows percent difference of average gross incomes of different crops served by

lined and unlined channels. The average gross income of field served by the lined

watercourse, for the three crops with that of the field served by the unlined channel in the

area, it was found that the income of lined watercourses was higher than that of the

unlined.

5.2 ECONOMIC IMPACTS IN SAHIWAL DISTRICT

(a) Irrigated area

The channel irrigated area was augmented by lining in all the selected watercourses

which is given in Table 5.6.

Table 5.6 Average Irrigated Areas of the Watercourses and Water Allowance in Sahiwal District

Watercourse Number



80755-R 36.9 32.5 13.5 0.37

8795-R 65.1 61.2 6.4 0.50

85258-R 37.3 33.6 11.0 0.25

13000-R 30.1 25.4 18.5 0.20

Although the conveyance losses in the lined section of watercourse 80755-R was almost

equal with the unlined section but the average channel irrigated area as reported by the

farmers was increased by 13.5%. It was mainly due to awareness of the water users in

cleaning and maintenance of unlined section of the same channel after lining of upstream

side section which may be attributed to good condition of the unlined section.

The largest increase in irrigated area (65.1%) was observed in case of 8795-R where the

observed water allowance was 0.50 l/sec/ha, which was almost double than the other

three selected watercourses in Sahiwal. Despite better water availability in the

watercourse 8795-R, the channel irrigated area was augmented by 6.4% which was lowest

among the other lined watercourses in Sahiwal. It was mainly due to poor condition of

unlined section at downstream side where irrigation conveyance loss was highest among

the other in the district, i.e. 1.75 l/sec/100m.

123



A low cropping intensity in watercourse 80755-R was observed which was mainly due to

some elevated areas towards tail of the watercourse which could not be irrigated and

remained fallow in both Kharif and Rabi seasons as shown in Fig 5.3. The owners of

these areas were lowering their land by excavation and had leased their land to the brick

kiln contractors and the removed earth was being used in brick making. Whereas, in other

three watercourses, the farmers had cultivated the maximum area in both seasons and the

lack of irrigation water was overcome by tubewell water (Fig.5.3).

Figure 5.3 Average Cropping Intensity of fields ‘With’ and ‘Without’ Lining of their Watercourses

in Sahiwal District


The average wheat yield under the command area of lined watercourses in Sahiwal varied

from 3.57 to 3.79 t/ha (38.6 to 41 maund/acre). The highest average wheat yield of 3.79

t/ha was obtained in lined watercourses of 8795-R (Table 5.7), whereas, the lowest wheat

yield of the fields served by lined watercourses was 3.57 t/ha on 13000-R.

The average wheat yield of the fields served by the unlined watercourse was 3.22 t/ha

(34.8 maund/acre). Similarly, the average rice yield varied from 3.42 to 3.84 t/ha (37 to

41 maund/acre). The highest average rice yield of the fields served by the lined

watercourse 80755-R, whereas, the lowest yield was obtained in the command area of

lined channel 13000-R. The rice yield of the fields served by the unlined watercourse was

155.1

196 187.2 189.1

152.2

195.1 186.1 177.2

1.9 0.5 0.6 6.7 0

50

100

150

200

250

80755-R 8795-R 85258-R 13000-R


Crop

ping

Inte

nsity

(%)

Watercourse number

124


3.03 t/ha (32.7 maund/acre). The sugarcane crop was grown only in the command area of

watercourse 8795-R where the average yield obtained was 52.42 t/ha (567 maund/acre).

Table 5.7 Average Yield of Wheat, Rice and Sugarcane of the fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in Sahiwal district

Watercourse Number

Crop yield

Wheat (t/ha)

Percent difference

Rice (t/ha)

Percent difference

Sugarcane (t/ha)

Percent difference

80755-R 3.76 17 3.84 27 0 -

8795-R 3.79 18 3.75 24 52.42 -

85258-R 3.609 12 3.55 17 0 -

13000-R 3.57 11 3.42 13 0 -

Unlined 3.22 - 3.03 - 0 -

The average yields of the field served by lined watercourses were higher than those of the

fields served by the unlined channel. The reason for low yield of the field served by the

unlined watercourse was non uniform channel section with porous side walls where side

leakage/spillage was observed throughout the channel length. Sugarcane was grown only

in the command area of lined channel 8795-R and hence the yield was not compared with

other lined and unlined watercourses but it was 25% lower than the Punjab average yield

during the year 2011 (69.92 t/ha) reported by the Federal Water Management Cell,

Ministry of Food and Agriculture , Pakistan.

The average gross value of the three selected crops in the lined and unlined watercourses

of Sahiwal district was computed and the results are presented in Table 5.8.

Table 5.8 Average Gross Value of the Selected Crops of the fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in Sahiwal District


Rate/kg (Rs)


80755-R 8795-R 85258-R 13000-R Unlined

Wheat 950 23.75 89229 90013 85714 84764 76451

Rice 1300 32.50 124638 121908 115343 111248 98345

Sugarcane 150 3.75 0 196556 0 0

As discussed earlier, all the visited sites were short of canal irrigation water and the crop

water requirement deficiency was compensated by supplementing with tubewell water

125


especially for rice cultivation during the Sharif (summer) season. Hence, the cost of tube

well water played a key role in the gross farm incomes, especially towards tail end of the

watercourse. During the field survey, the average cost of tube well water per unit area for

maturing the selected crops was collected from the farmers of the relevant sites through a

designed questionnaire.

On the basis of field data the average cost of tube well water per hectare of cropped area

was computed and it is summarized in Table 5.9.

The “gross crop income” was computed for each of the selected lined and the unlined

watercourses which were the average gross value of the crop per hectare minus the

average cost of the tube well water per hectare. The gross income is given in Table 5.10.

Table 5.9 Average Cost of Tube well Water used on fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses for a Crop Season in Sahiwal District


80755-R 8795-R 85258-R 13000-R Unlined

Wheat 5859 6007 6068 5911 6214

Rice 36699 15307 45916 42489 50793

Sugarcane - 36404 - - -

Table 5.10 Average Gross Income of the Three Selected Crops on the fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses in Sahiwal District


80755-R 8795-R 85258-R 13000-R Unlined

Wheat 83750 84396 80039 79237 70641

Rice 90325 107596 72412 71521 50854

Sugarcane 0 162513 0 0 0

The average gross income for the selected three crops under lined watercourses in

Sahiwal district was higher than the unlined watercourse in the command area (Table

5.10). The highest difference in gross income between lined and unlined watercourse was

observed in the command area of 8795-R for rice crop which was 111.58% higher than

the income in unlined channel (Fig. 5.4). The increase is attributed to better availability of

126


channel water (63 l/sec) due to partially lining and better cleaning and maintenance of the

unlined section of the lined watercourse.

Figure 5.4 Average Difference in Crop Income fields served by Lined Watercourses Compared to

the Unlined Watercourse in Sahiwal district

5.3 ECONOMIC IMPACTS IN OKARA DISTRICT

(a) Irrigated area

A small difference was observed between areas irrigated by watercourses with and

without lining except the watercourse 12336-L where the difference was comparatively

greater (Table 5.11).

Table 5.11 Average Irrigated Areas of the Watercourses and Water Allowance in Okara District

Watercourse Number



12330-L 10.6 10.2 3.9 0.47

53010-L 20.4 20.1 1.5 0.21

12336-L 15 13.3 12.8 0.45

23800-R 46.4 45.1 2.9 0.55

18.56 19.47 13.30 12.17

77.62

111.58

42.39 40.64

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

80755-R 8795-R 85258-R 13000-R


Watercourse number

Inco

me

varia

tion

of c

rop

(%)

127


But, a significant difference between the watercourses was observed with respect to the

percent area irrigated by the channel. The substantial difference of irrigated areas between

the watercourses was mainly due to the varying supply of canal water, failure of the PID

to match the mogha size to the respective command area and also due to different

locations of the watercourses along the distributary, which was usually observed during

the study. Due to these contrary situations, the water allowance in the command area of

the watercourses in Okara also varies from 0.21 to 0.55 l/sec/ha.

The largest increase (46.4%) in the irrigated area was observed in case of 23800-R where

the observed water allowance was 0.55 litre/sec/ha, which was highest among the other

three selected watercourses and also the warabandi time in the command area of the

23800-R was 73 min/acre for a discharge of 41.2 litre/sec. whereas, the same at 12330-L

was 21 min/acre for a discharge of 33.7 litre/sec, hence less volume of water per acre was

available for irrigation in the latter case (12330-L).

In case of 12336-L, the channel irrigated area was increased by 12.8% which was highest

than the other lined watercourses. It was mainly due to good condition of the unlined

section at downstream side where irrigation conveyance loss was lowest among the other

in the district, i.e. 1.68 l/sec/100m.


Approximately, all the farmers from the selected farms in Okara have answered that they

have usually cultivated the entire cultivable area of their farms in both Rabi (winter) and

Kharif (summer) cropping seasons ‘With’ and ‘Without’ lining. However, the farmers

were lack of canal irrigation water which only met 15 – 62% of their requirement and

most of them supplemented the canal irrigation water using tubewell water, as reported by

the farmers. It was observed that lining of selected watercourses did not enhance the

average cropping intensity at farm level as shown in Fig. 5.5.


The average wheat yield at farm level in the command area of lined watercourses varied

from 2.71 to 3.66 t/ha (29 to 39 maund/acre). The highest average wheat yield was

obtained in the command area of lined watercourse No.12330-L, where the yield was 3.66

t/ha. However, the lowest average wheat yield was obtained in the command area of lined

128


watercourse No.23800-R where the yield was 2.71 t/ha. The average wheat yield in the

command area of unlined watercourse was found to be 3.38 t/ha (36 maund/acre) (Table

5.12).

Figure 5.5 Average Cropping Intensity of fields ‘With’ and ‘Without’ Lining of their Watercourses

in Okara District

Table 5.12 Average Yield of Wheat, Rice and Sugarcane of the fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in Okara District

Watercourse Number

Crop yield Wheat (t/ha)

Percent difference

Rice (t/ha)

Percent difference

Sugarcane (t/ha)

Percent difference

12330-L 3.66 8 3.67 6 51.01 8

53010-L 3.21 -5 3.60 4 0 -

12336-L 3.36 -0.4 3.63 5 52.22 11

23800-R 2.70 -20 3.69 7 0 -

Unlined 3.38 - 3.46 - 47.12 -

Similarly, the average rice yield in lined watercourses varied from 3.60 to 3.69 t/ha (39 to

40 maund/acre). The highest average rice yield was obtained in the command area of

lined watercourse 23800-R, however, the lowest yield was obtained in lined channel

No.53010-L. The average rice yield obtained in unlined watercourses was 3.46 t/ha (37

maund/acre). The sugarcane crop was grown in two out of the four lined watercourses

(Table 5.12) the yields were close to each other and the highest yield of 52.22 t/ha (565

maund/acre) was obtained in the command area of lined channel No.12336-L and the

lowest yield of 51.01 t/ha (552 maund/acre) was obtained in 12330-L. While, the average

195 187.4 196 192.9 195 186.9 196 192.8

0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 0

50

100

150

200

250

12330-L 53010-L 12336-L 23800-R


Watercourse number

Crop

ping

Inte

nsity

(%)

129


yield of sugarcane of the fields served by unlined watercourses was 47.12 t/ha (510

maund/acre) which was low than the average yields served by the lined channels.

The average wheat yield in lined watercourses, except 12330-L, was lower than the

average yield in unlined channel in the same area (Table 5.12). The reason for the low

wheat yield of the fields served by the lined channels was the failure of the farmers to

meet the crop water requirement due to the shortage of canal water. The average cropping

intensity in those areas was almost 190% but when they failed to fully supplement the

crop water requirements by using the tubewell water, the wheat yields were decreased.

The water availability and the area irrigated by watercourse 23800-R were better than the

other lined channels but the wheat yield was low. The reason for low wheat yield under

that watercourse was the weak soil condition due to high water table (1.7m below the

surface) and the farmers used water to irrigate the wheat crop only once during the

season. On the other hand the farmers of watercourse 23800-R got the highest yield of

rice crop where they have efficiently used the available water. The average yield of rice

crop in the same command area of all lined watercourses was better than the wheat crop

because the farmers paid more attention to the rice crop due to its higher market value as

compared to the wheat crop.

The average gross value of the three selected crops in lined and unlined watercourses

command areas in Okara district was computed in Table 5.13.

Table 5.13 Average Gross Value of Selected Crops of the Lands Served by lined and unlined Watercourses in Okara District:

Crop Rate/40kg (Rs)

Rate/kg (Rs)


12330-L 53010-L 12336-L 23800-R Unlined

Wheat 950 23.75 86806 76238 79919 64244 80275

Rice 1300 32.50 119145 116968 117975 119925 112483

Sugarcane 150 3.75 191288 - 195844 - 176681

In all of the lined channels, the canal irrigation water was supplemented with tubewell

water for irrigating the three selected crops because the canal water was scarce to fulfil

the crop water requirement. The use of tubewell water relied upon the requirement,

affordability and availability. The use varied along the watercourse with minimum at

130


head and maximum at the tail end. The data regarding use of tubewell water along the

selected watercourses was averaged which is summarized in Table 5.14.

Table 5.14 Average Cost of Tubewell Water used on the fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses for a Crop Season in Okara District


12330-L 53010-L 12336-L 23800-R Unlined

Wheat 6981 13763 7650 0.00 13393

Rice 32418 32739 35658 28013 33962

Sugarcane 30396 …. 34471 …. 59910

On the basis of the average Gross value’ and cost of tubewell water per hectare, of all

lined watercourses, the average gross crop income (subtracting only the average cost of

tubewell water) was computed which is given in Table 5.15

Table 5.15 Average Gross Income of Three Selected Crops on fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses in Okara District


12330-L 53010-L 12336-L 23800-R Unlined

Wheat 80278 63369 72766 64244 67752

Rice 88835 86357 84635 93733 80729

Sugarcane 162862 0 163608 0 120656

The Table 5.15 shows that the lowest gross income in wheat crop was obtained from the

command area of watercourse 53010-L and the reason was shortage of canal water in the

area where the warabandi time was 20 min/acre at a flow rate of 27.5 l/sec. Therefore, the

farmers were not able to meet the crop water requirements.

The Fig 5.6 is plotted after comparing the average crop incomes (Table 5.15) of the fields

served by lined watercourses to the field served by neighbouring unlined watercourse.

The figures with negative sign reveal the reduce in the particular crop income from fields

served by lined channels as compared to that of neighbouring unlined watercourse and

vice versa. The farmers supplied water by the lined channel (23800-R) earned 16.11%

more from their rice crop (Fig. 5.6) than the farmers supplied by the unlined channel in

131


the same area. The main reason of the difference in the rice crop income was better water

availability of channel in the area (0.55 l/sec/ha). During the Rabi season, these farmers

earned 5.18% less from their wheat crop than the adjacent farmers on an unlined channel

because the farmers irrigated the wheat crop only one time during the season depending

on the high water table in the command area and unwilling to buy costly tubewell water

because it might not be required. In case of lined watercourse 12336-L, the gross income

was higher than in the command area served by unlined watercourses for all three crops.

This was not only due to the lined channel but also the better availability of canal water in

the command area (flow rate is 46.6 l/sec with a water allowance of 0.45 l/sec/ha and a

warabandi time of 45 min/acre) contributed to the well income.

Figure 5.6 Average Difference in Crop Income fields served by Lined Watercourses Compared to

the Unlined Watercourse in Okara District

5.4 ECONOMIC IMPACTS IN PAKPATTAN DISTRICT

(a) Irrigated area

The average percent irrigated area, under partially lined watercourses in Pakpattan

district, was augmented in first two and last watercourses but the same was reduced in the

third watercourse (28400-R) is given in Table 5.16.

18.49

-6.47

7.40

-5.18

10.04

6.97 4.84

16.11

34.98

0.00

35.60

0.00

-10.00

-5.00

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

12330-L 53010-L 12336-L 23800-R


Watercourse number

Inco

me

varia

tion

of c

rop

(%)

132


Table 5.16 Average Irrigated Areas of the Watercourses and Water Allowance in Pakpattan District

Watercourse Number



131880-L 56.1 54.2 3.5 0.16

1320-R 40.2 38.7 3.9 0.27

28400-R 21.3 28.2 -24.5 0.34

14587-TR 68.1 65.3 4.3 0.36

The reason for reduce of irrigated area in the command of channel (28400-R) was due to

low water supply from the Distributary to their channel during the last few years, as

reported by the farmers. A minor increase in watercourse irrigated areas was observed in

case of first two and last partially lined watercourses (i.e.131880-L, 1320-R and 14587-

TR). The area under channel irrigation varied widely among the selected watercourses

due to directly affected by the irrigation water allowance at the relevant sites or available

canal water supply. In Pakpattan district, the water distribution varied from a lowest water

allowance of 0.16 l/sec/ha (131880-L) to a highest allowance of 0.36 l/sec/ha (14587-

TR).


A small enhance in the cropping intensity, after lining of watercourses, was observed in

first three channels (Fig. 5.7), whereas, a reduction was observed in 14587-TR. The Fig.

5.7 shows that the lining of watercourses did not reveal significant impact on the cropping

intensity in the selected area.


The average wheat yield (Table 5.17) in the command area of lined watercourses in

Pakpattan varied from 3.31 to 3.61 t/ha (35 to 39 maund/acre). The highest average wheat

yield was obtained in case of lined watercourse 14587-TR due to better water availability

where the yield was 3.61 t/ha. Whereas, the lowest average wheat yield was obtained in

case of lined channel 1320-R where the yield was 3.31 t/ha. The average wheat yield of

the neighbouring fields served by an unlined watercourse was 2.97 t/ha (32 maund/acre).

133


Figure 5.7 Average Cropping Intensity of fields ‘With’ and ‘Without’ Lining of their Watercourses in

Pakpattan District

Table 5.17 Average Yield of Wheat, Rice and Sugarcane Crop of the fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in Pakpattan District

Watercourse Number

Crop yield

Wheat (t/ha)

Percent difference

Rice (t/ha)

Percent difference

Sugarcane (t/ha)

Percent difference

131880-L 3.54 19 3.70 12 0 -

1320-R 3.31 11 3.44 4 0 -

28400-R 3.45 16 3.32 1 54.410 13

14587-TR 3.61 22 3.54 7 0 -

Unlined 2.97 - 3.30 - 48.20 -

Similarly, the average rice yield in lined watercourses varied from 3.32 to 3.7 t/ha (36 to

40 maund/acre). The highest average rice yield was obtained in the command area of

lined watercourse131880-L, whereas, the lowest yield was obtained under the command

area of lined watercourse 28400-R. The rice yield of the adjacent fields served by an

unlined watercourse was 3.3 t/ha (35 maund/acre). The sugarcane crop was grown only

under the lined channel 28400-R where the average yield was obtained 54.41 t/ha (589

maund/acre).While, the average yield of sugarcane of the fields served by unlined

194.3 173.2

156.4 162.5 190.4

169.3 154.2

188.3

2.0 2.3 1.4

-13.7 -50

0

50

100

150

200

250

131880-L 1320-R 28400-R 14587-TR


Watercourse number

Crop

ping

Inte

nsity

(%)

134


watercourse was 48.20 t/ha (521 maund/acre) which was low than the average yield of the

fields served by the lined watercourse 28400-R is given in Table 5.17.

A little difference was observed in average wheat yield among the lined watercourses.

The rice crop also had better yields of the fields served by the lined than the unlined

channel. Sugarcane was grown only under the lined watercourse 28400-R which was

higher than the average yield of the neighbouring fields served by an unlined channel.

The average ‘Gross value’ of the three selected crops in lined and unlined channels of

Pakpattan district was computed and the results are presented in Table 5.18.

Table 5.18 Average Gross Value of the selected three Crops under Lined and Unlined Watercourses in Pakpattan District


Rate/kg (Rs)


131880-L 1320-R 28400-R 14587-TR Unlined

Wheat 950 23.75 84146 78613 81985 85714 70538

Rice 1300 32.50 120153 111963 107933 114985 107283

Sugarcane 150 3.75 0 0 204038 0 180769

In addition to the channel water used in all the selected watercourse commands area

tubewell water was also used for irrigating the crops and the ratio varied from site to site

relative to the available discharge at outlet. The data regarding use of tubewell water

along the selected watercourses in Pakpattan was averaged and summarized in Table

5.19.

Table 5.19 Average Cost of Tubewell Water used on the fields under Command of lined and unlined Watercourses for a Crop Season in Pakpattan District


131880-L 1320-R 28400-R 14587-TR Unlined

Wheat 7415 7180 7663 8562 8728

Rice 48576 32093 26101 38345 39586

Sugarcane - - 54022 - 59363

135


On the basis of the average ‘Gross value’ and cost of tubewell water per hectare, under

lined watercourses, the average gross crop income (subtracting only the average cost of

tubewell water) was computed which is given in Table 5.20.

Table 5.20 Average Gross Income of the Three Selected Crops Grown on fields Served by lined and unlined Watercourses in Pakpattan District


131880-L 1320-R 28400-R 14587-TR Unlined

Wheat 77213 71899 74820 77708 62376

Rice 74735 81957 83529 79133 70270

Sugarcane 0 0 153518 0 125255

In the selected watercourses of Pakpattan district, the canal water was available mostly

during Kharif (summer) season and during Rabi (winter) season the canal water was very

scarce and, thus, the farmers mainly used tubewell water in the fields for irrigation

purpose. Due to the more use of tublewell water their gross income was decreased,

compared to other full supply canal irrigated areas.

The Percent Gross Income/ha in lined watercourses were higher than the unlined channel

for the three selected crops. The reason of low income in case of the unlined watercourses

was high conveyance losses and seepage due to poor maintenance.

In case of rice crop, the highest income was obtained under lined watercourse 28400-R

due to highest water availability among the channel commands (Fig. 5.8). As a result, the

farmers field served by the canal water got significantly more income, while the incomes

of farmers field served by the other watercourses, which received less water, were lower

and similar to each other.

During Rabi season, the wheat crop relied mainly on tubewell water for irrigation, thus, in

the areas with enhanced use of tubewells water the wheat yield also augmented but due to

the additional cost of tubewell water their income reduced. For instance, in case of wheat

yield under lined watercourse 14587-TR where the yield was 3.61 t/ha which was highest

among the others, but the income of wheat crop was close to the income of the other

selected lined watercourses.

136


Figure 5.8 Average Difference in Crop Income from fields Served by Lined Watercourses compared

to an Unlined Watercourse in Pakpattan District

5.5 OVERALL ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF WATERCOURSE LINING

The economic impacts of partially lining was evaluated by comparing the results of lined

with those in the neighbouring of the unlined channels using ‘with’ and ‘without’ project

analysis technique. The beneficiaries of all the lined watercourses had reported their

experiences and shared their views concerning economic impacts of partially lining which

were recorded in a designed questionnaire proforma.

5.5.1 Impacts of Watercourse Lining on Irrigated Area

The general views of the beneficiaries about data collection regarding channel irrigated

area at each selected farm was also obtained after a thorough interviews and conversation

with the beneficiaries of the lined channels located at the head, middle and tail of the

distributaries. The water availability reduces downstream along the channel.

Consequently, the channel irrigated area also reduces downstream. Hence, the data was

averaged to present the overall economic performance of partially lining along the

channel. The district wise aggregate of the channel irrigated area in the selected farms

‘with’ and ‘without’ lining are summarized in Table 5.21.

23.79

15.27

19.95

24.58

6.35

16.63

18.87

12.61

0.00 0.00

22.56

0.00 0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

131880-L 1320-R 28400-R 14587-TR


Watercourse number

Inco

me

varia

tion

of c

rop

(%)

137


Table 5.21 Average Irrigated Areas of the channels in different districts ‘With’ and ‘Without’ Lining of the Watercourses

Selected Districts Average Flow rate at Outlet (l/sec)

Average Irrigated Area (%) Percent Increase With Lining Without Lining

Khanewal 40.0 33.3 29.8 11.7

Sahiwal 37.6 42.4 38.2 11.0

Okara 37.2 23.1 22.2 4.1

Pakpattan 36.6 46.4 46.6 -0.4

The results revealed that the enhancement in the channel irrigated area with lining should

not be interpreted as additional cropped area but it represents the augment in channel

irrigation to the existing cropped areas which were supplemented by tubewell water prior

to lining the channel. The highest average augment in channel irrigated area was observed

11.7% in the command area of district Khanewal (Table 5.21).

In case of lined channels of district Pakpattan, the channel irrigated area has reduced by

0.4%. The reason for this reduction was not the poor quality of lining but it was due to

reduction in water supply in these areas. The overall increase in channel irrigated area

with partial lining averaged 6.6%. The majority of the farmers agreed that the irrigated

area under channel water augmented with lining but they did not believe that the poor

quality of the lining was reducing the channel irrigated area. Hence, it may be concluded

that the cropped area being irrigated by channel water is a function of water supply (water

allowance) in the area and it is also affected by the conveyance losses of the channels.

The same conclusions were reported by WAPDA (1994) in the evaluation report of

OFWM-I & II Projects in Pakistan.

5.5.2 Impacts of Watercourse Lining on Cropping Intensity

Almost all the farmers of the selected sites try to cultivate the entire area of their farm

during both (Kharif plus Rabi) seasons irrespective of whether they can meet the crop

water requirements or not. During this study and interaction with the farmers, in general,

they confirm that the lining of channels have enhanced the cropping intensity. Because

the quantities of channel water which were being saved by the lining, were used to

supplement the irrigation of the prevailing crops. Thus, the farmers were being provided

138


with an opportunity to reduce the cost of production by decreasing the use of tubewell

water. The farmers’ view concerning impact of partial lining on cropping intensity were

recorded and it was found that 25.1% were of the opinion for the augment, 4.2% stated

the reduction and 70.7% claimed that the partial lining did not change the cropping

intensity.

The data regarding impact of channel lining on cropping intensity was collected from the

farmers at the head, middle and tail of the selected lined channels according to the

designed procedure described earlier. The aggregate cropping intensity ‘with’ and

‘without’ lining of the channels, are summarized in Fig. 5.9. The partial lining of channels

did not cause a substantial change in the cropping intensity. Also, no relationship was

established between the cropping intensity and lining of the channels. The partial lining of

channels by 30% of the length has increased the average conveyance efficiency by 10%,

as discussed in the previous sections, but the economic results reveal that it was

insufficient to significantly enhance the cropping intensity.

Figure 5.9 Average Increase in Cropping Intensity by Lining 30 percent Length of watercourses in

the study area.

5.5.3 Crop Yield

Wheat, rice and sugarcane are the three major crops in the study area. The yields of these

crops, irrigated by the selected lined channels, were compared with the same crops

178.0 182.0 193.0

172.0 172.0 178.0 192.0

176.0

3.5 2.2 0.5

-2.3

-50.0

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0



Cro

ppin

g In

tens

ity (%

)

139


irrigated by the unlined channels in the neighbouring areas. The average crop yield and its

gross value were computed for the selected sites. As described earlier, it was assumed that

the farmers of the selected research sites had spent same amount on the crop inputs per

unit area except the cost of tubewell irrigation. So, the gross crop income for the selected

lined and unlined channels was computed by subtracting the amount spent on tubewell

irrigation from gross value of the harvested crop. The difference of gross income between

the fields served by lined and unlined channels for a given crop was used as an indicator

of the economic impact of partial lining on the beneficiaries. The average yields of the

selected crops, from the research sites, along the lined and unlined watercourses are given

in Table 5.22.

Table 5.22 Average Crop Yield on fields Served by Lined and Unlined watercourses in the study area

Selected Districts

Average Crop yield (t/ha)

Wheat percent difference Rice

percent differenc

e Sugarcane percent

difference

Khanewal 3.70 17 3.72 15 55.30 13

Sahiwal 3.64 15 3.68 14 52.42 7

Okara 3.23 2 3.65 13 51.62 6

Pakpattan 3.48 10 3.50 8 54.410 11

Average Lined 3.51 11 3.64 12 53.44 9

Unlined 3.18 - 3.237 - 48.86 -

The highest average wheat yield (3.70 t/ha) was reported on fields served by the lined

channels of Khanewal district, whereas the lowest average wheat yield was stated as 3.23

t/ha in Okara district. A difference of 0.47 t/ha was observed between the highest

(Khanewal) and lowest (Okara) yield of wheat on fields served by lined channels and the

average wheat yield in Okara was 12.7% lower than that of Khanewal district. When the

average wheat yields of fields served by lined channels was compared with that of those

served by the unlined channels, it was found that the lined channels of Khanewal have

augmented the highest average wheat yield by 17% while the lined channels of Okara

have enhanced the yield by 2%. Similarly, the highest average rice yield was observed

140


again in Khanewal district while the lowest yield on fields served by lined channels was

obtained under Pakpattan district with average yields of 3.72 and 3.50 t/ha, respectively.

The average rice yield of Pakpattan was 6% lower than the lined channels of Khanewal.

The lined channels of Khanewal and Pakpattan have augmented the average rice yield by

15 and 8%, respectively, when compared with that of unlined channels. Similarly, the

highest yield of sugarcane was found in khanewal (55.30 t/ha). Here, again the lowest

average yield of sugarcane was observed in Okara (51.62 t/ha) which was 6.7% lower

than the lined channels in khanewal. The average sugarcane yield on field served by the

lined channels was 13 and 6% higher than those served by the unlined channels. The

overall average crop yields from fields served by partially lined channels were

respectively, for wheat, rice and sugarcane, 3.51, 3.64 and 53.44 t/ha which were higher

than average yields of fields served by the unlined channels by 11, 12 and 9%,

respectively. The Punjab averages for wheat, rice and sugarcane crop yield were reported

by the Federal Management Cell, Ministry of Food and Agriculture , Pakistan as 3.882,

3.753, and 69.915 t/ha, during the year 2011.

5.5.4 Gross Crop Value and Gross Crop Income

The average gross values of the selected crops are summarized in Table 5.23.

Table 5.23 Average Gross Value of Selected Crops from fields Served by lined and unlined watercourses in the study area during the Year 2011

Crop Rate/40kg (Rs)

Rate/kg (Rs)


Khanewal Sahiwal Okara Pakpattan Unlined

Wheat 950 23.75 87923 86426 76784 82603 75406

Rice 1300 32.50 121063 119633 118495 113750 105203

Sugarcane 150 3.75 207386 196556 193564 204038 183210

The average gross values of the selected crops are directly proportional to the average

crop yield. Among the selected study districts, the highest gross value of the average crop

yield was from sugarcane crop followed by rice and wheat crops (Table 5.23).

141


The gross crop value and the amount of irrigation water applied by canal water and

tubewell water were analysed to calculate the benefit of lining. The farmers were deeply

probed about the proportion of canal water and tubewell water used for irrigation. The

average proportion (%) of the crop irrigated by canal water and tubewell water in each

selected district of the lined and unlined channels are presented in Fig. 5.10.

Jehangir et al (2004) stated that canal water scarcity was critical in Pakistan and almost

75% of the crop demand was met through groundwater exploitation. In the present study,

the groundwater use varied from 57 – 85% of the applied irrigation (Fig 5.10).

As the canal water delivered was only about 50% of normal, almost all of the fields

received some tubewell water. It was learnt during the study that the farmers usually

apply 7.5 cm (3.0 inch) of water during each irrigation (at maximum) and it takes which

was in 8-12 hours to irrigate one hectare when water was supplied from tubewells, while

the same amount of water was applied to the fields in 10-18 hours/ha when using canal

water. The normal number of irrigations applied to wheat, rice and sugarcane crops were

4, 14 and 18, respectively.

Figure 5.10 Average Proportion of canal and Tubewell Irrigations for Wheat, Rice, and Sugarcane

Crops on fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in the study area

64 57

62

72

85

36 43

38

28

15

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Khanewal Sahiwal Okara Pakpattan Unlined

Avg.Irrig.Prop.By Tubewell Avg.Irrig.Prop. By Channel


Aver

age

Irrig

atio

n Pr

opor

tion

(%)

142


The groundwater in the study area was extracted by using electric or diesel engines

tubewells having discharge in the range of 20 – 25 l/sec. The average pumping cost was

about Rs.300 (US$3.0) per hour, but the same was being sold to the neighbouring farmers

for about Rs. 400 (US$4.0) per hour. Hence, the average cost of Rs. 350 (US$3.5) per

hour was used in the analysis which covers installation plus operating costs. The

aggregate use and cost of tubewell water per crop season, to supplement the canal

irrigation for the selected crops grown on fields served by the lined and unlined

watercourses was computed and the same is given in Table 5.24.

Table 5.24 Average Cost of Tubewell Irrigation per Crop Season on fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in the study area (Punjab) during the Year 2011

Selected Districts


Use of Tubewell (hrs/ha)

Crop irrigation

(%)

Cost (Rs./ha)


Crop irrigation

(%)

Cost (Rs./ha)


Crop irrigation

(%)

Cost (Rs./ha)

Khanewal 18 46 6392 101 72 35354 132 73 46138

Sahiwal 17 43 5961 100 72 35103 104 58 36404

Okara 27 68 9465 92 66 32207 93 51 32433

Pakpattan 22 55 7705 104 74 36278 154 86 54022

Average 21 53 7381 98 70 34221 121 67 42249

Unlined 30 75 10488 125 89 43796 161 89 56332

Average water allowance in lined channels of Khanewal, Sahiwal, Okara and Pakpattan

was 0.40, 0.33, 0.42 and 0.28 l/s/ha, respectively. Whereas the water allowance (average)

for unlined watercourses was 0.32 l/s/ha. Table 5.24 indicates that, instead of lining, the

water allowance has dictated the extent of tubewell water for irrigation in about all the

selected districts. For instance, the lowest use of tubewell water for irrigation was

observed in Sahiwal district. Among the others districts, the use of tubewell irrigation was

higher in Pakpattan where the water allowance was lowest (0.28 l/sec/ha). The above

table also shows that the highest average percent of tubewell water for irrigation was used

under rice crop (70%), followed by sugarcane (67%) and wheat (53%) crops in lined

watercourses. The aggregate cost of tubewell water per season per hectare on field served

143


by lined channels was lower than on field served by unlined channels by 30, 22 and 25%

for wheat, rice, and sugarcane crops, respectively.

The main objective of computing the cost of tubewell irrigation for the selected crops was

to evaluate the gross income by subtracting the amount spent on tubewell irrigation from

the gross crop value. The aggregate gross incomes from wheat, rice and sugarcane crops

grown on fields served by lined and unlined watercourses is given in Table 5.25.

Table 5.25 Aggregate Gross income of Wheat, Rice and Sugarcane Crops is grown on fields Served by Lined and Unlined Watercourses in the study area during the Year 2011

Selected Districts in Punjab

wheat Rice Sugarcane Gross

Income (Rs./ha)

Increase in income in improved

channels (%)

Gross Income (Rs./ha)

Increase in income in improved channels

(%)

Gross Income (Rs./ha)

Increase in income in improved

channels (%)

Khanewal 81531 26 85709 40 161248 27

Sahiwal 80465 24 84530 38 160152 26

Okara 67319 4 86288 41 161131 27

Pakpattan 74898 15 77472 26 150016 18

Mean 76053 17 83500 36 158137 25

Unlined 64918 61407 126878

The aggregate gross incomes in the lined watercourses, for the selected crops, were

higher than those of the unlined channels as shown in Table 5.25. The lined channels of

Khanewal have augmented the gross income by 26 and 27% for wheat and sugarcane

crops, respectively, while the gross income increased by 41% for sugarcane in Okara

district. The mean gross incomes in lined channels were computed as Rs. 76053(US$

760.5), 83500 (US$835.0), and 158137 (US$1581.4) per hectare for wheat, rice and

sugarcane crops, which were higher from the unlined watercourses by 17, 36 and 25%,

respectively. The gross farm income per hectare on areas served by lined watercourses

was 26% higher compared with areas served by neighbouring unlined channels. The

calculated gross incomes served by the lined channels were higher than the unlined

channels indicating that channel lining has benefitted the farmers.

144


5.6 COMPARISON OF THE RESULTS WITH OTHER STUDIES

The results of present study regarding economic impacts of watercourse lining are

compared with other studies, as shown in Table 5.26. The average increase in cropping

intensity due to watercourse lining in current study is 11%, which is compatible with the

average cropping intensity of other studies reviewed. The maximum enhancement in

cropping intensity is 20% reported by OFWM (1982) and minimum rise in cropping

intensity is 9% reported by PERI (1987). Similarly, the crop yield of wheat, rice and

sugarcane has also compared with other studies, mentioned in Table 5.26. The gross farm

income increase of 26% of current study by lining is also comparable with the results of

other studies. The overall results conclude that the output parameters of the current study

are similar to other studies of Pakistan. However the minor difference in results is due to

different case study areas considered.

Table 5.26 Comparison of results with other studies

Different Studies

Enhancement of Output Parameters due to Watercourse Lining

Cropping Intensity (%)

Crop Yield (%) Gross Farm Income (%) Wheat Rice Sugarcane

Present study 11 11 12 9 26

M. Karimi. (2013) - 20 - - - Chaudhary et al.

(2004) 14 15 14 9 30

WAPDA. (1994) 15 - - - 24

PERI. (1993) 14 11 17 15 23

OFWM. (1982) 20 18 - 11 -

PERI. (1987) 9 8 16 9 -

The overall results of the study revealed that lining of watercourses have added 10.6%

additional water to the tertiary irrigation system in the study area of Punjab and the

farmers of lined watercourses received higher gross returns than those served by the

unlined channels. The performance of lining was not always substantial under sampled

channels at district level, but, was well defined when analyzed on aggregate basis. It was

observed during the economic survey that the command area water allowance was the

limiting factor in getting higher yields; however, the partial lining of watercourses had

145


improved the situation to some extent and played a secondary role in enhancing the crop

yield. Farmers have come to this same conclusion based on observations that the lining

length be augmented from 30% to the maximum to achieve this benefit. Hence, it is

concluded that the lining of watercourses has positive impact on the economic status of

the farmers in terms of enhancing their farm incomes.

146

CHAPTER 6

ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION

INTERVENTIONS

The economic analysis was carried out to find out augmentation in yield, net farm income

and reduction in cost of production of rice-wheat cropping zone using RCIs as compared

to traditional irrigation system. The results of economic analysis of each indicator for

RCIs and traditional irrigation system are discussed in this chapter.

6.1 TILLAGE COST

At the time of sowing, cultural practices like levelling, ploughing and planking were

applied for preparation of the fields. The data showed that field preparation for sowing of

wheat was commonly carried out by tractor. Bullocks were rarely used for cultivation.

Some advanced farmers had rotavators and disc harrow plough. Table 6.1 shows the

number of ploughing and planking for wheat fields in the selected areas.

Table 6.1 Number of Ploughing and Planking for wheat Fields

Intervention Traditional Zero tillage Laser land

levelling Bed-furrow

Ploughing 5 0 3 3

Planking 4 1 1 2

The items that are included in the cost of soil preparation and sowing are levelling,

ploughing, planking and sowing/planting of seeds. Lumpsum rate is charged for cost of

soil preparation and sowing (levelling, ploughing, planking and sowing/planting of seeds)

which also includes the labour cost. Therefore, no separate labour cost was collected.

For wheat sowing, ZT is the utmost effective intervention. In this intervention, wheat is

planted with a special drill without any preparation after harvesting rice crop. This

intervention not only curtails the agriculture cost to a substantial amount but also saves

time by approximately 15-20 days. Laser land levelling permits for uniform application of

irrigation water, saving of land and fertilizers. For example, results of some studies

147

CHAPTER 6 ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION INTERVENTIONS

showed that cultivable land has increased from 3 to 5% by LLL because of reduction in

number of field channels (Jat and Chandna 2004).

Bed-furrow is a relatively new intervention for efficient water saving. Under this

intervention, the wheat crop is planted on bed in different rows. Plants on these beds

obtain moisture from the furrows. Traditional irrigation technique uses ancient farm

intervention i.e. flood irrigation. This technique produces less net returns than improved

interventions. The average, median and range of cost of ZT, LLL and BF are presented in

Table 6.2. The survey was carried out for adjacent and nearby districts of Punjab. Only

minor difference in cost of RCI was observed for the selected districts.

Table 6.2 Soil preparation and sowing costs (Rs. per ha)

Items

Interventions

Traditional Zero tillage Laser land levelling Bed-furrow Range of

Cost value

Avg. value

Median cost

value

Range of Cost value

Avg. value

Median cost

value

Range of Cost value

Avg. value

Median cost

value

Range of Cost value

Avg. value Median

cost value

Levelling (per

Hectare) …. …. … …. 3309-

3605 3457 3469 …. ….

Ploughing (one time)

1790-2049 1926 1938 …. …. …. 1802-

2099 1975 2000 1753-2148 1975 1988

Planking (one time)

1012-1185 1111 1111 716-

938 864 889 889-1062 988 1000 864-

1062 988 1012

Sowing (per

Hectare)

1062-1333 1234 1259

1951-

2272 2099 2099 1568-

1901 1728 1753 3173-3506 3333 3358

6.2 SEED RATE

Application of improved seed was more inspiring in the selected areas. Some farmers

used seed obtained from Government Seed Corporation and private companies while the

other used seed retained from the previous crop. Average seed rate in areas where RCIs

have been adopted varied from 121 to 128 kg per hectare, whereas 148 kg per hectare

seed was used in traditional irrigation farm. The seed rate in traditional farm is more than

the RCIs adopted farms. Recommended seed rate should be 116-126 kg per hectare for

wheat (OFWM, Punjab, Pakistan 2003). Wheat varieties mostly planted in the study area

included Sahar 2006, Shafaq 2006, Fareed 2006 and Inqilab 91. The cost of seed for

148


wheat was Rs.2000/50 kg. The seed rate for both ‘with’ intervention (RCIs) farms and

‘without’ intervention farms is presented in Table 6.3. It is apparent from these data that

seed rate and its cost are lower for all the RCIs than the traditional method.

Table 6.3 Sowing dates and average seed rate (kg per ha) for wheat crop

Sowing dates Traditional Zero tillage Laser land


22 Oct to 7 Nov. 143 118 123 121

8 Nov to 15 Nov. 146 121 128 123

16 Nov to 30Nov. 156 123 133 126

Average seed rate 148 121 128 123

Percentage 100 82 86 83

6.3 IRRIGATION WATER

In the study area, sources of irrigation water are canal and tubewell. In the study area, the

common practice is the conjunctive use of irrigation due to insufficient canal supplies.

The number of irrigations, average depth per irrigation and total depth of irrigation for

farms where RCIs have been implemented and total cost of irrigation water per hectare of

wheat crop are given in Table 6.4. Number of irrigations applied and depth per irrigation

were collected from the farmers during the field survey. Accordingly average depth per

irrigation was multiplied by number of irrigations to calculate total depth (Δ) of irrigation

applied. The volume of water applied was estimated by multiplying the total irrigation

depth and the area irrigated. Water saved in RCIs varied from 49 to 31% (Table 6.4).

In Punjab, the canal water rate (abiana) is nominal and at the time of data collection it was

Rs.200 (US$2.0) per hectare for the whole season of Rabi crops (e.g. wheat) and

tublewell water rate was Rs.300 (US$3.0) per hour. Due to conjunctive use of irrigation,

total cost of irrigation per hectare was taken through feedback of farmers for each

intervention (Table 6.4). Thus, total irrigation cost includes cost of canal water (Rs. 200)

plus Rs.300 multiplied by total number of tubewell water (hours) applied. Total cost of

irrigation per ha for traditional farming was Rs.4716 (US$47.2) whereas for the RCIs it

varied from Rs.3501 to Rs.3975 (Table 6.4).

149


Table 6.4 Total Depth of Irrigation and water saved for wheat crop (2011-12)

Intervention Traditional Zero Tillage Laser Land

Levelling Bed-Furrow

No. of irrigations applied. 5 3 4 3

Average depth per

irrigation (cm). 8.9 7.6 7.6 8.9

Total depth of irrigation

applied (cm) per ha. 44.5 22.9 30.5 26.7

Water saved per ha (cm). - 21.6 14 17.8

Water saved in percent - 49 31 40

Cost of total irrigations

(Rs/ha) 4716 3501 3975 3390

6.4 FERTILIZER

Farmers habitually trust on commercial fertilizers to revive fertility of their soils. Farm

Yard Manure (FYM) was also a source of fertility but it was applied to a limited extent.

Data did not show about the use of green manuring on the sampled farms. According to

farmer’s perceptions, the use of nitrogenous fertilizers was superior to phosphate and

potash fertilizers. Phosphate and potash fertilizers were applied at the time of sowing of

the crops whereas nitrogen was applied mostly in two to three dozes i.e. with Ist, 2nd and

3rd irrigations. The major hindrance jagged by the farmers was low purchasing power

against extremely high fertilizer prices, its uncertain supply, adulteration and less weight.

Table 6.5 Average fertilizer use for wheat crop (2011-12) under different interventions (kg per ha)

Intervention Traditional Zero tillage Laser land levelling Bed-furrow

Nitrogen (N) 173 143 160 146

Phosphate (P2O5) 111 99 104 96

FYM 1037 765 963 889

Total Cost (Rs/ha) 19083 15985 17772 16346

150


In spite of these, the farmers used suitable and sufficient quantity of fertilizers in ‘with’

intervention farms as compared to ‘without’ intervention farms, because more use of

fertilizers gave more yield which compensate the expenditure of the fertilizers as shown

in Table 6.5. The prevailing costs of phosphate and nitrogen fertilizers were Rs.4000/bag

(50 kg) and Rs.1750/bag respectively whereas the cost of FYM fertilizer was Rs.4/kg.

6.5 WEED ERADICATION

Weeds and crop plants grow under the same environment. Equally extrovert moisture and

soil nutrients from the same medium of soil take CO2 and light for photosynthesis from

the same atmosphere and accommodate their build up within the same space. Due to these

reasons, weeds have adverse effect on the yield of crop and consequently, crop yield is

curtailed. Chemical was applied to eradicate the weeds. Weed densities before and after

application of herbicides and its cost per hectare are given in Table 6.6. It is apparent

from the table that cost of weed eradication is more for traditional method as compared to

the RCIs.

Table 6.6 Weed eradication and use of herbicide for wheat crop

Interventions Traditional Zero tillage Laser land


Weed density

(Number/m2)

Before

herbicide 99 65 87 62

After

herbicide 14 11 12 10

herbicide cost (Rs/ha) 3778 3037 3383 2765

6.6 IMPACT OF INTERVENTIONS ON INPUTS

The impact of the three RCIs on overall field level agricultural inputs are given in Table

6.7. All three interventions resulted in significant savings in tillage and irrigation water

costs. However, impacts of fertilizer and herbicide use were relatively small in laser land

levelling. Reduction in production cost was approximately 37.86, 13.23 and 20.80% in

zero tillage, laser land levelling and bed-furrow interventions respectively.

151


Table 6.7 Impact of different Interventions on Inputs (Rs. per ha).

Name of

inputs traditional

zero

tillage

laser

Land

levelling

bed -

furrow

cost reduction in percent

Zero

Tillage

laser Land

levelling

Bed-

furrow

Tillage&

sowing 15308 2963 12099 11234 80.64 20.96 26.61

Seeds 5920 4840 5120 4920 18.24 13.51 16.89

Irrigation

water 4716 3501 3975 3390 25.76 15.71 28.12

Fertilizers 19083 15985 17772 16346 16.23 6.87 14.34

Herbicide 3778 3037 3383 2765 19.61 10.46 26.81

Total 48805 30326 42349 38655 37.86 13.23 20.80

6.7 CROP YIELD

Soil management, soil fertility, application of fertilizers, quality of seeds, timely sowing

of crops and adoption of better cultural practices all affect yield of the crops. There is a

close relationship between all these inputs and high crop yields. All the agriculture inputs

play an important role in enhancing the crop yield. To appraise the impact of these

interventions on wheat yield, yield data was analysed separately for each intervention

(Table 6.8). Yield increase of 16, 21 and 7% was recorded for ZT, LLL and Bed-furrow

interventions respectively.

Table 6.8 Yield of wheat crop (2011-12) on the sample farms

Intervention Traditional Zero tillage Laser Land

Levelling Bed -furrow

Yield (kg/hectare) 3970 4617 4802 4247

Bhoosa (kg/hectare) 4247 4338 4985 4432

Increase in Yield(Percent) - 16 21 7

152


6.8 CROPPING INTENSITY

The cropping intensity has increased ‘with’ RCIs as compared to the ‘without’ RCIs as

shown in Figure 6.1. According to the farmers’ response, there is a significant increase in

cropping intensity on zero tillage, laser land levelling and bed-furrow farms. Figure 6.1

also shows that a marginal increase in cropping intensity in zero tillage intervention

because in general it saves rauni (pre-sowing irrigation) and tillage and does not require

irrigation water and labour as compare to laser land levelling and bed-furrow.

Figure 6.1 Cropping Intensity (%) of Rabi season (2011-12)

6.9 WATER PRODUCTIVITY (WP)

Water productivity is ratio of crop yield to depth of water applied. Water productivity is a

simple appraise to measure how effectively irrigation water has been used for crop

production. Any effort which tends to augment crop yield or curtail the amount of water

required, without disturbing crop yield, will enhance the water productivity. In this study,

water productivity has been worked out as Kg per cubic meter of water applied. Table 6.9

shows that water productivity achieved by RCIs are much higher than traditional farms. It

153


is highest for ZT followed by bed-furrow and LLL farms. Water saved by ZT, LLL and

bed-furrow are 49, 31 and 40% per hectare respectively w.r.t traditional farming.

Table 6.9 Water productivity of wheat crop on sample farms (2011-12)

Description Units Traditional Zero

tillage

Laser land


water applied m3/ha 4439 2284 3044 2664

Crop yield kg/ha 3970 4617 4802 4247

water productivity kg/ m3 0.89 2.02 1.58 1.59

water saved m3/ha - 2155 1395 1775

Water saved per ha w.r.t.

traditional in percent

-

49 31 40

6.10 FERTILIZER USE EFFICIENCY (FUE)

Fertilizer use efficiency is the ratio of crop yield to total fertilizers applied. The efficiency

of Manure/Fertilizer use for farms ‘with’ RCIs was greater than ‘without’ RCIs farms.

Effective use of fertilizer for RCIs farms resulted in augmented yield. Table 6.10 shows

that the fertilizer use efficiency of RCIs farms is higher than traditional farms. Higher

fertilizer use efficiency revealed that these interventions are more helpful for optimal use

of fertilizers.

Table 6.10 Fertilizer use efficiency of wheat crop on sample farms (2011-12).

Intervention Traditional Zero tillage Laser land


Total NP (kg/ha) 284 242 264 240

Crop yield

(kg/ha) 3970 4617 4802 4247

Fertilizer UE (%) 13.98 19.1 18.19 17.7

6.11 GROSS AND NET BENEFITS

The goal of economic analysis was to appraise the impact of zero tillage, laser land

levelling and bed- furrow on yield, net farm income and cost of production for wheat

154


crop. Table 6.11 shows that ZT intervention for wheat sowing is the utmost cost effective

intervention with aggregate cost of production of Rs.30326 (US$303.3) per hectare. The

key reason for less cost of production for this intervention is less cost of soil preparation

for sowing of the crop. Bed-furrow was second cost effective intervention with aggregate

cost of production of Rs.38655 (US$386.5) per hectare. The main reason for less cost of

this intervention was the less expenditure incurred on herbicide and irrigation. Cost of

production for LLL was more than the other improved interventions. The cost difference

was endorsed mainly to cost of levelling on traditional farm.

Table 6.11 Total Cost of production, Gross Benefits and Net Benefit for wheat by various interventions (Rs per ha)

Interventions Traditional Zero tillage Laser land levelling Bed-furrow

Levelling - - 3457 -

Ploughing 9876 - 5926 5926

Planking 3951 988 988 1975

Sowing 1481 1975 1728 3333

Seeds 5920 4840 5120 4920

Irrigation 4716 3501 3975 3390

Fertilizer 19083 15985 17772 16346

Herbicide 3778 3037 3383 2765 Total Cost of Production 48805 30326 42349 38655

Gross benefits 130494 148309 157209 139184

Net benefits 81689 117983 114860 100529

Increase in net benefits (Rs/ha) - 36294 33171 18840

Increase in net benefits (%) - 44 41 23

Gross benefits were computed by multiplying yields (in 40 kg) with market rates (average

prevailing rate Rs.1050/40kg) of wheat crop in 2012. Gross revenue for wheat also

included benefits of wheat by- product (i.e. bhoosa) which was computed based on

average prevailing rates in the study area as Rs.250/40 kg. Gross benefits of laser land

levelling is highest followed by zero tillage and bed-furrow farms.

155


Economic well-being and agricultural achievement depends mainly on net revenue

gained. Net benefits were calculated by subtracting the total cost from gross benefits as

shown in Table 6.11. The net benefits of zero tillage are the highest (44%) followed by

laser land levelling (41%) and bed-furrow (23%) farms. Hence, economic analysis

concludes that the zero tillage intervention is the best feasible and attractive opportunity

for agricultural community due to less cost of production inputs and enhanced water

productivity, fertilizer use efficiency and net benefits.

6.12 COMPARISON OF THE RESULTS WITH OTHER STUDIES

The results of present study regarding economic impacts of RCIs are compared with other

studies from Pakistan, India, Mexico and China where these RCIs have been implemented

(Table 6.12). The average wheat yield of present study is only 7% higher than the average

wheat yield of Pakistan and compatible with India (only 4% lower). However, the yield is

23 and 12% lower than Mexico and China respectively. Similarly, water productivity

(kg/m3) is slightly higher and fertilizer use efficiency is 9% lower than Pakistan. The

overall results conclude that the output parameters of the current study are similar to

regional countries like India and lower than the developed countries i.e., Mexico and

China.

Table 6.12 Comparison of results with other studies

Output parameters Present study Pakistan India Mexico China

Wheat yield (kg/ha) 4250 4758 5591 5137

Water Productivity (kg/m3) 1.73 1.6 1.75 2.3 2.16

Fertilizer use efficiency (%) 18.33 20 25 30 28

Latif et al. (2013)

156

CHAPTER 7

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 CONCLUSIONS

The specific conclusions of the study are

1. The results of the study indicate that partial lining (30% of their length) of the

watercourses have reduced the conveyance losses by an average of 32% or one- third of

the losses. This practically increased 10.6% water availability at the farm level.

2. According to this study contribution of seepage losses in the conveyance losses of lined

& unlined sections of watercourses was about 19 & 29 % respectively. The remaining

81% of the water losses in the lined watercourses were attributed to management losses

(leakage, spillage, etc.) which can be reduced by proper operation and timely

maintenance of the watercourses and their infrastructures (i.e. lids).

3. Average yields of wheat, rice and sugarcane crops served by lined watercourses were

higher than those served by neighbouring unlined channels by 11, 12 and 9 %

respectively.

4. The average gross income in lined watercourses was higher than the neighbouring

unlined channels by 17, 36 & 25 % for wheat, rice and sugarcane crops, respectively. The

gross farm income per hectare on areas served by lined watercourses was 26% higher

compared with areas served by neighbouring unlined channels.

5. The survey from farmers indicated that partial lining of watercourses had a relatively

small impact on irrigated area and cropping intensity and this policy of partial lining

needs to be reviewed.

6. Wheat yields obtained by using RCIs were 4802 kg/ha for laser land levelling followed

by zero tillage (4617 kg/ha), bed-furrow (4247 kg/ha) and traditional farming (3970

kg/ha). The increase in crop yield varied from 7 to 21% in all the RCIs.

157

CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7. The Rabi cropping intensity of wheat increased from 66% (traditional) to 95%, 85%

and 81% by zero tillage, laser land levelling and bed-furrow respectively.

8. Saving of irrigation water by Zero tillage, bed-furrow and laser land levelling was 49,

40 and 31%per hectare respectively as compared to traditional practices.

9. Water productivity was higher for zero tillage farming (2.02 kg/m3) followed by bed-

furrow (1.59 kg/m3) and laser land levelling farming (1.58 kg/m3).

10. Net farm income increased by 44, 41 and 23% respectively by ZT, LLL and B-F over

traditional farming for wheat crop.

7.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

General Recommendations

1. The policy of lining only 30% length of the watercourses needs to be reviewed to

increase the length of the lining as its impact is relatively small.

2. The quality of work during lining of watercourses should be strictly monitored as it

was observed during this study that quality of the lining in many cases was poor.

3. Regular maintenance of both lined and unlined watercourses is compulsory. This study

indicated low conveyance losses on well cleaned and properly maintained unlined

watercourses compared with poorly maintained and bad quality lined watercourses.

4. A significant amount of irrigation water is being lost by leakage through closed control

structures at junctions. In most cases the precast concrete lids at junctions and Nakka

turnouts were not properly closed or the lids were so badly damaged that they did not stop

the leaking water unless the openings were sealed by mud and weeds. Therefore, it is

recommended that present system of lids (used for opening and closing of Nakkas) should

be revisited to avoid excessive water loss due to leakage through them.

5. The water allowance, which is vital for effective agricultural planning and production,

varied at each visited site. The concerned government department should review the

water allocations so that the complaints of farmers may be rectified.

158

CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6. Benefits of Resource Conservation Interventions farms can be increased and sustained

through better irrigation agronomy. Extension services should be strengthened to

distribute the results of RCIs among the farming community.

7. The study concludes that Resource Conservation Interventions are favourable to

enhance the crop production and net income, and their attractiveness is augmenting every

day among the farming community. However, these are not used by most of the farmers

in Punjab due to high cost of equipment used for implementing RCIs. Therefore, it is

recommended to reduce the costs of RCIs equipment, to encourage farmers to benefit

from these measures.

8. Several instances of low conveyance losses on well cleaned and maintained unlined

channels illustrate the fact that labor available in villages, can increase and maintain

conveyance efficiencies to over 80%. Benefit/cost ratios of this investment can exceed 10

when the labour is properly instructed and motivated. It is recommended that personnel in

the On Farm Water Management Program be: given training in this type of cleaning and

maintenance; equipped with flow measuring device that will enable them to show the

WUAs that cleaning and maintenance are excellent investments. These WUAs should

then be encouraged to hire “Canal Guardians” who would work essentially full time on

cleaning & maintenance and report condition, performance and needs of the canal to the

WUAs at proper intervals.

Future Recommendations

1. Seepage losses of watercourses were measured by ponding method using falling head

technique. The depth of water in the watercourse and its wetted perimeter are usually

considered important factors affecting seepage losses, therefore, it is recommended that

the seepage losses should also be measured by using constant head technique.

2. Results of this study clearly demonstrate that seepage losses are 19% whereas 81% are

the manageable losses. The control of manageable losses (i.e. leakage from lid, leakage

from lining cracks, etc.) will improve the conveyance losses considerably.

159

REFERENCES

“Agricultural Statistics of Pakistan 2007-2008” Government of Pakistan, Ministry of

Food, Agriculture and Livestock (MINFAL). Ahmedjanov, M., Manabaev, ANT. and Teshabaev, AZ. (1988), “Application of laser for

land levelling” Journal of Mechanized Cotton Production 12:4–6 (in Russian). Akram, M., W.D. Kemper and J.D. Sabey. (1981), “Water Levels and Losses and

Cleaning in Watercourses” Transactions of ASAE, Vol. 24(3). PP. 643-650.

Ambast, S.K., Tyagi, N.K. and Tyagi, H.R. (1990), “Performance evaluation of water delivery system in a unit command area” J. Ind. Water Resource. Soc. 10 (2), 19–24.

ANCID (Australian National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage) (2006), “Open Channel Seepage and Control” Volume 1.2 Current Knowledge of Channel Seepage Issues and Measurement in the Australian Rural Water Industry, Prepared by Sinclair Knight Merz, August 2006.

Anonymous (1997), “Irrigation agronomy, OFWM field manual” Federal water management cell. Ministry of Food Agriculture and Livestock, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Aquino, P. (1998), “The adoption of bed planting of wheat in the Yaqui Valley, Sonora, 349 Mexico. Wheat Special Report No. 17a. Mexico, DF: CIMMYT.

Arshad, M. (2004), “Contribution of Irrigation Conveyance System Components to the Recharge Potential in Rechna Doab under Lined and Unlined Options” Ph.D. Dissertation. Faculty of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan.

Arshad, M., N. Ahmad, M. Usman and S. Shabbir. (2009), “Comparison of Water Losses between Unlined and Lined Watercourses in Indus Basin of Pakistan” Pakistan Journal of Agriculture Sciences, Vol. 46(4). PP. 280-284.

Arshad, M. and N. Ahmad. (2011), “Performance assessment of irrigation system in rice-wheat cropping zone using modern techniques” ICID 21st International Congress on Irrigation and Drainage, 15-23 October 2011, Tehran, Iran.

Ashraf, M., W.D. Kemper, M.M. Choudhry, B. Ahmad and T. Trout. (1977), “Review of Watercourse Loss Measurement in Pakistan” WAPDA Publication No. 71, Joint Contribution of CSU and MREP, Bhalwal, Pakistan. PP. 45.

Ashraf, M. and M. Munir. (1981), “Potential in Watercourse Improvement” Bulletin of IDFCR Council, Vol. 11, No. 1 and 2.

Aslam, M., Majid, A., Hobbs, P.R., Hashmi, N.I. and Byerlee, D. (1989), “Wheat in the Rice-Wheat cropping system of the Punjab” A synthesis of on –farm research results

160

REFERENCES

1984-1988. Coordinated wheat programme, Pakistan Agricultural Research Council,

Islamabad. PARC/CIMMYT Paper no.89-3. Aslam, M., Ahmad, M., Hashmi, N.I., Chatha, M.Q. and veen, M.V. (1991), “Zero tillage

wheat pilot production programme for the Punjab Rice-Wheat system” Coordinated Wheat Programme, Pakistan Agricultueral Research Council, Islamabad.

Aslam, M., Majid, A. and Gill, M.A. (1999), “Zero tillage wheat production technology: prospects and threats” Journal of Science Technology and Development 18 (3): 17–23.

Asrar-ul-Haq, Khan, M.A., Khan, M.H. (2008), “Water resources management in

Pakistan: the challenges, climate change implications and way forward” Published by

Pakistan Engineering Congress. Paper No 718.

Bell, R. (1997), The no-till soil. In: Zero Tillage: Advancing the Art. Manitoba zero tillage research association, North Dakota. USA.

Bhatti, A.M., P. Suttinon and S. Nasu. (2009), “Agriculture Water demand Management in Pakistan: Review and Perspective” Society for Social Management Systems. PP 1-2.

Bhutta, M.N. and N. Ahmad. (2006), “Impact of Watercourse Lining plus Measures on Reducing drainage Requirements” IWASRI Publication No. 258.

Bodla, M.A., A. Hafeez, M. Tariq, M.R. Chohan and M. Aslam (1998), “Seepage, Equity and Economic Evaluation for Irrigation Canal Lining in FESS Project” IWASRI Publication No. 204. PP 73-76.

Brandt, S.A. (1992), “Zero vs conventional tillage and their effects on crop yield and moisture” Can. J. Plant Sci. 72, 679–688.

Bukhari, N.H., M.H. Hafeez, M.S. shafique and G.V. Skogerboe (2001), “Non constricting Rectangular Channels for Measuring Farm Water Deliveries” Transactions of the ASAE, Vol. 44(6): 1489-1494.

Burton, M.A. (1994), “Land levelling on irrigation projects” Southampton, U.K. Byerlee, D. and Moya, P. (1993), “Impacts of International Wheat Breeding Research in

the Developing World” Mexico, DF: CIMMYT. Cai, L.Q., Qi, Q. and Zhang, R.R. (2008) “Effects of conservation tillage on soil

aggregate stability and soil organic carbon in spring wheat/pea system” J. Soil Water Conserv. 22, 141–145.

Chand, R. and S. Pal (2003), “Policy and technological options to address India’s food surpluses” Current Science, February 2003.

Cheema, S. and M. Zulfqar (1989), “The impact of laser land levelling on crop production in Faisalabad. Pak.” J.WM, 1: 13.26.

Chaudhary, MH, Hussain, S., Khan, SB, Hussain, F. and Anwar, J. (1999), “Food requirements of Pakistan in the first decade of 21st century–Role of wheat research in Punjab” Journal of Science Technology and Development 18 (2): 1–5.

161

REFERENCES

Chaudhary, M.A., Gill, M.A., Kahlown, A. and Hobbs, P.R. (2002), “Evaluation of

resource conservation technologies in rice–wheat system of Pakistan.” In: Proceedings of the international workshop on developing an action program for farm level impact in rice–wheat system of Indo-Gangetic plains. New Delhi, India, 25–27 September 2000, Rice–Wheat Consortium Paper Series 14. Rice–Wheat Consortium for the Indo-Gangetic Plains, p. 148.

Chaudhary, M.A., N.A. Shah, J.M. Asim and A.Aziz (2004), “Impact of Watercourse Improvement on Farm Economy” Mona Reclamation Experimental Project, WAPDA, Bhalwal, Pakistan. Publication No. 260. pp. 33.

Clyma, W. and G.L. Corey. (1974), “The Importance of Farm Water Management in Pakistan” Water Management Research Project, Colorado State University, USA. Report No. 2.

Clyma, W., A. Ali and M. Ashraf. (1975), “Watercourse Losses” CENTO Panel Meeting on the Optimum use of Water in Agriculture, Nuclear Institute of Agriculture and Biology, Faisalabad, March, 1975. PP. 30.

Corey, G.L. and W. Clyma. (1973), “Improving Farm Water Management in Pakistan” Annual Technical Report, Water Management Research Project, Colorado State University, USA.

CSIRO. (2008), “Technical Manual for Accessing Hotspots in Channel and Piped Irrigation Systems” A Report to the Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and Arts by Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Australia. pp. 27.

Dickey, E.C., J.C. Siemens, P.J. Jasa, V.L. Hofman and D.P. Shelton (1992), “Tillage system definitions” In: Conservation Tillage Systems and Management. MidWest Plan Services, Iowa State University, USA.

Drost, B.W., S. E. Cox, and K. M. Schurr (1997), “Changes in ground-water levels and ground-water budgets, from predevelopment to 1986, in parts of the Pasco Basin, Washington” U.S. Department of the Interior/U.S.G.S. Water Resources Invest. Report No. 96–4086 (1997).

Du, B., Deng, J., Li, W.Y., and Liao, Z.X.(2000), “Comparison of effects of conservation and conventional tillage systems on winter wheat growth, grain yield and soil properties” J. China Agri. Univ. 5, 55–58.

Early, A.C., J.B. Eckert, D.M. Freeman, W.D. Kemper, M.K. Lowdermilk, G.E. Radosevich and G.V. Skogerboe (1976), “Institutional Framework for Improved On-Farm Water Management in Pakistan” Special Technical Report, Water Management Research Project, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. PP 88.

Early, A.C., R. Ali and M.K. Lowdermilk (1977), “Progress Report on Water Management Survey Project Phase-II” CSU Progress Report No.5.

Eckert, J., N. Dimick and W. Clyma, (1975), “Water Management alternatives for Pakistan” Field Report No.3. Water Management Res. Colorado State Univ. pp. 33-39.

162

REFERENCES

El-Raie, A.S., A.M. El-Nozahy and R.K. Ibrahim (2004), “Laser land levelling impact on

water use efficiency, soil properties and machine performance under agricultural intensification conditions” Misr. J. Ag. Eng, 20 (4): 757-775.

Erenstein, O., U. Farooq, R.K. Malik and M. Sharif (2008), “On-farm impacts of zero-tillage wheat in south Asia’s rice-wheat systems” Field Crops Research 105: 240-252.

Feder, G., A. Willett, and W. Zijp (2001) Agricultural Extension: Generic Challenges and Some Ingredients for Solutions, ed. S. Wolf, and D. Zilberman. Boston, MA, Kluwer. Gill, M., 1998. “Water for life” Proceeding of seminar on world food day. Directorate of agriculture information. Dept. Agric. Govt. Punjab, pp: 9-13.

Fujisaka, S.L., Harrington, L. and Hobbs, P.R. (1994), “Rice-wheat in South Asia” Systems and long-term priorities established through diagnostic research. Agricultural Systems, 46: 169-187.

FAO. (2010). United Nations, Food and Agriculture Organization, Web Data.

FWMC. (1997), “Irrigation Agronomy, OFWM Field Manual” Vol. VI. Federal Water Management Cell, MINFAL, Islamabad, Pakistan.

FWMC. (2004), “Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Federal Water Management Cell (FWMC)” Umbrella PC-I for National Program for Improvement of Watercourses in Pakistan, April 2004.

FWMC. (2010), “Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Federal Water Management Cell (FWMC)” Unpublished Data. 2010.

Gill, M.A. (1994), “On-farm water management: A historical overview. In: Water and Community” An Assessment of On-Farm Water Management Programme (ed.) C. Inayatullah, SDPI, Islamabad, pp. 24–39.

Gill, M. (1998), “Water for life” Proceeding of seminar on world food day. Directorate of agriculture information. Dept. Agric. Govt. Punjab, pp: 9-13.

Gill, M.A. (2001), “Agriculture in Pakistan, Trends in Crop Production, Issues and Resource Conservation Strategies for Improving Efficiency” Paper presented in the International Workshop on Conservation Agriculture for Food Security and environment Protection in Rice-Wheat Cropping Systems. Feb. 6-9, 2001. Lahore.

Gill, M.A., Awan, N.A. and Ahmad, M. (2006), “Promotion of Resource Conservation Technologies in the Punjab” Paper presented in the International Seminar on Institutional and Technological Interventions for Better Irrigation Management in the New Millennium. Dec. 4-6, 2006. Avari Hotel, Lahore.

Goldsmith, H. and I.W. Makin (1989), “Canal Lining: From the Laboratory to the Field and Back Again” Overseas Development Unit Hydraulics Research Ltd., Wallingford, U.K.

Government of Punjab (1987), Planning and Development Department, Lahore. Report of the Technical Committee on “Water Losses in Watercourses in Punjab”, Pakistan.

GOP. (2006), “Pakistan Economic Survey 2005-06” Economic Advisor’s Wing, Finance Division, Islamabad.

163

REFERENCES

Gupta, R.K., Hobbs, P.R., Ladha, J.K. and Prabhakar, S.V.R.K. (2002), “Resource

Conserving Technologies” Transforming the Rice-Wheat systems of the Indo-Gangetic Plains. Rice-Wheat Consortium-A success story. Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institution FAO Regional Office for Asia and The Pacific Bangkok. P. 42.

Gupta, RK and Seth A. (2007), “A review of resource conservation technologies for sustainable management of the rice-wheat cropping systems of the Indo-Gangetic Plains” Crop Protection, 26: 436-447.

Hagan, R.E. (1989),. “Measuring Discharge with Current Meters” International Irrigation Centre, Utah State University, Logan, Utah. pp. 39.

Hobbs, P.R., K.D. Sayre and J.I. Ortiz-Monasterio (1997), “Increasing Wheat Yields Sustainably through Agronomic means” Paper 98-01. CIMMYT, Mexico.

Hobbs, P.R. (2001), “Tillage and crop establishment in South Asian rice-wheat systems, present practices and future options” In: The rice-wheat Cropping System of South Asia: Efficient Production Management (Ed., Kataki, P.K.), The Haworth Press, New York.

Hobbs, P.R. and R. Gupta (2002), “Resource Conserving Technologies for Wheat in Rice Wheat Systems” CIMMYT, Mexico.

Hobbs, P. R., and Gupta, R. K. (2003), “Rice-wheat cropping systems in the Indo-Gangetic Plains” Issues of water productivity in relation to new resource conserving technologies. In: Water Productivity in Agriculture: Limits and opportunity for improvement, eds. J. W. Kijne; R. Barker; D. Molden. CABI publishing in association with International Water Management Institute.

Huang, P.M. (1992), “The Status quo and perspectives of wheat production in China” In: Progress of the Study on Wheat Planting in China, China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, Beijing, China, pp. 1-12 (in Chinese).

Humphreys, E., Meisner, C., Gupta, R., Timsina, J., Beecher, H. G., Lu, T. Y., Singh, Y., Gill, M. A., Masih, I., Guo, Z. J. and Thompson, J. A. (2005), “Water savings in rice-wheat systems” Plant Production Science 8(3): 242-258.

Hussain, M., B.A. Chaudhary and I.U.H. Chaudhary (1977), “Impact of Watercourse Improvement at Tubewell MN-56 and MN-78 on the Farm Economy” MREP, WAPDA Publication No.73. PP 32-33.

IWASRI. (2004), “Impact of Watercourse Lining on Reducing Drainage Requirement” International Waterlogging and Salinity Research Institute. Publication 258. WAPDA, Lahore. Pakistan.

IWMI. (2007), “Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture. 2007” Water for Food, Water for Life: Trends in Water and Agricultural Development. London: Earthscan, and Colombo: International Water Management Institute. PP 69-70.

Jat, M.L., Pal, S.S., Subba Rao, AVM., Sirohi, K., Sharma, SK and Gupta, RK. (2004), “Laser land levelling-the precursor technology for resource conservation in irrigated eco-system of India” In: Proceedings of National Conference on Conservation

164

REFERENCES

Agriculture: Conserving Resources-Enhancing Productivity, September 22-23, 2004, NASC Complex, Pusa New Delhi, pp 9-10.

Jat, M.L. and Chandna, P. (2004), “Precision Land Leveling- Laser Land Leveling System” Rice-Wheat Information Sheet 48 (June): 3.

Jat, M., P. Chandna, R. Gupta, S. Sharma, and M. Gill (2006) “Laser land levelling: a precursor technology for resource conservation” Rice-Wheat Consortium Technical Bulletin Series 7.

Jat, M., R. Gupta, P. Ramasundaram, M. Gathala, H. Sidhu, S. Singh, R.G. Singh, Y. Saharawat, V. Kumar, and P. Chandna (2009), “Laser assisted precision land levelling: a potential technology for resource conservation in irrigated intensive production systems of the Indo-Gangetic Plains” ed. J.K. Ladha, Yadvinder Singh, O. Erenstein, and B. Hardy Los Banos, Philippines, International Rice Research Institute, pp. 223.

Jehangir, W.A., H. Turral and I. Masih (2004), “Water Productivity of Rice Crop in Irrigated Areas” Proceedings of the 4th International Crop Science Congress, Brisbane, Australia, 26 Sep – 1 Oct 2004.

Johnson, S.H., W.D. Kemper and M.K. Lowdermilk (1978), “Improving Irrigation Water Management in the Indus Basin” Water Bulletin. American Water Resources Association. Vol. 15(2): 473-495.

Kahlown, M.A., Shafique, M.S. and Iqbal, M. (1998), “Improved Irrigation Methods for Efficient Use of Irrigation Water under Different Water-table Depths” Mona Reclamation Experimental Project, WAPDA, Bhalwal, publication no. 231.

Kahlown, M.A. and T. Masood (2000), “Innovative Watercourse Lining Techniques in Pakistan” Journal of Drainage and Water Management, Vol. 4, Nos. 1&2. PP 1-12.

Kahlown, M.K., Gill, M.A. and Ashraf, M. (2002), “Evaluation of Resource Conservation Technologies in Rice-Wheat Systems of Pakistan” Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Kahlown, M.A. and W.D. Kemper (2005), “Bonding of Soil and Sediment Cleaned from Channels by Cement into Blocks for Lining Irrigation Channels” Agricultural Water Management, Vol. 74 (2005). PP 77-85.

Kemper, W.D., W. Clyma and M.M. Ashraf (1975), “Improvement and Maintenance of Earthen Watercourses to Reduce Waterlogging and Increase Water Supply for Crop Production” Proceedings of International Conference on Waterlogging and Salinity, Lahore, Pakistan, October, 1975.

Kemper, W.D., W.Clyma and Mian Muhammad Ashraf (1976), “Improvement and maintenance of earth watercourses to reduce waterlogging and increase water supplies for crop production” Mona publication No.50, July, 1976.

Kemper, W.D., Wayne Clyma, Gaylore V. Skogerboe and Thomas J. Trout (1980), “Watercourse Improvement Research in Pakistan” Water management Technical Report No.56. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, USA.

165

REFERENCES

Khan, B.M. (1986), “Overview of water management in Pakistan” Proceedings of

Regional seminar for SAARC member countries on-farm water management. Govt. of Pakistan. p.8.

Khan, M.A., K. Mahmood and G.V. Skogerboe (1997), “Current Meter Discharge Measurements for Steady and Unsteady Flow Conditions in Irrigation Channels” International Irrigation Management Institute (IIMI), Report No. T-7. pp. 64.

Khan, M. A., M. Z. Anwar, A. Gill, N. I. Hashmi and P. R. Hobbs (2002), “Impact Assessment of Zero Tillage Wheat Sowing Technologies in the Rice-Wheat Farming System of Punjab” Socio-economic Research Studies, SSI, NARC, PARC, Islamabad., 2006.

Khepar, S.D., Chaturvedi, M.C. and Sinha, B.K. (1982), “Effect of precise levelling on the increase of crop yield and related economic decision” Journal of Agricultural Engineering. 19: 23-30.

Kraatz, D.B. (1977), “Irrigation Canal Lining” FAO Land and Water Development Series, No.1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.

Lawrence, P.A., Radford, B.J., Thomas, G.A., Sinclair, D.P. and Key, A.J. (1994), “Effects of tillage practices on wheat performance in a semi-arid environment” Soil Till. Res. 28, 347 364.

Landon, N. j. (1995), “An investigation into the impact and applicability of laser land levelling in Pakistan” Thesis M. Sc., Univ. Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Latif, A., A.S. Shakir and Rashid, M.U. (2013), “Appraisal of economic impact of zero tillage, laser land levelling and bed-furrow interventions in Punjab, Pakistan” Pak. J. Engg.&Appl. Sci. vol. 13, July, 2013 (p. 65-81).

Lawler, D. J. (1990), “Seepage losses from earthen Farm Channels in the Campaspe west area” VCAH-Dookie campus internal report October 1990.

Laxmi, V., Erenstein, O. and Gupta, R.K. (2007), “Impact of zero tillage in India’s rice–wheat systems” Research report. RWC, New Delhi.

Limon-Ortega, A., Sayre, K.D., Drijber, R.A. and Francis, C.A. (2002), “Soil attributes in a furrow-irrigated bed planting system in northwest Mexico” Soil Till. Res. 63, 123–132.

Li, Y.Z., (2008), “Analysis on Chinese grain market in 2007” China Agri. Inform. 3, 7–11 (in Chinese).

Lowdermilk, M.K. (1978), “Watercourse Improvement Impact on Farm Economy” On-Farm Water Management, Punjab, Pakistan. PP 7.

M. karimi (2013), “Study the effect of channel lining on water productivity and economy of farmers in Razavi Khorasan province, Iran” IJACS/2011/3-2/55-60.

Malik, R. K. Gupta, R. K. Yadav, A. Sardana, P. K., Punia, S. S, Malik, R. S. Singh, S. and Singh, S. (2005), “The socio-economic impact of zero-tillage in rice-wheat cropping system of Indo-Gangetic Plains” The voice of Framers, Technical Bulletin No. 9. Directorate of Extension Education, C C S Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, Haryana, India.

166

REFERENCES

Malik, R.K., Gupta, R.K., Singh, C.M., Yadav, A., Brar, S.S., Thakur, T.C., Singh, S.S.,

Singh, A.K., Singh, R., Sinha, R.K. (2005a), “Accelerating the adoption of resource conservation technologies in rice wheat system of the Indo-Gangetic Plains” In: Proceedings of the Project Workshop. June 1–2, 2005. Directorate of Extension Education, CCS HAU, Hisar, Haryana, India.

Mann, R.A. (1988), “New dimensions of crop productivity systems in the developing countries” Pakistan’s pursuit. Agric. Systems, 28: 213–35.

Mann, R.A., M. Ramzan and M.H. Syed (2002), “Annual Report for the ADB Project. Rice Programme” Pakistan Agricultural Research Council, Islasmabad, Pakistan.

Mann, R.A. and C.A. Meisner (2003), “Proceedings of the national workshop on rice-wheat systems in Pakistan, 11-12th December, 2002. Islamabad, Pakistan” A Rice Wheat Consortium Paper Series 15. pp. 2-3

Merrey, D.J. (1986), “The Local Impact of Centralized Irrigation Control in Pakistan” A Socio-Centric Perspective. IIMI Research Paper No. 4. PP 13-14.

MINFA. (1998), Agricultural statistics of Pakistan, 1997/ 1998. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad.

National Seminar (1983), “Focus on lining of watercourses in canal command areas. Chandigarh, India” Haryana State Minor Irrigation (Tube Wells) Corporation.

Nazir, M.S. (1994), “Crop production, Crop water requirement and irrigation system” National Book Foundation, pp: 63-67.

Noorjamal, T., Akhtar, M. R. and Aune, J. B. (2006), “Assessment of Conservation Agriculture from an Agronomic, Economic and Social Perspective in Punjab, Pakistan” Paper presented in the International Seminar on Institutional and Technological Interventions for Better Irrigation Management in the New Millennium. Dec. 4-6, 2006. Avari Hotel, Lahore.

OFWM. (1982), “Impact of Watercourse Improvement on Farm Production” On-Farm Water Management Program, Water Management Training Institute, Lahore, Pakistan.

Pal, S.S., Jat, M.L. and Subba Rao, A.V.M. (2004), Annual progress report on “Precision Farming under National Agricultural Technology Project submitted to Project Implementation Unit, Mission Mode project on NATP” Krishi Anusandhan Bhawan II, Pusa, New Delhi.

PERI. (1987), “Base Line Survey of Command Water Management Project, Punjab, Pakistan, November, 1987” Punjab Economic Research Institute (PERI), Planning and Development Department, Lahore.

PERI. (1993), “Evaluation of On Farm Water Management Programme in Punjab” Publication No. 281. Punjab Economic Research Institute, Lahore. Pakistan.

PID. (2010). Government of Punjab, Irrigation and Power Department, Web Data. Rajput, T.B.S. and Patel, N. (2003), “Laser land levelled se khet samatal karayiye, pani

bachayiye aur paidavar badhayiye” Folder (Hindi). Water Technology Centre, Indian Agricultural research Institute, Pusa, New Delhi.

167

REFERENCES

Ren WT, Hu ZF, Cui HG, Yang CT, Liu Y, Wang YJ, Zhang ZY. and Li BF. (2003),

“Effect of laser controlled land levelling and baby rice seedling direct planting on saving water” Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng 19(3):72–75.

Renfro, R.Z.H. (1983), “Economic of Local Control of Irrigation Water in Pakistan” A Pilot Study. Ph.D. Thesis Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. USA.

Report of the National Irrigation Commission, Volume-I, (1972).

Reuss, J.O., G.V. Skogerboe, and D. J. Henery (1979), “To improve agriculture productivity” Publication No. SCU Pakistan Report No. 42 L-8/2.

Rickman, J.F. (2002), “Manual for Laser Land Leveling” Rice–Wheat Consortium Technical Bulletin Series 5. Rice–Wheat Consortium for the Indo-Gangetic Plains, New Delhi, India, pp. 24.

RWC (2004), “The rice-wheat consortium” an institutional innovation in international agricultural research on the rice-wheat cropping system. New Delhi.

S. Rajaram, K. D. Sayre, J. Diekmann, R. Gupta and W. Erskine (2007), “Sustainability Considerations in Wheat Improvement and Production” In: M. S. Kang, Ed., Agri-cultural and Environmental Sustainability-Considerations for Future, Haworth Food & Agricultural Products Press, New York, pp. 105-124.

Sarki, A., S.Q. Memon and M. Leghari (2008), “Comparison of Different Methods for Computing Seepage Losses in an Earthen Watercourse” Agricultural Tropical Et Subtropica, Vol. 41(4). PP 197-205.

Sattar, A., Khan. F.H. and Tahir, A.R. (2003), “Impact of precision land levelling on water saving and drainage requirement” Journal of AMA. 34: 39-41.

Saturnino, H.M., Landers, J.N. (2001), Introduction: “what is zero tillage?” In: Saturnino, H.M., Landers, J.N. (Eds.), The Environment and Zero Tillage. Associaçaõ de Plantio Direto no Cerrado, Federaçaõ Brasileira de Plantio Direto na Palha, Brasil, pp. 13–24.

Sayre, K.D. (2000), “Effects of tillage, crop residue retention and nitrogen management on the performance of bed-planted, furrow irrigated spring wheat in northwest Mexico. Presented at the “15th Conference of the International Soil Tillage Research Organization”, July 2-7, 2000. Fort Worth, Texas, USA.

Sayre K.D. (2004), “Raised-bed cultivation” In: Lal R (ed) Encyclopedia of soil science Marcel Dekker, Inc.

Sayre, K.D. and Hobbs, P.R. (2004), “The raised-bed system of cultivation for irrigated production conditions” In Lal, R. et al (eds) Sustainable Agriculture and the International

Rice-Wheat System, pp 337–355. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York. Shahid, B.A., A.S. Shakir and M.A. Bodla (1996), “Review of Seepage Losses from

Unlined and Lined Canals Inside and Outside Pakistan” IWASRI Publication No. 167. PP. 40.

Sidhu, B.S. (2003), “Diffusion of Zero-Tillage Technology for Wheat in Punjab” Department of Agriculture, Punjab Chandigarh.

168

REFERENCES

Singh, R.P. and Khan, M.A. (1999), “Rainwater management: water harvesting and its

efficient utilization” In: Singh, H.P., Ramakrishna, Y.S. and Venkateswaralu, B. (eds) Fifty Years of Dryland Agricultural Research In India. Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture (CRIDA), Hyderabad, India, pp. 301–313.

Singh, R., Kumar, A. and Chand, R. (2007), “Accelerating Adoption of Zero Tillage Technology” Indian Research Journal of Extension Education, 7 (1): 6-10.

Skogerboe, G.V. (1996), “Physical versus Institutional Development in the Evolution of Watercourses Improvement in Pakistan” IIMI, Pakistan. Report No. R-8. PP 2-10.

Sorrenson, W.J. and Montoya, L.J. (1989), “Implicacoes economicas da erosion do solo e do use de algumas practices conservationists no Parana” Boletim Tecnico no. 21.

Trout, T., S.A. Bowers, M. Wahla, H.U. Khan, M. Yasin and M. Iqbal (1977), “Operational Conveyance Losses on Tubewell 81-R Watercourse” A Joint Contribution of CSU and MREP, WAPDA Publication No. 76. PP 42.

Trout, T.J. and S.A. Bower (1980), “Factors Affecting Water Loss from Indus Basin Irrigation Canals” Water Management Research, CSU, Technical Report No. 50. PP 30-40.

Trout, T., M. Akram, A. Cheema and Munir Ahmad (1981), “Measurement of Watercourse Losses by Ponding Method and Study of Factors which Affect Watercourse Losses” A joint Contribution of CSU and MREP, WAPDA Publication No. 110. PP. 43.

Trout, T.J. and S.A. Bowers (1981), “Operational Evaluation of Village Level Irrigation Conveyance Systems” Transactions of the ASAE, Vol. 24(3): PP 636-642.

Tuong, T.P. (1999), “Productive water use in rice production: opportunities and limitations” Journal of Crop Production 2: 241-264.

Tyagi, N.K. (1984), “Effect of land surface uniformity on irrigation quality and economic

parameters in sodic soils under reclamation” Irrigation Science. 5: 151-166. USBR. (2001), “Water Measurement Manual” United States Department of the Interior,

Bureau of Reclamation, Washington DC. pp. 87-107. USDA. (1997), “Irrigation Guide, National Engineering Handbook Series” United States

Department of Agriculture, Washington D.C., USA. Vaidyanathan, A. (1999), “Water Resources Management” Institutions and Irrigation

Development in India. Oxford University Press, New Delhi. Van der Lely A. (1995), Cited, Coleambally Draft Land and Water Management Plan November, 1995. Wachyan, E. and K.R. Rushton (1987), “Water Losses from Irrigation Canals” Journal of

Hydrology, 92 (1987). PP 275-288. Wang, F.H., Wang, X.Q. and Sayre, K.D. (2004), “Comparison of conventional, flood

irrigated, flat planting with furrow irrigated, raised bed planting for winter wheat in China” Field Crops Res. 87, 35–42.

169

REFERENCES

WAPDA. (1982), “Monitoring and Evaluation of On-Farm Water Management Program

(Post Project Evaluation)” WMED, P & I Publication No. 272. WAPDA. (1984), “Monitoring and Evaluation of On-Farm Water Management Program

(Pre-Improvement Evaluation), September, 1984”.

WAPDA. (1984a), “Monitoring and Evaluation of On-Farm Water Management Program” Final Report, Vol. 1. WMED, P & I Publication No. 293.

WAPDA. (1993), “Monitoring and Evaluation of On Farm Water Management Project-III, Baseline Report, Rabi, 1992-93” Watercourse Monitoring and Evaluation Directorate, Planning Division, WAPDA, Lahore, Pakistan. Publication No. 398.

WAPDA. (1993a), “Water Conservation through Watercourse Improvement” Drainage Sector Environmental Assessment. NDP Main Report, Vol.1.

WAPDA. (1994), First Time-Scaled Evaluation Report of On Farm Water Management Program IDA Financed OFWM-I & II Projects” Watercourse Monitoring and Evaluation Directorate, Planning Division, WAPDA, Lahore, Pakistan. Publication No. 402.

WAPDA. (2002), Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Water and Power (WAPDA), Chief Engineering Advisor; Pakistan Water Sector Strategy, Volume-5, October 2002.

Whiting, P. and Javed. (1979), “Control of Water Losses from Nakkas with Mud Sealing” On Farm Water Management Project, Peshawar, Pakistan.

Woodhead, T., R. Huke, E. Huke and L. Balababa (1994), Rice-Wheat Atlas of India, IRRI, CIMMYT, ICAR.

Yi, Y., Zhang, W., Liu, X.B., Zhao, H.L. and Zhang, Y. (2007), “Status quo and prospect of multiple cropping about wheat in northern China” J. Anhui Agi. Sci. 35, 1631– 1632 (in Chinese, with English abstract).

170

APPENDICES

171

APPENDICES

Appendix-A

FIRST FIELD SURVEY REPORT OF WATERCOURSE

1. Watercourse No._______________ 2. Distributary/Minor Canal _______________

3. Village _____________ Tehsil ______________ District _______________

4. Sanctioned/Design Discharge ________ (l/sec) 5. Type of Outlet ________________

6. Command Area ______________ (Acres) 7. Water Allowance _______ (l/sec/ha)

8. Number of Share Holders _____________

9. Rabi Crops ________________________ 10. Kharif Crops ___________________

11. Total Length of watercourse ________ (m) 12. Lined Length _______________ (m)

13. Date of completion of Lining ____________ (years)

Watercourse Lined Section:

14. Average Wetted Perimeter ______ (m); Top Width ______ (m); Total Depth ______ (m)

Watercourse Unlined Section:

15. Average Wetted Perimeter ______ (m); Top Width ______ (m); Total Depth ______ (m)

16. Name of Farmers ___________________________

17. Visit Date ________________________

18. Warabandi Schedule:

Irrigation Turn Day Time

From To

Last Turnout (Lined Section)

Tail of watercourse

172

APPENDICES

Appendix-B

PHYSICAL STATUS REPORT OF LINED WATERCOURSE

1. Watercourse No __________ 2. Name of Distributary/ Minor Canal___________

3. Village ______________ Tehsil ____________ District ___________________

4. Type of Outlet AOSM Pipe outlet other

5. Working of the outlet as per design Tempered

6. Lining Type Double brick walls with brick bed plastered inside

In-Situ cement concrete in panels

7. Watercourse Geometry Rectangular Trapezoidal

8. Bed Width __________________ (m) 9. Top Width ________________ (m)

10. Total Depth _________________ (m) 11. Flow Depth _______________ (m)

12. Free Board __________________ (m) 13. Side Slope _______ H _______ V

14. Average depth of deposited sediment:

Head _____ (cm) Middle ______ (cm) Tail ______ (cm)

15. Weed growth along the bed of channel Yes No

16. Weed growth along the side walls of channel Yes No

17. Operation of Check & Turnout Structures:

Using Nakka Lid Using Mud Firm Leaky

18. Side Spillage Yes No

19. If Yes, apparent reason:

Weeds inside the section Silt deposition along the bed

Discharge in excess of the design improper section design

20. Visible cracks along the perimeter Yes No

173

APPENDICES

21. If Yes, number of spots _______________ 26. Average length of crack ______ (cm)

22. Damaged lined sections Yes No

23. If Yes, number of spots ________________

24. Type of damages Side wall collapse Partial settlement of section

25. Apparent Reason:

Hit by farm machinery while Passing Crossing Damaged by farm animals Damaged by earth pressure or settlement of backfill material Damaged by the community Damaged due to poor construction

Name of Observer _________________ Date ______________________

174

APPENDICES

Appendix-C

WATERCOURSE VELOCITY MEASUREMENT

1. Watercourse No __________ 2. Name of Distributary/ Minor Canal___________

3. Village ______________ . Tehsil ____________ District ___________________

First Observation Station

Total Water Surface Width _____ (m) Reach Length ______________

Start Time: ______________ End Time: _______________

Flow Depth w.r.t. Bed: _____

Vertical Sections Average Velocity at 0.6 y (m/sec)

No. Width (cm) Depth (cm) Repetitions I II III

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Head of Lined Section:

Number of Nakka Turnouts (Right/Left): ____________

Watercourse Wetted Perimeter (m): 1) ___________ 2) ____________ 3) ____________

Average Wetted Perimeter (m): _______________

Watercourse Top Width (m): 1) ___________ 2) ____________ 3) ____________

Average Top Width (m): _________________

REMARKS:________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

175

APPENDICES

Second Observation Station (Tail Lined Section)



Flow Depth w.r.t. Bed: ________


No. Width (cm)

Depth (cm)

Repetitions I II III

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Surface evaporation during test time (mm):

1) Initial level _________ 2) Final Level __________ 3) Difference __________

Vicinity Temperature during test (oC):

1) Minimum Temperature __________ 2) Maximum Temperature ___________

Humidity (%): ____________

REMARKS:

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

176

APPENDICES

Third Observation Station



Flow Depth w.r.t. Bed: ___________


No. Width (cm)

Depth (cm)

Repetitions I II III

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Unlined Section:

Number of Nakka Turnouts (Right/Left): ____________

Watercourse Wetted Perimeter (m): 1) ___________ 2) ____________ 3) _________

Average Wetted Perimeter (m): _______________

Watercourse Top Width (m): 1) ___________ 2) ____________ 3) ____________

Average Top Width (m):_________________

REMARKS:

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________


177

APPENDICES

Appendix-D

WATERCOURSE SEEPAGE MEASUREMENT

1. Watercourse No._____________ 2. Name of Distributary/ Minor Canal___________

3. Village _____________ Tehsil _______________ District ________________

4. Length of test section isolated for seepage measurement by Ponding Method ______ (m)

5. Measurement along the test section:

Description Measurements 1 2 3 Average

Initial water surface width at three locations in the test section, W1

Final water surface width at the previously selected locations, W2

Initial wetted perimeter of the test section at the same selected locations, P1

Final wetted perimeter at previously selected locations, P2

Depth of water at beginning, y1 Depth of water after six hours, y2

6. Seepage Measurement (Water Level Recession):

Sr. No.

TIME Water Level in Ponded

reach (cm)

Sr. No.

TIME Water Level in Ponded

reach (cm)

Clock (hrs)

Elapsed (min)

Clock (hrs)

Elapsed (min)

1 8 2 9 3 10 4 11 5 12 6 13 7 14

7. Vicinity Temp, Min./Max. (oC) _________ / ________ 8. Humidity (%)___________ 9. Water surface evaporation, Final/Initial (mm) _____/_____ Difference _________


178

APPENDICES

Appendix-E

Mid-Section Method:

In the mid-section method, mean velocity and the depth are measured for each of

a number of verticals along the cross section. The depth at a vertical is multiplied by the

width, which extends halfway to the preceding vertical and halfway to the following

vertical, to develop a cross-sectional area (USBR, 2001). It is assumed that the velocity at

each vertical represents the mean velocity in a rectangular subsection. Khan et al. (1997)

explained the method by plotting the sketch of an earthen channel and discussed the

computation steps for determining the flow rate from a channel cross section. The cross-

section is defined by depths at verticals 1, 2, 3… n as shown in Fig.1.

Fig. 1: Sketch of Computing Channel Flow Rate using Mid-Section and Mean-Section

Methods. (Source: Khan et al., 1997)

The mean velocity of flow is determined by the described six-tenth (0.6y) method

in each sub-section. The discharge in a sub-section is calculated by using the following

equation described in general form:

q𝑥 = v𝑥 ��w𝑥−w(𝑥−1)�+�w(𝑥+1)−w𝑥�

2� y𝑥 (1-E)

179

APPENDICES

q𝑥 = v𝑥 �w(𝑥+1)−w(𝑥−1)

2� y𝑥 (2-E)

Where qx = flow rate through section ‘x’

Vx = mean velocity at vertical ‘x’

Wx = distance from initial point to vertical ‘x’

w(x-1)= distance from initial point to preceding vertical

w(x+1)= distance from initial point to next vertical

yx = flow depth at vertical ‘x’

Using the equation (2-E) and referring to Fig.1, the flow rate through any sub-

section, say the sub-section five can be calculated as follows:

q5 = v5 �w6−w4

2� y5 (3-E)

Similarly, the flow rate at end sections can be computed as under:

q1 = v1 �w2−w1

2� 𝑦1 (4-E)

q𝑛 = v𝑛 �w(𝑛+1)−w(𝑛−1)

2� y𝑛 (5-E)

As, y1= 0 (Fig.1), therefore the equation (4-E) will be zero and the flow rate in the

small triangular area near the initial point will be assumed to be zero. This may be termed

as the limitation of this method because in each case, the flow is not truly zero at the

described point.

The velocity ‘vn’ described in equation (5-E) cannot be directly measured as

actually it represents the velocity at the vertical wall. The velocity at vertical wall was

estimated by Hagan (1989) who developed a relationship between the velocity at a

vertical close to the wall and the velocity at a distance of flow depth from the wall (yw).

The relationship is described in the following equation:

V�𝑊 = 0.65V�𝑥V�𝑥 V�𝑦𝑤�

(6-E)

Where

V�𝑊 = mean velocity at the vertical wall

V�𝑥= mean velocity in a vertical at a distance ‘x’ from the wall

V�𝑥 V�𝑦𝑤� = relative mean velocity in the vertical at a horizontal distance ‘x’ from the wall.

The value of this ratio can be obtained from the graph at Appendix-F.

180

APPENDICES

Mean-Section Method:

In the mean-section method, the mean velocity at any two consecutive verticals is

observed and the calculated flow rate represents the mean flow rate of the area enclosed

by the considered consecutive verticals. The method is explained in the following

equations with respect to Fig.1:

The sub sectional area a2−3 = (y2+y3)(w3−w2)2

(7-E)

Mean Velocity in the area (a2-3) V�2−3 = V�2+V�32

(8-E)

By multiplying equation (7-E) and (8-E), we get

Mean flow rate in the area a2-3 q2−3 = �(y2+y3)2

� �V�2+V�32

� (w3 − w2) (9-E)

Contradictory to the mid-section method, where the flow rate was assumed zero

close to the initial point (Fig.1), the mean-section method also calculates the flow rate in

the triangular area near the channel bank.

The sub sectional triangular area a1−2 = y2(w2−w1)2

(10-E)

Mean Velocity in the area a1-2 V�1−2 = V�2−V�13

= V�23

(11-E)

The velocity is a vector quantity and it acts at the centroid of the triangular area, (a1-2).

Mean flow rate in the triangular area (a1-2) close to the channel bank is as below:

By multiplying equation (10-E) and (11-E)

Mean flow rate in the area a1-2 q1−2 = �y2(w2−w1)2

� �V�23� (12-E)

181

APPENDICES

Appendix-F

Graph of Relative Mean Velocity near a Vertical Wall in Open Channel

182

APPENDICES

APPENDIX-G

DISCHARGE DATA OF LINED AND UNLINED SECTIONS OF THE SELECTED WATERCOURSES

183

APPENDICES

Appendix G-1:

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (39886-L) sections in Khanewal District

Average Wetted Perimeter of Lined Section = 1.1 m Average Wetted Perimeter of Unlined Section = 1.30 m

0 0.28 0.0990.28 0.03 0.008 0.149 1.252

0.03 0.28 0.1990.28 0.07 0.020 0.2095 4.106

0.1 0.28 0.220.2825 0.1 0.028 0.225 6.356

0.2 0.285 0.230.285 0.1 0.029 0.22 6.270

0.3 0.285 0.210.2825 0.1 0.028 0.2005 5.664

0.4 0.28 0.1910.28 0.05 0.014 0.1785 2.499

0.45 0.28 0.1660.28 0.04 0.011 0.0915 1.025

0.49 0.28 0.01727.2Discharge in Watercourse Section:

HEAD of LINED SECTION

Distance from left bank 'w' (m)

Flow Depth 'y' (m)

Average Point Velocity at 0.6y

(m/s)Mean Depth

(m)Width

(m)Area (m2)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Vertical SectionDischarge

(L/s)

0 0.31 0.0990.31 0.03 0.009 0.1445 1.344

0.03 0.31 0.190.31 0.07 0.022 0.195 4.232

0.1 0.31 0.20.3125 0.1 0.031 0.18 5.625

0.2 0.315 0.160.315 0.1 0.032 0.1705 5.371

0.3 0.315 0.1810.315 0.1 0.032 0.176 5.544

0.4 0.315 0.1710.3125 0.05 0.016 0.156 2.438

0.45 0.31 0.1410.31 0.07 0.022 0.0775 1.682

0.52 0.31 0.01426.2

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Discharge (L/s)

TAIL LINED SECTION

Distance from left bank 'w' (m)

Flow Depth 'y' (m)


(m/s)Mean Depth

(m)

Discharge in Watercourse Section:

Vertical SectionWidth

(m)Area (m2)

0 0 00.055 0.05 0.003 0.006 0.017

0.05 0.11 0.0120.1325 0.05 0.007 0.0385 0.255

0.1 0.155 0.0650.1875 0.1 0.019 0.075 1.406

0.2 0.22 0.0850.23 0.1 0.023 0.0975 2.243

0.3 0.24 0.110.245 0.1 0.025 0.113 2.769

0.4 0.25 0.1160.25 0.1 0.025 0.128 3.200

0.5 0.25 0.140.25 0.1 0.025 0.125 3.125

0.6 0.25 0.110.25 0.1 0.025 0.105 2.625

0.7 0.25 0.10.25 0.1 0.025 0.095 2.375

0.8 0.25 0.090.23 0.1 0.023 0.092 2.116

0.9 0.21 0.0940.16 0.1 0.016 0.088 1.408

1 0.11 0.0820.055 0.1 0.006 0.045 0.248

1.1 0 0.00821.8Discharge in Watercourse Section:

Mean Depth (m)

Width (m)

Vertical SectionDistance from left

bank 'w' (m)

Flow Depth 'y' (m)


(m/s)Area (m2)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Discharge (L/s)

UNLINED SECTION

184

APPENDICES

Appendix G-2:

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (98188-R) sections in Khanewal District


0 0.24 0.1370.24 0.05 0.012 0.1625 1.950

0.05 0.24 0.1880.2425 0.05 0.012 0.209 2.534

0.1 0.245 0.230.245 0.1 0.025 0.2525 6.186

0.2 0.245 0.2750.2475 0.1 0.025 0.2875 7.116

0.3 0.25 0.30.245 0.1 0.025 0.285 6.983

0.4 0.24 0.270.24 0.1 0.024 0.25 6.000

0.5 0.24 0.230.24 0.05 0.012 0.194 2.328

0.55 0.24 0.15833.1

HEAD OF LINED SECTION


Distance from left bank 'w'

(m)

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)

Average Point Velocity at 0.6y (m/s)

Mean Depth (m) Width (m)

Area (m2)

Mean Velocity (m/s)


(L/s)

Mean Depth (m)

Width (m)

Area (m2)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Discharge (L/s)

0 0.275 0.140.275 0.05 0.014 0.155 2.131

0.05 0.275 0.170.28 0.05 0.014 0.18 2.520

0.1 0.285 0.190.285 0.1 0.029 0.2 5.700

0.2 0.285 0.210.285 0.1 0.029 0.215 6.128

0.3 0.285 0.220.28 0.1 0.028 0.215 6.020

0.4 0.275 0.210.275 0.1 0.028 0.19 5.225

0.5 0.275 0.170.275 0.06 0.017 0.15 2.475

0.56 0.275 0.13

30.2Discharge in Watercourse Section:

Vertical SectionDistance from left bank 'w'

(m)

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


TAIL LINED SECTION

Mean Depth (m)

Width (m)

Area (m2)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Discharge (L/s)

0 0 0.0250.05 0.05 0.003 0.0275 0.069

0.05 0.1 0.030.11 0.05 0.006 0.065 0.358

0.1 0.12 0.10.13 0.2 0.026 0.115 2.990

0.2 0.14 0.130.145 0.1 0.015 0.1315 1.907

0.3 0.15 0.1330.16 0.1 0.016 0.1465 2.344

0.4 0.17 0.160.1825 0.1 0.018 0.17 3.103

0.5 0.195 0.180.195 0.1 0.020 0.17 3.315

0.6 0.195 0.160.1825 0.1 0.018 0.135 2.464

0.7 0.17 0.110.16 0.75 0.120 0.091 10.920

0.8 0.15 0.0720.075 0.075 0.006 0.0475 0.267

1 0 0.02327.7Discharge in Watercourse Section:

UNLINED SECTIONVertical SectionAverage Point Velocity

at 0.6y (m/s)

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)

185

APPENDICES

Appendix G-3:

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (9057-TR) sections in Khanewal District


0 0.25 0.150.25 0.03 0.008 0.2 1.500

0.03 0.25 0.250.265 0.07 0.019 0.2675 4.962

0.1 0.28 0.2850.28 0.1 0.028 0.308 8.624

0.2 0.28 0.3310.285 0.1 0.029 0.3105 8.849

0.3 0.29 0.290.275 0.1 0.028 0.2725 7.494

0.4 0.26 0.2550.26 0.04 0.010 0.1775 1.846

0.44 0.26 0.10.26 0.03 0.008 0.09 0.702

0.47 0.26 0.0834.0


(m)

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


Head of lined section:



(L/s)Width

(m)Area (m)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Mean Depth (m)

0 0.315 0.10.315 0.03 0.009 0.1375 1.299

0.03 0.315 0.1750.3175 0.07 0.022 0.2025 4.501

0.1 0.32 0.230.3225 0.1 0.032 0.227 7.321

0.2 0.325 0.2240.3225 0.1 0.032 0.201 6.482

0.3 0.32 0.1780.32 0.1 0.032 0.176 5.632

0.4 0.32 0.1740.3175 0.04 0.013 0.159 2.019

0.44 0.315 0.1440.315 0.04 0.013 0.1275 1.607

0.48 0.315 0.11128.9


(m)

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)



Mean Depth (m)

Vertical SectionWidth

(m)Area (m2)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Discharge (L/s)

Tail lined section:

0 0 0.090.0625 0.1 0.006 0.155 0.969

0.1 0.125 0.220.1525 0.1 0.015 0.24 3.660

0.2 0.18 0.260.2 0.1 0.020 0.28 5.600

0.3 0.22 0.30.22 0.1 0.022 0.295 6.490

0.4 0.22 0.290.2 0.1 0.020 0.23 4.600

0.5 0.18 0.170.165 0.1 0.017 0.135 2.228

0.6 0.15 0.10.12 0.1 0.012 0.075 0.900

0.7 0.09 0.050.045 0.12 0.005 0.026 0.140

0.82 0 0.00224.6

Mean Depth (m)

Width (m)

Unlined section:Vertical SectionDistance from

left bank 'w' (m)

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


Area (m2)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Discharge (L/s)


186

APPENDICES

Appendix G-4:

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (35991-L) sections in Khanewal District


0 0.31 0.2690.31 0.05 0.016 0.2845 4.410

0.05 0.31 0.30.31 0.05 0.016 0.325 5.038

0.1 0.31 0.350.31 0.1 0.031 0.365 11.315

0.2 0.31 0.380.315 0.1 0.032 0.39 12.285

0.3 0.32 0.40.32 0.1 0.032 0.39 12.480

0.4 0.32 0.380.32 0.1 0.032 0.35 11.200

0.5 0.32 0.320.315 0.05 0.016 0.285 4.489

0.55 0.31 0.250.31 0.06 0.019 0.2365 4.399



Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)

Head of lined section:Vertical Section

0 0.285 0.1960.285 0.05 0.014 0.23 3.278

0.05 0.285 0.2640.2875 0.05 0.014 0.2775 3.989

0.1 0.29 0.2910.295 0.1 0.030 0.326 9.617

0.2 0.3 0.3610.3025 0.1 0.030 0.354 10.709

0.3 0.305 0.3470.305 0.1 0.031 0.3445 10.507

0.4 0.305 0.3420.2975 0.1 0.030 0.341 10.145

0.5 0.29 0.340.285 0.1 0.029 0.305 8.693

0.6 0.28 0.270.28 0.05 0.014 0.2315 3.241


Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


(m)

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


Tail lined section:Vertical Section

0 0 0.0150.1725 0.1 0.017 0.0575 0.992

0.1 0.345 0.10.3525 0.1 0.035 0.115 4.054

0.2 0.36 0.130.3685 0.1 0.037 0.14 5.159

0.3 0.377 0.150.3785 0.1 0.038 0.175 6.624

0.4 0.38 0.20.3725 0.1 0.037 0.205 7.636

0.5 0.365 0.210.3575 0.1 0.036 0.2 7.150

0.6 0.35 0.190.3495 0.1 0.035 0.185 6.466

0.7 0.349 0.180.332 0.1 0.033 0.16 5.312

0.8 0.315 0.140.2975 0.1 0.030 0.13 3.868

0.9 0.28 0.120.14 0.11 0.015 0.068 1.047


Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)


Vertical SectionArea (m)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


(m)

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)

Unlined section:

187

APPENDICES

Appendix G-5:

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (80755-R) sections in Sahiwal District


0 0.25 0.150.25 0.05 0.013 0.17 2.125

0.05 0.25 0.190.255 0.05 0.013 0.24 3.060

0.1 0.26 0.290.2625 0.1 0.026 0.31 8.138

0.2 0.265 0.330.265 0.1 0.027 0.31 8.215

0.3 0.265 0.290.2625 0.1 0.026 0.27 7.088

0.4 0.26 0.250.255 0.05 0.013 0.18 2.295

0.45 0.25 0.110.25 0.06 0.015 0.095 1.425

0.51 0.25 0.0832.3

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)



Discharge (L/s)


Vertical SectionMean Velocity

(m/s)Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

0 0.28 0.10.28 0.05 0.014 0.14 1.960

0.05 0.28 0.180.285 0.05 0.014 0.2 2.850

0.1 0.29 0.220.29 0.1 0.029 0.2315 6.714

0.2 0.29 0.2430.29 0.1 0.029 0.22 6.380

0.3 0.29 0.1970.285 0.1 0.029 0.1725 4.916

0.4 0.28 0.1480.28 0.1 0.028 0.144 4.032

0.5 0.28 0.140.28 0.05 0.014 0.12 1.680

0.55 0.28 0.128.5

Mean Velocity (m/s)


Discharge (L/s)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)

Vertical SectionTAIL LINED SECTION

Area (m2)

0 0 0.090.0625 0.1 0.006 0.105 0.656

0.1 0.125 0.120.1525 0.1 0.015 0.17 2.593

0.2 0.18 0.220.2 0.1 0.020 0.255 5.100

0.3 0.22 0.290.22 0.1 0.022 0.26 5.720

0.4 0.22 0.230.2 0.1 0.020 0.22 4.400

0.5 0.18 0.210.165 0.1 0.017 0.2 3.300

0.6 0.15 0.190.12 0.1 0.012 0.107 1.284

0.7 0.09 0.0240.045 0.09 0.004 0.013 0.053



Flow Depth 'y'

(m)

UNLINED SECTIONDistance from left bank 'w'

(m)


(L/s)Mean Velocity

(m/s)Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

188

APPENDICES

Appendix G-6:



0 0.25 0.0250.25 0.05 0.013 0.1275 1.594

0.05 0.25 0.230.25 0.05 0.013 0.265 3.313

0.1 0.25 0.30.25 0.1 0.025 0.31 7.750

0.2 0.25 0.320.255 0.1 0.026 0.335 8.543

0.3 0.26 0.350.26 0.1 0.026 0.355 9.230

0.4 0.26 0.360.26 0.1 0.026 0.365 9.490

0.5 0.26 0.370.26 0.1 0.026 0.3575 9.295

0.6 0.26 0.3450.255 0.1 0.026 0.3275 8.351

0.7 0.25 0.310.25 0.05 0.013 0.275 3.438

0.75 0.25 0.240.25 0.06 0.015 0.1325 1.988

0.81 0.25 0.02563.0

Discharge (L/s)


Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)

HEAD OF LINED SECTIONVertical Section

0 0.23 0.0360.23 0.05 0.012 0.197 2.266

0.05 0.23 0.3580.23 0.05 0.012 0.374 4.301

0.1 0.23 0.390.23 0.1 0.023 0.41 9.430

0.2 0.23 0.430.235 0.1 0.024 0.445 10.458

0.3 0.24 0.460.24 0.1 0.024 0.47 11.280

0.4 0.24 0.480.24 0.1 0.024 0.445 10.680

0.5 0.24 0.410.235 0.1 0.024 0.33 7.755

0.6 0.23 0.250.23 0.1 0.023 0.1795 4.129

0.7 0.23 0.1090.23 0.06 0.014 0.06 0.828


Discharge (L/s)

TAIL LINED SECTION

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)Mean Velocity

(m/s)Area (m2)

Vertical Section

0 0 00.02 0.05 0.001 0.0045 0.005

0.05 0.04 0.0090.179 0.05 0.009 0.0545 0.488

0.1 0.318 0.10.349 0.1 0.035 0.11 3.839

0.2 0.38 0.120.41 0.1 0.041 0.148 6.068

0.3 0.44 0.1760.4485 0.1 0.045 0.2015 9.037

0.4 0.457 0.2270.466 0.1 0.047 0.2135 9.949

0.5 0.475 0.20.4625 0.1 0.046 0.195 9.019

0.6 0.45 0.190.4425 0.1 0.044 0.1725 7.633

0.7 0.435 0.1550.4115 0.1 0.041 0.1515 6.234

0.8 0.388 0.1480.288 0.1 0.029 0.1305 3.758

0.9 0.188 0.1130.122 0.1 0.012 0.062 0.756

1 0.056 0.0110.028 0.15 0.004 0.0055 0.023

1.15 0 056.8Discharge in Watercourse Section:


(m)Discharge

(L/s)Mean Velocity

(m/s)Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

UNLINED SECTIONAverage Point Velocity

at 0.6y (m/s)

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)

Vertical Section

189

APPENDICES

Appendix G-7



0 0.275 0.0970.275 0.05 0.014 0.1135 1.561

0.05 0.275 0.130.275 0.05 0.014 0.1325 1.822

0.1 0.275 0.1350.2825 0.1 0.028 0.1575 4.449

0.2 0.29 0.180.285 0.1 0.029 0.1845 5.258

0.3 0.28 0.1890.28 0.1 0.028 0.1695 4.746

0.4 0.28 0.150.2775 0.1 0.028 0.12 3.330

0.5 0.275 0.090.275 0.1 0.028 0.075 2.063

0.6 0.275 0.060.275 0.06 0.017 0.0475 0.784

0.66 0.275 0.03524.0

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)



Discharge (L/s)



(m/s)Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

0 0.31 0.0870.31 0.05 0.016 0.1015 1.573

0.05 0.31 0.1160.31 0.05 0.016 0.1135 1.759

0.1 0.31 0.1110.31 0.1 0.031 0.108 3.348

0.2 0.31 0.1050.315 0.1 0.032 0.103 3.245

0.3 0.32 0.1010.32 0.1 0.032 0.094 3.008

0.4 0.32 0.0870.315 0.1 0.032 0.083 2.615

0.5 0.31 0.0790.31 0.1 0.031 0.0755 2.341

0.6 0.31 0.0720.31 0.08 0.025 0.066 1.637

0.68 0.31 0.0619.5

Mean Velocity (m/s)


Discharge (L/s)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


Area (m)

0 0 0.090.05 0.1 0.005 0.0925 0.463

0.1 0.1 0.0950.12 0.1 0.012 0.0975 1.170

0.2 0.14 0.10.155 0.1 0.016 0.1125 1.744

0.3 0.17 0.1250.1725 0.1 0.017 0.1475 2.544

0.4 0.175 0.170.1825 0.1 0.018 0.155 2.829

0.5 0.19 0.140.1875 0.1 0.019 0.13 2.438

0.6 0.185 0.120.1675 0.1 0.017 0.11 1.843

0.7 0.15 0.10.075 0.15 0.011 0.095 1.069



Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


(L/s)Mean Velocity

(m/s)Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

190

APPENDICES

Appendix G-8:



0 0.25 0.1290.25 0.05 0.013 0.1535 1.919

0.05 0.25 0.1780.255 0.05 0.013 0.184 2.346

0.1 0.26 0.190.265 0.1 0.027 0.215 5.698

0.2 0.27 0.240.2675 0.1 0.027 0.25 6.688

0.3 0.265 0.260.26 0.1 0.026 0.24 6.240

0.4 0.255 0.220.255 0.1 0.026 0.195 4.973

0.5 0.255 0.170.255 0.05 0.013 0.1505 1.919

0.55 0.255 0.1310.255 0.04 0.010 0.1145 1.168



Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m/s)Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


(m)


Discharge (L/s)

0 0.305 0.080.305 0.05 0.015 0.09 1.373

0.05 0.305 0.10.305 0.05 0.015 0.11 1.678

0.1 0.305 0.120.3075 0.1 0.031 0.123 3.782

0.2 0.31 0.1260.31 0.1 0.031 0.1315 4.077

0.3 0.31 0.1370.3075 0.1 0.031 0.1485 4.566

0.4 0.305 0.160.3025 0.1 0.030 0.155 4.689

0.5 0.3 0.150.3 0.05 0.015 0.145 2.175

0.55 0.3 0.140.3 0.05 0.015 0.12 1.800

0.6 0.3 0.124.1

Area (m2)



(m)


Mean Velocity (m/s)

Discharge (L/s)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)

0 0 0.0050.1225 0.1 0.012 0.007 0.086

0.1 0.245 0.0090.2525 0.1 0.025 0.0195 0.492

0.2 0.26 0.030.2685 0.1 0.027 0.045 1.208

0.3 0.277 0.060.2835 0.1 0.028 0.075 2.126

0.4 0.29 0.090.28 0.1 0.028 0.0975 2.730

0.5 0.27 0.1050.265 0.1 0.027 0.1 2.650

0.6 0.26 0.0950.255 0.1 0.026 0.0725 1.849

0.7 0.25 0.050.2325 0.1 0.023 0.035 0.814

0.8 0.215 0.020.1975 0.1 0.020 0.0149 0.294

0.9 0.18 0.00980.09 0.15 0.014 0.0074 0.100



Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)

Vertical Section

191

APPENDICES

Appendix G-9:

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (12330-L) sections in Okara District


0 0.25 0.150.25 0.03 0.008 0.1975 1.481

0.03 0.25 0.2450.255 0.07 0.018 0.2825 5.043

0.1 0.26 0.320.26 0.1 0.026 0.325 8.450

0.2 0.26 0.330.262 0.1 0.026 0.3125 8.188

0.3 0.264 0.2950.264 0.1 0.026 0.275 7.260

0.4 0.264 0.2550.264 0.05 0.013 0.1775 2.343

0.45 0.264 0.10.264 0.04 0.011 0.09 0.950

0.49 0.264 0.0833.7

Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Discharge in Watercoure Section:

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


0 0.32 0.10.32 0.03 0.010 0.1375 1.320

0.03 0.32 0.1750.32 0.07 0.022 0.1865 4.178

0.1 0.32 0.1980.323 0.1 0.032 0.211 6.815

0.2 0.326 0.2240.326 0.1 0.033 0.21 6.846

0.3 0.326 0.1960.323 0.1 0.032 0.185 5.976

0.4 0.32 0.1740.32 0.05 0.016 0.159 2.544

0.45 0.32 0.1440.32 0.03 0.010 0.1275 1.224



(L/s)Mean Velocity

(m/s)

TAIL LINED SECTION

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)

0 0 0.090.0625 0.1 0.006 0.095 0.594

0.1 0.125 0.10.1525 0.1 0.015 0.12 1.830

0.2 0.18 0.140.2 0.1 0.020 0.16 3.200

0.3 0.22 0.180.22 0.1 0.022 0.2 4.400

0.4 0.22 0.220.2 0.1 0.020 0.19 3.800

0.5 0.18 0.160.165 0.1 0.017 0.14 2.310

0.6 0.15 0.120.12 0.1 0.012 0.085 1.020

0.7 0.09 0.050.045 0.15 0.007 0.026 0.176

0.85 0 0.00217.3Discharge in Watrcourse Section:

UNLINED SECTIONVertical Section

Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)

192

APPENDICES

Appendix G-10:

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (53010-L) sections in Okara District


0 0.28 0.0990.28 0.03 0.008 0.149 1.252

0.03 0.28 0.1990.2815 0.07 0.020 0.2095 4.128

0.1 0.283 0.220.283 0.1 0.028 0.225 6.368

0.2 0.283 0.230.283 0.1 0.028 0.225 6.368

0.3 0.283 0.220.283 0.1 0.028 0.2055 5.816

0.4 0.283 0.1910.283 0.05 0.014 0.1785 2.526

0.45 0.283 0.1660.2815 0.04 0.011 0.0915 1.030

0.49 0.28 0.01727.5


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)




(L/s)Mean Velocity

(m/s)Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

0 0.315 0.0990.315 0.03 0.009 0.1095 1.035

0.03 0.315 0.120.3175 0.07 0.022 0.125 2.778

0.1 0.32 0.130.32 0.1 0.032 0.151 4.832

0.2 0.32 0.1720.32 0.1 0.032 0.1775 5.680

0.3 0.32 0.1830.32 0.1 0.032 0.172 5.504

0.4 0.32 0.1610.3175 0.05 0.016 0.153 2.429

0.45 0.315 0.1450.315 0.06 0.019 0.0795 1.503

0.51 0.315 0.01423.8

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


(L/s)Mean Velocity

(m/s)


TAIL LINED SECTION

0 0 00.055 0.05 0.003 0.006 0.017

0.05 0.11 0.0120.1325 0.05 0.007 0.0385 0.255

0.1 0.155 0.0650.1875 0.1 0.019 0.075 1.406

0.2 0.22 0.0850.23 0.1 0.023 0.0925 2.128

0.3 0.24 0.10.245 0.1 0.025 0.1025 2.511

0.4 0.25 0.1050.25 0.1 0.025 0.1125 2.813

0.5 0.25 0.120.25 0.1 0.025 0.11 2.750

0.6 0.25 0.10.25 0.1 0.025 0.095 2.375

0.7 0.25 0.090.25 0.1 0.025 0.08 2.000

0.8 0.25 0.070.23 0.1 0.023 0.0655 1.507

0.9 0.21 0.0610.16 0.1 0.016 0.0405 0.648

1 0.11 0.020.055 0.1 0.006 0.0125 0.069

1.1 0 0.00518.5

Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

UNLINED SECTIONVertical SectionAverage Point Velocity

at 0.6y (m/s)

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


193

APPENDICES

Appendix G-11

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (12336-L) sections in Okara District Average Wetted Perimeter of Lined Section = 1.25 m Average Wetted Perimeter of Unlined Section = 1.60 m

0 0.3 0.150.3 0.05 0.015 0.205 3.075

0.05 0.3 0.260.305 0.05 0.015 0.265 4.041

0.1 0.31 0.270.31 0.1 0.031 0.275 8.525

0.2 0.31 0.280.3125 0.1 0.031 0.2875 8.984

0.3 0.315 0.2950.3125 0.1 0.031 0.2825 8.828

0.4 0.31 0.270.305 0.1 0.031 0.25 7.625

0.5 0.3 0.230.3 0.05 0.015 0.205 3.075

0.55 0.3 0.180.3 0.06 0.018 0.135 2.430

0.61 0.3 0.0946.6


Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

Discharge (L/s)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


0 0.32 0.090.32 0.05 0.016 0.122 1.952

0.05 0.32 0.1540.32 0.05 0.016 0.1735 2.776

0.1 0.32 0.1930.325 0.1 0.033 0.2035 6.614

0.2 0.33 0.2140.33 0.1 0.033 0.228 7.524

0.3 0.33 0.2420.335 0.1 0.034 0.2285 7.655

0.4 0.34 0.2150.335 0.1 0.034 0.2075 6.951

0.5 0.33 0.20.33 0.05 0.017 0.19 3.135

0.55 0.33 0.180.33 0.07 0.023 0.156 3.604

0.62 0.33 0.13240.2

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


Vertical SectionDistance from left bank 'w'

(m)

TAIL LINED SECTION

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Discharge (L/s)

0 0 0.0630.07 0.1 0.007 0.079 0.553

0.1 0.14 0.0950.16 0.1 0.016 0.0975 1.560

0.2 0.18 0.10.1975 0.1 0.020 0.105 2.074

0.3 0.215 0.110.2175 0.1 0.022 0.115 2.501

0.4 0.22 0.120.215 0.1 0.022 0.1395 2.999

0.5 0.21 0.1590.2025 0.1 0.020 0.1675 3.392

0.6 0.195 0.1760.2025 0.1 0.020 0.194 3.929

0.7 0.21 0.2120.21 0.1 0.021 0.219 4.599

0.8 0.21 0.2260.205 0.1 0.021 0.212 4.346

0.9 0.2 0.1980.2 0.1 0.020 0.1835 3.670

1 0.2 0.1690.185 0.1 0.019 0.1495 2.766

1.1 0.17 0.130.155 0.1 0.016 0.127 1.969

1.2 0.14 0.1240.07 0.15 0.011 0.095 0.998


Vertical SectionUNLINED SECTION

Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)

194

APPENDICES

Appendix G-12:

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (23800-R) sections in Okara District Average Wetted Perimeter of Lined Section = 1.11 m Average Wetted Perimeter of Unlined Section = 1.45 m

0 0.255 0.190.255 0.05 0.013 0.215 2.741

0.05 0.255 0.240.2575 0.05 0.013 0.25 3.219

0.1 0.26 0.260.26 0.1 0.026 0.271 7.046

0.2 0.26 0.2820.26 0.1 0.026 0.299 7.774

0.3 0.26 0.3160.26 0.1 0.026 0.308 8.008

0.4 0.26 0.30.255 0.1 0.026 0.289 7.370

0.5 0.25 0.2780.25 0.05 0.013 0.254 3.175

0.55 0.25 0.230.25 0.04 0.010 0.1915 1.915



Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

0 0.255 0.1850.255 0.05 0.013 0.2185 2.786

0.05 0.255 0.2520.2575 0.05 0.013 0.2595 3.341

0.1 0.26 0.2670.26 0.1 0.026 0.286 7.436

0.2 0.26 0.3050.26 0.1 0.026 0.2825 7.345

0.3 0.26 0.260.26 0.1 0.026 0.2555 6.643

0.4 0.26 0.2510.26 0.1 0.026 0.2355 6.123

0.5 0.26 0.220.26 0.05 0.013 0.2165 2.815

0.55 0.26 0.2130.26 0.05 0.013 0.1845 2.399


TAIL LINED SECTION

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


(L/s)Mean Velocity

(m/s)

0 0 0.0120.0775 0.2 0.016 0.067 1.039

0.2 0.155 0.1220.155 0.1 0.016 0.1225 1.899

0.3 0.155 0.1230.19 0.1 0.019 0.1235 2.347

0.4 0.225 0.1240.23 0.1 0.023 0.1245 2.864

0.5 0.235 0.1250.235 0.1 0.024 0.1475 3.466

0.6 0.235 0.170.235 0.1 0.024 0.15 3.525

0.7 0.235 0.130.2675 0.1 0.027 0.125 3.344

0.8 0.3 0.120.33 0.1 0.033 0.119 3.927

0.9 0.36 0.1180.305 0.1 0.031 0.1175 3.584

1 0.25 0.1170.24 0.1 0.024 0.1165 2.796

1.1 0.23 0.1160.19 0.1 0.019 0.1145 2.176

1.2 0.15 0.1130.075 0.05 0.004 0.062 0.233



Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)

195

APPENDICES

Appendix G-13:

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (131880-L) sections in Pakpattan District


0 0.25 0.0990.25 0.05 0.013 0.1345 1.681

0.05 0.25 0.170.25 0.05 0.013 0.185 2.313

0.1 0.25 0.20.255 0.1 0.026 0.215 5.483

0.2 0.26 0.230.26 0.1 0.026 0.214 5.564

0.3 0.26 0.1980.26 0.1 0.026 0.192 4.992

0.4 0.26 0.1860.255 0.1 0.026 0.156 3.978

0.5 0.25 0.1260.25 0.07 0.018 0.0715 1.251



(m)


Discharge (L/s)


(m/s)Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)

0 0.24 0.0990.24 0.05 0.012 0.11 1.320

0.05 0.24 0.1210.245 0.05 0.012 0.1375 1.684

0.1 0.25 0.1540.25 0.1 0.025 0.1715 4.288

0.2 0.25 0.1890.255 0.1 0.026 0.2025 5.164

0.3 0.26 0.2160.26 0.1 0.026 0.203 5.278

0.4 0.26 0.190.255 0.1 0.026 0.155 3.953

0.5 0.25 0.120.25 0.09 0.023 0.067 1.508

0.59 0.25 0.01423.2


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

TAIL LINED SECTION

Discharge (L/s)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

Vertical Section

0 0 00.055 0.05 0.003 0.003 0.008

0.05 0.11 0.0060.1325 0.05 0.007 0.029 0.192

0.1 0.155 0.0520.1875 0.1 0.019 0.061 1.144

0.2 0.22 0.070.23 0.1 0.023 0.08 1.840

0.3 0.24 0.090.245 0.1 0.025 0.094 2.303

0.4 0.25 0.0980.25 0.1 0.025 0.099 2.475

0.5 0.25 0.10.25 0.1 0.025 0.105 2.625

0.6 0.25 0.110.25 0.1 0.025 0.105 2.625

0.7 0.25 0.10.25 0.1 0.025 0.0925 2.313

0.8 0.25 0.0850.23 0.1 0.023 0.0775 1.783

0.9 0.21 0.070.16 0.1 0.016 0.062 0.992

1 0.11 0.0540.055 0.2 0.011 0.0295 0.325



(m)

Vertical SectionAverage Point Velocity at 0.6y (m/s)

Flow Depth 'y'

(m)Discharge

(L/s)Mean Velocity

(m/s)Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

196

APPENDICES

Appendix G-14:

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (1320-R) sections in Pakpattan District


0 0.22 0.1680.225 0.1 0.023 0.2065 4.646

0.1 0.23 0.2450.23 0.1 0.023 0.2615 6.015

0.2 0.23 0.2780.2325 0.1 0.023 0.2845 6.615

0.3 0.235 0.2910.2325 0.1 0.023 0.2855 6.638

0.4 0.23 0.280.23 0.1 0.023 0.2615 6.015

0.5 0.23 0.2430.23 0.1 0.023 0.2365 5.440

0.6 0.23 0.230.225 0.04 0.009 0.2 1.800

0.64 0.22 0.1737.2

Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)


Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


0 0.22 0.120.22 0.1 0.022 0.1325 2.915

0.1 0.22 0.1450.225 0.1 0.023 0.1625 3.656

0.2 0.23 0.180.23 0.1 0.023 0.195 4.485

0.3 0.23 0.210.23 0.1 0.023 0.215 4.945

0.4 0.23 0.220.23 0.1 0.023 0.2075 4.773

0.5 0.23 0.1950.23 0.1 0.023 0.1675 3.853

0.6 0.23 0.140.225 0.07 0.016 0.135 2.126



(L/s)Mean Velocity

(m/s)

TAIL LINED SECTION

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)

0 0 0.0250.05 0.05 0.003 0.0275 0.069

0.05 0.1 0.030.11 0.05 0.006 0.0375 0.206

0.1 0.12 0.0450.13 0.2 0.026 0.0675 1.755

0.2 0.14 0.090.145 0.1 0.015 0.094 1.363

0.3 0.15 0.0980.155 0.1 0.016 0.1055 1.635

0.4 0.16 0.1130.175 0.1 0.018 0.1065 1.864

0.5 0.19 0.10.185 0.1 0.019 0.099 1.832

0.6 0.18 0.0980.173 0.2 0.035 0.094 3.252

0.7 0.166 0.090.158 0.8 0.126 0.0705 8.911

0.9 0.15 0.0510.075 0.075 0.006 0.037 0.208



Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)

197

APPENDICES

Appendix G-15:

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (28400-R) sections in Pakpattan District


0 0.25 0.1870.25 0.03 0.008 0.2185 1.639

0.03 0.25 0.250.25 0.07 0.018 0.275 4.813

0.1 0.25 0.30.255 0.1 0.026 0.3225 8.224

0.2 0.26 0.3450.26 0.1 0.026 0.3375 8.775

0.3 0.26 0.330.265 0.1 0.027 0.3025 8.016

0.4 0.27 0.2750.265 0.04 0.011 0.2575 2.730

0.44 0.26 0.240.255 0.04 0.010 0.205 2.091

0.48 0.25 0.1736.3


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)



Discharge (L/s)


(m/s)Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


(m)

0 0.28 0.120.285 0.03 0.009 0.148 1.265

0.03 0.29 0.1760.295 0.07 0.021 0.2055 4.244

0.1 0.3 0.2350.305 0.1 0.031 0.245 7.473

0.2 0.31 0.2550.314 0.1 0.031 0.2445 7.677

0.3 0.318 0.2340.314 0.1 0.031 0.216 6.782

0.4 0.31 0.1980.3 0.05 0.015 0.169 2.535

0.45 0.29 0.140.285 0.04 0.011 0.135 1.539


TAIL LINED SECTION

Discharge (L/s)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


(m/s)Area (m2)

0 0 0.0250.05 0.05 0.003 0.0275 0.069

0.05 0.1 0.030.105 0.05 0.005 0.0375 0.197

0.1 0.11 0.0450.12 0.2 0.024 0.0675 1.620

0.2 0.13 0.090.135 0.1 0.014 0.1 1.350

0.3 0.14 0.110.153 0.1 0.015 0.112 1.714

0.4 0.166 0.1140.173 0.1 0.017 0.11 1.903

0.5 0.18 0.1060.171 0.1 0.017 0.1055 1.804

0.6 0.162 0.1050.147 0.25 0.037 0.0975 3.583

0.7 0.132 0.090.1275 0.825 0.105 0.0705 7.416

0.95 0.123 0.0510.0615 0.0615 0.004 0.037 0.140



Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


(L/s)Mean Velocity

(m/s)Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

UNLINED SECTION

198

APPENDICES

Appendix G-16:

Discharge of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (14587-TR) sections in Pakpattan District


0 0.31 0.230.31 0.05 0.016 0.245 3.798

0.05 0.31 0.260.31 0.05 0.016 0.275 4.263

0.1 0.31 0.290.305 0.1 0.031 0.305 9.303

0.2 0.3 0.320.295 0.1 0.030 0.315 9.293

0.3 0.29 0.310.285 0.1 0.029 0.3 8.550

0.4 0.28 0.290.275 0.1 0.028 0.27 7.425

0.5 0.27 0.250.265 0.05 0.013 0.215 2.849

0.55 0.26 0.180.255 0.06 0.015 0.135 2.066



Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)

0 0.32 0.090.32 0.05 0.016 0.122 1.952

0.05 0.32 0.1540.32 0.05 0.016 0.1735 2.776

0.1 0.32 0.1930.325 0.1 0.033 0.2065 6.711

0.2 0.33 0.220.33 0.1 0.033 0.231 7.623

0.3 0.33 0.2420.335 0.1 0.034 0.2325 7.789

0.4 0.34 0.2230.335 0.1 0.034 0.2115 7.085

0.5 0.33 0.20.33 0.05 0.017 0.19 3.135

0.55 0.33 0.180.33 0.07 0.023 0.156 3.604


TAIL LINED SECTION

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)


(L/s)Mean Velocity

(m/s)

0 0 0.0630.07 0.1 0.007 0.0665 0.466

0.1 0.14 0.070.151 0.1 0.015 0.08 1.208

0.2 0.162 0.090.1715 0.1 0.017 0.0955 1.638

0.3 0.181 0.1010.1875 0.1 0.019 0.1105 2.072

0.4 0.194 0.120.192 0.1 0.019 0.1375 2.640

0.5 0.19 0.1550.195 0.1 0.020 0.172 3.354

0.6 0.2 0.1890.205 0.1 0.021 0.1745 3.577

0.7 0.21 0.160.215 0.1 0.022 0.1555 3.343

0.8 0.22 0.1510.215 0.1 0.022 0.1455 3.128

0.9 0.21 0.140.2 0.1 0.020 0.1365 2.730

1 0.19 0.1330.18 0.1 0.018 0.1265 2.277

1.1 0.17 0.120.155 0.1 0.016 0.105 1.628

1.2 0.14 0.090.07 0.1 0.007 0.078 0.546



Discharge (L/s)

Mean Velocity (m/s)

Area (m2)

Width (m)

Mean Depth (m)


Flow Depth 'y'

(m)


(m)

199

APPENDICES

APPENDIX-H

MEASURED SEEPAGE RATE DATA OF LINED AND UNLINED WATERCOURSES

200

APPENDICES

Appendix H-1:

Seepage Loss Data of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (39886-L) Sections in Khanewal District Maximum temperature during test period = 26.40C Minimum temperature during test period = 21.60C

Evaporation from water surface during test period in millimetres = 1.5 Humidity = 19%

Calculation of seepage losses from lined and unlined sections of a watercourse

Basic data and description of the ponded reach

Seepage loss rate from lined test Section

S = 0.45cm3/cm2/hr

= 0.07 l/sec/100 m

= 10.76 cm/day

Seepage loss rate from unlined test Section

S = 1.21 cm3/cm2/hr

= 0.21 l/sec/100 m

= 29.11 cm/day

Clock Elapsed Lined Section Unlined Section Lined Section Unlined Section(hr) (min) (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm)

1 10:30 0 31.72 19.23 0 02 11:00 30 31.4 18.48 0.32 0.753 11:30 60 31.08 17.73 0.64 1.54 12:00 90 30.76 16.98 0.96 2.255 12:30 120 30.26 16.23 1.46 36 13:00 150 29.8 15.48 1.92 3.757 13:30 180 29.34 14.73 2.38 4.58 14:00 210 28.88 13.97 2.84 5.269 14:30 240 28.42 13.22 3.3 6.01

10 15:00 270 27.96 12.47 3.76 6.7611 15:30 300 27.5 11.72 4.22 7.5112 16:00 330 27.04 10.97 4.68 8.2613 16:30 360 26.68 10.22 5.04 9.01

Water Level RecessionSerial number

Time Water Level in Ponded Section

Lined Section Unlined Section1 55 552 55 923 100 1124 31.72 19.235 26.68 10.226 55 61.6

MeasurementsSerial number Description

Length of ponded test reach in meters (L)Average water surface width in cm (W)

Average wetted perimeter in cm (P)Depth of water at beginning in cm (y1)Depth of water after 6 hours in cm (y2)

Average wetted area of pond in m2 (A)

201

APPENDICES

Appendix H-2:

Seepage Loss Data of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (98188-R) Sections in Khanewal District

Maximum temperature during test period = 27.60C Minimum temperature during test period = 21.90C




Seepage loss rate from lined test Section S = 0.62 cm3/cm2/hr = 0.09 l/sec/100 m = 14.80 cm/day

Seepage loss rate from unlined test Section S = 1.36 cm3/cm2/hr = 0.23 l/sec/100 m = 32.71 cm/day


1 10:30 0 33.56 22.48 0 02 11:00 30 33 21.73 0.56 0.753 11:30 60 32.51 21.02 1.05 1.464 12:00 90 32.02 20.32 1.54 2.165 12:30 120 31.53 19.67 2.03 2.816 13:00 150 31.04 18.82 2.52 3.667 13:30 180 30.55 18.13 3.01 4.358 14:00 210 29.98 17.45 3.58 5.039 14:30 240 29.41 16.78 4.15 5.7

10 15:00 270 28.84 16.01 4.72 6.4711 15:30 300 28.27 15.32 5.29 7.1612 16:00 330 27.7 14.61 5.86 7.8713 16:30 360 27.16 13.8 6.4 8.68

Time Water Level in Ponded Section Water Level RecessionSerial number

Lined Section Unlined Section1 52 522 59 1103 100 1154 33.56 22.485 27.16 13.86 52 59.8


Average water surface width in cm (W)Average wetted perimeter in cm (P)

Depth of water at beginning in cm (y1)Depth of water after six hours in cm (y2)


Length of ponded test reach in meters (L)

202

APPENDICES

Appendix H-3:

Seepage Loss Data of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (9057-TR) Sections in Khanewal District








1 10:30 0 31.43 22.4 0 02 11:00 30 31 21.83 0.43 0.573 11:30 60 30.57 21.3 0.86 1.14 12:00 90 30.14 20.8 1.29 1.65 12:30 120 29.71 20.28 1.72 2.126 13:00 150 29.28 19.76 2.15 2.647 13:30 180 28.85 19.24 2.58 3.168 14:00 210 28.42 18.72 3.01 3.689 14:30 240 27.99 18.2 3.44 4.2

10 15:00 270 27.56 17.68 3.87 4.7211 15:30 300 27.13 17.16 4.3 5.2412 16:00 330 26.7 16.44 4.73 5.9613 16:30 360 26.3 15.7 5.13 6.7


Lined Section Unlined Section1 50 502 54 983 103 1164 31.43 22.45 26.3 15.76 51.5 58






203

APPENDICES

Appendix H-4:

Seepage Loss Data of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (35991-L) Sections in Khanewal District





Seepage rate from lined test Section S = 1.23 cm3/cm2/hr = 0.18 l/sec/100 m = 29.48 cm/day

Seepage rate from unlined test Section S = 1.42 cm3/cm2/hr = 0.26 l/sec/100 m = 34.15 cm/day


1 10:30 0 31.43 22.4 0 02 11:00 30 30.3 21.22 1.13 1.183 11:30 60 29.37 20.04 2.06 2.364 12:00 90 28.34 18.86 3.09 3.545 12:30 120 27.31 17.68 4.12 4.726 13:00 150 26.28 16.5 5.15 5.97 13:30 180 25.25 15.32 6.18 7.088 14:00 210 24.22 14.14 7.21 8.269 14:30 240 23.19 12.96 8.24 9.44

10 15:00 270 22.16 11.78 9.27 10.6211 15:30 300 21.13 10.6 10.3 11.812 16:00 330 20.1 9.42 11.33 12.9813 16:30 360 19.07 8.24 12.36 14.16


Lined Section Unlined Section1 53 532 59 763 98 1254 31.43 22.45 19.07 8.246 51.94 66.25






204

APPENDICES

Appendix H-5:

Seepage Loss Data of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (80755-R) Sections in Sahiwal District








1 10:30 0 29.67 20.98 0 02 11:00 30 29.1 19.93 0.57 1.053 11:30 60 28.58 18.88 1.09 2.14 12:00 90 28.06 17.83 1.61 3.155 12:30 120 27.54 16.78 2.13 4.26 13:00 150 27.02 15.73 2.65 5.257 13:30 180 26.5 14.68 3.17 6.38 14:00 210 25.98 13.63 3.69 7.359 14:30 240 25.46 12.58 4.21 8.4

10 15:00 270 24.94 11.53 4.73 9.4511 15:30 300 24.42 10.48 5.25 10.512 16:00 330 23.92 9.43 5.75 11.5513 16:30 360 23.4 8.38 6.27 12.6








205

APPENDICES

Appendix H-6:






Seepage loss rate from lined test Section S = 1.12cm3/cm2/hr = 0.21 l/sec/100 m = 26.92 cm/day



1 10:30 0 38.37 29.46 0 02 11:00 30 37.25 28.1 1.12 1.363 11:30 60 36.13 26.6 2.24 2.864 12:00 90 35.01 25.1 3.36 4.365 12:30 120 33.89 23.6 4.48 5.866 13:00 150 32.77 22.1 5.6 7.367 13:30 180 31.65 20.6 6.72 8.868 14:00 210 30.53 19.1 7.84 10.369 14:30 240 29.41 17.6 8.96 11.86

10 15:00 270 28.29 16.1 10.08 13.3611 15:30 300 27.17 14.6 11.2 14.8612 16:00 330 26.05 13.1 12.32 16.3613 16:30 360 24.8 11.5 13.57 17.96



Lined Section Unlined Section1 55 552 60 1283 120 1324 38.37 29.465 24.8 11.5

6 66 72.6






206

APPENDICES

Appendix H-7:









1 10:30 0 30.12 20.31 0 02 11:00 30 29.72 19.81 0.4 0.53 11:30 60 29.32 19.32 0.8 0.994 12:00 90 28.92 18.83 1.2 1.485 12:30 120 28.52 18.34 1.6 1.976 13:00 150 28.16 17.85 1.96 2.467 13:30 180 27.76 17.36 2.36 2.958 14:00 210 27.36 16.87 2.76 3.449 14:30 240 26.96 16.38 3.16 3.93

10 15:00 270 26.56 15.89 3.56 4.4211 15:30 300 26.16 15.4 3.96 4.9112 16:00 330 25.76 15 4.36 5.3113 16:30 360 25.4 14.5 4.72 5.81




6 48.88 54.08






207

APPENDICES

Appendix H-8:









1 10:30 0 39.12 29.34 0 02 11:00 30 38 27.74 1.12 1.63 11:30 60 36.88 26.13 2.24 3.214 12:00 90 35.76 24.52 3.36 4.825 12:30 120 34.64 22.91 4.48 6.436 13:00 150 33.52 21.3 5.6 8.047 13:30 180 32.4 19.69 6.72 9.658 14:00 210 31.28 18.08 7.84 11.269 14:30 240 30.16 16.47 8.96 12.87

10 15:00 270 29.04 14.86 10.08 14.4811 15:30 300 27.92 13.25 11.2 16.0912 16:00 330 26.8 11.64 12.32 17.713 16:30 360 25 10.18 14.12 19.16


Lined Section Unlined Section1 55 552 50 1233 110 1324 39.12 29.345 25 10.18

6 60.5 72.6






208

APPENDICES

Appendix H-9:

Seepage Loss Data of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (12330-L) Sections in Okara District








1 10:30 0 36.45 29.34 0 02 11:00 30 35.43 28.22 1.02 1.123 11:30 60 34.4 27 2.05 2.344 12:00 90 33.37 25.78 3.08 3.565 12:30 120 32.34 24.56 4.11 4.786 13:00 150 31.31 23.34 5.14 67 13:30 180 30.28 22.12 6.17 7.228 14:00 210 29.25 20.9 7.2 8.449 14:30 240 28.22 19.68 8.23 9.66

10 15:00 270 27.19 18.46 9.26 10.8811 15:30 300 26.16 17.24 10.29 12.112 16:00 330 25.13 16.02 11.32 13.3213 16:30 360 24.01 14.81 12.44 14.53









209

APPENDICES

Appendix H-10:








Clock Elapsed Lined Section Lined Section Lined Section Lined Section(hr) (min) (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm)

1 10:30 0 38.56 29.65 0 02 11:00 30 37.53 28.36 1.03 1.293 11:30 60 36.51 27.07 2.05 2.584 12:00 90 35.49 25.78 3.07 3.875 12:30 120 34.47 24.49 4.09 5.166 13:00 150 33.45 23.2 5.11 6.457 13:30 180 32.43 21.91 6.13 7.748 14:00 210 31.41 20.62 7.15 9.039 14:30 240 30.39 19.33 8.17 10.32

10 15:00 270 29.37 18.04 9.19 11.6111 15:30 300 28.35 16.75 10.21 12.912 16:00 330 27.33 15.46 11.23 14.1913 16:30 360 26.3 14.12 12.26 15.53



Lined Section Lined Section1 55 552 50 1183 112 1364 38.56 29.655 26.3 14.12

6 61.6 74.8






210

APPENDICES

Appendix H-11:









1 10:30 0 32.5 22.34 0 02 11:00 30 32 21.65 0.5 0.693 11:30 60 31.51 21 0.99 1.344 12:00 90 31.02 20.35 1.48 1.995 12:30 120 30.53 19.7 1.97 2.646 13:00 150 30.04 19.05 2.46 3.297 13:30 180 29.55 18.4 2.95 3.948 14:00 210 29.06 17.75 3.44 4.599 14:30 240 28.57 17.1 3.93 5.24

10 15:00 270 28.08 16.45 4.42 5.8911 15:30 300 27.59 15.8 4.91 6.5412 16:00 330 27.1 15.15 5.4 7.1913 16:30 360 26.51 14.34 5.99 8



6 59.4 66






211

APPENDICES

Appendix H-12:

Seepage Loss Data of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (23800-R) Sections in Okara District








1 10:30 0 30.23 21.34 0 02 11:00 30 29.7 20.65 0.53 0.693 11:30 60 29.17 20 1.06 1.344 12:00 90 28.64 19.35 1.59 1.995 12:30 120 28.11 18.7 2.12 2.646 13:00 150 27.58 18.05 2.65 3.297 13:30 180 27.05 17.4 3.18 3.948 14:00 210 26.52 16.75 3.71 4.599 14:30 240 25.99 16.1 4.24 5.24

10 15:00 270 25.49 15.45 4.74 5.8911 15:30 300 24.96 14.8 5.27 6.5412 16:00 330 24.43 14.15 5.8 7.1913 16:30 360 23.9 13.4 6.33 7.94



6 52.5 57.5






212

APPENDICES

Appendix H-13:

Seepage Loss Data of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (131880-L) Sections in Pakpattan District








1 10:30 0 32.23 21.34 0 02 11:00 30 31.3 20.23 0.93 1.113 11:30 60 30.36 19.11 1.87 2.234 12:00 90 29.42 17.99 2.81 3.355 12:30 120 28.48 16.87 3.75 4.476 13:00 150 27.54 15.75 4.69 5.597 13:30 180 26.6 14.63 5.63 6.718 14:00 210 25.66 13.51 6.57 7.839 14:30 240 24.72 12.39 7.51 8.95

10 15:00 270 23.78 11.27 8.45 10.0711 15:30 300 22.84 10.15 9.39 11.1912 16:00 330 21.9 9.03 10.33 12.31

13 16:30 360 20.94 7.99 11.29 13.35




6 54.6 63.44






213

APPENDICES

Appendix H-14:

Seepage Loss Data of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (1320-R) Sections in Pakpattan District








1 10:30 0 30.76 21.34 0 02 11:00 30 30.4 20.13 0.36 1.213 11:30 60 29.98 18.92 0.78 2.424 12:00 90 29.56 17.71 1.2 3.635 12:30 120 29.14 16.5 1.62 4.846 13:00 150 28.72 15.29 2.04 6.057 13:30 180 28.3 14.08 2.46 7.268 14:00 210 27.88 12.87 2.88 8.479 14:30 240 27.46 11.66 3.3 9.68

10 15:00 270 27.04 10.45 3.72 10.8911 15:30 300 26.62 9.24 4.14 12.112 16:00 330 26.2 8.03 4.56 13.3113 16:30 360 25.79 6.82 4.97 14.52



6 60.5 71.5






214

APPENDICES

Appendix H-15:

Seepage Loss Data of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (28400-R) Sections in Pakpattan District








1 10:30 0 37.76 27.27 0 02 11:00 30 36.9 25.77 0.86 1.53 11:30 60 36.03 24.27 1.73 34 12:00 90 35.16 22.77 2.6 4.55 12:30 120 34.29 21.27 3.47 66 13:00 150 33.42 19.77 4.34 7.57 13:30 180 32.55 18.27 5.21 98 14:00 210 31.68 16.77 6.08 10.59 14:30 240 30.81 15.27 6.95 12

10 15:00 270 29.94 13.77 7.82 13.511 15:30 300 29.07 12.27 8.69 1512 16:00 330 28.2 10.77 9.56 16.513 16:30 360 27.33 9.27 10.43 18




6 60.5 75.9






215

APPENDICES

Appendix H-16:

Seepage Loss Data of Lined and Unlined Watercourse (14587-TR) Sections in Pakpattan District








1 10:30 0 29.45 27.27 0 02 11:00 30 28.88 26.9 0.57 0.373 11:30 60 28.31 26.53 1.14 0.744 12:00 90 27.74 26.16 1.71 1.115 12:30 120 27.17 25.79 2.28 1.486 13:00 150 26.6 25.42 2.85 1.857 13:30 180 26.03 25.05 3.42 2.228 14:00 210 25.46 24.68 3.99 2.599 14:30 240 24.89 24.31 4.56 2.96

10 15:00 270 24.32 23.94 5.13 3.3311 15:30 300 23.75 23.57 5.7 3.712 16:00 330 23.18 23.2 6.27 4.0713 16:30 360 22.61 22.83 6.84 4.44

Time Water Level in Ponded Reach Water Level RecessionSerial number

Lined Section Unlined Section1 55 552 55 863 96 1254 29.45 27.27

5 22.61 22.83

6 52.8 68.75



Depth of water at beginning in cm (y1)

Depth of water after six hours in cm (y2)



216

APPENDICES

Appendix-I

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ECONOMIC DATA OF LINED WATERCOURSES

1. Watercourse No __________ 2. Name of Distributary/ Minor Canal_________

3. Location of Watercourse along the Distributary/Minor: Head Middle Tail

4. Village _____________ Tehsil ______________ District _______________

5. Design Discharge (l/sec) __________ 6. Command Area (acre) _____________

ECONOMIC DATA OF LINED WATERCOURSES

1. Name of Farmer _________________S/O ________________

2. Education ______________________Experience _____________

3. Total cultivable area _________ (acre) 4. Location along the watercourse_________

5. Total length/lined length of watercourse _______/________ (m)

6. Total Irrigated area Pre/Post-Lining:

Pre/Post-Lining

Irrigated Area (acre) Canal Tubewell Total

Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Pre-Lining

Post- Lining 7. Crop area irrigated by different sources:

Crop Irrigated Area

Canal Tubewell Wheat Rice

Sugarcane Vegetable

Fodder

8. Warabandi time _______________ minute/acre.

9. Utilization of warabandi time (after lining) Increased Increased for few years Unaffected

10. Time required irrigating one acre using canal water (hrs.) ________________ 11. Water table Depth (m) ___________Increased Decreased Unaffected

217

APPENDICES

12. Discharge & Year of tubewell installation ___________ (owned by farmer or others)

13. Tubewell power source Electric Diesel PTO Driven (Tractor)

14. Charges of tubewell water per hour (Rs./hr.) ____________

15. Time required irrigating one acre using tubewell water (hrs.) __________________

16. Groundwater quality (after lining) Improved Deteriorated Unaffected

17. Waterlogging in the area (after lining) Increased Decreased Unaffected

18. Watercourse Spillage: Before Lining Seldom Often Never

After Lining Seldom Often Never

19. Silt Deposition in the channel Increased Decreased Unaffected (After lining)

20. Growth of weeds in the watercourse Increased Decreased Unaffected

21. Average crop production pre/post-lining (Maund*/Acre) Crops Grown Decrease in

Crop Production Pre-Lining Post-Lining

Kharif Production Rabi Production Kharif Production Rabi Production Kharif Rabi

Rice Wheat Rice Wheat Maize Barley Maize Barley

Sugarcane Fodder Sugarcan

e Fodder Sorghum Vegetables Sorghum Vegetables

*One Maund = 37.4 kg.

22. Gross Income/Year (after lining) Increased Decreased Unaffected 23. Amount of Increase/Decrease (Rs./Year) ___________________

24. Value of Land (after lining) Increased Decreased Unaffected

25. Amount of Increase/Decrease (Rs./acre) ___________________

26. Labour Requirement (after lining) Increased Decreased Unaffected 27. Amount of Increase/Decrease (Rs/Year) ___________________ 28. Suggestions of the Farmers: ___________________________________________________________________________

Interviewed by ___________________ Date ______________________

218

APPENDICES

Appendix-J

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ECONOMIC DATA OF UNLINED WATERCOURSES

1. Watercourse No ____________ 2. Name of Distributary/ Minor Canal___________

3. Location of Watercourse along the Distributary/Minor: Head Middle Tail

4. Village ______________ Tehsil ________________ District ___________________

5. Design Discharge (l/sec) __________ 6. Command Area (acre) _________________

ECONOMIC DATA OF UNLINED WATERCOURSES

1. Name of Farmer ______________________ S/O __________________

2. Education ___________________________Experience _____________

3. Total cultivable area __________ (acre) 4. Location along the watercourse___________

5. Total length of unlined watercourse _______________ (m)

6. Crop area irrigated by different sources:

Crop Area Irrigated

Canal Tubewell

Wheat

Rice

Sugarcane

Vegetable

Fodder

7. Warabandi time ______________ minute/acre

8. Time required to irrigate one acre using canal water (hrs.) ______________

9. Water table Depth (m) __________ Increased Decreased Unaffected

10. Discharge & Year of tubewell installation ___________ (owned by farmer or others)

11. Tubewell power source PTO Driven (Tractor) Electric Diesel

12. Charges of tubewell water per hour (Rs./hr) _____________

219

APPENDICES

13. Time required to irrigate one acre using tubewell water (hrs.) ________________

14. Groundwater quality Good Marginal Bad

15. Waterlogging in the area Yes No

16. Average crop production (Maund*/Acre):

Kharif Production Rabi Production

Rice Wheat

Maize Barley

Sugarcane Fodder

Fodder Vegetables *One Maund = 37.4 kg.

17. Gross Income/Year (Rs.) _____________________

18. Suggestion of the Farmers: ___________________________________________________________________________

Interviewed by ___________________ Date ______________________

220

APPENDICES

Appendix-K

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR EVALUATION OF RCIs (ZERO TILLAGE, LASER LAND LEVELLING AND BED-FURROW INTERVENTIONS) OF WHEAT FARMS.

Name of Farmer________________________ S/O________________ Village/district______________________________ Location of farm w.r.t. watercourse: Head __________ Middle__________ Tail_________

Area under Different interventions: Chak No./

Distt. Wheat Farms

Traditional Zero tillage Laser land leveling

Bed-furrow

Area (Acre) Area (Acre) Area (Acre) Area (Acre)

Number of ploughing and planking on wheat field w.r.t. different interventions (per acre) Interventions Ploughing Planking Traditional

Zero Tillage Laser land leveling

Bed-furrow

Land preparation and sowing cost (Rs/Acre) Interventions Land leveling Ploughing Planking Sowing Traditional Zero tillage

Laser leveling Bed-furrow

Seed Rate and seed variety for wheat ZT, LLL and Bed-furrow:

Sowing period

Traditional zero tillage Laser Leveling Bed-furrow Seed Rate

(kg/acre)

Seed variety

Seed Rate (kg/acre)

Seed variety

Seed Rate

(kg/acre)

Seed variety

Seed Rate

(kg/acre)

Seed variety

22 Oct. to 7 Nov.

8 Nov. to 15 Nov.

16 Nov. to 30 Nov.

Number of Irrigations (per acre), Range of depth per irrigation and cost per Acre of water applied under ZT, LL and Bed-furrow:

Traditional Zero tillage Source of

irrig. (canal, T/Well, canal

+T/well)

No. of Irrig.*

Range of depth per

irrigat. (inch)

Cost/acre (Rs)

Source of irrig. (canal, T/Well, canal +T/well)

No. of Irrig. *

Range of depth per irrigate. (inch)

Cost/acre (Rs)

221

APPENDICES

Traditional Laser leveling Source of


+T/well)

No. of Irrig.*

Range of depth per

irrigat. (inch)

Cost/acre (Rs)

Source of irrig. (canal,

T/Well, canal +T/well)

No. of Irrig. *


Cost/acre (Rs)

Traditional Bed-furrow Source of


+T/well)

No. of Irrig.*

Range of depth per

irrigat. (inch)

Cost/acre (Rs)

Source of irrig. (canal,

T/Well, canal +T/well)

No. of Irrig. *


Cost/acre (Rs)

*Excludes pre-sowing irrigation

Fertilizer Application for wheat under different technologies

Type of Fertilizer

Traditional Zero tillage Laser land leveling Bed-furrow

Rate (Kg/acre)

Cost/acre

Rate (Kg/acre)

Cost/acre

Rate (Kg/acre)

Cost/acre

Rate (Kg/acre) Cost/acre

Nitrogen Phosphate

FYM (animal waste)

Weed density and weedicide cost

Interventions Weed density (m2) Weedicide cost

(Rs./Acre) Before weedicide After weedicide

Traditional Zero tillage


Yield, Bhoosa and Cropping intensity of wheat under different techniques

Interventions Grain yield (Maund*/acre) Bhoosa( Maund*/Acre) cropping intensity (%)

Traditional Zero tillage


* One maund= 37.4 kg

FARMERS’ PERCEPTIONS ABOUT RCIs ______________________________________________________________________

222

Documents

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF ON-FARM WATER …prr.hec.gov.pk/jspui/bitstream/123456789/940/1/1929S.pdf · 2018-07-17 · Chairman Civil Engineering Department is thankfully acknowledged